Netanyahu risks isolation on the world stage

The last few weeks have seen a softening of rhetoric between the leaders of Iran and the USA. The new Iranian president Hassan Rouhani has been on something of charm offensive, promising that his country does not want to make a nuclear bomb, and insisting that he is committed to a diplomatic solution. US president Barack Obama has responded in kind, saying that despite challenges, he is willing to talk. The two men even spoke on the phone; the first time in 30 years that direct contact was made between the leaders of the two nations.

One premier who has watched these developments with growing anxiety is Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu. Following a series of statements expressing concern about Iran’s new approach, Netanyahu used his speech to the UN General Assembly on Tuesday to urge the world to be cautious. He also warned that Israel would take action alone, if necessary, to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb.

“Israel will never acquiesce to nuclear arms in the hands of a rogue regime that repeatedly promises to wipe us off the map,” he said, to an audience that included Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the UN. “I want there to be no confusion on this point. Israel will not allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. If Israel is forced to stand alone, Israel will stand alone.”

Threats of unilateral action are nothing new. During the reign of previous Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Netanyahu repeatedly intimated that military force – alone, if necessary – was a serious option for Israel. The continued urgency stems from the fact that Israel believes that Iran already has enough enriched uranium for an atomic bomb, if it is processed further into weapons-grade fuel.

Netanyahu’s tone was uncompromising. “Rouhani doesn’t sound like Ahmadinejad,” he said. “But when it comes to Iran’s nuclear weapons programme, the only difference between them is this: Ahmadinejad was a wolf in wolf’s clothing. Rouhani is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a wolf who thinks he can pull the wool over the eyes of the international community.”

He cast doubt on Rouhani’s credibility, pointing out that while he was Tehran’s chief nuclear negotiator in 2003-5, a period of diplomatic outreach was used to complete work at a nuclear facility. “This is a ruse,” he said, urging the US not to be fooled into relaxing international sanctions against Iran. “It’s a ploy.”

In addition to a widening of sanctions, he also demanded that Iran halt its uranium enrichment programme altogether. This is unlikely to be agreed: Rouhani, like other leaders, had defended Iran’s right to enrich uranium for civilian use. Netanyahu said that a deal would also have to include the transfer of enriched uranium out of Iran, and the dismantling of its nuclear infrastructure to remove its ability to produce plutonium and start a weapons programme.

Israel is by no means alone in its concern over the apparent thaw in US-Iran relations. Gulf States such as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates are all watching anxiously, concerned that Iran could use improved relations with Washington to challenge their economic and security interests in the region. Yet no other state has sounded such a publicly doubtful and belligerent tone.

Iran’s representatives responded quickly and angrily, with a diplomat saying that “the Israeli prime minister had better not even think about attacking Iran, let alone planning for that.”

Meanwhile, White House press secretary Jay Carney said that “it is entirely justifiable that Israel is sceptical about Iran and Iran’s intentions” given that “until recently”, its leadership wanted to destroy Israel. However, he also told reporters that “it is absolutely worth pursuing” a negotiated diplomatic resolution with Rouhani, and reiterated that “the most important measuring stick when it comes to pursuing this diplomatic opening is action”. He declined to say whether Netanyahu’s speech has undermined Obama’s diplomatic drive.

Prior to the Israeli leader’s speech, analysts within the country were expressing concern that by not even giving Iran’s new leadership a hearing, Netanyahu risked looking isolated on the world stage. Commentators have suggested that this fairly open criticism of US policy was an attempt to mobilise pro-Israel lawmakers in Washington. It’s worth noting that several politicians – both Republican and Democrat – have voiced support for Netanyahu’s call for more expansive sanctions. But as things stand, the Obama administration shows no signs of abandoning its current track. Israel’s opposition is not the only barrier to progress in the talks; it remains to be seen whether the multitude of challenges can be overcome.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.