Israel’s Kan channel looked at Israel’s fears of the United States signing a nuclear deal with Iran, even though it could keep Tehran away from a nuclear bomb.
The channel’s report said that “Israel’s arguments against returning to a nuclear deal with Iran are unclear. The agreement is certainly not optimal and full of problems. But if the criterion against which the situation is being considered is the desire to keep Tehran as far away as possible from being able to quickly penetrate the production of a nuclear bomb, it is clear that the answer is clear,” noting that “Iran is a few weeks from now, while the agreement, as far as we know its details, will set them back about half a year from now.
She asked: “What alternative does the Israeli leadership offer to a bad deal? So far, no alternative course of action has been presented to the public to keep Iran from this point. However, what is the logic of the majority of the Israeli elite? in their strong opposition to the deal?”, pointing out that the opponents of the nuclear deal, led by Mossad chief David Barnea, believe that the most important thing is to preserve Israel’s freedom of action in the face of Iran.
She added: “In their view, if Jerusalem does not openly oppose the agreement, it will not have the legitimacy to act (militarily) after it is signed,” adding that “this is an argument with many flaws: a massive military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is an action which requires in any case. “Coordination with the US. This is mainly due to the need for massive US military assistance after such an attack.”
She explained that “regarding the continuation of covert disruption operations in Iran attributed to Israel: Israel seems to believe that if it now publicly opposes the agreement, this will give it the right to continue these operations against the demands of the Americans.” Vardy says they will now be unable to continue acting against the Iranians for the duration of the agreement. program agreements.
And she considered that “beyond this, it is possible that the source of the Israeli objection is mainly due to fear of the growing conventional military power of Iran and to a lesser extent of the Iranian nuclear program”, given that “it is possible that opponents of the agreement from the political elite and security elites in Israel believe that the current situation can be lived without an agreement. A situation in which Iran is very close to the bombing point. Assuming that covert interdiction measures will help keep Iran at a relatively safe distance from the possibility of a bomb.
Source: “was”