The Jerusalem Post is concerned by Russia’s role in the proliferation of nuclear power plants in several countries in the region, and warns that this “bodes ill in the long term,” as “None of the governments around us that are so eager to acquire nuclear capability can even be trusted with the safe maintenance of such facilities.” The editor is further concerned that “The instability characteristic of most Mideastern societies could lead to the ascendance of irresponsible forces, to resort to understatement,” and asserts: “The blame for this burgeoning nuclear race must be laid squarely at the door of the powers negotiating a deal with Iran.” The editor adds: “The bad deal in the making with Tehran . . . is geared toward establishing Iran as a regional nuclear power that both can then claim to be a strategic ally,” and states: “This is not only bad news for Israel. The Jewish state, it must be stressed, is not the only country that fears Iran, even if it is the most directly threatened by it.”

Haaretz believes that last week’s disqualification Arab MK Haneen Zoabi by the Central Elections Committee was unjustified, and states: “In light of the election committee’s repeated disqualifications of Arab candidates for political reasons, Israel should tighten the requirements and drastically reduce the use of this instrument.”

Yediot Aharonot notes the increase in Israel’s GNP per capita over the past decade, which brought it to the top ranks of European countries, and is apprehensive that this may be a cause of anti-Semitism: “Just like Jews have been envied throughout the generations for their economic success, rising Israel may be a source of envy too – for Europe, for example.” Pointing out that “Most of the Israeli leap is the fruit of the mind, as the world is in an information revolution era, and the United States and Israel are the capital cities of this era,” the author states: “This time, however, anti-Semites will not be able to claim that we robbed someone else's resources. This leap is the fruit of the Israeli mind, invention, startups and initiatives.”

Yisrael Hayom wonders whether the joint struggle of the United States and Iran against the Islamic state is sufficient to warrant a revolution in US policy and asks: “Would Iran really become a dependable partner for the U.S. in fighting Islamic State in Iraq, allowing Washington to reconsider its older Middle Eastern alliances with Israel and Saudi Arabia?” The author asserts: “The U.S. would be making a terrible mistake if it comes to believe that it can replace its old Middle Eastern partners with a revolutionary Iranian regime, along with its proxy forces,” and concludes: “it must always be remembered that Tehran's purpose since 1979 has been to reduce American influence across the entire area from Beirut to Bahrain in order to pave the way for its own military domination of the region as a whole.”

Globes believes that the US and Iran have reached an agreement, and that the “US looks set to present its allies with a dangerous fait accompli on Iran's nuclear program.” The author asserts: “The [US] president is desperate to be able to claim some sort of foreign policy ‘victory’ to embellish an otherwise dismal record,” and declares: “He should not be given the opportunity to mimic Chamberlain in 1938, this time at the expense of Israel and half the Middle East besides, instead of merely Czechoslovakia.”