In 2004, when IAEA Chairman Muhammad al-Baradei arrived in Israel, MK Yuval Steinitz asked him in one of the meetings: "What is the International Atomic Energy Agency doing to stop Iran?" Al-Baradei replied: "Iran is going to produce weapons Nuclear, no one is seriously going to stop her.
In our estimation at the agency, this will happen in 2011.
You have about seven years to prepare." And this week, in a radio interview, Steinitz added: "Since then another ten years have passed, and they still don't have a bomb.
This is to a very large extent thanks to Benjamin Netanyahu's policy."
In contrast to this reality, in recent times we have witnessed a political campaign to twist the historical story of the struggle over the Iranian nuclear issue, for which it was decided to slaughter the last sacred consensual cow that we may still have left, just to try (again) to damage Benjamin Netanyahu's status.
He was accused of being "obsessive" about Iran: Benjamin Netanyahu, photo: Gideon Markovitch
Those who slandered him all these years for being "obsessed" with the matter of Iran, and for the unnecessary "intimidation" that he allegedly sowed in the world, are today leading a new, opposite line, according to which they are working against Iran, while Netanyahu is the one who is precisely to blame for its nuclearization.
what was said
The "Truth" ministry qualified for a new record.
If once the past was rewritten through the invention of one false narrative, now the lie industry prints new new sheets for tomorrow.
The history of resistance to resistance
In the years 2009-2012, when Netanyahu encouraged the sanctions regime against Iran, they argued against him that it was too late and that it had already passed the point of no return.
When he considered and planned several attack attempts in Iran - they claimed it was too dangerous, rushed to inform the Americans and pressed for a diplomatic option.
In 2015, when he opposed the nuclear deal and led an offensive line against it, it was argued to him that the deal was good and would prevent Iran from going nuclear, and that his attack on the Obama administration was the real danger.
When it turned out that the agreement was bad and dangerous, they attacked Netanyahu this time for not being able to prevent it, and described his previous efforts as "ruining relations with the US for a speech".
A nuclear facility in Iran, photo: E.P.I
In 2018, when he introduced a policy that led to the US withdrawing from the agreement, to the return of sanctions and the inclusion of the Revolutionary Guards in the list of terrorist organizations - this time they decided that exiting the agreement was not correct. On the contrary, they began to establish a narrative according to which Iran advanced in the nuclear program only because of the withdrawal of the US.
The fact that Iran began enriching uranium in abnormal quantities of 20% and 60% only in 2021, after Biden came to power, when she saw before her eyes an administration that intends to return to the agreement at any cost - was suppressed from the story.
The agreement that is taking shape is actually a US return to the 2015 agreement (JCPOA), with the same timetables. That is, from 2023 onwards the restrictions will begin to be gradually removed, until the agreement expires in 2030, and Iran will be able to possess a nuclear arsenal within a few weeks. In the same memorandum of understanding , anchored in Resolution 2231 of the UN Security Council, Iran was given permission to enrich uranium - a status that is not given to any other nuclear state that is not among the five recognized ones, within the framework of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
This time too, an extended economic deal was forged on the side of the nuclear agreement.
The Israeli government talks about 100 billion dollars that will flow into the Iranian economy after the lifting of sanctions, but international research bodies estimate that it is about 275 billion dollars in the first two years, and about a trillion dollars by 2030.
Worse than that, in addition to everything provided in the existing agreement, Iran is placing a series of new demands: guarantees that the US will not be able to withdraw from the agreement in the future, either through financial compensation received from the other signatory countries, or through the imposition of sanctions on companies that violate agreements with it; The revolution from the list of terrorist organizations; and stopping the IAEA investigations that reveal its violations of the previous agreement.
Offensive line against Iran: Yair Lapid, photo: Gideon Markovich
Either way, the understandings that have already been reached, the economic benefits that have already been given, and above all the fact that Iran never withdrew from the (previous) agreement and did not seek to cancel it - all these indicate that the nuclear agreement serves Iranian interests well.
Image (absence) policy
With the formation of the government about a year ago, Bennett and Lapid led a "no surprises policy" vis-à-vis the US on the Iranian issue, and announced that they would not challenge the Biden administration's efforts to reach an agreement. Bennett expanded and said: "We are not bearish, no, no, we will not oppose any agreement." Let's say For a moment, the dramatic mistake of the lack of understanding of the American political system, and the fact that one must act both in the channel of public opinion and in the corridors of Congress in order to influence it. But even when it became clear over the past year that the USA was rushing towards the dangerous agreement - Bennett, Lapid and Gantz did not budge from the concept.
Even when Richard Nafio, Rob Mali's deputy and who in 2015 was one of the architects of the Obama administration's agreement (and who specializes in sanctions regimes), resigned from his position because he did not accept the American weakness in negotiating the agreement - the Israeli government said nothing.
"Nothing will happen if you don't sign the agreement," Bennett hissed in his conversation with Biden.
Aside from this weak opposition, Defense Minister Gantz continued to lead an approach that prefers to return to the agreement.
And so, in many ways the government abandoned the campaign even before it began, and left the battle for our existence in the hands of another country.
Even members of the American Congress who spoke harshly against returning to the agreement were surprised by the indifferent line of the government.
And even now, when perhaps the government is being remembered to admit that the agreement that is about to be signed is bad, the only supreme struggle waged by Lapid this week was to obtain a photo with Netanyahu.
Instead of leading a worldwide policy against the agreement, he is fighting with all his might for the image, for the representation in which a prime minister is seen talking about the Iranian nuclear.
Nevertheless, the time has come to print the new issue of the Ministry of Truth and plant the next lie in it.
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us