"Answering President Obama's question of what the alternative is to the
Vienna agreement, Amdiror said that "there is a clear answer. The
alternative was increasing the pressure of sanctions, conducting
stubborn negotiations, and making serious preparations for military
action that would crystallize all options on the table.
Together, these would achieve a better agreement... Why the six powers
agreed to a bad agreement is an interesting historical question. In the
meantime, we are left to deal with its consequences, which for Israel,
and in my opinion for most of the world, are extremely dangerous...
...On the basis of this understanding, which was accepted by the American experts as well, American policy was initially clear: the
agreement should dismantle Iran’s nuclear capabilities. This was the term used by the Americans themselves. But at some stage the US decided to move from a policy aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear capability, to a policy aimed at delaying Iran’s ability to achieve nuclear weapons by ten to fifteen years," he added."
...On the basis of this understanding, which was accepted by the American experts as well, American policy was initially clear: the
agreement should dismantle Iran’s nuclear capabilities. This was the term used by the Americans themselves. But at some stage the US decided to move from a policy aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear capability, to a policy aimed at delaying Iran’s ability to achieve nuclear weapons by ten to fifteen years," he added."
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar