The revelation of the deep disagreement between the security arms regarding the nuclear agreement with Iran was yesterday the main topic of conversation at the top of the political-security arena.
She also led Defense Minister Bnei Gantz to issue an unusual statement, in which he called for this discourse to be held in closed rooms and to state that "any other way harms Israel's security."
The controversy was revealed yesterday in the headline of "Israel Today".
Its roots lie in the expected exchange in the Prime Minister's Office: while Naftali Bennett led a strategy according to which the State of Israel opposes a return to the nuclear agreement with Iran, Yair Lapid, who will replace him this week, has not yet formulated his position.
Leading the pressure to change Israel's position are senior members of the intelligence and Iranian divisions in the IDF. For the decade, Israel will be able to work to extend it or formulate a real and viable military option, and in their view, it can leverage its support for Israel to request significant military and security assistance from the United States.
Iranians within touching distance of a nuclear ?, Photo: IPI
"Strategic mistake"
On the other hand, other security officials believe that returning to the agreement would be a historic mistake.
Prominent among them is the head of the Mossad, Dedi Barnea, and next to him the head of the National Security Council, Eyal Hulta.
In their opinion, Israel cannot be a partner in a bad agreement, whose expiration is imminent and does not address the holes that were in the original agreement and those that have been discovered since.
They also warn that the billions that will go into Iran's coffers as a result of the lifting of sanctions will be directed in part to regional empowerment and funding for terrorist acts around the world.
Opponents also believe that support for the agreement would deprive Israel of a viable option to act against it, if required, in other ways.
It will also reduce Israel's ability to continue the aggressive campaign it is conducting, according to various publications against personalities and infrastructure related to Iran's nuclear and terrorist arrays.
Lapid himself has not yet commented on the issue, and will discuss it only after he takes office.
So far he had completely aligned himself with Bennett's position, and if there were any disagreements between them they remained in the closed rooms.
Ganz also acted in accordance with the official position, although he is closer to the position of the National Security Agency. Yesterday he said that the discussions would continue while giving freedom of opinion to all participants, but leaving the decision to the political echelon.
A hint of Lapid's future intentions can perhaps be found in the exchange of correspondence between him and EU Foreign Minister Joseph Burrell, which was revealed on the Politico website.
According to this report, Burrell updated Lapid on his trip to Tehran in an effort to bring the parties back to the nuclear talks, and Lapid responded that this was a "strategic mistake that sends the wrong message to Iran."
Burrell during his visit to Tehran, alongside Iranian Foreign Minister Hussein Amir Abdullahian, Photo: IPI
This internal Israeli controversy is largely barren, because decisions on the issue will ultimately be made in Washington.
The Biden administration is determined from the beginning of its path to return to the agreement, and it is possible that it will even reach agreements with Iran even before the US president visits the country in the middle of next month.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we would love for you to share it with us