Biden is expected to visit Israel soon.
In the background, there were contacts in Qatar between the United States and Iran over the possibility of resuming talks to return to the nuclear agreement from 2015. Although the talks in Doha did not yield any progress, the parties did not declare an "explosion."
Israel must prepare for the visit and advance its main goals, with an emphasis on clarifying the dangers inherent in the agreement, despite the aspirations of the Biden administration.
It is important to promote activities to increase cooperation in the promotion and development of critical technologies for the two countries, but not to try and deviate from the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding valid until 2027).
However, it is better not to seek financial support for the Israeli development of advanced systems, and certainly not for the tactical laser that will serve as an additional interceptor in the Iron Dome, so as not to "contaminate" them with an American identity.
Ulyanov, Russia's ambassador to the IAEA, was interviewed at the time and boasted that under his leadership the Iranians were about to accept a much better agreement than they would hope for. The agreement reached was called "Putin's agreement". In Ukraine, Iran is aiding it in the war and the economic blockade by advice to circumvent sanctions, and the US is aligning itself with the Russian leadership in negotiations with Iran. This absurdity has not been emphasized enough and Israel must emphasize it.
No leverage over Iran
Why is a return to the agreement a serious mistake, and to what extent is it detrimental to the security of the former senior officials who are backing the agreement?
What is the damage done to Israel by the media leaks of senior IDF positions that ostensibly support the return to the agreement?
The agreement is based on the worst agreement of 2015, with further concessions.
It does not take into account the time that has elapsed and the short time left for the expiration of the restrictions.
In addition, it does not take into account the new findings from the nuclear archive and the violations revealed by the IAEA's inspectorate.
Beyond that, the agreement will allow Iran to surely become a nuclear threshold state and reach a bomb, leading to an extensive arms race in the Middle East.
Also, there is no tools and levers in the agreement that will force the Iranians to negotiate a "longer and stronger" agreement before it expires, as Biden promised.
The Sunset (expiration of the restrictions), which was already short in the original agreement, became almost immediate, and will be carried out according to the original schedule. Assets in the hundreds of billions.The money will enable the restoration of the Iranian economy, intensify development and nuclear and conventional equipment, as well as increase support for Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis and terrorism around the world.
Both.
To prepare for the visit, Photo: EPA
Pulling time
The agreement does not address oversight of the development of the weapons system, and like the 2015 concessions on the closure of the Open Investigations (PMD), the future of the open investigations in the IAEA is in the fog. Iran has no appropriate answers, so They intend to reach an agreement. It is quite possible that the Iranians are "playing on time again." A waiver of the investigation of the open cases will worsen the precarious status of the IAEA and make it irrelevant.
It is probably convenient for Biden to continue the talks, even without progress, at least until the mid-November elections.
Signing a humiliating agreement will provoke opposition in the legislature and hurt the Democratic Party.
If they return to the agreement, no one, except Israel, will deal with the nucleus, and the IAEA will not have any leverage left either. No one will harm the agreement, no matter what they find in Iran.
A cure for the disease?
Proponents of a return to the agreement admit that the agreement is very bad, but argue that it is the least bad alternative, and it is required to buy time that will allow it to better prepare for the action that will be required in the future.
This is a fundamentally wrong argument, without requiring the operational question, which should not be discussed in public, whether Israel needs more time to prepare, although always more time will allow for better readiness.
The time we "earn" will be very precious.
Under the agreement Iran will approach, and probably reach, a situation where the capabilities to be built will be irrelevant.
This can be compared to someone trying to "gain time" to develop a cure for a disease that will kill him within a year, by an investment that will take three years - "the surgery may work but the patient will die."
In addition, there is no certainty about what will happen in the moment of truth, what the global environment will be and who will support Israeli action.
In terms of alternatives it is clear why the proponents of returning to the agreement are wrong.
In a bad deal the Iranians will surely reach industrial enrichment capability and covert evasion capability, based on advanced centrifuges and underground facilities, and the accumulation of fissile material for the bomb.
Khamenei.
Bad agreement // Photo: EPA,
In a position of weakness
Reaching the status of a threshold state and a bomb will be done at a slower pace, but Iran will arrive stronger, as an "obedient" country that has kept agreements.
Under the agreement, even if Iran progresses greatly, it will be difficult for Israel to exercise the capabilities it allegedly built while "gaining" following the agreement.
Without an agreement, Iran will try to reach threshold state status and bomb faster, but from a position of weakness and without legitimacy.
Israel and the United States will have legitimacy, urgency and goals for painful and critical harm.
Former executives, and especially incumbents, must understand the immense damage their statements cause to national security, and the weapons they give to elements like JSTREET, Robert Mali, the AA and others.
Assuming that the leaks are accurate, and the chief of staff, the head of the Mossad, the head of the GSS and the political echelon oppose a return to the agreement, it is not possible for lower echelons to be briefed and expressed differently from the political echelon.
In a democracy, what they have to say will be kept in closed rooms.
Dense rows
Israel must "crowd in", clarify its position and receive from Baidan a promise to maintain full freedom of action and cooperation in fighting Iran in all dimensions.
The country must continue its campaign to delegitimize and weaken Iran in every way: economically, politically, militarily, politically, cyber, kinetically, legally, and more.
In addition, Iran's leaders must understand that the era in which the head remains immune while operating emissaries is over.
Prime Minister Netanyahu introduced this important change in the perception of security that he published in 2018, and since then the change has been taking place.
Israel must prepare a plan for a strategic media campaign, which emphasizes Iran's regional behavior and the dangers expected from the world from a nuclear Iran, and builds legitimacy for increasing intelligence.
It is forbidden to return to a bad agreement, nor to rounds of fruitless talks, during which it is more difficult to act.
We must return to "maximum economic pressure" and to build a credible, American and Israeli military threat.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we would love for you to share it with us
