Iran's nukes in exchange for peace
Netanyahu needs to prepare himself for the possibility that Iran will redeem its concessions vis-a-vis its nuclear program with Israeli concessions over the territories.
By Akiva Eldar Tags: Benjamin Netanyahu Iran Iran nuclear Israel newsOne of the best-known sayings bandied about in this region is that "Israel will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East." This has been the official position of successive Israeli governments. What is less known is that after a comprehensive, regional peace agreement is reached, Israel will support a regional decommissioning of nuclear weapons. Recently, President Shimon Peres personally confirmed to me that this was the policy he had presented to the world when he served as prime minister. He added that as far as he knows, this policy remains in effect to this day.
Let us assume that tomorrow Iran informs its American interlocutors that it will cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency, abide by all United Nations resolutions relating to nuclear weapons, and recognize Israel - but on two conditions: first, that Iran will receive assurances from the international community that it will immediately act to implement UN resolutions calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state in territories conquered in 1967, and a commitment to expedite the end of Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights; secondly, that Israel be forced to open its reactor in Dimona to IAEA inspectors, to ensure that the country has developed nuclear energy solely for peaceful purposes rather than for producing dozens of atomic bombs, which foreign press reports say do, in fact, exist.
Is this a scenario for the distant future? Not necessarily. During a meeting among the foreign ministers of Muslim states that took place in Tehran in May 2003, Iran - then led by president Mohammad Khatami - voted in favor of the Arab League peace initiative introduced in March 2002. According to the initiative, which has since become part of the road map as well as UN Security Council Resolution 1515, the Arab League would offer Israel full, normalized relations in exchange for a total withdrawal from the territories.
Flynt Leverett, the senior director for Middle East affairs on the National Security Council during president George W. Bush's first term in office, claims that on at least two occasions, Washington ignored conciliatory gestures from Tehran. In a lecture he gave in June 2006 before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Leverett recalled that in the spring of 2003 - a short time after the U.S. invasion of Iraq - the Swiss ambassador to Tehran relayed to the White House an Iranian offer which included three elements: an agreement to launch negotiations with the U.S. administration over the nuclear issue, to adopt the Arab League initiative, and to cease support of Palestinian terrorist organizations based outside of the territories. The Bush administration ignored the message.
According to an article written by Leverett at the time, this was not the first time that an Iranian offer was met with a cold shoulder. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, he noted, Iran offered the Bush administration assistance in stopping the terrorism sowed by Al-Qaida and the Taliban. Bush preferred to adopt the "Axis of Evil" strategy. In a New York Times op-ed piece which he co-authored with his wife, Hillary Mann Leverett, Leverett warned U.S. President Barack Obama not to repeat the same mistakes as his predecessor vis-a-vis Iran.
Today Leverett, a research fellow who specializes in Iran at The New America Foundation, shares the view of many experts, who are doubtful of the chances that Russia and China will support more stringent sanctions against Iran. Given the fact that the "traditional" sanctions policy has not produced any tangible results, they warn that Obama will be faced with two unsavory options: coming to terms with an uninspected Iranian nuclear program that will demonstrate the powerlessness of the international community; or another war in the Middle East.
Leverett proposes a different approach: replacing the language of sanctions against Iran with an attempt to build new relations with it, based on shared interests. In the op-ed piece, he noted that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared recently in New York that cooperation with the United States on the nuclear issue is possible only within the context of a wider strategic understanding in the diplomatic, security-related and economic realms.
Is this a case of naivete? Perhaps. It is certainly possible that the ayatollah regime seeks to mislead the Americans in order to buy more time to complete its nuclear program. But what will we do if the Iranians surprise Obama with an offer to rid the Middle East of nuclear weapons and to help establish peace throughout the entire region? It is so convenient for us to remain tied to the policy of ambiguity on both issues. Netanyahu needs to prepare himself for the possibility that Iran will redeem its concessions vis-a-vis its nuclear program with Israeli concessions over the territories.
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
The Iranian president ACTUALLY cares about the Palestinians, Natenyahu's the one who asked the Americans to deal with the Iranians on a condition to stopping settlements and continuing peace with the Palestinians, Gee sorry but the Israelis made a domestic issue into a international issue which is pure juvenile Natenyahu
The Iranians are not a obediant dependant country that the US wants it to be, it has nothing to do with nuclear weapons because the CIA and Mossad already know that this scenario is just not likely to happen in the present.
Akiva be serious, like we did not wait for Adolf Hitler to show he actually was a man of peace. The Iran regime has shown to be willing to murder, torture and rape its own citizens to stay in power so you think they can be trusted? Lets just look at an alternative Ha'aretz does not want to accept, and that is lets make sure that the home defense forces of Israel will be well prepared for a war in 6 months. Lets check if Iran will blink when finally an ultimatum is given which states come clean before year end of face war within a year. Keep it simple and clear war or peace. Russia and China need to know this choice and decide what they prefer including the Europeans. Israel and the US are prepared to go to war, is Ha'aretz ready? Or Iran? I do not think so as the Iranian regime has a weak corrupt incompetent army which will fall as easy as Saddam Hussein fell.
you should more than naive to believe that Iran is caring about the palestianians. Pals particularly gazans are perfect puppets such as Lebanon shies that would be used for their objections such as capturing part of Iraq. that is very obvious.
"Iran repeatedly argues for the destruction of the Israeli state?" You do know that it is the 'destruction' of the "Zionist regime" rather than the "Israeli State" that Irans' president talks about, thats two different things.
As long as Israel has the bomb, other countries in the region, including Iran, will continue to want to have one too.
Iran only gains by keeping the pot boiling. If there was peace, Iran would have no role to play.
Acknowledging the slights by every actor against each other since 1979, it is categorically impossible to approach the Iranians from such a conciliatory bargaining stance without pulling a modern-day Chamberlain. One cannot "build relations" with Iran as long as the status quo is retained. Even if one were to ignore the loaded nature of appeasement policy in general, shouldn't the receiving party be deserving? Even if the stakes were significantly lower, realities cannot be simply wished away. It is not as if the Mullahs actions have not been on the world stage. How can otherwise rational people be so blind to painful truths? This would be the blockbuster sweetheart deal of the century, and is tantamount to assisted suicide. The irrational blindness of many would be laughable if the world order was not at stake.
Iran would not give up nukes and Israel would not agree to a 2 state solution either.
Iran exchanges nukes for Pal state Iran cares about Pal state Iran resists the urge to become major power of middle east & to push radical Islam. Iran fights for womens rights Iran allows religious freedom Iran accepts existence of Israel Poor Iranians - just how did they come under the power of such tyrants. But pity the rest of the world when those tyrants have the bomb and they show us all the mercy of their (the rulers - not the people) ways.
Middle east nations are acting like children. There will be no peace agreement in my lifetime thats for sure. I say give it another 200 years or so and maybe then, after countless more lives are lost will people only then be willing to finally end this mess.
If the Muslims of the world have made one thing clear over the past 60 years, it is that they could not possibly care less about the plight of the Palestinians. Palestinian suffering is used as the pretext for all sorts of anti-Israel actions and rhetoric, but the fate of their brethren has never elicited much more than lip service from the hyper-wealthy Muslims of the region. Nothing Israel does will ever be enough. Is this truly news to you, Akiva?
Appeasement! Israel and Eastern Europe has been already sold for some a quid-pro-quo from Russia and Iran on their nukes; Taiwan follows to please China and get something ephemere on NK nukes.
why does the author believe that Iran is interested in a two-state solution when Iran repeatedly argues for the destruction of the Israeli state? it seems the author fails to critically examine Iranian rhetoric, and too easily believes it's ideology. But Iran is using the Palestinians for it's own regional power play, and does not work in the interest of the Palestinians. Therefore, the idea that Iran would agree to such a deal is a mere fantasy, based on an uncritical acceptance of Iranian propaganda. Luckily, growing sections the Iranian opposition recognize this, and argue for a politics in the interest of Iranians, and against the Jihadist ideology of the country's leaders.
Iran wants nukes to dominate the gulf states even more than to eradicate Israel. They do not really care about the Palestinians other than as a convenient tool to gain popular support among all Muslims (especailly Sunnis). They will never give up on their nukes unless they get a better deal for an opportunity to achieve their main goal of becoming the dominant power in the Middle East.
The truth is that the Arab countries don?t care about Palestinians unless it pushes their own agendas. If they did care then they would be taking the refugees. Even Egypt won?t allow Palestinians from Gaza into their country.
This plan sounds like a child's dream to me and I really wish I could believe in it, however much I would like to. However , how can we belive that all the fuss coming out of Iran is all about liberating the oppressed Palestinians. How about first liberating the oppressed Iranians who cannot live freely, in constant fear of their lives, in increasing Islamic restrictions, in their own streets, their own homes, and being cheated of fair and honest votes/elections ? If this the way they treat their own people, under strict , more and more barbaric Islamic "laws", what do they really care about Sunni Palestinians ? Other than spreading Islamic laws in Gaza and gradually in the West Bank and in fact wherever they can : Lebanon, Syria, Sudan.... That is their real aim : spreading Islamic dictatorships, preferably with Iran as their Head Islamic country. And to achieve this, they use the Pal/Israel conflict, the denial of Holocaust, secret help to Taliban, open help to Hamas and Hizbola
belligerence towards Israel in its current leaderships' ambiguous rhetoric, provocative measures of aiding Hezbollah and Hamas, uncertainty of its nuclear power ambitions, etc. are interrelated to the conflict in the Middle East, specifically relating to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Do they genuinely support the Arab League initiative of 2002 and would recognize the Jewish state? I would like to believe in Eldar's suggested prognosis for resolving the crisis with Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but uncertainty remains with their religious ideological beliefs which entertains the thinking of Israel's non-existence and the Shite belief of the second appearance of their prophet. That's the inconsistency here. PS. My father told me there was the story that during the time of Shah, a Syrian ambassador visiting Tehran stated to an Iranian official that he saw an El Al plane (cargo plane) at the Tehran airport. The Iranian official responds that he have his eyes checked!
"A two state solution will only work if Israel becomes a "Jewish State" and removes the Israeli Arabs " I am shocked to read a fellow US and Dallas citizen explicitly endorse ethnic cleansing. Israeli efforts to do this would probably be the beginning of the end of Israel. No one in the world will deal with Israel if it embarks on such an atrocity. Israel is a very dependent country with few natural resources and it is heavily dependent on other countries for the raw matrials for the products it produces. Its economy will totally fail if it attempts such an atrocity. By the way, Hispanics are becoming the majority in Texas. Do you want to ethnically cleanse them too? A Hispanic majority is not threatening to most of us because they have not been treated like the Palestinians have. Israel has created its own enemies who justly hate it. That does not bode well for the future, but the consequences of Israel's own crimes cannot justify ethnic cleansing.
You don't seem to get what israel is about. Why trust it? Its government defends, protects and expands the settlements on an almost daily basis. They distort history by denying or minimizing the Naqba. After the thousands of innocent Palestinians and numerous peace activists have been murdered by the IDF? After many of its officials and most settlers explicitly call for annexation of all or part of the WB and E Jersusalem and even deny the very existence of the Palestinian people? After Israel's persistently violent response to peaceful demonstrations and its willingness to sell arms to many of the worst regimes in the world? After years of daily systematic killing, harassing and persecution of millions of Palestinians, many of them civilians and a startling percentage children? After years and years of Israel's pathetic attempt to deny its possession of nuclear weapons and refusal to permit UN inspection of its nuclear facilities?
I can hope and dream, but I've got my doubts. I wish I believed that Ahmadinejad could be trusted and would agree to such a great solution to several of the world's most intractable problems. Unfortunately, Ahmadinejad is no more credible than Netanyahu and any such agreement would have to include supervised demolition of Iranian nuclear facilities - just as Israel's compliance would have to be real, not just more lies and evasions - before either side could take any proposed agreement seriously. If it happened, it would certainly be good for Israel, Iran and the rest of the World, though I'm not eager to see Ahmadinejad with more power and prestige. Nonetheless, the benefits would geatly exceed the risk and cost.
If you believe Iran can be trusted to hold up their end of the bargain, I've got some swamp land I want to sell you in Egypt. Israel would be giving land in exchange for Iran's nuclear program being restarted later, only much more secretive.
Where is the proof Iran has nukes??? Once again jumping to your own conclusions.
A two state solution will only work if Israel becomes a "Jewish State" and removes the Israeli Arabs. This would also kill the zionist dreams of a greater Israel and leave the settlers out in the cold. While many Israeli Arabs own their land, most the settler are only leasing theirs. Part of the ideal for settlements was to put them on invasion route from Jordan and to at some point try to trade settlement lands for Israeli Arabs lands. Under fine print in the 1995 Israel/PA agreement many older settlements are legal but newer settlements illegal and land could only be taken for temporary military use.
Dirty dealing and cheating is the way Israel always works. Whatever it says it would always double cross you in the end. No one could trust Israel to play by the rules.
Iran has tried to play the 'Palestinian Card' like so many before and after - including al-Qaeda. They don't really give a hoot what happens to the Sunni Arabs called Palestinians. It's just a perfect card to play and land on the side of justice, morality and humanity. Hinging the nuclear program to a Palestinian state would empower Iran as a regional player and raise Ahmedinejad to statesman...while he ships missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Go get some coffee. Sober up!
Isreal's security comes from intergration rather than confrontation. Integration also means opening a wide and rich economical market for Isreal. A Middle East economical Block. This is only a dream because Isreal is ruled by extremists with a narrow vision called "settlers". These extremists will do far more damage to Israel in the long term than a nuclear Iran. GET RID OF THE SETTLERS AND FREE ISRAEL ONCE AND FOR ALL.
... with the true ambitions of the Israeli right-wing... since it would render them redundant...
There could be a re-invasion clause. If Iran tries to rebuild nukes, Israel gets to re-seize the territories. And vise versa. Two birds with one stone. Lovely.
Netanyahu has sacrificed the negotiations with the Palestinians over substantive matters on the altar of the 'Iranian bombs'. What is Obama and the West to say when Ahmedinajad conditions forgoing the bomb in exchange for implementation of UN242 and inspection of the Dimona facilities? This is a high stake Poker game- it is a win-win position for the Iranians and for the US. Ultimately it is a win-win for Israel as well but anathema for the Likud and the expansionists.
Still don't get it what Iran is about? After all its government declares almost on a daily basis? After holocaust denial and threatening explicitly with the destruction of Israel? After the massacres in Buenos Aires, and after its arming, funding, training and helping logistically all of the terrorist sects bent on destroying Israel? After years and years of lies, deceit and excuses about its nuclear programme, and after the discovery of the Qom site? This is like expecting in 1938 the nazis to suddenly turn down their anti-Semitic policies. This is lunatic. Pleeeeease, Akiva, not again !