More importantly, Mossad Director David Barnea set
off the alarm bells loud and clear in a media briefing on Thursday.
Barnea said the Biden administration has betrayed Israel’s most basic
existential interests with this deal, which he referred to as “a
strategic disaster” for Israel. He explained that the agreement “gives
Iran license to amass the required nuclear material for a bomb,” as well
as the financial means to massively expand its regional aggression
through the likes of Hezbollah, the Assad regime and Palestinian terror
groups supported by Iran in Gaza, Judea and Samaria.
Barnea said the United States “is rushing into an accord that is
ultimately based on lies.” The main lie is Iran’s claim that its nuclear
activities are peaceful in nature—a claim that has been unsustainable
since Israel seized and exposed Iran’s nuclear archive in 2018. Barnea
added that US President Joe Biden believes it is in his
interest to reach a deal, and that Iran, for its part, wants the
hundreds of billions of dollars it is expected to receive after the U.S.
lifts its economic sanctions against Iran as part of the new deal.
Lapid reportedly dressed Barnea down for breaking with the
government’s line. After refusing to walk back his remarks about the
Biden administration, Barnea has been subjected to withering criticism
by Ravid and multiple other government mouthpieces in the media who
received briefings from Lapid. Among other things, Ravid called Barnea
“messianic,” that is, delusional.
The gross disparity between the calming messages Lapid, Gantz and
their media flacks are putting out on the one hand, and Barnea’s
insistence that the approaching agreement is a strategic catastrophe on
the other, is but the latest iteration of a longstanding dispute at the
highest echelons of Israeli leadership over how to understand the
so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (aka the 2015 nuclear
deal), and the challenge it poses for Israel.
The JCPOA was the culmination of the Obama administration’s efforts
to realign the United States away from Israel and its Sunni Arab allies
and towards Iran. Obama’s determination to abandon Israel and the Sunnis
in favor of Iran upended what had been the underlying assumption of
Israel’s military and intelligence leadership since the 1970s. That
assumption was and remains that Israel’s greatest strategic asset isn’t
the IDF, or the Mossad, but the United States.
For nearly 50 years, the guiding concept of Israel’s military and
intelligence chiefs has been that Israel could make what appeared to the
naked eye to be insane strategic concessions, like withdrawing from the
Golan Heights or Judea and Samaria or the Jordan Valley, or canceling
the Lavi fighter jet program, because Israel didn’t need to be able to
defend its borders, or field the best air platform in the world. It
could trust the United States to protect it.
Military leaders like Gantz and all of his predecessors since Ehud Barak
argued that Israel had to make concessions to the Arabs to help America
help Israel. As for the Lavi, Israel has no business building fighter
jets. That’s America’s job. Israel doesn’t need strategic independence
or defensible borders. It needs to keep the US on its side. Because
America, not the IDF, is the guarantor of Israel’s security.
The JCPOA was a profound rebuke to this claim. The deal guaranteed
Iran would become a nuclear-armed state within 15 years at most, with
the UN Security Council’s seal of approval. It also gave Iran the
financial means to massively expand and accelerate its regional and
global aggression.
Israel had two options for contending with the JCPOA. It could
respond rationally, by developing a flexible, self-reliant strategy
based on bold, independent initiatives and the creation of new regional
alliances. Or it could respond irrationally, by doubling down on its
dependence on the United States and lashing out against anyone who
questioned the credibility of US protestations of its “sacrosanct”
commitment to Israel’s security.
From 2009, when then President Barack Obama began flirting with Iran, through May 2021 when then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
was ousted from office, Israel implemented both options. Netanyahu
adopted the rational response, while the security establishment,
including two Mossad directors, Meir Dagan and Tamir Pardo, and three IDF chiefs of staff Gabi Ashkenazi, Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot, implemented the irrational one.
With the heads of Mossad and the IDF undercutting him at every turn,
Netanyahu used the Foreign Ministry and the National Security Council,
both of which he controlled, to reposition Israel as an independent
regional power. He massively expanded Israel’s relations with states in
Africa, Asia, Latin America and east-central and southern Europe. He
developed personal ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
He transformed Israel into an energy power by developing its offshore
natural gas deposits. And beginning with the Arab Spring, Netanyahu
opposed the US-supported ouster of long-serving Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak
in 2011, and his replacement by the Muslim Brotherhood in 2012.
Netanyahu supported the Egyptian military’s overthrow of Muslim
Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi in 2013.
These actions earned him the gratitude and respect of the Egyptian
military, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Those
sentiments led to operational partnerships against Hamas and Iran that
later formed the basis of the Abraham Accords.
When Netanyahu finally got an ally as Mossad head with his appointment of Yossi Cohen to replace Pardo in 2016, Cohen and National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat
worked together both operationally and diplomatically to expand
Israel’s regional military and intelligence ties, and carry out strikes
against Iran’s nuclear installations.
For their part, Israel’s generals did their best to discredit and
subvert Netanyahu. From 2010 through 2012, Dagan, Pardo, Ashkenazy and
Gantz all rejected repeated orders from Netanyahu to prepare the
security services to attack Iran’s nuclear installations. In 2010 Dagan
flew to Washington without authorization to tell then CIA chief Leon Panetta
that Netanyahu had ordered the Mossad and the IDF to attack Iran. Pardo
and Gantz similarly refused Netanyahu’s order to prepare to attack Iran
in 2011.
Israel’s military and intelligence leaders also worked to undermine
Netanyahu’s credibility by refusing to stand with him when he waged his
public campaign against the JCPOA in 2014 and 2015. While refusing to
publicly criticize the deal which gave Iran a glide path to a nuclear
arsenal, military and intelligence leaders gave off-camera interviews
applauding the deal. Eisenkot openly embraced the JCPOA after he retired
in 2019.
During Donald Trump’s presidency, Pardo condemned
Netanyahu for revealing that the Mossad had seized Iran’s nuclear
archive, despite the fact that the operation, and its publication, paved
the way for Trump’s abandonment of the JCPOA and implementation of his
“maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, which brought the regime to
its knees and dried up its funding for its terror proxies. Gantz and
Ashkenazy opposed the Abraham Accords
and torpedoed Netanyahu’s sovereignty plan in Judea and Samaria. Gantz
refused to fund a project Netanyahu advocated that would significantly
improve Israel’s ability to attack Iran’s nuclear installations.
Last year, with the newly elected Biden having pledged to return the
United States to the JCPOA, and with Netanyahu out of power, Israel’s
dual rational-irrational response to the JCPOA came to an end.
Irrationality won out.
Upon entering office, then prime minister Naftali Bennett,
Lapid and Gantz made the security establishment’s defense of the JCPOA
and its refusal to recognize its strategic implications the basis of
their policymaking. They adopted a policy of silencing criticism of the
administration’s Iran policy, and continuously blaming Netanyahu for
Iran’s nuclear advances. They ignored the fact that all of Iran’s
nuclear advances happened after Biden won the presidential elections in
November 2020, and attributed them instead to Trump’s abandonment of the
JCPOA. Indeed, they claimed Netanyahu’s public opposition to the JCPOA
was the reason Obama signed onto it, and that Netanyahu’s success in
persuading Trump to abandon the deal is the reason Iran is now a nuclear
threshold state.
Bennett, Lapid and Gantz announced a policy of “no surprises” in
relation to Israel’s operations in Iran, giving Biden an effective veto
over all of Israel’s actions—which all but ended shortly thereafter.
Lapid ended Israel’s independent foreign policy and opted to transform
Israel into the State Department’s echo chamber. In so doing, he
destroyed Israel’s relations with Russia, endangering Israel’s
operations in Syria and paving the way for Russia’s decision to upgrade
its ties with Iran.
Whereas Obama’s JCPOA was a looming strategic disaster for Israel,
Biden’s nuclear deal is an imminent existential threat to Israel.
Despite Lapid and Gantz’s calming messages, Barnea’s warnings are
entirely accurate. Even if it is true that Sullivan whispered sweet
nothings in Hulata’s and Gantz’s ears, the fact is that under Biden’s
deal, the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear operations begin expiring next
year, and effectively end in 2025. Biden’s deal leaves Iran’s illicitly
enriched uranium in Iran. It hamstrings the IAEA. And it massively
enriches Iran, transforming it into a regional power, boasting a nuclear
weapons program legitimized by the UN Security Council and guaranteed
by an administration that will remain in power until the nuclear
restrictions end.
So too, as Barnea warned, Biden’s deal with Iran endangers the
Abraham Accords, by compelling the Sunnis to reach accommodations with a
hegemonic Iran, leaving Israel without regional partners.
The rational response to this catastrophic turn of events is to
disengage from the Biden administration, work with the Republicans to
wage a public relations war against the deal, ratchet up Israel’s ties
with the Gulf states, mend fences with Russia and work intensively to
develop and deploy military means to destroy Iran’s nuclear
installations. The irrational response is to fly to America, pretend
that everything is fine, and proclaim, based on a “feeling,” that the
Americans will solve the Iran problem for us.
No comments:
Post a Comment