After his important meetings with President Biden and heads of state, the highlight of Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit to the United States will be his speech at the United Nations. Assuming it resembles previous speeches, there is certainly something to look forward to.
The direct Iranian threat to Israel through the advancement of its nuclear program and the continued development of precision missiles and drones carrying heavy armaments, the indirect threat through its proxies in the Middle East (Hezbollah, Hamas, Jihad and sometimes the Palestinian Authority), and the ongoing threat to the free world through support and encouragement of terrorism, will undoubtedly play a central role in the speech. The desire for normalization vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia and other countries, the multi-front threats in the north, Gaza and the West Bank, and the need to calm the internal (legitimate) debate in Israel will also be emphasized.
We should not be confused with what the real priorities are. The prime minister will probably emphasize the responsibility placed on the United States and Europe, in light of the aggressive and negative behavior of the ayatollahs in Iran. Hearers must clearly understand from the prime minister that preventing an agreement or bad "agreements" with Iran, as the US has now done, has not been relegated to a lower priority.
PM Netanyahu: "We are committed to acting against Iran's nuclear program" | Photo: Omer Meron/GPO | Sound: Ben Peretz /GPO
It is important to clarify that the striving to sign agreements between Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United States – which is justified and very important in itself – will in no way come at the expense of the acute need to stop Iran. After the meeting with Biden and the MBS interview, it is understood that the news of the suspension of the talks was wrong.
Despite reports of continued (legitimate) attempts at persuasion led by Dermer, it seems that the talks on a defense pact between the US and Israel have lost momentum, mainly due to a lack of motivation in the White House to promote an alliance at this time, and this is a good thing: the disadvantages of the alliance far outweigh its advantages.
The demands for a "civilian nuclear" are problematic
Riyadh's demands are security guarantees, based on a defense agreement on the Asian model, mainly against Iranian aggression; Advanced arms deals and a free trade zone. These are demands that Israel can accept, assuming that its qualitative advantage (QME) is maintained.
On the other hand, the demands for a "civilian nuclear" are problematic. The requirement is for a full nuclear fuel cycle capability on Saudi soil. The "civil justification" is the aspiration for commercial exploitation of natural resources, i.e. mining uranium and turning it into a "yellowcake", converting it to gas (UF6) and enriching it to the level required for the production of nuclear fuel rods for power reactors (electricity generation), independent use and export.
Not to be confused, as many have been doing lately: the Saudis are asking for a full fuel cycle on their soil, including enrichment, rather than nuclear power reactors to generate electricity as the Chinese are proposing. There is no problem in principle with a Saudi reactor whose fuel sources come from outside, and will go outside after use (as in the Russian reactor in Bushehr).
The Saudis are prepared for any inspection and control by the United States and the IAEA to prevent future conversion for military purposes. Despite the optimistic reports about experts who have found ways to "square the circle," I suggest continuing the old approach and not gambling when it comes to nuclear capabilities. An MBS speech in which he declared that Saudi Arabia would acquire nuclear weapons if Tehran did so proves the thesis.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in an interview with Fox News,
One should not be impressed by the irresponsible reports that Israel is developing "hidden capabilities" that will prevent future military capabilities. Even if it is "proven" that the chances of success are high, on the day of an order, everything may change. Even if the insistence on preventing enrichment in Saudi Arabia means canceling the deals, we must not give up, because it is in our souls. Acceptance of Saudi nuclear demands will serve as a basis for demands from countries in the region such as Egypt, the UAE, and Turkey, and will officially open a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
The Palestinian issue, pushed mainly by the US, has gained volume in recent weeks and Israel will have to make concessions. This issue, about which I am less concerned, must not become the central issue. Unlike nuclear, this is not an existential threat and therefore calculated risks can be taken in order to achieve normalization.
The prime minister will emphasize that Iran is violating every treaty and agreement it has signed, yet recent agreements have given it permission to continue enrichment to 60%, which is about 98% of the time required for full military enrichment. Brilliant negotiations have paid Iran from the U.S. not to do what it really doesn't want to do, which is enrich to 90%.
At the same time, Iran continues to develop and manufacture advanced centrifuges, build an extensive underground site at Natanz that will be used for enrichment and production of centrifuges, develops and possesses ballistic missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, and continues to develop the weapons system that truly separates it from nuclear capability.
Condition: Return of Security Council sanctions
It is clear where the Saudi demands come from. They are based on the nuclear agreement and the absurd "agreements." The United States, of course, denies any connection between the surrender and the transfer of billions of dollars in exchange for the release of the prisoners, and the agreements on the nuclear issue that bypassed the need for congressional approval, which probably would not have been accepted.
At the same time, mass murderer Raisi is received with honor at the UN General Assembly and humiliates Biden with declarations of his full control over the exploitation of surrender funds, in stark contrast to American statements. The Iranians remove a third of the IAEA inspectors, fail to answer questions about the open files, attack American interests in the Gulf, violate human rights and kill women and girls in Iran, continue their massive support for Russia and transfer advanced weapons to it, and receive de facto American approval to increase oil sales to China to new heights.
It is very important to promote a Saudi-American-Israeli deal that will include normalization, without the need for a defense pact between Israel and the United States, but at the same time it is possible to overcome the problems of Saudi Arabia's demand for an independent fuel cycle and minimize damage from the agreements made with Iran by launching a snapback that will reinstate the Security Council sanctions, including a total ban on uranium enrichment in Iran.
This will pull the rug from under Saudi demand, make it possible to move forward with deals without a nuclear threat from Saudi Arabia, and open the door to joint action against Iran's nuclear program. Whoever suggests that Israel promise MBS that it will handle the removal of the threat of Iran's nuclear program and therefore does not need a nuclear program is assigning Israel a task that is the responsibility of the superpowers – even if Israel ultimately has to carry it out itself.
Brig. Gen. (res.) Yaakov Nagel is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and a professor at the Technion. He served as National Security Advisor to Prime Minister Netanyahu and as Acting Head of the National Security Council.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us