Israel does not speak with one voice on Iran. Several politicians and current and former intelligence officials have broken with the government’s largely hawkish view of Iran since President Hassan Rouhani took office in August 2013. President Shimon Peres has expressed willingness to “convert enemies into friends” and even meet Rouhani while Prime Minister Netanyahu has called Iran’s president a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”
Israel’s alternative voices on the Islamic Republic are generally more open to testing diplomacy and Tehran’s intentions before promoting the military option. Military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, has concluded that Iran is undergoing “significant” and “strategic” changes and that centrist political factions have gained strength since Rouhani’s election. Military intelligence has also contended that a complete dismantling of Tehran’s uranium enrichment equipment —one of Netanyahu’s top demands — is unrealistic.
Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan has long opposed an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. In February, he reportedly told a closed forum that Netanyahu’s preferred policy toward Iran could have led to war. Others have disagreed with the government's focus and approach to Iran. In December, former Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin said failed peace negotiations with the Palestinians would be a "far graver" threat to Israel’s future than Iran's nuclear program. In late 2013, opposition politician Zahava Gal-on declared her support for the Obama administration's approach to diplomacy with Iran and even accused Netanyahu of trying to sabotage U.S. efforts. The following are excerpted remarks by Israeli security experts and politicians on Iran.
President Shimon Peres
“Why not [meet President Hassan Rouhani]? I don't have enemies. It's not a matter of a person but of a policy. The purpose is to convert enemies into friends. If it was only him I'd take it with greater assurance, but there are other structures, other people. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard, half army and half organization, spreads terror all over the world. And I'm not so sure they support the president. We have to see the balance of the situation.”
“We don’t consider Iran as an enemy… There were times [when] we didn’t want to meet, for example, with [Palestinian Liberation Organization chief Yasser] Arafat. But the moment Arafat changed his policy, why not? We are for peace.”
“Last night a deal was signed between the P5+1 and Iran. This is an interim deal. The success or failure of the deal will be judged by results, not by words. I would like to say to the Iranian people: You are not our enemies and we are not yours. There is a possibility to solve this issue diplomatically. It is in your hands. Reject terrorism. Stop the nuclear program. Stop the development of long-range missiles. Israel like others in the international community prefers a diplomatic solution. But I want to remind everyone of what President Obama said, and what I have personally heard from other leaders. The international community will not tolerate a nuclear Iran. And if the diplomatic path fails, the nuclear option will be prevented by other means. The alternative is far worse.”
Nov. 24, 2013 in a statement
Institute for National Security Studies Director and former Military Intelligence chief Amos Yadlin
“They [Iranians] didn’t sign onto this in order to breach it… The Iranians came to Geneva to get sanctions lifted. They understand that this [interim deal] is a test. It will be illogical for them to breach it in the next six months. It might be more logical for them to try to escape it after six months.”
“Though we don't like this agreement, it's better than the alternative of no agreement…
“In the coming six months the legitimacy of an [Israeli] attack [on Iran] will diminish.”
Former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy
“I come away from this with a sense of possibility, by no means a certainty, that there might be an opening, in which one can turn around the thorniest problem of all: the deep-seated rejection of Israel by the current regime in Iran.
“IF, if, the nuclear file is closed, and sanctions removed, it will bring economic relief…[and] a renewed view from Tehran of the opportunities the world is offering. And then, if there will be a desire to move beyond the nuclear issue, then the Iran regime will be able to turn to the public and say, ‘we should no longer be in the business of fear mongering. If we want to move forward with the US, it will be difficult while maintaining a state of belligerency against one of the US key friends and allies.”
November 2013 in an interview with Al Monitor
Meretz Party leader Zahava Gal-on
Netanyahu was “sabotaging and “undermining” Obama’s efforts to engage with Iran.
“Netanyahu doesn’t object, as he wrote on his Facebook page, to a ‘bad agreement with Iran,’ but to any agreement that’s directly negotiated between the United States and Iran.
“It’s in Israel’s interest to support the U.S. goal of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons through a diplomatic agreement that will employ stringent monitoring and verification, and not the winds of war.”
Former Shin Bet chief Carmi Gillon
“The American policy is a policy of wisdom… In my eyes, American policy is not coming out of weakness. It comes out of power.”
Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan
“Even if we assume that we would use the military option to deal with this, I think that achievements that we would reach would be limited. It would be a delay, not an end” to Iranian nuclear development.
Jan. 5, 2014 at a public forum in Kfar Saba
Former Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin
“The ramifications of failed negotiations [with the Palestinians] are far graver for Israel’s future than the Iranian nuclear program.”
December 2013 in an interview with Haaretz
Photo credit: Shimon Peres by David Shankbone (David Shankbone) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/)], via Wikimedia Commons
