What is Israel's Stance in Nuclear Negotiations?

What is Israel's stance in nuclear negotiations? Now that nuclear negotiations are on the verge of reaching a historic outcome, why is Israel not backing down? In the midst of Europe's winter chill, the nuclear negotiations are hotter than ever. And with each step closer to a final agreement, the fire of international criticism from some opponents intensifies. The right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel is at the forefront of the critics of the agreement with Iran, stating that it will not rest in opposing a 'bad agreement.' Netanyahu is on his way to Washington to speak against the 'bad agreement' in Congress, and it seems that all the increasing pressures from the Democratic government in the U.S. and internal opponents of Netanyahu have not deterred him. Israel asserts that under no circumstances will it allow the Islamic Republic in Iran to develop nuclear weapons. However, Iran has denied this accusation. The issue of distrust towards the Islamic Republic has led to over a decade of 'nuclear negotiations' that are supposed to reach a conclusion through diplomacy. So where does Israel's problem lie? Ya'akov Amidror, a researcher at the Begin-Sadat Center in Israel, was Benjamin Netanyahu's national security advisor until about a year ago. He is also one of the prominent critics of the 'bad agreement' with Iran. In an interview with Radio Farda, he answered all the questions regarding Israel's policies towards the nuclear negotiations. Keyvan Hosseini: Some observers believe that we are currently closer to a nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 than ever before. You stated about a year ago that this agreement would make the world a more dangerous place. Can you explain why? Ya'akov Amidror: Based on the behavior of the Islamic Republic and the Revolutionary Guards over the years and their activities around the world, we have concluded that with Iran under a nuclear umbrella, more terrorist actions will occur globally. Over the years, we have managed to identify and neutralize 30 operations by the Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah, from Africa to Europe... from Thailand to Washington. Based on our understanding, Iran with nuclear capability will become more active and dangerous. Look at the Middle East. Iran has invested millions of dollars in Lebanon to strengthen Hezbollah and create a powerful organization. Hezbollah will be strengthened under the Iranian nuclear umbrella. Iran is also currently active in Syria. Members of the Revolutionary Guards, like members of Hezbollah, are currently fighting in Syria. They are killing Arab citizens in these wars. There is no doubt that under the Iranian nuclear umbrella, pressure on Syria will increase, and more people will be killed in that country. Therefore, we believe that Iran equipped with nuclear weapons poses a threat not only to Israel but to the entire Middle East. And with all due respect to the P5+1, this agreement is not strong enough to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. However, the group negotiating is aligned with Israel's concerns in this regard, especially the United States. The U.S. government states that if an agreement is reached, it will be one that prevents Iran from producing nuclear weapons. Do you not trust the U.S. government on this issue? We trust the U.S. very much. We have a very good relationship with the U.S. government. However, there is no doubt that our judgment from Jerusalem differs from Washington's. We are in the Middle East. We are very close to Iran. Hezbollah is just across our borders. Hezbollah commanders and their Iranian friends are in the Golan Heights. What we see from Jerusalem is not visible from Washington. That is why we have a heightened sensitivity to the Iran-P5+1 agreement compared to the U.S. You speak of the good relations between Israel and the U.S., but some observers say that these days we are witnessing the darkest period in the relations between the two countries, and specifically there are many personal disagreements between Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Obama. Moreover, there are serious differences of opinion between the two governments on issues like Iran's nuclear program. You were Mr. Netanyahu's national security advisor. You were responsible for this relationship regarding Iran. What do you think about this relationship now? I think the relations between Israel and the U.S. are very good. There is one major issue on which we do not agree, and that is the issue of Iran. However, the relationship between the two countries is not based on the personal relationships of the Prime Minister and the President, although they do speak a lot. Nevertheless, the relationship is deep. We have strong supporters among the American public and Congress. I can even tell you that the relationships of some parts of the U.S. government with us are better than in the past. For example, the relationship between the Pentagon and the Israeli Defense Forces is excellent. Therefore, there is a disagreement, and that is the nuclear agreement. If it is a good agreement, we have no problem. And if this agreement is a bad one, we will not remain silent, and as you know, the Prime Minister of Israel is set to go to Washington to speak against a bad agreement in Congress. However, during this trip, the U.S. President announced that he is unwilling to meet with Mr. Netanyahu. This is completely understandable. The U.S. government does not want to be in a position that seems to interfere in Israeli elections, and it is natural that the U.S. President would not meet with the Israeli Prime Minister. As Mr. Obama said, any leader, even from Europe, who goes to Washington two weeks before elections will not be met. This is natural and understandable for us. You speak of a bad agreement, and we hear this especially from Israelis. What characterizes this bad agreement? How do you describe it? A bad agreement is one under which the Islamic Republic can, without us or the U.S. knowing, build a bomb within a few months. Or they could use international events as an excuse to end the agreement or, in any case, manage to develop nuclear weapons based on any situation. We believe that due to the radicalism of the Tehran regime and because some leaders of the Islamic Republic openly and loudly speak of the destruction of Israel, they should not have the capability to build nuclear weapons. We are not opposed to Iran's peaceful nuclear program at all. We have no opposition to the Bushehr reactor that generates electricity. We believe that Iran should not become a nuclear-armed state. From Israel's perspective, is there any difference between Rouhani's government and the previous Iranian foreign policy? No. Rouhani is smarter. He knows how to negotiate. If you read his book, he explicitly states that throughout the negotiations while he was in charge, Iran increased its nuclear capabilities. This has happened before, and we believe that this idea will be implemented in the future as well. We see no difference in the dream of acquiring nuclear weapons between Ahmadinejad and Rouhani. The only difference is that Rouhani is smarter. With that said, what is your solution to the Iranian nuclear issue? Our solution is very clear. If the Iranians want a peaceful nuclear program, they can buy it from all over the world. Exactly what many countries do. But their insistence on uranium enrichment indicates that what they have in mind is a military nuclear program. We have no opposition to a non-military nuclear program in Iran. If the Iranian people need a non-military nuclear program, we will support it. But at this moment, we believe that this program is a cover for the clerics in Tehran and the officials of the Islamic Republic to achieve the capability to build nuclear weapons. We will do whatever is necessary to prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons. My question is about the nuclear negotiations because Israel's position is not only against the military nuclear program. Israel is also opposed to the nuclear negotiations. No, we are not opposed to negotiations. Not at all. We have been negotiating behind the scenes for many years. We support negotiations. Contrary to what many believe, we support Iran's negotiations with the P5+1 and believe that a good agreement is the best solution to this issue. We hope it is not a bad agreement. If a bad agreement occurs, Israel will not be bound. But we would be very happy to see a good agreement. However, we have reports that U.S. officials say that the Israelis are distorting the U.S. position by leaking information related to the negotiations and sabotaging the negotiations. In fact, you yourself once said when you were in charge that the information you received from the Americans regarding the negotiations had become less and more limited... No! What I said was that regarding the secret channel that the Americans established with Iran through Oman, we had not been informed. This was very insulting to us, and we did not understand why the Americans thought that something might happen in the Middle East and we would not be informed. Ultimately, we learned about the matter through our intelligence agency, and this was an issue where the Americans had not provided us with enough information. I hope this does not happen again because the Americans realized that hiding such negotiations from us is very difficult. But if we, as the Israeli side, leak part of the information that the U.S. provides us, we have made a big mistake. Israel should not leak this information that it obtains during the exchange of information from the U.S. My last question is about the accusations made by Iranian officials against Israel. They accuse Israel of sabotaging the nuclear program domestically and killing Iranian nuclear scientists. Are these accusations true? I do not know if these accusations are true or not. But as I said earlier, we will do whatever is necessary to prevent the officials of the Islamic Republic from acquiring the capability to build nuclear weapons.