Hanegbi: Iran decision no later than beginning of 2014

Israel’s decision whether or not to attack Iran’s nuclear installations will be made by the end of this year, or no later than the beginning of 2014, MK Tzachi Hanegbi said in Washington on Thursday.

„We are close to the moment where the central players will need to make a decision,” said Hanegbi, who was attending an annual conference hosted by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. „We are getting closer and closer to the point of no return where Iran will have enough enriched uranium to produce the bomb. The debate over whether or not they’ve already crossed the red line is not very important because decisions should be made this year, no later than the beginning of 2014.”

Hanegbi, a former chairman of the powerful Knesset Foreign Affairs Defense Committee, is considered a close confidant to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Hanegbi, who said he was representing Israel at the conference, reminded the audience that in the past two years, under the leadership of U.S. President Barack Obama, the international community has unified to impose the harshest sanctions ever levied against one country on Iran, but that there was „no sign that the economic hardships are translating into a diplomatic change for the Iranian regime.”

„We are nearing the point of no return, whereby the Iranians will have enough enriched uranium to make a bomb. Decisions need to be made this year, or at the beginning of 2014 at the very latest,” he said.

According to a May 6, 2013 report in the Wall Street Journal, U.S. officials see Iran’s June vote as a critical test of whether the current Obama administration approach — using economic sanctions to try to shape Iranian public sentiment and bring the country’s hard-liners to the negotiating table — is having the desired effect. U.S. officials told the WSJ that the U.S. and Israel have reached an understanding that they will assess the intentions of Iran’s leaders after the election, and then, barring progress on the diplomatic track, shift to a detailed discussion of military options.

U.S. officials said the elections won’t trigger an automatic shift from the diplomatic to the military track but would be a critical juncture in American and Israeli deliberations, the WSJ reported.

But on Thursday, Hanegbi poured cold water on the concept of change in Iran after the elections.

„Some analysts believe that the identity of the next Iranian president will influence their nuclear policy. I believe that this is naive. In Iran, strategy is determined by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. And he is not going anywhere on June 14 [the date of the Iranian presidential elections]. Khamenei has had many opportunities to reach a reasonable settlement. Up until now there is no indication that Iran is considering any compromise. The Iranian resolve to attain the ultimate weapon of mass destruction has not been curtailed.

„If the only options left on the table are containment or use of force, should Israel place its fate in the hands of the United States? Can Israel be assured that its closest ally will act in due time to remove the nuclear threat? My answer is no. Such assurance can be given by no president and can be demanded by no prime minister. Israel does not and should not expect such a commitment. Israel’s bond with the United States is unbreakable. The threat posed to our nations by a nuclear Iran is mutual, but at the end of the day we are each beholden to our own national security policies and priorities,” Hanegbi said, adding that Israel’s future cannot be dependent on others, „even not our best allies.”

„We wouldn’t be able to survive without the money, help and military assistance, without the backing at the U.N., without the planes and the bombs and the tanks and everything that we get [from America]. But still, we don’t want anyone to spill his blood for us. If we will have to confront Iran it should be our mission and our responsibility,” Hanegbi added.

Speaking at the same conference, Hagel said America’s Middle East strategy is founded on and framed around its commitment to Israel. A core principle of U.S.-Israel security cooperation is America’s commitment to or what Hagel called “its capacity to defeat any threat or combination of threats from state or non-state actors.”

In Saudi Arabia and UAE, he said, “Concerns over Iran’s support for the Assad regime, its destabilizing activities, and its nuclear program were at the top of the agenda.”

The Middle East, made up of very different nations, faces a number of common challenges from Iran, Syria, and the continuing threat of al-Qaida and other terrorist groups, he said.

“These common challenges must be met through the force of coalitions of common interests, which include Israel and our other allies in the region,” Hagel added. The most enduring and effective solutions to the challenges facing the region are political, not military, he said, and America’s role is to influence and shape the course of events through diplomatic, economic, humanitarian, intelligence and security tools “in coordination with all of our allies.”

Meanwhile, negotiators from the European Union and Iran will meet in Istanbul this month to discuss future diplomatic efforts to resolve a decade-old dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program.

The May 15 meeting between the EU’s foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who leads diplomacy with Iran on behalf of six world powers, and Tehran’s chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili follows a failed round of talks in Kazakhstan in April.

Its outcome may be crucial in deciding whether a new round of negotiations can take place, and when, Western diplomats say.