Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, today (Sunday, 23 November 2014), was interviewed on the ABC network program This Week and made the following remarks:

"I don't know, but I think it's important that there won't be a bad deal. A bad deal would enable Iran to remain with thousands of centrifuges, which it could use to enrich uranium which is what you need for a nuclear bomb. It could do so in a very short time.

I think the key principle is this: Don't dismantle sanctions before you dismantle Iran's capacity to make a nuclear bomb. And as I understand it, the Iranians are nowhere near to accepting that and if for any reason the United States or the other powers agree to leave Iran with that capacity to breakout, I think that would be a historic mistake. Not only because it endangers my country, Israel, that Iran's ruler, the Ayatollah Khamenei, vows to annihilate, but also because I think it would endanger the entire Middle East and the world.

We're doing everything we can to influence people not to make a bad deal and of course such a deal is something that would, would leave Iran with the capacity to threaten everyone. You know, they're developing ICBMs, intercontinental ballistic missiles. Why in heaven's name does Iran need intercontinental ballistic missiles? They don't need those missiles to reach Israel. They need it to reach Europe and the United States, and the only thing you carry on intercontinental ballistic missiles are nuclear warheads.

So I think that the issue here is not merely Israel, but everyone, the entire world, all of the – or nearly all of the regimes in the Middle East, with the exception of the Syrian regime – and everybody else, they understand that this is a great danger. Israel itself will always reserve the right to defend itself against any threat with its own power."


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was interviewed (Monday, 24 November 2014) on the BBC and made the following remarks:
 
"No deal is better than a bad deal. The deal that Iran was pushing for was terrible. The deal would have left Iran with the ability to enrich uranium for an atom bomb while removing the sanctions. The right deal that is needed is to dismantle Iran's capacity to make atomic bombs and only then dismantle the sanctions. Since that's not in the offing, this result is better, a lot better.
 
Well, I think Iran should not have any capacity to enrich. There's no right to enrich. What do you need to enrich uranium for if you're not developing an atomic bomb? They are. How do we know that? Because they're developing intercontinental ballistic missiles. What do you do with such missiles? The only reason you build ICBMs is to launch a nuclear warhead. So Iran, I think everybody understands, is unabashedly seeking to develop atomic bombs and I think they shouldn't have the capacity either to enrich uranium or to deliver nuclear warheads.

And I think that's the position that the P5+1, the leading powers of the world, should take. What is the justification of not taking this position? They say, well, it offends Iranian pride. So what? I mean, if this position was taken in the 1930s against Germany, it would have offended German pride, but it would have saved millions and millions of lives. You do not want to give this medievalist regime in Iran, that throws acid in the faces of women, that oppresses gays, that subjugates an entire population, that exports terrorism far and wide - don't give these violent medievalists atomic bombs. That's not a good thing for the future of the world and its security.
 
Well I hope, I hope that the pressures continue. I mean, the fact that there's no deal now gives an opportunity to continue the economic pressures that have proven to be the only thing that brought Iran to the table, to continue them, to toughen them. I think that's the road that has to be taken. But of course Israel is watching very carefully what is happening here and Israel always, always reserves the right to defend itself."

In an interview (November 23) on the i24news network, Prime Minister Netanyahu referred to the anticipated votes in the French parliament on recognizing a Palestinian state:

Of course I'm worried about this because what they're voting on is Palestine without peace. That's what the Palestinians want. They want to have a state to continue, not to end the war, with Israel but to continue the war from improved boundaries. That's all they're saying. Look at what has happened. Every time we gave territory to the Palestinians, for example in Gaza, Iran walked in with its Palestinian proxies, fired thousands of rockets on our cities. Does anyone in Paris talk about this? This is what they have to do now when the world is exploding? When Islamist fires are sweeping throughout the Middle East? When every place that we vacate becomes a bastion for militant Islam and for Iran? This is what is going to produce peace?!? To ask Israel to put the suburbs of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv in the hands of Islamic militants?

This is irresponsible. It's not conducive to peace. In fact, it hardens the Palestinian positions because it tells them, you get a state - which will be used to attack Israel - you don't have to give anything.

I think this is a terribly misguided position, terribly misguided position. You know, we don't come out and say what countries or what regions of France should be independent. We don't talk about that, nor do we talk about Spain nor do we talk about every European country, but this is what happens right now when the entire world is aflame, when the Middle East is aflame, when Israel - the only democracy - is standing with France and with Europe to fight the Islamist fires and they say, "No, well, bring, give the Palestinian who are lining up with the Islamists, who are supporting Hamas, who are glorifying these murders in synagogues as heroes, give them a state" - without peace. You think that's responsible? I think it's irresponsible and wrong.