Tehran-Jerusalem-Washington: Blinken contradicts Netanyahu in interview to Israeli news channel
Netanyahu claimed publicly that the U.S. should avoid returning to the nuclear agreement and that Israel is not committed to it. In response, Blinken claimed that the agreement is the best alternative at the moment, and that Iran's nuclear program developed even further in the absence of an agreement
Ami Rojkes Dombe
| 27/05/2021
Photo: Haim Zach/GPO
During an interview that he gave to Israeli television, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was asked pointed questions by journalist Yonit Levy. And without hesitating, he responded to comments made by Netanyahu at the ceremony for the appointment of the new head of the Mossad. Netanyahu told Blinken that Israel is not committed to the nuclear agreement that the U.S. is striving for with Iran (based on the agreement of 2015), but Blinken claimed that the withdrawal from the agreement (which Netanyahu and Yossi Cohen pushed for) is more dangerous to Israel and the world.
According to Blinken, the nuclear agreement is the most successful alternative at the moment
"The United States and Israel are absolutely united in the proposition that Iran can never acquire a nuclear weapon. We are joined in that goal and in that commitment. It’s also no secret that over time we’ve had differences over the best way to get there, to make sure that Iran does not get a weapon," Blinken said.
"From our perspective, the JCPOA did exactly what it set out to accomplish, which was to cut off all of the pathways that Iran had to producing fissile material for a nuclear weapon on short order. And our experts verified that it was working, international experts verified that it was working, and it had the most intrusive inspections regime of any arms control agreement ever achieved."
"And the result was that when the agreement was in force, Iran, had it decided to try to produce fissile material for a nuclear weapon, would have required at least a year to do so, which would have been plenty of time to see it and, if necessary, to do something about it."
"But here’s what happened since. Now that we’re out of the deal, Iran has started to ignore the constrains that the deal imposed. And it is closer and closer and closer to being able to produce fissile material for a nuclear weapon on very short order. And so far from getting less dangerous without the deal, it’s gotten more dangerous. And I think there’s a certain amount of urgency to try to put Iran back into the nuclear box that the deal constructed."
"So having said that, if – what we’ve said along is if we succeed in doing that, if Iran returns to compliance with the deal, we would do the same. We would also seek to make it, as we say, longer and stronger. And we’d also work hard to engage the other issues where Iran is a very dangerous and problematic actor for us and for Israel – destabilizing activities in the region, proliferation of weapons, support for terrorist groups, et cetera. All of those things."
"The two most important timelines – the level at which Iran can enrich, 3.67 percent, the limits on the stockpile of enriched uranium to 300 kilograms – those don’t expire until 2030. So if Iran were to come back into compliance, we would also have some time to seek to extend those deadlines and others."
Assistance to Gaza
Blinken also publicly expressed his expectations and those of his boss, the president of the U.S., from the government of Israel in the Palestinian context following the end of operation "Guardian of the Walls".
"First, of course, we need to deal with the urgent situation in Gaza itself – humanitarian assistance, water, electricity, sanitation – to respond to the immediate needs," Blinken said. "But equally important, we continue to believe very strongly that a two-state solution is not just the best way, but probably the only way to really assure that going forward, Israel has a future as a secure Jewish and democratic state, and the Palestinians have a state to which they’re entitled."
"So I think we want to get to that. But right now, the focus is on dealing with the aftermath, the recent violence, trying to build on the ceasefire, address the immediate needs and concerns, and then see if over time the conditions are such that there’s a better environment for trying to pursue a two-state solution."
Theoretical Israeli plan
Blinken's comments on the Palestinian issue are backed by some of the top figures in the Israeli government hierarchy. Recently, senior Israeli politicians proposed a plan for Gaza, Judea and Samaria.
The plan includes:
Strengthening of the alliance with the moderates: the weakening of Hamas and renewal of the political ties with the Palestinian Authority; an international and regional mechanism via the Palestinian Authority and international entities supervising the rehabilitation of Gaza; and the combination of the U.S., the European Union, and moderate states in promotion of the political process, the arrangement for Gaza, and the strengthening of the Palestinian Authority.
Enlisting Qatar's help with part of the process: continuing administrative work to establish a new mechanism that strengthens the moderate forces and changes the way that the funds are transferred; making the rehabilitation of Gaza contingent upon the return of Israeli prisoners and MIAs; and strengthening the connection between the normalization policy and the moderate axis to the rehabilitation of Gaza and processes in Gaza and Judea and Samaria.
Until the promotion of the political processes: maintaining the basic humanitarian standard for Gaza; responding to attacks from Gaza in a more powerful manner, with an attack on Sderot treated like an attack on Jerusalem; and establishing a reconciliation cabinet in the next government that deals with the situation between Jews and Arabs in Israeli society (among others).
As in every theoretical political plan, it is still not clear how much of it will be implemented, especially when we are in a situation of a transitional government and it is still not clear when a permanent government will be established.
Netanyahu claimed publicly that the U.S. should avoid returning to the nuclear agreement and that Israel is not committed to it. In response, Blinken claimed that the agreement is the best alternative at the moment, and that Iran's nuclear program developed even further in the absence of an agreement
Photo: Haim Zach/GPO
During an interview that he gave to Israeli television, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was asked pointed questions by journalist Yonit Levy. And without hesitating, he responded to comments made by Netanyahu at the ceremony for the appointment of the new head of the Mossad. Netanyahu told Blinken that Israel is not committed to the nuclear agreement that the U.S. is striving for with Iran (based on the agreement of 2015), but Blinken claimed that the withdrawal from the agreement (which Netanyahu and Yossi Cohen pushed for) is more dangerous to Israel and the world.
According to Blinken, the nuclear agreement is the most successful alternative at the moment
"The United States and Israel are absolutely united in the proposition that Iran can never acquire a nuclear weapon. We are joined in that goal and in that commitment. It’s also no secret that over time we’ve had differences over the best way to get there, to make sure that Iran does not get a weapon," Blinken said.
"From our perspective, the JCPOA did exactly what it set out to accomplish, which was to cut off all of the pathways that Iran had to producing fissile material for a nuclear weapon on short order. And our experts verified that it was working, international experts verified that it was working, and it had the most intrusive inspections regime of any arms control agreement ever achieved."
"And the result was that when the agreement was in force, Iran, had it decided to try to produce fissile material for a nuclear weapon, would have required at least a year to do so, which would have been plenty of time to see it and, if necessary, to do something about it."
"But here’s what happened since. Now that we’re out of the deal, Iran has started to ignore the constrains that the deal imposed. And it is closer and closer and closer to being able to produce fissile material for a nuclear weapon on very short order. And so far from getting less dangerous without the deal, it’s gotten more dangerous. And I think there’s a certain amount of urgency to try to put Iran back into the nuclear box that the deal constructed."
"So having said that, if – what we’ve said along is if we succeed in doing that, if Iran returns to compliance with the deal, we would do the same. We would also seek to make it, as we say, longer and stronger. And we’d also work hard to engage the other issues where Iran is a very dangerous and problematic actor for us and for Israel – destabilizing activities in the region, proliferation of weapons, support for terrorist groups, et cetera. All of those things."
"The two most important timelines – the level at which Iran can enrich, 3.67 percent, the limits on the stockpile of enriched uranium to 300 kilograms – those don’t expire until 2030. So if Iran were to come back into compliance, we would also have some time to seek to extend those deadlines and others."
Assistance to Gaza
Blinken also publicly expressed his expectations and those of his boss, the president of the U.S., from the government of Israel in the Palestinian context following the end of operation "Guardian of the Walls".
"First, of course, we need to deal with the urgent situation in Gaza itself – humanitarian assistance, water, electricity, sanitation – to respond to the immediate needs," Blinken said. "But equally important, we continue to believe very strongly that a two-state solution is not just the best way, but probably the only way to really assure that going forward, Israel has a future as a secure Jewish and democratic state, and the Palestinians have a state to which they’re entitled."
"So I think we want to get to that. But right now, the focus is on dealing with the aftermath, the recent violence, trying to build on the ceasefire, address the immediate needs and concerns, and then see if over time the conditions are such that there’s a better environment for trying to pursue a two-state solution."
Theoretical Israeli plan
Blinken's comments on the Palestinian issue are backed by some of the top figures in the Israeli government hierarchy. Recently, senior Israeli politicians proposed a plan for Gaza, Judea and Samaria.
The plan includes:
Strengthening of the alliance with the moderates: the weakening of Hamas and renewal of the political ties with the Palestinian Authority; an international and regional mechanism via the Palestinian Authority and international entities supervising the rehabilitation of Gaza; and the combination of the U.S., the European Union, and moderate states in promotion of the political process, the arrangement for Gaza, and the strengthening of the Palestinian Authority.
Enlisting Qatar's help with part of the process: continuing administrative work to establish a new mechanism that strengthens the moderate forces and changes the way that the funds are transferred; making the rehabilitation of Gaza contingent upon the return of Israeli prisoners and MIAs; and strengthening the connection between the normalization policy and the moderate axis to the rehabilitation of Gaza and processes in Gaza and Judea and Samaria.
Until the promotion of the political processes: maintaining the basic humanitarian standard for Gaza; responding to attacks from Gaza in a more powerful manner, with an attack on Sderot treated like an attack on Jerusalem; and establishing a reconciliation cabinet in the next government that deals with the situation between Jews and Arabs in Israeli society (among others).
As in every theoretical political plan, it is still not clear how much of it will be implemented, especially when we are in a situation of a transitional government and it is still not clear when a permanent government will be established.
