Here we go: 'Senior Israeli official' slams 'Obama's Mossad lies'
A 'senior Israeli official' has slammed '
Obama's Mossad lies,' a reference to an
article in Bloomberg View by @JoshRogin and @Eli Lake. This is from the first link.
"The fraudulent claims against the Mossad Head were raised by the
Americans yesterday, despite a message that had been transmitted to them
on Tuesday by Intelligence Minister [Yuval] Steintz,” the senior
Israeli source told Channel 2 news.
He added that Israel had gone over the minutes of the meeting between
Pardo and the delegation of senators, and that Pardo had not said what
was attributed to him.
"Leaking the Mossad Head's statements, even if they had not been
falsified, is a serious breach of all the rules,” the senior source
added. “Friends do not behave like this. Information from a secret
meeting must not leak out.”
Pardo denied on Thursday the report – which was carried by Bloomberg news – claiming that the Mossad disagrees with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu about the need to press new sanctions on Iran.
Wow.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bob Corker, Eli Lake, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Josh Rogin, Mark Kirk, P 5+1, plutonium, Robert Menendez, Yuval Steinitz
Army Radio: @JoshRogin @EliLake story is Barack's revenge
Israel's Army Radio reports that the story by @JoshRogin and @EliLake in Bloomberg's that many are (falsely) interpreting as showing a split between Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Mossad on Iran sanctions is
President Obama's revenge for Netanyahu's invitation to address a joint session of Congress.
Sources in Jerusalem told Army Radio Thursday that the story reported in Bloomberg about
disagreement between Netanyahu and the Mossad regarding sanctions on
Iran is US President Barack Obama administration's “revenge” for
Netanyahu's invitation to address Congress.
The invitation was extended by Congress without consulting Obama.
Sorry, but I don't buy this one. If the White House wanted to plant a story, it would have gone to Jeffrey Goldberg or Tom Friedman.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bob Corker, Eli Lake, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Josh Rogin, Mark Kirk, Mossad, P 5+1, plutonium, Robert Menendez, Tamir Pardo
Breaking: Full statement from Mossad head on Iran
The above was just posted on
TwitLonger by Israel Radio reporter Chico Menashe. Here's my translation:
Reaction of the Mossad Chairman to the new crisis with Washington:
On 19 January 2015, Mossad Chairman Tamir Pardo met with a delegation of American Senators. The meeting took place at the Senators' request, and with the Prime Minister's approval.
Contrary to the report, the Mossad Chairman did not say that he opposes additional sanctions against Iran. In the meeting, the Mossad Chairman emphasized the unusual effectiveness of the sanctions imposed on Iran a number of years ago in bringing Iran to the negotiating table.
The Mossad Chairman pointed out that the negotiations with Iran must be conducted using 'carrots and sticks,' and the 'sticks' are currently missing. The Mossad Chairman pointed out that without strong pressure, it will not be possible to bring about significant compromises on the Iranian side.
The Mossad Chairman did not relate to the use of the term 'hand grenade' with respect to the imposition of sanctions, because in his eyes, these are the 'sticks' that will help to obtain a good agreement. He used this term to describe the possibility of creating a temporary breakdown in the talks, at the end of which the negotiations will be restarted under better conditions.
The Mossad Chairman explicitly pointed out that the agreement that is being reached with Iran is bad, and may lead to a regional arms race.
Welcome to Washington Prime Minister Netanyahu.
UPDATE 4:21 PM
Previous posts on this story
here and
here.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bob Corker, Eli Lake, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Josh Rogin, Mark Kirk, Mossad, P 5+1, plutonium, Robert Menendez, Tamir Pardo
And it looks like I was right
In an
earlier post reviewing an article by @JoshRogin and @EliLake, I argued that the Mossad never recommended not putting additional sanctions on Iran.
It looks like I was right.
Developing....
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bob Corker, Eli Lake, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Josh Rogin, Mark Kirk, P 5+1, plutonium, Robert Menendez
No, the Mossad didn't say new Iran sanctions are a bad thing
@JoshRogin and @EliLake report on disagreements between Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Mossad about the impact of new US sanctions on Iran. Many are taking the report as a reason (excuse?) to vote against the Kirk-Menendez bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran.
But notice what's left unsaid.
Already, the Barack Obama administration and some leading Republican
senators are using the Israeli internal disagreement to undermine
support for the bill, authored by Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat
Robert Menendez, which would enact new sanctions if current negotiations
falter.
Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee --
supported by Republican Senators Lindsay Graham and John McCain -- is
pushing for his own legislation on the Iran nuclear deal,
which doesn't contain sanctions but would require that the Senate vote
on any pact that is agreed upon in Geneva. The White House is opposed to
both the Kirk-Menendez bill and the Corker bill; it doesn't want
Congress to meddle at all in the delicate multilateral diplomacy with
Iran.
Israeli intelligence officials have been briefing both Obama
administration officials and visiting U.S. senators about their concerns
on the Kirk-Menendez bill, which would increase sanctions on Iran only
if the Iranian government can't strike a deal with the so-called P5+1
countries by a June 30 deadline or fails to live up to its commitments.
Meanwhile, the Israeli prime minister’s office has been supporting the
Kirk-Menendez bill, as does
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, ahead of what will be a
major foreign policy confrontation between the executive and legislative
branches of the U.S. government in coming weeks.
Evidence of the Israeli rift surfaced Wednesday when Secretary of
State John Kerry said that an unnamed Israeli intelligence official had
said the new sanctions bill would be “like throwing a grenade into the
process.” But an initial warning from Israeli Mossad leaders was also
delivered last week in Israel to a Congressional delegation -- including
Corker, Graham, McCain and fellow Republican John Barrasso; Democratic
Senators Joe Donnelly and Tim Kaine; and independent Angus King --
according to lawmakers who were present and staff members who were
briefed on the exchange. When Menendez (who was not on the trip) heard
about the briefing, he quickly phoned Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Ron
Dermer to seek clarification.
Barrasso told us Tuesday that different parts of the Israeli
government told the delegation different things. “We met with a number
of government officials from many different parts of the government.
There’s not a uniform view there,” he said.
In a Wednesday morning hearing on Iran at the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, Corker talked about the Israel visit and said that
his bill (not the Kirk-Menendez bill) was acceptable to all the Israeli
officials they spoke with. “Some of us were in Israel this weekend over
this very same issue. We have heard no one, no one, say that if Congress
were to weigh in on the final agreement it would in any way destabilize
the negotiations,” Corker said.
Note that the Mossad is
not saying 'don't pass new sanctions.' It's saying 'if you do pass new sanctions, Iran is likely to walk away from the talks. If one accepts the proposition that Iran is using the talks as
cover to continue its nuclear weapons development program, Iran walking away from the talks would probably not be such a bad thing.
Moreover, as Rogin and Lake admit, no one really knows for sure what Iran would do if the Kirk-Menendez bill is passed. If Iran walks away from the talks, it risks isolating itself in the international community. While Russia and China might prevent the Security Council from acting against Iran, if Iran is isolated, it is less likely that Israel - for example - would be inhibited from acting. After all, the West would no longer be able to argue that we have to give negotiations a chance. There would be no negotiations.
Iran's argument that new sanctions would violate the 'spirit of the negotiations'
ought to fall on deaf ears. Iran has violated any spirit that ever existed.
Saying that passing Kirk-Menendez might cause Iran to walk away from the talks is a no-brainer. But it also might not. And even if it did cause Iran to walk away, that might not be such a bad outcome.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bob Corker, Eli Lake, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Josh Rogin, Mark Kirk, P 5+1, plutonium, Robert Menendez
