[The two sides are
attempting to agree a joint public statement to paper over the divide but talks
will not be made easier by a deepening distrust in which the Israelis question
Obama's commitment to confront Iran while the White House is frustrated by what
it sees as political interference by Netanyahu to mobilise support for Israel's
position in the US Congress.]
Binyamin Netanyahu pressing for explicit threat from US ahead of
crucial meeting with Obama next week in Washington
By Chris McGrea
Israel is pressing Barack Obama for an
explicit threat of military action against Iran if sanctions fail and
Tehran's nuclear programme advances beyond specified "red lines".
Binyamin Netanyahu,
the Israeli prime minister, is expected to raise the issue at a White House
meeting on Monday after weeks of intense diplomacy in which Obama has
dispatched senior officials – including his intelligence, national security and
military chiefs – to Jerusalem to try and dampen down talk of an attack.
Diplomats say that
Israel is angered by the Obama administration's public disparaging of early
military action against Iran, saying that it weakens the prospect of Tehran
taking the warnings from Israel seriously.
The two sides are
attempting to agree a joint public statement to paper over the divide but talks
will not be made easier by a deepening distrust in which the Israelis question
Obama's commitment to confront Iran while the White House is frustrated by what
it sees as political interference by Netanyahu to mobilise support for Israel's
position in the US Congress.
"They are poles
apart," said one diplomatic source. "The White House believes there
is time for sanctions to work and that military threats don't help. The
Israelis regard this as woolly thinking.
They see Iran as
headed towards a bomb, even though they agree there is no evidence Tehran has
made that decision yet, and they want the White House to up the ante. The White
House has the Europeans behind its position but it's losing Congress."
The mood is not
helped by worsening distrust between the two leaders. Relations soured within
weeks of Obama coming to power after he attempted to pressure Netanyahu to halt
construction of Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories.
Netanyahu told his
weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday that Iran will dominate his talks with Obama.
"There is no
doubt that one issue will be at the centre of our talks, and that is, of
course, the continued strengthening of Iran and its nuclear programme," he
said.
Israeli officials
say that Netanyahu is not happy with Obama's "vague assertion" that
all options are on the table in dealing with Iran. The Israeli prime minister
wants Obama to state unequivocally that Washington is prepared to use force if
Iran's nuclear programme advances beyond specified red lines.
US administration
sources say that Obama is unlikely to make a major shift in policy in public
although he may give Netanyahu firmer assurances in private.
White House
spokesman Jay Carney said the administration is intent on preventing Iran from
acquiring a nuclear weapon but that for now it is committed to using sanctions
and diplomacy.
"We believe
that there is time and space to continue to pursue that approach," he
said. "Even as we refuse and make clear that we do not take any option off
the table in our effort to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon,"
he said.
But last month the
Guardian revealed that some
American officials are convinced that sanctions will not deter Tehran from
pursuing its nuclear programme, and believe that the US will be left with no
option but to launch an attack on Iran or watch Israel do so.
One of the principal
differences is over timing. The US continues to say it believes Iran has not
yet decided whether or not to develop a nuclear bomb, and that even if it does
it is perhaps years away from being able to do so.
Israel's defence
minister, Ehud Barak, was in Washington this week for meetings with
vice-president Joe Biden and US defence secretary Leon Panetta, among others,
at which he pressed his view that a direct decision by Tehran to develop a
nuclear weapon is not the immediate issue so long as it continues to build the
means to do so, and that the matter is urgent.
The chairman of the
US joint chiefs of staff, General Martin Dempsey, told Congress this week that
during a recent visit to Jerusalem the principal difference was over the
question of how long to give sanctions and diplomacy an opportunity to work. "We've
had a conversation with them about time, the issue of time," he said.
Dempsey was one of
several senior US officials to travel to Israel in recent weeks, including
Obama's national security adviser, Tom Donilon, and the director of national
intelligence, James Clapper.
Dempsey infuriated
Netanyahu with comments that it is "premature" to launch an attack
and that an Israeli assault on Iran would be imprudent and destabilising, and
not achieve Israel's objectives. He also said that Iran is a "rational"
player and should be treated as such.
Netanyahu met a
group of US senators last week, including John McCain, and complained strongly
about Obama administration officials publicly opposing an Israeli strike on
Iran.
After the meeting,
McCain criticised the White House position. "There should be no daylight
between America and Israel in our assessment of the [Iranian] threat.
Unfortunately there clearly is some," he said.
McCain described
relations between the US and Israel as in "very bad shape right now"
saying that differences over Iran have caused "significant tension".
He appeared to side with the Israeli position in noting that "there is
very little doubt that Iran has so far been undeterred to get nuclear weapons".
The Republican chair
of the House of Representatives intelligence committee, Mike Rogers, said on
Monday after meeting Israeli officials that there is a wide difference of
opinion between Israel and the White House.
"I got the
sense that Israel is incredibly serious about a strike on [Iran's] nuclear
weapons programme. It's their calculus that the [US] administration … is not
serious about a real military consequence to Iran moving forward," he
said. "They believe they're going to have to make a decision on their own,
given the current posture of the United States."
Last week, 12 senators
sent the president a letter warning that he should not allow Tehran to buy time
by engaging in fruitless diplomatic negotiations, expected to begin in the
coming weeks. They demanded that Obama insist Iran halt its uranium enrichment
programme before talks begin.
More than half the
members of the Senate have backed a resolution that some see as pressing for an
attack in declaring that the White House should not pursue a policy of
"containment".
Senator Joe
Lieberman, one of the sponsors of the resolution, said it is intended "to
say clearly and resolutely to Iran: You have only two choices – peacefully
negotiate to end your nuclear program or expect a military strike to end that
programme."
Critics of the
resolution said that it smacks of a congressional authorisation for an attack
on Iran. That view was reinforced when the sponsors declined a request from
some Democrats to amend it to clarify that the resolution did not imply consent
for war.
Israeli officials
told the Associated Press this week that Israel will not notify the US before
an attack on Iran. US officials scoff at the idea that Washington would not
know an assault is coming, and the Israeli position may be intended to allow
the White House to deny any responsibility.
