Give the new nuclear deal a chance to succeed
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may have reasons to feel apprehensive about Iran's nuclear programme and the accord that has been worked out between Iran and the Western powers, especially the friendly US. But there is no need for him to prejudge the outcome and base his sabre-ratting on it. He ought to wait and see what the final accord is, and what it is likely to lead up to. But Mr Netanyahu already seems to have made up his mind that the agreement, is “dangerous for all of humanity” and that it confirms “our concerns and worse”. The Israeli Prime Minister is free to have an opinion, and it cannot be denied that those hardline positions have been the product of his country having faced, and still facing, repeated terror attacks from the borders by at least some of the groups which have allegiance to Iran.
It is also a fact that, if Iran's nuclear programme causes the greatest and the most direct danger to any nation, it is Israel. Also, one mustn't forget that even the new, supposedly moderate Iranian leadership of President Hassan Rouhani, has been as dogmatic as its predecessors in its non-recognition of Israel's existence, and worse, in its stated desire to see Mr Netanyahu's country disappear off the earth's face. But even Israel cannot deny the fact that, once Iran gets bound by an agreement with Western powers on its nuclear programme, its potential to play mischief covertly will be severely restrained, if not altogether eliminated. Surely this should be good news for embattled Israel.
The agreement ought to goad Iran to reduce the number of centrifugal machines it uses in its nuclear facilities and to ship out, under strict international supervision, its considerable stockpile of nuclear material. But there is still no complete clarity on these issues. Iran does not want to be seen as significantly backtracking on its nuclear programme — which it claims is for peaceful, civilian purposes only — and that too at the West's insistence. This ‘capitulation' will goes against the very grain on which Tehran's foreign policy has been crafted over the decades. Nothing can be worse for its civilian leadership, the powerful ayatollahs and the people than to be seen as bowing to directives of the Western nations, with many of them having sound relations with Israel.
The challenge for both Tehran and the West, therefore, is to strike a path that is seen as dignified for both, while also accommodating each other’s concerns. Meanwhile, Mr Netanyahu's belligerence is also because, having recently won a record term in office riding on the support of the nationalist and the ultra-Right elements in politics and among the people, he cannot sudden transform into a dove. Still, the West cannot altogether ignore his concerns about allowing for loopholes in the deal for Iran to exploit sooner than later. If the agreement collapses, Israel will have the moral and diplomatic strength to do what it considers best to protect its interests.
