Israeli officials warn that the emerging US-Iran understanding falls short of Israel’s war aims
Ynet News
Israeli officials expressed obvious anger Friday over an emerging memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran, warning that the reported deal would fall ‘far short’ of Israel’s strategic goals.
‘Trump screwed us,’ one Israeli official told ynet, referring to the emerging U.S.-Iran understanding.
Another Israeli official said the deal taking shape ‘looks very bad.’
‘From our perspective, it is a catastrophe, because it does not meet any of the principle objectives we spoke about when the war began,’ the official said.
A senior U.S. administration official said Friday that Washington’s conditions include the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program. The official said frozen funds would not be released until Tehran meets its commitments, adding that the Strait of Hormuz would be opened to traffic and that Iran would stop financing terrorism.
Another Israeli official said however that ‘uncertainty’ remained over whether there was ‘any deal at all’.
‘First, it is not certain there is an agreement,’ the official said. ‘And even if there is one, the regional working assumption is that it was signed under Iranian pressure and an American climbdown, not the other way around. In any case, that is the mood in our region, and therefore an agreement, at least in the short term, will be considered a failure, and I am still skeptical about the signing of an agreement and about its durability over time.’
The cool response from Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Office also reflected Israel’s belief that the emerging agreement is a bad one. Unlike the principles discussed when the military campaign began in late February, the reported deal does not include regime change, and according to Iranian reports, the issue of Iran’s proxies would also remain outside the agreement, raising Israeli concerns that Hezbollah is already beginning to reassert itself.
Israel stresses that despite whatever deal is made that the IDF will retain freedom of action against any perceived threat anywhere.
According to reports, the memorandum would see the United States release between 12 billion and 15 billion dollars in frozen funds. Iran would not receive the money in cash, but would be allowed to use it for medicine and food purchases through Qatar, which would serve as trustee for the funds.
The Americans reportedly agreed to increase the sum after Iran accepted that the money would be deposited with Qatar. But Iran would also be allowed to sell oil, a move that could bring Tehran substantial revenue.
The ballistic missile issue also appears to remain entirely outside the deal, because Trump does not view it as an existential threat to Israel. That is also why he reportedly told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, ‘People weren’t killed on your side, so end this war.’
The core of the agreement is expected to be the nuclear issue, but that issue is complicated, because removing Iran’s fissile material enriched to 60% would not be enough on its own. Even here, Israeli officials believe compromises are likely, and that the fissile material may not be removed from Iran, but diluted inside the country under the supervision of inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Beyond that, many questions remain unanswered. Will Iran truly commit to not advancing towards a nuclear weapon? Is there a way to supervise its nuclear facilities and scientific activity? Iran has previously become adept at doing such work secretly, and it could also do so elsewhere. Russia and China have already shown they are close allies of Tehran, and Israel could eventually find itself facing an Iranian nuclear program being developed in Russia.
From Israel’s perspective, the emerging deal is a failure and a surrender. It may be a good agreement from Washington’s point of view, allowing Trump to claim he bought 15 years of quiet, but the agreement appears far below the minimum threshold Israel set when it launched the war.
Netanyahu said Friday that ‘as long as I am prime minister of Israel, Iran will not have nuclear weapons…For more than 30 years, I have been at the forefront of the international struggle against Iran’s nuclear program, and as long as I am prime minister, it will not happen.’
Despite those statements, Israeli officials now believe that the war may not have improved Israel’s position and may even have worsened it strategically, because it gave Iran a sense of strength and confidence it had never had before. Tehran saw that it could withstand a severe military assault, while using the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and other moves to turn the situation in its favor and gain more than it lost.
It is still unclear whether Iran can sustain that position over time, whether its economy can recover, what will happen amongst its population, and what the future holds for the regime.
But the agreement as reported does not address those questions. Israel will have to hope that developments move in a positive direction in the coming years, but at this stage, that looks like an enormous gamble.
The bottom line is that the emerging agreement is far from what Netanyahu and Trump promised. What is supposed to be presented as an achievement, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, was already available at the outset. The agreement does not address missiles or proxies. It may even reinforce the idea of a unified regional front.
Most troubling of all for Israel is that Iran is negotiating from a position of strength.
Tehran is being treated as an equal, as a country that did not fold under U.S. and Israeli military pressure, as a country that responded with force and brought the global economy to its knees, as a country that regional states fear, and as a power whose demands are being heard and taken into account.
Iran has established itself as a strong regional power that does not defer to Israel, does not defer to Europe, and is willing to stare down the United States. Every country in the region, including Turkey, has seen that Israel failed to impose its will on Iran, and that even the United States did not succeed in doing so.
The conclusions drawn from that will not benefit Israel.
Israel has, for now at least, lost deterrence and strategic leverage.