Bibi to Europe: You have to pick America or Iran
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told French and German foreign ministers who visited Jerusalem today that he predicts "with high probability" that President Trump is going to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal on May 12th and urged the Europeans to agree to significant changes in the deal, Senior Israeli officials who attended the meetings told me.
Why it matters: The European powers — Germany, France and the U.K. — have been engaged in intense negotiations with the U.S. in an attempt to reach a formula that would save the Iran deal. The Europeans believe the chances of finding a formula which will satisfy Trump are very slim.
Netanyahu said changes will be needed to three parts of the deal to keep the U.S. from killing it:
1. Sanctions on the Iranian ballistic missile program
2. Inspections of suspicious sites in Iran
3. A removal of the the "Sunset clause" which would start to lift limitations on the Iranian nuclear program in nine years
According to the Israeli officials Netanyahu told the European foreign ministers:
"We can debate whether it (U.S. withdrawal from the deal) is a good thing or a bad thing, but it is just the reality. Then you Europeans will have to choose between the small economy of Iran and the huge economy of the U.S."
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas told Netanyahu that the current deal is better than no deal. The Israeli officials said Netanyahu replied: "The Munich agreement from 1938 was also a deal. I also want to remind you what happened to the nuclear deal with North Korea."
French foreign minister Jean Yves Le Drian briefed Netanyahu on his recent visit to Tehran, saying he came back deeply disappointed and frustrated with the difficult position the Iranians presented regarding the European demands on the Iranian missile program and the Iranian activity in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, the Israeli officials said.
Everyone Loves Israel Now
The muted Arab government reaction to President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is indeed a marker of what has changed — and what hasn’t. In absorbing that step, Arab governments have likewise had to reaffirm their Arab and Muslim solidarity with the Palestinian leadership and the Palestinian claim to Jerusalem. Israel achieved a symbolic victory, but it may face a more united Arab front if it follows up with new unilateral steps that impede Palestinian aspirations. If Israel’s government wants to cultivate Arab state goodwill, it will have to be sensitive to the concerns of Arab governments who face contrary public opinion.'Will UNESCO demand Western Wall be given to the Muslims?'
The new regional environment also presents Israel with new dilemmas it did not face when Sunni Arab states were uniformly hostile. The most vexing concerns whether Israel can tolerate the transfer of sophisticated Western arms and technology transfers to Arab governments. Traditionally, Israel has used its considerable political influence to prevent the United States, Europe, and even Russia from selling Arab militaries advanced technology that might erode the country’s vaunted “qualitative military edge.” It has also expressed unequivocal opposition to any possible transfer of sensitive nuclear technology to Arab states.
But what to do now that the eager seekers of such weapons and technology are Israel’s newfound “friends”? Can Israel afford the risk that in the future these states — which would then be much better equipped — might return to open confrontation? Israel already faced this dilemma regarding a pending sale of advanced German submarines to Egypt — and the disagreements among Israeli military and civilian leaders over this question have now resurfaced amid allegations of corruption and a criminal investigation surrounding Israeli relationships with the German submarine producer. Saudi Arabia’s recent quest for nuclear technology presents an even more vexing issue, since both states oppose Iranian nuclear capability — but to say the least, Israel is not comfortable with the idea of the Saudis acquiring such capabilities either.
It’s clear that today’s chaotic Middle East has created some strange bedfellows. For Israelis who have been isolated in their region for some 70 years, the possibilities are exhilarating. But the new horizons must not blind Israeli leaders or the Israeli public to tough choices they will have to make in dealing with their Arab frenemies in the months and years to come. Sometimes, it’s easier to have an implacable foe.
Several Arab states submitted a new draft resolution to the UNESCO organization on Jerusalem prior to the meeting of the organization's Executive Committee to take place immediately after the Passover holiday.UN Watch: Why is the UN defining Judaism as a war crime?
The proposal is very short, and at first glance appears to be devoid of offensive language against Israel. The title of the proposal deals with 'occupied Palestine', and states that the Old City of Jerusalem is an international heritage site with a Jordanian connection.
The proposal also includes a direct reference to UN General Assembly resolutions on the legal status of 'Palestine' and Jerusalem, and in particular UN Security Council Resolution 2334 which declares all Jewish presence over the so-called 'Green Line' illegal and the recent UN General Assembly resolution condemning US President Donald Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
The Arab states included a reference to the importance of the sanctity of Jerusalem to all religions in order to avoid the appearance that the resolution is biased against Israel and the Jewish people.
Israeli Ambassador to the UN Carmel Shama Hacohen said that "Israel cannot agree to the proposal because it is a package of all the elements we fought against in a miniature package, wrapped in a misleading cover. This is an attempt to persuade us to swallow a small poisonous pill in the shape of a well-wrapped candy, instead of a bucket of poison from previous times that was different in size and that smells very bad due to false, offensive and inflammatory expressions."
"The wording does not include false and offensive details as in the past, but in fact it contains references to all the decisions of the past, including those that the Arabs have already withdrawn from, such as the Islamization of the Western Wall and the Temple Mount through the back door. It is trying to drag countries that voted against this in the past to change the way they vote," added Shama Hacohen.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry began working to ensure that the proposal is not brought for a vote as soon as it was published.