Israeli Premier Says Biden Shifting Over Iran Nuclear Talks

Axios correspondent Barak Ravid quoted a senior Israeli official as saying on Sunday that David Barnea will attend closed door classified meetings of House and Senate intelligence committees.

In remarks that were not coordinated with Prime Minister Yair Lapid, the spymaster described the emerging agreement "a strategic disaster" for Israel and the United States “is rushing into an accord that is ultimately based on lies,” referring to Iran’s claim that its nuclear activities are peaceful in nature.

Shortly after Barnea’s comments were published, Lapid called the Mossad chief, telling him he had gone off script in his criticism of the US and asking for a clarification.

Barnea’s visit is the latest effort by Israel to sway Western powers from returning to the landmark accord. 

Earlier in the day, Lapid said that Israel's “diplomatic fight” against the deal included its National Security Adviser Eyal Hulata and Defense Minister Benny Gantz holding recent meetings in the US.

“We are making a concerted effort to ensure the Americans and Europeans understand the dangers involved in this agreement,” Lapid said, reiterating that what was signed in 2015 was “not a good deal,” and that the one currently being discussed entails “greater dangers.”

Lapid and US President Joe Biden are likely to meet in September, Israel’s Kan news reported on Saturday, citing unnamed officials. 

Iran is currently reviewing the US response to its position earlier sent to the European Union, which acts as a mediator between the two sides.

The conservative government-controlled Jomhuriyeh Eslami (Islamic Republic) newspaper on Sunday published parts of the US response to Iran’s demands that were sent through the European Union mediators. The newspaper said that the text was published on “media”, which means it might have been leaked on social media, and there is no certainty if indeed it reflects the contents of the secret US response.

According to Jomhuriyeh Eslami, the US appears to have rejected three demands deemed important by Iran.

The newspaper adds that if indeed the leaked text reflects the American response, then 16 months of nuclear talks have again hit a snag and there won’t be a signing ceremony soon.

One Iranian demand related to guarantees it has been seeking was accepted, and that is submitting the new deal to the US Congress for approval. But this vague alleged promise by the Biden Administration does not say if the agreement will be submitted to the Senate or to both houses of Congress. It also does not say in what legal format the issue will be put to vote.

If it is true that there will be a vote in Congress, what if the agreement fails to pass in the Senate where Republicans can garner a majority on this issue. Even if the agreement is presented for a non-binding vote and it fails, the purpose of giving a guarantee to Iran will be defeated.

The Biden Administration has rejected an Iranian demand for the US to guarantee that Western companies will do business with Iran. The alleged American response has said that the US will permit all companies, except those under sanctions, to deal with Iran, but it cannot force private companies to interact with the Islamic Republic.

Iranian negotiators are well aware that a Western government cannot force private firms to do business with a country if they do not want to, and one can assume that this demand is probably made to be rejected, so Tehran can ask for something else.

The second Iranian demand rejected by the Biden Administration is about the US issuing insurance for multinational companies that would do business with Iran after the agreement. Iran demanded that if the United States withdraws form the nuclear deal again, these corporations be compensated. Washington has responded that this is beyond the powers of the President, and Biden can only give his official assurances as long as he remains the President and not beyond it.

The third Iranian demand allegedly rejected is related to SWIFT, the international banking transfers system. Iran has lost the privilege of using the mechanism since 2018 when the US withdrew from the JCPOA and imposed sanctions. This makes trade and investments extremely difficult.

The US in its response has said that Washington cannot guarantee Iran’s return to the SWIFT, because it has not accepted financial reforms demanded by the Financial Actions Task Force (FATF), an international watchdog based in Paris that requires financial transparency from countries, anti-corruption measures and laws to prohibit financing of terrorism.

Iran has dragged its feet since 2017 to approve the measures demanded by the FATF and is blacklisted along with North Korea.

The revelations that the US has rejected three Iranian demands has cast a shadow over hopes in Tehran of a quick agreement. The Iranian currency that had initially risen 15 percent against the US dollar has again retreated.

Israel’s Kan news, citing unnamed officials, reported on Saturday that the two sides are discussing the meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. World leaders often hold bilateral meetings while attending the annual event.

As negotiations to restore the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) are advancing, Israel is increasingly criticizing the impending deal for being too weak to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz visiting Washington met with National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan to discuss the issue.

Speaking to leading Washington think tanks, Gantz said on Saturday that “improvements are necessary” in the new nuclear agreement.

“Iran has gained knowledge, infrastructure and capabilities” in recent years, Gantz said, “much of which is irreversible.”

According to Times of Israel he added, “this will enable Iran to further expand its nuclear program during the period of an agreement that would have fewer restrictions.” And Iran “would be able to acquire a nuclear weapon when said agreement would end in 2031.”

He emphasized that “Improvements are necessary in the nuclear agreement in discussion – with an emphasis on the ‘sunset’ clause.”

Iran is currently reviewing a US response to its position earlier sent to the European Union, which acts as a mediator between the two sides.

One remaining point of difference centers on Iran’s demand that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) shelve its enquiries into Tehran’s pre-2003 nuclear work. The US – backed by the ‘E3’ of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom – argued this is a separate issue from efforts to revive the 2015 deal, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action).

The IAEA board of governors, made up of 35 member states, convenes September 12-16, three months after it passed a motion moved by the US and the E3 censuring Iran over its failure to satisfy the agency over unexplained uranium traces found by inspectors in sites used before 2003.

Bloomberg reported “officials familiar with the talks” Friday saying they thought it might take “several weeks” to resolve US-Iran differences centered on both the IAEA probe and Iran’s expectation that it be cushioned against adverse effects of the US once again leaving the JCPOA.

Oil prices

Bloomberg noted keen interest in the talks among both oil traders and politicians around the world wary over rising energy prices given the Ukraine crisis. Iran has at least 150 million barrels of oil in storage that could return to the market if the US eased sanctions under a revived JCPOA.

Iran said Wednesday it was reviewing a US response to Iran’s own response of August 15 to European Union proposals made August 8 aimed at concluding 16-month talks between Iran and world powers over restoring the JCPOA, from which President Donald Trump withdrew the US in 2018. US ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions prodded Iran in turn after 2019 to expand its nuclear program and restrict the access of IAEA inspections to those required under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty.

Rafael Mariano Grossi, the IAEA director-general, said this week in an interview with PBS that restoring the JCPOA would allow inspectors greater access – implying that the uranium traces might be more easily investigated with the 2015 agreement back in place.

But opponents of the JCPOA in the US may expect further action against Iran at the IAEA board meeting beginning September 12. Subsequent Republican gains in the November 8 mid-term elections would strengthen voice in Congress critical of the approach taken by President Joe Biden.

‘Credible military threat’

A White House statement Friday after a meeting between National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and Benny Gantz, Israeli defense minister, said the two had discussed the “US commitment to ensure Iran never develops a nuclear weapon, and the need to counter threats from Iran and Iran-based proxies.”

Successive Israeli governments have opposed the JCPOA and efforts to restore it, while Israel is widely thought responsible for killing Iranian scientists and for attacks on Iranian nuclear sites – actions that led Iran to expand its nuclear program and restrict IAEA access.

Israeli journalist Barak Ravid tweeted Friday he had been informed by an Israeli official that Gantz had “reiterated the need for a credible US military threat against Iran.”

Gantz had welcomed, Ravid wrote, US airstrikes against targets in Deir al-Zour province Syria, which Washington said were a response to attacks on US forces in Syria ostensibly to combat the Islamic State group (Isis).But while Defense Secretary Colin Kahl framed the strikes as a response to “Iranian and Iranian-backed aggression,” the Biden administration rejects the Israeli leadership’s view that Iran’s support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad or Hezbollah in Lebanon rules out restoring the JCPOA.

The ultra-conservative Kayhan newspaper affiliated with the Supreme Leader’s office, once again on Saturday raised objections to the nuclear deal being finalized. The paper expressed dissatisfaction that “not all sanctions are supposed to be lifted.” It also protested that the US terrorist designation for the Revolutionary Guard will remain in place, and “worst of all”, there will be no meaningful guarantees for Iran.

A former vigilante group leader who often talks to Iranian media including the state television as "an academic and political analyst" says an agreement with the United States is "absolutely impossible" without first lifting the sanctions on Iran.

Sadegh Kushki told Didban Iran news website on Friday, August 26, that the United States is not in a position to give ultimatums or determine deadlines for Iran. He added that Iran's hardliners will not be happy with anything less than the terms of the 2015 nuclear agreement (JCPOA).

In yet another controversial statement, Kushki said, verification of the United States' commitment to the JCPOA should come before an agreement.

He repeated the government’s demand that a nuclear agreement should bring an economic breakthrough for Iran. He also reiterated that Iran will never accept to be committed to the terms of any agreement without making sure that Iran's economy will to benefit from the deal.

100%

Many Iranian pundits and politicians have been arguing in recent weeks that removing the US sanctions will have a marginal impact since governance and the economic system need structural reforms.

According to Didban Iran, exchanging responses to EU's proposal by Iran and the United States suggested an imminent revival of the JCPOA, but as Russian diplomat Mikhail Ulyanov has said, the back-and-forth process could further prolong the negotiations.

Kushki, blaming Saudi Arabia for lack of an agreement so far, added that Arab states wish to exacerbate differences between the parties to boost international pressures on Iran.

In another development, Tehran's Friday prayer Imam, Ahmad Khatami claimed that the differences between Tehran and Washington are not about nuclear issues. "America has a problem with the Iranian regime," Khatami said, adding that "America's problem with Iran is that the Islamic Republic has a popular leader and whatever he says, the people will accept."

Khatami, seen as a firebrand loyalist of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, claimed that the United States has been conspiring against Iran during the past four decades and suggested that Iran should be resilient and continue to become stronger.

He went on to say that Iran's main demands in the negotiations are the lifting of US oil and banking sanctions. While reports in Iran and abroad maintain that Iran has relinquished some of its previous demands, Khatami reiterated that Iranian negotiators will not give any further concessions to the United States.

At the same time, while moderates at the Iranian parliament such as Jalil Rahimi Jahanabadi of the National Security Committee has said that many hurdles have been removed and a deal will be finalized within the next ten days, hardline lawmakers, including Ali Khezrian of the ultraconservative Paydari Party have claimed that the draft agreement contains many flaws and the issues of guarantees and verification are missing in the new agreement.