Netanyahu's harsh criticism of U.S. on Iran is a political boomerang
can disagree with the American conception of how to best thwart Iran’s
aspirations, but boasting of Israel’s ability to thumb its nose at the
international diplomatic process is a dangerous threat in itself.
10, 2013 | 1:00 AM |
There is an obstacle in the path of the
relations between Israel and the United States; one that could crack, if not
smash, those relations.
The harshest manifestation of the deep
dispute between the two governments was Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unbridled response to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s efforts vis-à-vis Iran on the
nuclear issue. With the parties on the threshold of signing a groundbreaking
agreement in Geneva, which could pave the way to a reduction of Iran’s nuclear
threat, Netanyahu continues to view the very diplomatic move itself as an
existential threat, because it will leave Iran with a nuclear capability that
could be transformed within a short period into bomb-making capability. “Israel
is not obliged by this agreement” Netanyahu said, nudging Israel toward the
status of a country that is threatening the international consensus.
This consensus could indeed be mistaken.
There is still no assurance that Iran does not seek to attain a nuclear weapon;
it is possible that agreements achieved in Geneva, at least in the first phase,
will leave Iran quite a bit of room to continue enriching uranium, while
weakening the sanctions against it.
yet, it would be a historic mistake to seal the diplomatic channel in a way
that does not allow full exploration of an end to the crisis without resorting
to a military option, the chances and implications of which are impossible to
Netanyahu can chalk up an impressive and
important achievement in that he has placed the Iranian threat at the top of
the world’s agenda. The threats of attack by Israel were even lauded by the
American administration, which saw them as one reason for Iran’s willingness to
move forward on diplomatic negotiations.
However, Israel’s strength depends on
American and international backing. Without it, Israel cannot deal with either
the Iranian threat or the other, closer, regional threats, especially when the
United States has Israel's back against the demand to examine and neutralize
Israel’s nuclear potential.
Netanyahu can disagree with the American
conception of how to best thwart Iran’s aspirations, but boasting of Israel’s
ability to thumb its nose at the international diplomatic process is a
dangerous threat in itself. It is a political boomerang, making its way directly back to Israel’s head.
Netanyahu should grit his teeth, curb
statements that only widen the rift between Israel and the United States and
let the talks with Iran pass the experimental phase. Meanwhile, he should
harness his rhetorical abilities and his concerns in progressing the diplomatic
process with the Palestinians.
suppose that the Editor of Haaretz has
written a very intelligent editorial for an indicted assassin a mighty criminal
to digest it without any digestive that Israel’s PM should stop barking in the
dark unnecessarily alerting the world and the US congress against America's of wrong doings by engaging in treaty with Iran without imposing Sanction. Well this is what happen when Criminals
take the seat of running the affairs of
the country. And Politician are used by them as their paid servants in the Kenneset.
is time to ask if the criticism is like, when caught killing Palestinians
illegally Israsel’s plea was always, “We Killed in self defense“ Now to
oppose getting disarmed they created a new plea Iran will wipe us from the surface of
earth if we do not have these WMD and iran is stoped becoming Nuke.
should Netanyahu not keep shut blabbering when US has already assured of
protecting Israel. What is the doubt? If Israel’s PM cannot believe US then let
him go alone and see if it can believe doing any better for its own security
PM please answer:
“And yet, it would be a historic mistake to seal the
diplomatic channel in a way that does not allow full exploration of an end to
the crisis without resorting to a military option, the chances and implications
of which are impossible to predict:”
“Was assassinating John F Kennedy necessary
to get the nuclear plant for Israel and manufacture WMD just because JFK was sgainst Israel go