Israel officials ordered to keep mum on reported Iran deal
Government wants to ascertain draft agreement details, ensure accuracy of media reports before responding.
By Barak Ravid Tags: IAEA Israel news Iran nuclearThe national security adviser has instructed all government officials involved in the Iranian nuclear issue not to respond to media reports on a draft agreement between Iran and the West regarding uranium enrichment in Russia.
Uzi Arad, who heads the National Security Council, issued the directive to officials in the Foreign Ministry, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Defense Ministry and the Israel Defense Forces.
A senior political source in Jerusalem said the directive was issued because Israel wishes to ascertain the details of the draft agreement and to ensure media reports on the deal are accurate.
Despite Arad's instructions, Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai said Wednesday that the campaign to pressure the Islamic Republic seems to be bearing fruit.
"This proves how important international pressure is," Vilnai told Army Radio. "Iran is more susceptible to pressure than we may believe."
Even if Iran agrees to the plan to reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium, world powers need to keep pressure on Tehran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapon capabilities, he said.
Vilnai said Israel would examine the UN draft agreement cautiously, "paying attention to every detail," to make sure Iran was not just trying to buy time.
Israel would also like to verify whether the deal reflects the positions of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United States and European countries.
Defense officials and intelligence experts are still trying to understand the basis for the agreement, which was presented by IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei.
A senior defense source said the entire story seems strange, and it remains unclear how this agreement came about.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met Wednesday with European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who is spearheading talks with Tehran on behalf of the Western powers.
Officials in the prime minister's bureau refused to state whether the reported deal came up in Netanyahu's talks with Solana.
Netanyahu discussed the Iranian issue in his conversation with the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice.
Rice, who addressed the President's Conference in Jerusalem yesterday, said the U.S. would not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, and would not ease pressure on Iran over this issue.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
I was about to point that out, but saw you beat me to it. And to #21 "Uzi" you have no ability to choose Jerusalem as your capitol. If you try, I think the "beasts" that you fear (however much machismo you try and project) will be banging down the walls. But it is surprising that that name for an assault weapon comes from you guys? Not really. Until someone tries to shoot me with a "thad" or a "chen" or a "ngozi," I'll assume that it's your country that is the violent one. One.
Sorry to dissapoint you but only us Israelis will deside whats our capital is , not you nor a billion arabs. Get used to it, in this case you dont decide, joooooos do.
With the passage of that deal, doesn't that knock the wind out of the Israeli campaign to get the USA to bomb Iran? Dang, gonna have to think up another way to turn Iran into a carbon-copy of Iraq.
The psycho right might note that while this is probably the end of their dreams of a 'cakewalk to Tehran' it is a long way from getting Iran to reenter the Additional Protocols (which would end their dreams of a single surgical strike which will bring 'Mission Accomplished'). The lefties should not this is in no way a signal that Iran will reenter the Additional Protocols, which would give the IAEA to conduct snap inspections at any active, suspect, or potential site. Thus it does not end the 'crisis' only the immediate problems of both sides. Of course the government eager to start a war is disappointed, but it's belief that it could get someone else to start the war is an indication of just how irrational it is.
too far-fetched. The UK, France, Germany, Russia have their own satellite intel, intelligence services, policies and strategy ref Iran and the EU has been quite clear from the outset about the course it has been following. It has not changed one whit. I doubt any of them or Iran take remotely seriously the threat of an Israeli air strike, knowing it to be beyond Israel's capability. Nor do they need advice from the wings or Netanyahu (or God preserve us, Lieberman) trying to get on the stage. The problem about having AIPAC around is that it gives Israel the idea that it's an important international player and influencer. The reality is it's a little country in the M-E and more of a hindrance than a help on international issues, due to its actions continually destabilising the region and creating problems.
"The ships then innocently approach the Iranian oil docks, the IDF disembarks and attacks by surprise. Sounds fantastic? It may be more realistic than you think." - Yonatan You left out the part where the Sunburn (Raduga P-270) missiles penetrate the sides of the tankers killing most aboard. Followed by the C-802s which will sink the ships. Your scenario is a fantasy worthy of Tom Clancy. Supertankers do not casually sail up to docks unnoticed. Moreover, do you propose sailing up the channel to Abadan or Bandar Mahshar? Or will the troops wade to Iran from Kish or Kharg Islands? I get it! The tankers will be flown to the Caspian Sea and land at Neka!
A major and bitter disappointment for the Netanyahu government. With George Bush missing, the 'west' is able to negotiate with Iran. That the agreement is minor, solving short-term problems for both the 'west' and Iran is not the problem for Israel's government. That problem is that it was concluded at all.
the idea that such deals, in fact, could have come to life thanx to those big mouths? So the owners of above mentioned big mouth may be, well, more relieved than galled? I gather that the Israel's first concern is it's survival, and the lower cost it comes at the better, right?
What if those ?Oil tankers of your imaginations? gets detected and attacked in open sea and in international waters? Your gung-ho war scenario is still ON..? What Israel needs is to CO-OPERATE in accord with the international communities. Giving orders and showing aggressions with unreasonable demands belongs to the last century. Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini etc. did the same?. And where are they now?
Israeli and GOP circles? It sure must be galling for Netanyahu and gang. Israel's mouthy belligerence and military threats universally ignored in favour of practical, down to earth negotiations. The enemy at the gates turns out to be nowhere near the gates, sort of takes the steam out of Netanyahu's big foreign distraction and scaremongering. Even worse, it seems no one is too interested in Israel and its views. So, no excuse not to get back to the real questions then Bibi. Outpost closures, talks with the Palestinians, independent inquiry into Cast Lead, you know, the hard issues gathering dust on your desk? No more engineered distractions now...
You forgot to add your name
....no matter whether they speak Arabic, Hebrew or English. The Krauthammers, Pipes, Perles, Netanyahus, Liebermans, Sharanskys, Nassrallahs, Mullah Omars, Bin Ladens etc. will have a pretty bad day today.... ....and that's certainly "good news" !! :)
The issue of enriched uranium is resolved but not in the way as Israel was hoping.
Here's the scenario: Israel purchases oil tankers, refits them to carry men and materiel in the Navy Yard in Haifa, provides fictitious papers, sails them empty through the Suez Canal, docks them in the Israeli port of Eilat. The IDF goes on "mameuvers" in the Negev; the troops. tanks and artillery are transferred at night to Eilat and loaded on the ships, which then sail. one by one to the open sea. The ships then innocently approach the Iranian oil docks, the IDF disembarks and attacks by surprise. Sounds fantastic? It may be more realistic than you think.
Meaning about a year or so, similar to the peaceful period between 30 September 1938 (the Munich Agreement) and 1 September 1939 (the German invasion of Poland).
The easiness in which was reached the accord shows that Iran doesn't need nuclear weapon and remind that Israel did all efforts to thwart any possibility of discussions.Even now Israeli's propaganda for war mentions that the accord only delay the Iranian bomb by one year,namely we are in 1937 and no 1938.
The capitol of Israel is Tel Aviv. It is not Jerusalem. No country on Earth recognizes "Jerusalem" as the capitol of Israel. Repeating it incessantly in AP wires and local Israeli news will not make it so.
..because Israel is smart enough to know that there is no such deal with Iran to stop uranium enrichment and if there was they would break it. No one believes a "face saving "IAEA except ,perhaps, themselves
I must be dreaming. Bradley. Pinch me and wake me up.
Would Iranian negotiators stiff their Supreme Leadership? That's the 64 thousand dollar question.
can we please change the subject... I can understand why Mr. Goldstone would like t debate this issue... but Israeli?