According to all indications, the contacts between the United States and Iran to promote a nuclear deal known as a "freeze for freezing," which is actually a "quiet for money" deal, are close to ripening into what the sides call "agreements," as opposed to an official agreement.
The idea behind the agreements is to freeze Iran's progressin enriching uraniumto a high level in exchange for partial sanctions relief (oil sales), the release of imprisoned funds, and the release of prisoners. Presenting the progress as an agreement rather than an agreement would probably allow the administration to avoid going to Congress, where it was subject to fierce opposition.
The centrifuges at the Natanz facility, photo: AP
Israel must "stand on its hind legs" and clarify in advance and loudly the dangers of the agreements being formulated and present firm opposition, even if it harms the potential for advancing a possible deal with Saudi Arabia, which in itself is very important, but much less so than concessions in the Iranian nuclear program.
Netanyahu was misunderstood
The reports that were published, according to which the prime minister presented in a confidential Knesset debate that Israel could live with these agreements, stemmed in my opinion from an incorrect interpretation of his remarks. Such a statement is unreasonable, inconsistent with the Prime Minister's consistent positions, and was probably not said in the manner quoted, or misunderstood.
Netanyahu exposes the Iranian website (archive), photo: Oren Ben Hakon
The agreements being formulated include allowing Iran to continue enriching to sixty percent, without increasing the amount accumulated. This is, in fact, the first time granting de facto approval for enrichment to sixty percent.
Since the idea of a "less for less" agreement was first raised, Tehran has massively enriched to 20 percent,and this is the main problem, which is intensified by the agreements being formulated. Nevertheless, the Israeli determination that enrichment to 90% would cause a kinetic reaction was very important, and it is a pity that the US did not join in and used only the language of "severe reaction."
Consents without getting answers
At the same time, the IAEA closed two investigation files and received no answers to the two open files. How is it possible to reach an agreement (which apparently includes a promise to close the files later) without getting answers? This would undermine the deteriorating basis of the agency's existence. Restoring supervision without activating the "teeth" when violations are discovered is meaningless.
The agreements will legitimize all Iranian violations, allow Iran to retain the assets obtained through ongoing violation of all agreements and treaties it has signed, and will inject billions of dollars to revitalize the economy and enable continued support for terrorism.
What is the point of a freeze when Iran, under the agreements, continues to develop and manufacture advanced centrifuges and possess ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads?
Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, photo: AFP
In addition, Iran will continue to secretly develop capabilities for the weapons system, which is what truly separates it from nuclear capability, while the real status of the development of the weapons system continues to be largely hidden.
If a freeze is decided, why not include a requirement to completely freeze the continuation of construction of the two underground sites at Natanz, the site where the advanced centrifuges are stored and the site under construction intended for future enrichment to high levels?
Biden wants quiet
The Biden administration's goal is to achieve quiet by the November 2024 elections. The agreements will stop any handling of Iran's nuclear program, under themistaken assumption that Jake Sullivan and now Barbara Leaf, two very senior White House officials, have already declared that "the program will go back to the box." The agreements will also make it very difficult for Israel to attack alone, if it concludes that the time has come. Although under "agreements" it will be a little easier to attack alone, than under an agreement, it will still be very difficult.
In the background, the Iranians continue to attack American interests in the Gulf and the Middle East, violate human rights and kill women and girls in Iran, continue their massive support for Russia, and transfer advanced weapons that help kill Ukrainian women and girls.
Inspectors from Iran's Atomic Energy Agency, photo: AP
INSTEAD OF REACHING BAD AGREEMENTS WITH IRAN, IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THE US TO LAUNCH A SNAP-BACK TO REINSTATE THE REVOKED SECURITY COUNCIL SANCTIONS, INCLUDING A TOTAL BAN ON URANIUM ENRICHMENT, BEFORE THE ABILITY TO OPERATE THIS MECHANISM EXPIRES IN 2025. Such an action would also render meaningless the Saudi desire and legitimacy for an independent fuel cycle.
The agreements that are being formulated will again impose a heavy price on Israel, so it must act against them with a unified voice. This critical issue must not be swallowed up by the noise of political debates, or suffer from the desire to reach a Saudi deal.
At the same time, Iran is trying to draw Israel into a multi-front confrontation and remain, at this stage, out of the physical confrontation. Israel must continue to improve its military capabilities to attack the nuclear program in all dimensions, while at the same time sending a clear message against the agreements being formulated.
Any statement that there is anything to talk about conveys that Israel is weak, like the United States, and cannot be trusted. The message, of course, reaches our friends in the Gulf, those who have signed agreements with us and those who may sign, but only if we are strong together against the Iranian threat.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us