Israel: The Reaction to A "More Committed" Washington

Last Wednesday, its ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren, rebuffed Washington's "two-year time frame": "In the past, attempts to impose time frameworks have not proved either realizable or helpful."

For Oren, the framework of talks should include security for Israel, recognition of the nation as a Jewish state, and an end-of-claims conclusion to the talks. Oren said this would be "a statement of what Israel's goals are and what the Palestinians' goals are, even if the assumption is that they wouldn't be immediately confluent". Referring to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's statement following PM Benjamin Netanyahu's announcement of a 10-month construction freeze , Oren stated that "these goals can be reconciled through good-faith negotiations."

Palestine: The Reaction to A “More Committed” Washington
Israel: Goldstone’s Return — Economic Sanctions on Tel Aviv?
Israel: Former Supreme Court President “Stop Boycotting International Criminal Court”

Clinton had said: "We believe that through good-faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements."

Israel and Iran: Moving From War Scenarios to "Tough Sanctions"

Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon is signalling the change in Israel's priorities regarding Tehran. Moving from his previous hawkish position, indicating no hesitation in striking Iran's nuclear facilities, without Washington's help and/or green light, Ayalon has started using the term "tough sanctions".

Last year, when Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that his Israeli counterpart Shimon Peres had given assurances of no military option against Iran. Ayalon said: "It is certainly not a guarantee. I don't think that, with all due respect, the Russian president is authorized to speak for Israel and certainly we have not taken any option off the table."

The Latest from Iran (8 January): Defeating the Wrong Questions

In November, Ayalon stated that "the one who's bluffing is Iran, which is trying to play with cards they don't have." He continued: "If Iranian behavior and conduct continues as they have exhibited so far, it is obvious that their intentions are only to buy time and procrastinate."

However, on Saturday that Ayalon declared there will be a united front as this month leads to a regime change in Iran. He said:

It is not certain that the regime in power now in Iran will be there in one year.

The world is uniting against Iran's nuclear program and within a month there will be United Nations Security Council sanctions. There is agreement in Washington, Moscow and Beijing that a nuclear Iran would destroy the current world order.

On Wednesday, Ayalon continued his remarks on the the "existential threat" of Iran and underlined the significance of tough sanctions.

Following his statement that "a nuclear Iran would destroy the world order" and that "we would see a nuclear arms race which we have never seen before," he continued: "Suffice to say that I take the American president and secretary of state at their word and they are right to say and to state that all options are on the table."

Meanwhile, Israel's Ambassador Michael Oren said Wednesday that the main goal of sanctions should be to weaken the Islamic regime and not its citizens. He spoke to CNN: "We are focused now on sanctions, not on destroying," and added:

We don't believe that sanctions will galvanize the regime, but will further drive the regime and people apart.

I'm sure that Iran under different leadership will have different relationship with Israel.