Once more, on Nov. 24, 2013, Israeli PM Benjamin Bibi Netanyahu made the terrible mistake of mouthing Israel’s deep-rooted hypocrisy on nuclear weapons. I’m surprised the seasoned investigative journalist Pepe Escobar didn’t mention it. So I thought I’d slip into this dialogue and fill in a few facts in Escobar’s otherwise excellent interview.
JM: First, no one mentioned the fact that Israel maintains 200 to 400 nuclear warheads at its aging plant in Dimona in the Negev desert. Nor did anyone mention Israel is planning to hack Iran’s nuclear computers with a new, more powerful Stuxnet Virus, which can trigger a chain reaction of nuclear explosions. And last but most, we have the insane Samson Option waiting in the wings, which stands for “we go down; everybody else goes down, too,” which will be a world-wide nuclear conflagration.
Iran’s nuclear deal with the P5+1 group of world powers in Geneva seems like child’s play next to the spin war Israel has produced, which will last for the next 6 months, as many of the parties involved will pursue their own business interests in this situation, correspondent Pepe Escobar rightly told RT.com when they asked . . .
RT: As we see it, US Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammed Zarif came out of the talks with different views. Why is there such diversity in the interpretation of the deal?
Pepe Escobar: Because the spin war started at 3 a.m. in Geneva. It’s going to go on for another six months, until May 2014, that’s the duration of this “first step” deal.
JM: If Bibi could drop his existential “angst” angry mask along with his ongoing agit-prop that Iran is the Wolf slavering over the Red Riding Hood of Israel, this deal might have a real chance of developing into something substantive, a positive relationship that would reduce tension in the entire Middle East region.
PE: Kerry had to say this so that he could appease the Israel lobby, the US Congress and the Wahhabi petrodollar lobby in the US, not to mention some neocons in the US as well, who are still very powerful.
JM: Escobar also pointed out that, “In Iran it’s different. They are saying, ‘We still have our right to enrich uranium,’ “and this is correct, because they will keep enriching uranium to 5 percent for the next six months, while 20 percent enrichment is frozen. They will discuss the next deal, which will be the definitive deal, starting from May 2014.’”
Escobar added, “And all the 20 percent enriched uranium that they have is going to be diluted, so it cannot be used later on for weapons-grade material.”
RT: As you’ve said, the spin war has started, but how that would affect the implementation of the deal now and six months down the road? Who will eventually benefit from it, if the two sides have such diverse opinions? Won’t it stall one day at some point?
PE: No, we have to follow the letter of the agreement. This means enrichment until 5 percent OK, no further enrichment till 20 percent for the next six months, no new centrifuges. If Iran follows this—they are abiding by the deal, no problem.
JM: The thing is, if among these IAEA inspectors [who] should be in Iran practically on a daily basis from now on, if you had the usual Eiffel traders [Parisian residents who’d fraudulently ‘sell’ the Eiffel Tower to unsuspecting visitors,] who start spinning something else . . .
PE: “I’m sure Iran won’t break their promises, it’s in their own interest not to break any promise.”
JM: I agree. Even that hysteric Netanyahu should see that. But no, the panic keeps spewing from his mouth and gives the deal a bad taste.
RT: It’s emerged that Washington was engaged in secret talks with Iran long before the Geneva agreement, and even their closest allies were unaware. What do you make of this?
PE: Look, this is an extremely complex negotiation. Can you imagine that you have sherpas going to Geneva a month or three weeks ago, and hammering out the final deal so foreign ministers can sign it? It’s impossible. Sherpas usually start such things months in advance and obviously we had America’s sherpas, Iranian sherpas and Russian sherpas, these are the ones that count. Britain and France are spectators; they don’t count at all.
JM: Sherpas are people who helped Sir Edmund Hillary climb Mount Everest. They are members of a traditionally Buddhist people of Tibetan descent living on the southern side of the Himalaya Mountains in Nepal and Sikkim. In modern times, Sherpas have achieved world renowned as expert guides on Himalayan mountaineering expeditionsed. Ergo here they are used somewhat ironically here as impeccable guides through political pitfalls.
PE: France counts [regarding] the 20 percent [enriched uranium], because they have cornered the market in medical isotopes. If Iran reaches 20 percent enrichment and starts selling their own medical isotopes cheaper, especially to the developing world, it’s not a good deal for France. So for the moment France is protecting its business interests.
RT: Let’s turn to America’s assessment of the situation, specifically what President Obama said. Looking at the Geneva deal, he said ‘this is just a first step to reach a comprehensive solution in the future.’ What in your opinion would make Washington consider a full agreement?
PE: Obama is correct when he said, “This is the first step.” But, very important, the way he said it was very condescending, in fact even insulting, to Iran. He said nothing about Iranians’ role in the deal, mentioning only the role of absurd sanctions, which should be dismantled, because most of the sanctions bypass the UN, like Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has been saying for months in fact.
Very important, for the next few months: follow the money. The Americans say they are going to unfreeze some of the Iranian money, perhaps $32 billion or even more. There is $10 billion in European banks. These are not going to be unfrozen. If the US unfreezes $4 to $5 billion—Obama can do it by executive order, bypassing the US Congress.
RT: John Kerry believes the sanctions have done their job and were quite helpful in sealing this deal. To what extent do you agree with this?
PE: In fact, it is the Iranian population that is paying the price of the sanctions; the Iranian government has found ways to bypass it. They’re selling, or bartering or trading energy, especially with their Asian customers. You know how much money Iran has [with] mostly Asian clients, China, Japan, Turkey and South Korea? $50 billion, [yet] they still cannot bring that money to Iran, so they have to buy products from these countries. So this is something that must be hammered out in the next agreement.
JM: Escobar sums it up, “For the moment we have a breakthrough—it’s going to last for six months. There will be all sorts of interests that will try to bombard this deal; I’m talking especially about Wahhabi petrodollar monarchy interests and the Israeli lobby as well.” That’s quite a crowd to deal with. Yet Pepe maintains his optimism and that is good . . .”
PE: But for the moment we have diplomacy in action, something that we haven’t seen, especially between Iran and the US, for 34 years. This is the major breakthrough at the moment. But we have to be vigilant.
JM: We have to be vigilant and courageous, and ready to stand up to Netanyahu and Israeli’s dark side. Fundamentally they are the major flies in the ointment here, working very hard to free their wings and start a conflagration to deny Iran and the world peace; just to protect their stolen state, now 67 years old, leaving the Palestinians out in the cold of an apartheid state. Let us not even think of this in terms of Iran descending to such a level as a result of one man’s nightmare.
Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer and life-long resident of New York City. An EBook version of his book of poems “State Of Shock,” on 9/11 and its after effects is now available at Amazon.com and Barnesandnoble.com. He has also written hundreds of articles on politics and government as Associate Editor of Intrepid Report (formerly Online Journal). Reach him at gvmaz@verizon.net.
When you consider that a nuclear attack by Iran on Israel would be suicidal on their part, one is led to two possibilities: first, that Iranians are so fanatical that they would opt for their own total destruction, or, second, that Israel fears that its constant strategy of unilateral attacks on their sovereign neighbors such as Syria, Lebanon and Iran would suffer a chilling effect. It is the latter scenario which is probably the important one. Depriving Israel of its self-designated right to bully its neighbors at whim would be a reality check on its real place in the community of Arab and Muslim neighbors.