Michael Livschitz

According to the 14-point draft agreement, the US is immediately lifting oil sanctions so Iran can resume selling oil, and giving Iran access to its frozen assets (estimated at around $300 billion globally). In return, Iran simply promises not to build nuclear weapons, while being allowed to keep its entire stockpile of enriched uranium. This isn’t a deal. This is surrender dressed up as diplomacy.

Israel would never have signed an MOU with Iran. Just think about what that stands for: Memorandum of Understanding. There is as much irony and mockery in that phrase as one can possibly imagine. This is not capitulation, not a treaty, and not an agreement. It is a parody of any rational solution. You can talk as much as you want about hidden pitfalls, double layers, and the wisdom of politicians who supposedly thought five steps ahead and then announced their great victory. All of that is smoke and mirrors, and an unwillingness to lose influence and political dividends. You cannot consider yourself smarter than everyone else and still fail to see that the emperor has no clothes. President Trump needed a way out of this war. He was in a hurry, and haste in matters like this is unacceptable. It puts at risk not only the military achievements of the United States, but also those of its closest ally, Israel. When it comes to fighting, we fight together. But when it comes to signing an agreement, the ally is suddenly not needed. No one asks whether Israel agrees to Iran gaining more from this deal than it had before the war. More than that, the Iranian regime had the nerve to present conditions it could never have dreamed of before its “defeat.” What is especially interesting is that a defeat in practical terms is being sold as a victory and a great achievement. A defeat precisely because such an agreement was drafted at all, and then signed. Is it really that easy to blackmail the entire world, hold it hostage through the Strait of Hormuz, terrorize an entire region, and then get away with it? Iran is allowed to have ballistic missiles because its neighbors or other countries have them? Brilliant logic. By that same reasoning, one could draw the same parallel with nuclear weapons, could one not? If others have them, why not allow Iran to become a nuclear power as well? But when choosing words that defend Iran’s right to build up its military potential, one should not ignore the fact that Iran is not comparable to its neighbors. It is the one using ballistic missiles to attack others, and ballistic missiles are offensive weapons by their very nature, not defensive ones. Lebanon is a separate issue. Iran insists on the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon because Israel is making it harder for its creation, Hezbollah, to breathe freely and shell Israel with impunity. The whole international community welcomes the ceasefire in Lebanon. Israel would be glad if that were true. But Hezbollah is the side that refuses to stop firing and continues to attack civilians. So what is left? To defend itself. Israel will not allow anyone to dictate how it should live or how it should protect its people from relentless terrorist aggression. Would the United States, Spain, or France like to trade places with Israel and live under daily rocket fire? How quickly would their patience run out? And would the whole world then urge them to accept, as a fact of life, that their people are being killed by terrorists? Enough of the hypocrisy wrapped in concern and compassion. Israel will not depend on a memorandum of understanding, or on any other agreement that endangers its national security.

Israel would never have signed an MOU with Iran. Just think about what that stands for: Memorandum of Understanding. There is as much irony and mockery in that phrase as one can possibly imagine. This is not capitulation, not a treaty, and not an agreement. It is a parody of any rational solution. You can talk as much as you want about hidden pitfalls, double layers, and the wisdom of politicians who supposedly thought five steps ahead and then announced their great victory. All of that is smoke and mirrors, and an unwillingness to lose influence and political dividends. You cannot consider yourself smarter than everyone else and still fail to see that the emperor has no clothes. President Trump needed a way out of this war. He was in a hurry, and haste in matters like this is unacceptable. It puts at risk not only the military achievements of the United States, but also those of its closest ally, Israel. When it comes to fighting, we fight together. But when it comes to signing an agreement, the ally is suddenly not needed. No one asks whether Israel agrees to Iran gaining more from this deal than it had before the war. More than that, the Iranian regime had the nerve to present conditions it could never have dreamed of before its “defeat.” What is especially interesting is that a defeat in practical terms is being sold as a victory and a great achievement. A defeat precisely because such an agreement was drafted at all, and then signed. Is it really that easy to blackmail the entire world, hold it hostage through the Strait of Hormuz, terrorize an entire region, and then get away with it? Iran is allowed to have ballistic missiles because its neighbors or other countries have them? Brilliant logic. By that same reasoning, one could draw the same parallel with nuclear weapons, could one not? If others have them, why not allow Iran to become a nuclear power as well? But when choosing words that defend Iran’s right to build up its military potential, one should not ignore the fact that Iran is not comparable to its neighbors. It is the one using ballistic missiles to attack others, and ballistic missiles are offensive weapons by their very nature, not defensive ones. Lebanon is a separate issue. Iran insists on the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon because Israel is making it harder for its creation, Hezbollah, to breathe freely and shell Israel with impunity. The whole international community welcomes the ceasefire in Lebanon. Israel would be glad if that were true. But Hezbollah is the side that refuses to stop firing and continues to attack civilians. So what is left? To defend itself. Israel will not allow anyone to dictate how it should live or how it should protect its people from relentless terrorist aggression. Would the United States, Spain, or France like to trade places with Israel and live under daily rocket fire? How quickly would their patience run out? And would the whole world then urge them to accept, as a fact of life, that their people are being killed by terrorists? Enough of the hypocrisy wrapped in concern and compassion. Israel will not depend on a memorandum of understanding, or on any other agreement that endangers its national security.

BREAKING: President Trump publicly rebukes Israel over its war against Hezbollah. "Israel's fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed." Trump said he opposed strikes that destroy apartment buildings filled with civilians and revealed he urged Israel to let Syria take the lead against Hezbollah instead. "If Israel can't do the job without killing everyone else, he'll do the job. Syria will do the job."

It was a major mistake from the start to negotiate with Iran during a ceasefire and allow it to catch its breath. Iran was given two months to recover, and during that time the sides did not move a single step closer to a deal that would satisfy the United States and Israel. Concessions from the Iranian regime can be achieved only through force and pressure. Any other method, as reality clearly shows, brings no result. Then why even start talking about a memorandum of understanding, an MOU, when it never looked even remotely like an agreement in the first place? Everyone is well aware that after losing its top leadership, Iran will continue to play for time while rebuilding internal links and searching for solid ground. How exactly do you negotiate with a terrorist regime obsessed with obtaining nuclear weapons, a regime that has spent 47 years cultivating its proxies, waging war against Israel through them, and now actively participating itself while no longer hiding its intentions? Iran prepared for this moment for a very long time. Its enormous arsenal of ballistic missiles speaks clearly about its intentions. If it had managed to create even one nuclear warhead, it would undoubtedly have been mounted on one of those thousands of ballistic missiles and launched at Israel. The desire to become a nuclear power is not always about gaining immunity. The Iranian regime must either capitulate or accept a deal that completely strips it of its nuclear ambitions and dismantles its ballistic missile program, which was created not for defense, but for attacking its neighbors. Iran views peace negotiations as a sign of weakness from the West. It senses that everyone is exhausted and uses this, while also playing the Strait of Hormuz card and forcing the entire world to doubt the wisdom of a military operation against it. And as we can see, it is working, since the situation has reached this point. Now that Iran has violated the ceasefire and struck Israel with ballistic missiles because it wanted to protect its own creation, Hezbollah, do you still believe it is ready for peace? Iran thinks in completely different categories, categories inaccessible to Western thinking. That is why there is no point in treating it as a rational party to dialogue. The starting point must be one fact alone: it is a direct and relentless threat not only to the entire region, but also to basic human values.

Israel has always been at war with varying states of intensity since its inception as a country. Always. Every generation of Israelis has lost some of their children for their national survival. Since 1979, Iran has been an enemy. Since the early 2000s, it has been their main enemy. Everything happening since 7 October is linked to Iran. Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, Iraqi Popular Mobilisation Forces, all of it. The category error too many people make is looking at each front in isolation due to the obsession with Gaza. Iran’s network has been severely weakened in one regional war since 7 October. That is why Hezbollah is Tehran’s red line. They are the jewel in the crown of Iran’s network. Whilst Israel strikes Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iran will not negotiate a permanent ceasefire because it is all one conflict. Israel cannot stop striking Hezbollah, because Hezbollah keeps firing into N Israel and those communities cannot live in safety. Therefore: either Trump secures concessions from Hezbollah not to fire at Israel, which will be linked to the US/Israel not firing at Iran, there is no way out of this. If the US escalates back to striking Iran directly, Iran will resume strikes on the Gulf states. This is a near impossible circle to close, and in the meantime, the world economy circles the drain as global oil prices skyrocket when reserves run out. If Trump can only get a ceasefire by ordering Israel to stop strikes in Lebanon, then Jerusalem has an existential decision to make. There is no good or easy way out of this, but if you don’t see Gaza, Lebanon and Iran as all linked for the last two years, you cannot understand the whole problem.

Unpopular opinion: The kind of strikes we saw tonight on Iran not only won't push them toward a deal, but will embolden them, as they feel there's nothing they have to worry about. Only massive strikes on energy and infrastructure can move the needle.

This looks like an unequal partnership. How else can the double standards be explained? The priorities have already been set, and we can see them in action.