Nepal-Israel-Iran: Latest Updates

Israeli Aid to Nepal

Last Saturday, minutes after Israel heard the news of the devastating earthquake that hit Nepal, the Israeli Foreign Ministry, set up a 24/7 Emergency and Crisis Management Center with the goal of providing an immediate and appropriate response to the situation and coordinate rescue, medical and humanitarian aid to Israelis, Nepalese and others who were caught up in the disaster.

According to an MFA bulletin issued Monday, “the first Israeli rescue plane, from the Home Front Command, landed in Kathmandu on Sunday (26 April) and brought back to Israel the first group of Israelis, including newborn babies. A Magen David Adom plane landed in Nepal, also on Sunday, and delivered a delegation of doctors and paramedics who settled in at the Chabad House. The plane returned to Israel with another group of Israelis.”

Three IDF air force planes arrived in Nepal on Monday loaded with emergency aid. They also brought back more stranded Israelis.

Two El Al planes - one cargo and one passenger – arrived on Tuesday carrying a team from the Israeli Ministry of Health and a large delegation of Home Front Command staff - more than two hundred doctors, sanitation engineers, machinery technicians and others - as well as medical equipment (portable monitor, oxygen tanks, medical ventilators, medicines, X-ray machines, resuscitation kits) and engineering equipment. After unloading their cargo, the planes returned to Israel carrying more Israeli travelers.

According to one witness at the airport, while preparing the planes for the return flights, the Israeli crews handed out sandwiches, oranges and water to the hundreds of stranded travelers, of all nations, that were waiting desperately to be rescued. Several Nepalese officials commented that no other country cares for its citizens as Israel does.

As of Tuesday morning, out of hundreds of Israelis currently still in Nepal, several dozen are unaccounted for. The Department for Israelis abroad at the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem is leading the efforts to establish contact with them.

The New Israeli Government

Not yet! As of Tuesday, April 28, with only 6 days left of the 14 day extension that President Rivlin gave Prime Minister designate Netanyahu, the coalition is yet to be finalized.

Not that there is a shortage of candidates. With Netanyahu needing at least 61 sitting Knesset members to form a coalition, there are plenty of potential “wannabe” ministers and deputy ministers in the parties considered ideological “natural partners” in a right-wing government, to give him at least 61, and possibly 67 seats.

But there’s the problem: Everyone wants a “job” or control over a ministry or committee that will allow them to spread patronage and benefits to their constituents…at a cost of tens of millions of dollars each year…all from the small national taxpayer funded coffers, which also have to support crucial government sectors like the IDF and national security, as well as education, power, infrastructure, development and more.

While Netanyahu has not yet formed a coalition, bits of information leaked from the negotiations indicate that he might be close.

For example: until the last Knesset changed a “Basic (constitutional) Law”, past Israeli governments have included dozens of ministers, deputies, and “ministers without portfolio”.  But according to the new law, as of this election the Israeli government can only have eighteen ministers and four deputy ministers.

 

However Netanyahu indicated on Monday that the Knesset might have to pass a new law that would enable him to form a broader coalition, with up to twenty two ministers and six deputy ministers, in order to satisfy the ambitions of potential partners who refuse to compromise on their demands for portfolios, personal benefits, and constituent-related budgets. If that happens then the so-called “cost of democracy” in Israel will go through the roof…

US Support for Israel

Sunday night I was encouraged by the warm, enthusiastic and unreserved support for Israel that reverberated through the packed ballroom during AIPAC’s annual event in Dallas. And I’m not talking about the very impressive gathering of over 1,200 local AIPAC members and supporters, whose very participation in this signature evening speaks volumes about their support for our historical and eternal Jewish homeland.

No – what encouraged me were the statements by the politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, seniors and juniors. While they all made the obligatory comments about “shared values” of democracy, human rights, justice and America’s long-term commitment to Israel’s security, I was pleasantly surprised that most of them, from both parties, specifically mentioned the current and immediate threat to Israel, the U.S. and the Middle East from a nuclear armed Iran. 

All agreed that a diplomatic resolution that prevents Iran from ever reaching that stage is preferable…and that Congress should be involved before a bad deal with the extreme Islamist, terror sponsoring Republic of Iran is signed.

This brings me to the “Bad Deal”

Last Friday Iran and the P5+1 negotiators, led by the U.S., renewed talks in Vienna.  After the first round Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs Abbas Araqchi said that the US negotiating delegation gave the Iranian nuclear team “very useful” explanations regarding the removal of anti-Iran sanctions. He could be referring to the desperate attempt by the US, according to the Wall Street Journal and several news agencies, to bribe Iran into signing a worthless and unenforceable “deal” by agreeing to release $30-50 billion of funds, frozen under the UN Security Council sanctions resolution, immediately…and with only an Iranian highly questionable “promise” to maybe comply…maybe.

What a week this has been:

• Israel projecting a bright and shining “light to the nations”, despite Bibi’s obstacles to forming a coalition and tension rises in the North and South.
• US grassroots political support for Israel’s security (at least in DFW) is at its height.
• The weak US led P5+1 appears to be abandoning the pledge that “no deal with Iran is better than a bad deal” in favor of “any deal at any cost”.

 
This week we’re two out of three…let’s see what next week brings.

Israel Update - "Things seen from here..."

     A line from a popular Israeli love song by prolific composer Matti Caspi goes: “Things seen from here are not seen from there”. I was frequently reminded of that line during a short visit to Israel last week for a class reunion, where I had a chance to talk to many friends and family members representing a broad spectrum of political opinions.

     This gave me a unique opportunity to gauge the overall mood of most Israelis in the wake of two major recent events:

1. The Election results in Israel
2. The widely criticized US-Iran “Nuclear Framework Agreement”. 

     Regarding the  elections, once the Likud supporters finished celebrating, and the Zionist Camp supporters got over their disappointment, the raw and combative election mode emotions literally dissipated. They were replaced by everyone’s calm and erudite opinions, expressed frequently and repeatedly whenever two or more Israelis, acquainted or not, happened to be in proximity (like at a bus stop or supermarket cashier line), as to which parties “must” be in Netanyahu’s coalition and what politician “must” get a senior cabinet position…lest the country goes to hell in a handbasket.
     As of this writing (Tuesday, April 21) Netanyahu has not yet formed a coalition and has been given a fourteen day extension by President Rivlin.

     I believe that Bibi will form a coalition, now that there seems to be a good agreement between him and Moshe Kahalon, whose party won 10 seats in the elections.

     Regarding the US-Iranian “Framework Agreement”, there is virtually universal condemnation of it by Israelis at all levels. Both pundits and security experts agree that by just announcing the unsigned “Framework agreement”, the US, and therefore the world, both in principle and in fact recognize and accept Iran as a “nuclear threshold” country. Whether breakout time is four weeks or twelve months or ten years is totally irrelevant.
     But the biggest issue with the “framework” is its focus on Uranium enrichment in thousands of cascading centrifuges of various “generations”. The “framework” talks about limiting enrichment, closing enrichment facilities, monitoring stockpiles of enriched Uranium, etc., but only in passing grudgingly allows Iran to continue using the heavy water nuclear reactor near the city of Arak as long as it limits the production of Plutonium.

     And “there’s the rub” as Shakespeare said. An enriched Uranium bomb is big, heavy, and cannot be miniaturized to fit on a missile. On the other hand a Plutonium based bomb is smaller, and easily transported and deployed. Weapons-grade Plutonium is produced in Heavy Water reactors, which can be as small on the outside as a warehouse.
     And who says that Iran has only one heavy water reactor in Arak?

     The nuclear reactor destroyed in Syria, allegedly by Israel on September 6, 2007, was a small, camouflaged North Korean model heavy-water reactor. In addition to a few North Korean workers killed in the attack, several Iranian nuclear engineers and IRGC officers were also killed and injured. This was a 100% Iranian heavy water weapons grade Plutonium producing reactor.

     The question is how many more does Iran already have that are operational, either in Iran, Syria, Iraq or Lebanon?

     According to Professor Avraham Guber from the Department of Electronic Physics in the Faculty of Engineering at Tel Aviv University - enriched Uranium nukes do not threaten Israel. Plutonium nukes do.

     Based on this information from Israel – I hope that the final “deal” will focus on finding and destroying the hidden heavy water reactors and Plutonium stockpiles, while dealing with Iran’s missiles, and worrying less about the enriched Uranium process.

     From my talks and meetings last week I have the comfortable feeling that Israel is already on it.

     To paraphrase Caspi’s song: “Things you see from Israel are certainly not seen from here”.

Just Don't Call it a "Deal"!

Exactly a week ago President Obama stood in the Rose Garden of the White house and formally announced, in front of the world’s TV cameras: “Today, the United States, together with our allies and partners, has reached a historic understanding with Iran, which, if fully implemented, will prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. I am convinced that if this framework leads to a final, comprehensive deal, it will make our country, our allies, and our world safer”. 

Assuming everything the president mentioned is in the final “agreement”, and based on how Iran understands this “framework”, let’s fact-check the veracity of some of the details mentioned in the President’s address  Below are a few of the points made, followed by my analysis:

1. The proposed framework would “cut off every pathway that Iran could take to develop a nuclear weapon”.

Analysis:  Since Iran is currently about 6 weeks from “breakout”, and the “framework” does not address the bulk of its stockpiled enriched Uranium, its “pathway to a nuclear weapon” is, in fact, a wide open highway.

2. Iran agreed to robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime.

Analysis:  Not according to top Iranian leaders who claim “national sovereign rights”

3. “This deal is not based on trust. It's based on unprecedented verification”.

Analysis:  Only IF the IAEA is allowed in to verify, including into the yet undisclosed locations…

4. The core of its heavy water reactor at Arak will be dismantled and replaced

Analysis:  Not according to the Iranians (see below)

5. Iran’s installed centrifuges will be reduced by two thirds.

Analysis:  According to the Iranians the old generation IR1 centrifuges will be replaced by thousands of the new and much more efficient IR3 and IR4 models, some of which are already assembled on site.

6. Iran will no longer enrich uranium at its underground Fordo facility.

Analysis:  But the centrifuges will continue to operate and not be dismantled…and inspections will be limited to the “civilian research facilities”

7. Iran will not enrich uranium with its advanced centrifuges for at least the next 10 years.

Analysis:  Maybe not at the currently known locations, but what about the yet undisclosed military facilities…?

8. The vast majority of Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium will be neutralized.

Analysis:  This was promised over three years ago. The world is still waiting for the first batch to be “treated”.

9. International inspectors will have unprecedented access to Iranian nuclear facilities and the entire supply chain that supports them.

Analysis:  Iranians: “we will decide what they can inspect.

In return for full Iranian compliance to all the above, the President said, “the international community has agreed to provide Iran with relief from certain sanctions”. “If Iran violates the deal”, he went on, “sanctions can be snapped back into place.”

During the briefing, the President made a number of telling statements:

A.   The “Framework” deal is not signed!

B.   Key details are still to be finalized.

C.   “Nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed”

It’s amazing how far the President has moved the Iranian nuclear goalposts since he said, at a March 6, 2012, press conference: "…we will not countenance Iran getting a nuclear weapon…my policy is to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon -- because if they get a nuclear weapon that could trigger an arms race in the region, it would undermine our non-proliferation goals, it could potentially fall into the hands of terrorists.”

So did the latest talks in Switzerland actually produce a “deal”, a “framework” for a deal” or even an “understanding”?

No…all one has to do is look at the “summary” papers put out by the State Department (1318 words in English), and the Iranian government (512 words in Persian), that offer totally contradictory understandings of what, if anything was agreed on in Luzon last week.

According to Amir Taheri in the New York Post on April 4th: “The American statement claims that Iran has agreed not to use advanced centrifuges, each of which could do the work of 10 old ones. The Iranian text, however, insists that “on the basis of solutions found, work on advanced centrifuges shall continue on the basis of a 10-year plan.”

Taheri adds that: “The American text claims that Iran has agreed to dismantle the core of the heavy water plutonium plant in Arak. The Iranian text says the opposite. The plant shall remain and be updated and modernized.”

The State Department summary paper talks about “phased sanctions relief” linked to Iranian compliance, while Iran claims, both in its official summary paper and in public announcements over the weekend that the sanctions would be “immediately terminated.” No wonder they were celebrating in the streets.

Bottom line: Since nothing has been signed, and since the sides obviously still disagree on key elements of the negotiations, we clearly do not have an “agreement” or even an “a historic understanding with Iran”…as we were led to believe in the Rose Garden last week.

What we do have are more negotiations, with flexible “deadlines” and no leverage, since many of the sanctions have been pretty much busted or by-passed. 

Call it whatever you want (“The 2015 P5+1 Capitulation” comes to mind…) – Just don’t call it a “Deal”!