(Israel Government Press Office)

Four papers discuss various issues regarding the major powers' negotiations with Iran about the latter's nuclear program:

Ma'ariv suggests, "Apparently, a bad agreement is better than the rifts in the West that were revealed last night in Geneva," and cautions, "If the window of opportunity is missed in the current circumstances, the collapse is liable to provide Tehran with a blank check to run forward with its nuclear program. The crisis in the talks does not stem from a united international position vis-à-vis the Iranians; its origin lies in the deep rifts that exist among the group of powers. The western powers were to have gone to negotiations like these well-prepared and coordinated. They came coordinated – with Tehran, not each other."
The author asserts, "The Iranians found themselves with a winning hand. If an agreement is achieved that rejects the French position and allows them to continue building a heavy water reactor in Arak, their position will have been accepted. If, on the other hand, it becomes clear that the deal fell through mainly due to opposition from Paris, the Iranians will be able to continue with their nuclear development plans unhindered." The paper believes that France is coordinating closely with Saudi Arabia, "which is as uninterested in an agreement as Israel is."
Regarding Israel, the author believes, "Whereas Israel's protests were once received in Geneva with ridicule, now the situation is much worse: They are being ignored. Israel is playing such a transparent and clear game and its positions are so automatic that their effectiveness is especially low," and adds, "Israel is now intentionally broadcasting a hysterical message in order to harden the West's positions." The author concludes: "Prime Minister Netanyahu's gun has no bullets. Any agreement with Iran would completely obviate any possibility of an Israeli attack; even the contacts being dragged into a deep stalemate would neutralize the chance of Israel taking action. The credibility of the Israeli military threat is zero – at least in the near future."

Yediot Aharonot says that, "None of the steps that the Iranians have committed to stop the race to a bomb and certainly do not turn back the clock," and adds, "The technique of gradual agreements, that do not include clear agreement on the dismantling of Iran's nuclear capabilities at the end of the process, allow Tehran to continue leading the world astray: The gradual reduction of sanctions and a return to the family of nations, without committing in advance to giving up the nuclear project." The author contends, "One of the sides in these contacts is either naïve or stupid, or both, and it isn't the Iranians. The Americans are so hot to reach an agreement, in light of their situation in the international arena and Obama's situation at home and abroad. The crisis that developed yesterday in Geneva has put the President in an uncomfortable position: Netanyahu is running amok, the Saudis and the Gulf states are outraged and everybody is appealing to Congress." The paper concludes: "And thus the talks have deepened the rift between Jerusalem and Washington. Until the weekend, Israel did not believe that the American administration would sign an agreement with Tehran in complete contravention of its own position. Over the weekend it understood that it had received a slap in the face."

Yisrael Hayom says, "It is clear that the business world in the West is closing its eyes and hoping for a resumption of trade with Iran, and every country will compete against its neighbor," and adds, "There are countries in the enlightened world that really do not care if Iran goes nuclear." The author reminds his readers that, "Obama is a short-time president; his time is up in less than three-and-a-half years. If Iran does not have a nuclear bomb by then, he will have achieved his goal and will say, 'After me, the flood.' But the world is concerned over Washington's shortsightedness, not only the West, but also the US's allies in the Middle East. The agreement is very bad because it brings the ayatollahs closer to their nuclear goal. It is bad because it leaves the US's allies in the Middle East – Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and Egypt – defenseless and open-mouthed."

Haaretz comments that Prime Minister Netanyahu's "harsh criticism of U.S. on Iran is a political boomerang. Netanyahu can disagree with the American conception of how to best thwart Iran’s aspirations, but boasting of Israel’s ability to thumb its nose at the international diplomatic process is a dangerous threat in itself. Netanyahu can chalk up an impressive and important achievement in that he has placed the Iranian threat at the top of the world’s agenda. However, Israel’s strength depends on American and international backing. Without it, Israel cannot deal with either the Iranian threat or the other, closer, regional threats, especially when the United States has Israel's back against the demand to examine and neutralize Israel’s nuclear potential. Netanyahu should grit his teeth, curb statements that only widen the rift between Israel and the United States and let the talks with Iran pass the experimental phase."
_______________

The Jerusalem Post writes: "Next week,  Jonathan Pollard begins his 29th year in prison for the crime of spying in the United States for the benefit of Israel. He never passed a single secret about America to Israel – only information about Israel’s enemies and their plans to destroy the Jewish state. Recent revelations of unbridled American espionage against its Western allies have exposed the hypocrisy and injustice that have kept him in prison for nearly three decades. Pollard’s petition for executive clemency – his final hope – has been sitting on Obama’s desk since October 2010. All it requires is a stroke of the president’s pen."

[Nadav Eyal, Alex Fishman and Dan Margalit wrote today’s articles in Ma'ariv, Yediot Aharonot and Yisrael Hayom, respectively.]