In a meeting with the foreign press, Israel’s Military Intelligence has decided to publicly support the current P5+1 negotiations with Iran, “even one that relaxes the Western sanctions on Iran.” This is in direct contrast to Prime Minister Netanyahu who does not want the sanctions lifted.
Israel’s Military Intelligence has also decided to come out against Prime Minister’s current strategy of “Zero enrichment” on Iranian soil.
According to Josh Mitnick who attended the meeting:
While Netanyahu has demanded that negotiators seek the full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear capability, the military official said the intelligence branch does not think this demand is realistic. The international community isn’t talking about “deleting” Iran’s nuclear program, he said.
Furthermore, as Prime Minister Netanyahu has called Rouhani “a wolf in Sheep’s clothing” the military intelligence official sees his election as a sign of change:
“The fact that economic numbers are not good and that there is some kind of noise among the public – at least about the economic situation – makes challenges for the regime. That’s probably why Rouhani was elected in such large numbers more than anything else.”
When asked if the officer sees signs of real change in Iran, he said that such a shift depends on the outcome of negotiations.
As Josh Mitnick points out in the rest pf his article, Israel’s Military Intelligence already came out on this against Netanyahu two months ago, by telling Haaretz that his election is a sign of “undergoing significant, strategic changes”.
My two cents: As I have mentioned in my previous posts, in Israel there are always several opinions regarding each policy. The fact that the Military Intelligence has come out to dispute some of Netanyahu’s notable Iran policies speaks volumes about the presence of lively, free and uninhibited debate in the state of Israel about Iran. It also shows that there are important people and groups who disagree with Netanyahu’s current Iran strategy. In Israel, no one wants to see a nuclear armed Iranian regime. There is a shared goal, but there are differences regarding the most suitable strategy to get there.
You can read the rest of Josh Mitnick’s article here