Netanyahu: Iran won't take nuclear talks seriously

Speaking in Prague, Israel's prime minister compared Iran's nuclear drive to that of North Korea, and said he has seen no evidence of Iran taking upcoming talks seriously.

Michal Kamaryt/CTK/AP
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to journalists after his meeting with Czech President Vaclav Klaus at the Prague Castle, Friday, May 18. Netanyahu and several ministers of his government are in Prague for a two-day visit.

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he has serious doubts that Iran will stop its nuclear program or take upcoming talks seriously. Mr. Netanyahu made the remarks on Friday after a meeting with Czech President Vaclav Klaus.

There has been much focus on Iran’s nuclear program as the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany prepare to meet for talks with Iran on May 23 in Baghdad.

"I have seen no evidence whatsoever that Iran is serous about stopping its nuclear weapons program," said Netanyahu during his remarks in Prague, recounted by The Jerusalem Post. “It looks as though they [Iran] see these talks as another opportunity to deceive and delay, just like North Korean [sic] did for years.”

Israeli officials have said that time is running out to find a diplomatic solution and avoid a military strike. But despite Netanyahu’s strong words, Israel’s Haaretz reports that he stopped short of making any ultimatums.

Netanyahu’s remarks come at time of increasingly heightened rhetoric in the US and Israel about using potential military force against Iran if it continues developing its nuclear program.

“It would be preferable to resolve this diplomatically and through the use of pressure than to use military force,” said US ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro according to The New York Times. “But that doesn’t mean that option is not fully available. And not just available, but it’s ready. The necessary planning has been done to ensure that it’s ready.” 

The New York Times adds that while US officials have often made it clear that “all options are on the table regarding Iran,” it’s extremely unusual for an American official to explicitly mention crafting specific plans to strike Iran.

Israel would like Iran to stop all of its nuclear development and enrichment activities, which it says is part of a nuclear weapons program. Iran has always contended that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, namely the generation of electricity.

It is unlikely that Iran will entirely stop its nuclear program, reports Reuters, adding that a compromise will have to be reached. Iran insists that stopping it from developing a nuclear program is a violation of its sovereignty. The UN priority now is for Iran to allow its inspectors unfettered access to its facilities and for Iran to stop its higher-grade enrichment program.

There is concern that if Israel pursues a military option, the results could be disastrous for the region. Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran's late Shah, told Al Arabiya that Israel would be much better off if it helped the Iranian people try to topple the current regime, rather than carry out a military strike.

“If Israel wages war against Iran now, this will cause a kind of tension with the Jewish people that had not existed since the time of Cyrus the Great,” said Mr. Pahlavi. “At the end of the day, the priority should be, and the whole world will agree, that the entire Iranian regime has to go.” 

Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.