America Is Underestimating the Israeli 'Concerns' About Iran – Will 'Tel Aviv' Move Alone?

2 years ago

12

Print

Share

Individual moves by the Israeli Occupation and the United States have floated recently, contrary to their usual coordination, prompting observers to talk about deep differences of vision on several files, the most important of which is the Iran nuclear deal, which is expected to be signed soon.

Israeli anger finally emerged in a statement jointly issued by Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, in which they stressed: "It is impossible for us to believe that the United States will abolish the definition of the IRGC as a terrorist organization."

Hebrew media reported that Israeli Army Minister Benny Gantz had refrained from joining officials who signed the March 18, 2022, statement addressed by the "Tel Aviv" government to the administration of the U.S. President Joe Biden.

 

Revolutionary Guard

Israeli news website Walla and American Axios said the United States is considering removing the Revolutionary Guard from the terrorism list, in exchange for a public pledge from Iran to de-escalate the region.

"The IRGC is Hezbollah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen, and militias in Iraq," Bennett and Lapid said in the joint statement.

"The IRGC is behind attacks on U.S. citizens and soldiers across the Middle East, including over the past year (2021). They are the ones who stood behind the planning to assassinate some senior administration officials."

"The IRGC played a role in killing hundreds of thousands of Syrian civilians, destroying Lebanon and engaging in lethal oppression against Iranian citizens," they said.

The statement stressed that the attempt to abolish the definition of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization was "a mockery of the victims and the removal of the documented reality supported by overwhelming evidence".

"Gantz avoided answering an explicit question about whether he refused to sign the cruel and unusual statement, so it can be understood that he chose to refrain from participating in that step," the Channel 13 Hebrew website said.

"This is not the first time Gantz has objected to Bennett's anti-U.S. moves on the Iran issue," the website said on the day of the release.

This time Lapid joined the prime minister's line, but the army minister is no longer in the same place, in terms of the form of expression of Israeli protest and the degree of publicity to be made, according to the website.

The Minister of the Army was very concerned about the imminent decision to remove the Revolutionary Guard from the list of terrorist organizations and believed that action should be taken against it. Gantz, however, seems to have objected to the statement's unusual tone.

In the first nuclear deal in 2015, the IRGC as an organization was not part of the sanctions, and was blacklisted entirely (not some individuals within) by former President Donald Trump.

This came at the request of former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2019 after withdrawing from the agreement and as part of Tehran's lobbying policy.

Naftali Bennett not only made the joint statement, on March 20th he reiterated his "concern" about the U.S. intention to respond to Iran's "demand."

"Even if this unfortunate decision is taken, the State of Israel will continue to treat the IRGC as a terrorist organization," he said in a series of tweets, stressing, "We will continue to work against them."

Speaking of the imminent conclusion of a new nuclear deal, Bennett continues to stress that "['Israel'] will not abide by its results and will reserve the right to act absolutely freely with Iran regardless of the outcome of the Vienna meetings."

 

Different Visions

On February 9, the Israeli Occupation's national security adviser, Eyal Hulata, met in Washington with his U.S. counterpart Jake Sullivan and held nuclear talks with Iran, their third meeting in a month.

Two days earlier, Hulata stressed that "Tel Aviv" and Washington did not agree on the Iranian issue, especially when it came to the nuclear deal, noting that "coordination is very important and strategic as we work on it."

"Whether the nuclear deal is returned or not, 2022 will be a year in which we need to act differently from the way we have worked so far, and we need to be prepared," he said, without elaborating.

More recently, Israeli officials have on more than one occasion hinted at a military option against Iran's nuclear program, amid accusations that Tehran is using its talks with major powers in the Austrian capital to buy time to develop its nuclear capabilities.

Indirect talks in Vienna between Washington and Tehran on a return to the 2015 nuclear deal, from which former President Donald Trump's administration withdrew in May 2018, have entered the final stage.

According to The Hebrew Channel 13 website, the White House and the State Department have recently tried to reassure "Tel Aviv," saying Washington will make sure that figures within the Revolutionary Guard involved in terrorism remain blocked and specific, but "Israel is unable to understand how the order is being implemented."

In general, "Israel" is angry at the idea of distinguishing the United States between wings and people within an organization whose "full essence is terrorism and instability in the Middle East," the website says.

The latest statements by U.S. Central Command Commander General Kenneth Mackenzie in mid-March summarize Washington's strategy of dealing with Iran.

McKenzie, whose term is nearing completion, said U.S. policy is that Iran will not have nuclear weapons, noting that a return to the agreement may not be an ideal step, but it is important to reach the goal.

According to Amos Harel, a military analyst at Haaretz, the impression in "Israel" is that the U.S. administration is determined to sign the agreement "and end the nuclear story, in order to stop Iran's uranium enrichment activities and because of the need to focus on other more pressing regions, primarily competition with China and the war in Ukraine."

"In the Israeli establishment, they recognize that the impact on U.S. positions in the negotiations (with Iran) has been minimal, following President Joe Biden's desire to speed up the signing of the nuclear deal," the Hebrew newspaper said in a March 21 report.

"U.S. listening to Israeli reservations has been low, and U.S. negotiators in Vienna have not tightened their positions in the wake of Israeli allegations," he said.

Haaretz said on March 29 that Biden wants to remove the issue (nuclear deal) from the agenda, and is less interested in reservations and concerns than U.S. allies, including Saudi Arabia, "Israel," and the UAE.

 

Future Concerns

According to Israeli prosecutors, the new agreement does not slightly restore the situation to what it was in 2015, because in the past years, since the U.S. withdrawal from the agreement, Iran has gathered a lot of technological expertise, developed new and sophisticated centrifuges and collected large quantities of enriched uranium.

The Israeli Occupation also considers that the clause in the agreement on the gradual lifting of demands from Iran, which will begin in 2025 and run until 2031, will "at an early stage" remove restrictions on Tehran operating centrifuges.

"Israel" recently stepped up its rhetoric because "after signing (the agreement), any dramatic Israeli action against the Iranians will be asked by the United States for an explanation," Hebrew Channel 12 reported on March 15.

"Action against Iran's military positioning in the Middle East, particularly in Syria, could be affected by the agreement, and once signed, Tehran will be able to pump money into places where it has influence thanks to the lifting of sanctions," it said.

Although the Israeli Occupation maintains confidentiality (in implementation and responsibility) when working on Iranian territory, it now seems willing to take greater risks than in the past to disrupt the operational capability of the Iranians and try to deter them, Israel Hayom says.

"Under the agreement, Israel will refrain from taking action against uranium enrichment facilities, but will be free to act against anything else that puts them at risk, such as Iran’s missile and missile system, the drone system, and The Jerusalem Corps activities," the paper said in a March 16 report.

Progress in the nuclear deal and Washington's flexible steps appear to have encouraged Iran to cross lines previously considered red, most recently by acknowledging its support for a "ballistic" missile attack on targets in Erbil, the largest city in northern Iraq's Kurdistan region.

The Revolutionary Guard said March 13th that it had targeted an "Israeli strategic center," while regional authorities denied the existence of any Israeli positions on its territory.

"Iran could have fired missiles, and it doesn't recognize it as Israel does in Syria, but when it says it does, it sends messages to multiple parties," the Persian-version of Sputnik commented.

In an article by Imad Abshnas in mid-March, it appeared that the IRGC had slapped enemies hard as it made the opposite party revolve around itself, he estimated.

U.S. officials predicted that the attack could be in response to an Israeli air strike in Syria about a week earlier that killed two Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

"The strike was in response to an earlier Israeli attack launched from Iraqi Kurdistan on a drone factory in the northwestern Iranian city of Tabriz a few weeks ago," a senior Iranian official was quoted as saying by the British website Middle East Eye.

On March 21, The Hebrew channel Kan, entitled "Allowed to Publish," said that two drones fired from Iran were shot down by a U.S. fighter jet in Iraqi airspace while on their way to explode in the Israeli Occupation, without specifying the time of the incident.

 

Tags