Israel does not approve JCPOA negotiations

With nuclear negotiations in Vienna set to start on Monday of next week, the conflict between Israel and the United States over Iran policy almost seemed to overtake the conflict between Jerusalem and Tehran.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett is extremely concerned that Washington is rushing toward a nuclear deal weaker than the 2015 JCPOA Iran deal, and made his most direct military-sounding threats yet this week.

Israeli-US exchanges on the issue could get a lot worse before they get better, at a time when predictions for the nuclear talks in Israel tend to range from Iran will not agree to anything to US will cave in for a bad deal.

The latest fireworks come after four evolving stages of ups and downs of how Israelis have viewed the Biden administration’s Iran policy over the last 10 months. The current stage seems to have returned to the original deeply worried stance of November 2020, and with Iran itself at a more dangerous point.

When US President Joe Biden was elected and in his early months, top Israeli officials in the administration of Benjamin Netanyahu ranged between resignation and dread that the US would rejoin the JCPOA 2015 Iran nuclear deal with no conditions.

For Israeli officials at that time, this would have erased all of the sanctions and psychological leverage they had built up over Iran over two-and-a-half years. This without receiving anything, will pave the way for the Islamic Republic to a nuclear weapon when the JCPOA would expire, if not before.  

Despite demands and threats from Iran that Biden must return to the JCPOA on its terms by January or February 2022, the Biden team took its time and said it would cut a deal only along with an add-on deal afterward that would strengthen and lengthen the JCPOA.

Among some other issues, this goal of Washington is one of the reasons that the April-June negotiations fell short of an agreement, even if they got close. One could call this period the first Israeli win in that the US stuck to its positions.

However, then there was a third stage of confusion in which there were no negotiations from June until now, where Israel was increasingly disturbed by the Islamic Republic’s escalating nuclear violations.

But on the positive side for Israel, US started to talk about a plan B with Iran. The US seemed to judge that diplomacy was failing and that the new administration of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi simply was unwilling to reach anything resembling a reasonable deal.

Although there was uncertainty surrounding how close the Islamic Republic was progressing toward a nuclear weapon, this period was possibly the best for Israeli-US relations because both administrations were equally frustrated with Raisi’s stonewalling.

However, once the IAEA Board of Governors seemed ready to publicly condemn Tehran in September, which could have even led to a UN Security Council referral, Raisi finally signaled a readiness to return to talks.

Even a whiff of a return to talks shut down the expected September IAEA condemnation and brought Washington into engaging in rapid diplomacy.

Despite IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi’s framing of negotiations with Iran as intractable so far (and the IAEA tried to bend over backward to be diplomatic), all signs were that the board of governors would put the issue again during its meetings this week. Off the record, US officials also started floating new flexibility toward the Iranians.

It is unclear whether the new flexibility means allowing Tehran to maintain all of its new army of advanced centrifuges for enriching uranium, or whether it means a “less for less” deal in which the US would partially lift sanctions for even a partial reduction in Iranian nuclear violations.

Raisi had already achieved more than his predecessor, Hassan Rouhani, simply by refusing to talk for a few months. This is clear from the fact that the old “less for less” deal floated in 2019 required the Islamic Republic to start returning to the nuclear deal – not just to freeze new violations.

If the 2019 “less for less” deal meant partial sanctions relief would come for Iran shipping out some of its new large uranium stock and freezing all new enrichment, the updated, worse “less for less” deal sounds like mere freezing or slowing of new enrichment – without shipping out any of the uranium stock.

If, in 2019-20, advanced centrifuges would need to be destroyed (and there were fewer of them anyway), now they could just be placed in storage. Placing them in storage would mean they could easily be returned to operation in a matter of days or weeks.

If the Biden administration is ready for a weaker JCPOA or a weaker “less for less” deal or any negotiations that seem to reduce the sense of crisis, even without a deal – then its original idea of improving the JCPOA would seem to be out the window.

Some top Israeli defense figures, including Defense Minister Benny Gantz, have been promoting Israel working quietly behind the scenes to get a better JCPOA, even if it does not get everything it wants – for example, greater limits either on Iran’s ballistic missiles (there are currently none with any teeth) or on its aggression in the region.

But if Washington is not equipped or committed sufficiently to achieve these improvements, then what exactly can Israel hope to get from the US?

Could it be as narrow as what circumstances Biden would green-light an Israeli preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, even if he will not order a strike on his own?

US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and US CENTCOM head General Kenneth McKenzie Jr. this week both emphasized that the US military option is on the table.

Yet, because of Biden’s passivity in using military force to date and his botched pullout from Afghanistan (Trump also intended to pull out, but his assassination of IRGC Quds Force chief Qasem Soleimani intimidated the Ayatollahs more than Biden has to date), many view this as empty talk with no details.

For example, during the Obama administration, US military officials gave public interviews about the readiness to use specific aircraft and weapons – and none have done that yet this round.

Possible reluctance on Biden’s part to use force raises the old question, dating back around a decade, of whether Israel has the capability to take out Iran’s deep underground Fordow facility.

There are additional, more recent questions about whether Israel could take out enough of Iran’s multiple nuclear facilities (unlike the cases of Iraq and Syria, where each had only one major facility) on its own to sufficiently set back the program.

Interestingly enough, there was a wide disparity of answers on this question by former top Israeli officials. Former IDF intelligence chief Amos Yadlin said Israel definitely could.

Former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo and former Mossad Iran desk chief Sima Shine both said they doubted that Israel could on its own.

Pardo’s successor at the Mossad, who just retired in June, Yossi Cohen, told the Jerusalem Post Conference last month and a Haaretz conference this month that Israel should make sure to have or develop such a capability – leaving his position unclear.

Similarly, former National Security Council chief Yaakov Amidror emphasized that Israel needs to have such a capability, but was vague about whether Israel could do so now.

Former IDF chief (2015-19) Gadi Eisenkot previously confidently told The Jerusalem Post that Israel could take out Iran’s nuclear program, without specifying how.

Whether the “yes” officials are bluffing to deter Iran or the “no” officials are misinformed or are downplaying Israeli capabilities to deter Jerusalem from rushing to pull the trigger, Bennett, even after this week’s speech, has not made it clear at what point he would strike.

With all of Netanyahu’s tough rhetoric, even he was intimidated from striking Iran for several years when the JCPOA was being negotiated or was operating.

Would Bennett really strike the Islamic Republic if there was a new version of the JCPOA operating, holes and all, but with the US back in the deal?

Would he aggressively use the Mossad to sabotage nuclear facilities and slow down the Islamic Republic as Netanyahu did, even if the delays from such hits might be measured only in months and not in years?

There is one factor that is much worse now than in the 2012-15 period, a factor that led Iran to make at least some big short-term nuclear concessions for the JCPOA.

Then, China and Russia wanted the Ayatollahs to make concessions and make the crisis go away.

But now China and Russia are both at new low points with the US, and short of Biden offering some game changer on Taiwan or Ukraine, he may have little to offer them to get them to press Tehran to cut a more reasonable deal.

In short, Israel is entering a period where the overall trends for changing Iranian behavior are worse. It may need to live with an extended period of uncertainty, as the US and Iran start a new game of chicken, which some think could run deep into 2022.

USD going up, up and away

Exchange rates most often impinge on the economic world when there’s big drama — China’s surprise devaluation in 2015, the crisis of confidence with EUR in 2000, the Asian currency collapses of 1997. There’s a sleeper hit developing right now with the dollar.

The Bloomberg Dollar Index, which measures the greenback against a basket of other major currencies, is heading for its biggest monthly gain since March 2020 — when global markets were in turmoil over the eruption of the pandemic and there was massive emergency demand for dollars.

On the flipside, the currencies of countries including Chile, Poland, South Africa and Turkey have tumbled in double-digit percent terms over the past six months.

USD is appreciating as investors start building in a more aggressive withdrawal of Federal Reserve monetary stimulus. San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly said on Wednesday that she’d support a faster taper if data stay strong. Some Wall Street banks raised forecasts for economic growth in the fourth quarter after a wave of robust data was released.

A rising USD would have significant consequences in particular for emerging markets, which still rely to a large extent on it for their borrowing needs. The stronger the currency is, the more expensive it is for companies and governments in developing nations to make payments on debt denominated in greenbacks.

Even as the American share of the global economy has declined over the years, the role of the dollar has in many ways strengthened — increasing the consequences of its appreciation. A Bank for International Settlements report in September showed that outstanding dollar credit to companies and other non-bank borrowers outside the US more than doubled since the financial crisis in 2008 to US$13 trillion by the end of March.

A host of emerging and developing central banks — from Chile to Russia to Pakistan — have already started increasing interest rates well ahead of counterparts in the developed world, and the prospect of their currencies weakening against the USD will only add to the pressure to extend or even strengthen those campaigns.

As the Fed moves to curtail the supply of USD, by winding down its quantitative easing program and turning at some point toward raising interest rates, conditions will only get tougher for emerging-nation borrowers. That will add further headwinds for economies struggling to match the rich nations in combating the pandemic.

“The peak in terms of the flow of liquidity’’ in USD “is behind us,” Shweta Sing, a managing director at research firm TS Lombard, wrote in a report. The big build-up in the Fed’s balance sheet since early 2020 has “meaningfully mitigated the ripple effects from a strong USD to global financing conditions,” she said. “But the risks are building up.”

Will Joe Biden succeed in reining in oil prices?

The United States is pulling out various stops in an effort to get gas prices under control at the start of a busy holiday travel season. The administration is tapping into the strategic petroleum reserve and President Biden has called on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether oil companies are responsible for increased prices.

But the focus on gas prices has provided fuel for Republican attacks on Biden’s handling of the economy, and his energy policies in particular, at a time when the White House is hoping to rally support for ambitious climate goals in its roughly US$2 trillion spending plan.

There was a prediction that 53.4 million people will travel for the Thanksgiving holiday, a 13% increase from 2020 when many Americans opted not to travel with coronavirus cases and deaths surging around the country.

The busy travel season to come has put a spotlight on gas prices in particular amid broader concerns about inflation, something the White House has attempted to show it has under control.

“Obviously, the president does not control the price of gasoline -- no president does,” Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm told reporters. “But what we’re seeing right now is this global mismatch between supply and demand. Oil production is lagging behind as the rest of the economy roars back to life after the shutdown.”

“So, we, in this administration, are leaving no stone unturned as we examine the market to figure out what's behind the high prices,” she said.

The White House has shown more urgency in recent weeks in publicly messaging how it is trying to provide relief for Americans grappling with inflation, particularly after the Labor Department released statistics showing consumer prices grew far faster than expected in October and that annual inflation had hit a 30-year high. That rise was in part a result of rising energy costs, and increased costs at the gas pump.

Biden last week wrote to the Federal Trade Commission requesting the agency look into whether oil companies were unfairly spiking prices at the pump.

And on Tuesday, the administration announced it would release 50 million barrels of oil from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve in coordination with several other countries in an effort to match supply with demand.

Experts have questioned whether either move will do much to meaningfully bring down prices immediately, and they cautioned other factors, like the course of the pandemic, are more likely to affect the trajectory in the months to come.

That has led some conservatives to question whether the White House’s actions on gas prices were more of a political maneuver as poll after poll has shown voters souring on Biden, particularly over his handling of the economy, with his approval ratings dropping into the low 40s.

“This is being done in order to use every tool at the president's disposal to lower the price of gas for the American people,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said when asked if tapping into the strategic reserve was being done for political purposes.

Republicans have gone on offense over inflation for the last few weeks, and the Biden administration’s decision to release oil from the strategic reserve provided more fodder for attacks on its energy policies.

Former President Donald Trump and GOP lawmakers argued the Biden administration’s desire to shift away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy industries has led to problems at the pump.

“Today’s announcement is nothing more than a gesture. If the president and his administration wanted to make a real, long-term impact, they would work to maximize domestic production and expedite energy infrastructure like pipelines—not close federal lands to drilling and add a federal tax to methane,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a statement.

Sen. John Barrasso, the top Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, accused Democrats of “waging a war on American energy.

Even Sen. Joe Manchin, who has opposed some climate initiatives in Biden’s Build Back Better agenda, called the release of oil from the reserves an “important policy Band-Aid for rising gas prices” while criticizing the administration's energy policy as “shortsighted.”

Biden in remarks Tuesday sought to assure the public that the US economy was on the upswing and a rise in prices would not be a long-term concern.

“I also want to briefly address one myth about inflated gas prices: They are not due to environmental measures. My effort to combat climate change is not raising the price of gas or increasing its availability,” Biden said in prepared remarks, arguing investments in electric vehicles, solar panels and other sectors would spur job creation and innovation.

“Let’s beat climate change with more extensive innovation and opportunities,” he added. “We can make our economy and consumers less vulnerable to these sorts of price spikes when we do that.”

Israel airstrikes Syria, once again

At least four people were killed and seven injured in an alleged Israeli airstrike that reportedly targeted sites belonging to Hezbollah in Homs in western Syria, according to Syrian media and reports.

According to SANA, the airstrikes were carried out from northeastern Beirut. The report claimed that most of the missiles were shot down by Syrian air defenses. Two civilians were killed and another was injured in the strikes.

A Syrian anti-aircraft missile launched at what was allegedly an Israeli aircraft crashed into the Mediterranean Sea, but preliminary estimates say it went over Lebanon and did not cross into Israeli airspace, according to reports.

According to the opposition-affiliated Halab Today TV, about 10 members of Hezbollah were injured after a site the movement uses as a military headquarters and to store logistical equipment was targeted in the airstrikes.

According to Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, at least 10 missiles hit positions belonging to Syrian regime forces west of the city of Homs, causing casualties among civilians, Syrian soldiers and Iran-backed militants. One of the sites targeted was located in the Syrian Gas Company, according to the report.

The two civilians were reportedly killed by a missile that hit a civilian area near a gas station west of Homs.

The airstrikes come exactly a week after the IDF fired two missiles from the Golan Heights toward an empty building south of Damascus.

One of the missiles was shot down and no losses were caused, according to the report. It is unclear whether the missiles were fired from an aircraft or were surface-to-surface ones.

A week before that strike, two Syrian soldiers were injured and material damage was caused in an alleged Israeli airstrike targeting sites in the Homs area.

Over the past year, while Israeli strikes have intensified in Syria, the response time by Syrian air defense batteries has become quicker, leading the Israel Air Force to change how it acts during such operations – including by having larger formations so that more targets can be struck at once during an operation instead of having jets return to the same target.

Iran has begun deploying advanced anti-aircraft missile batteries to the region in an attempt to challenge Israeli jets.

US getting ready to confront with Russia

The Biden administration is considering sending military advisers and new weapons to Ukraine in the face of a Russian military buildup near the border between the two countries, CNN reported Tuesday.

The proposed lethal aid package could include mortars, air defense systems such as stinger missiles and new Javelin anti-tank and anti-armor missiles, multiple sources familiar with the deliberations told the outlet.

Sources also said the Pentagon has pressed for some equipment that would have gone to Afghanistan to instead be sent to Ukraine, like Russian-made Mi-17 helicopters. The US military has halted sending such equipment to Afghanistan with the end of its mission there in August.

US officials have also talked with European allies about forming a new sanctions package that could go into effect should Russia invade Ukraine, the sources said. 

The discussions are taking place as Ukraine has begun to warn the US and allies that a Russian invasion could happen as soon as January. 

Kyiv earlier this month noted the unusual Russian troop movements, but after discussions between US and Ukrainian officials — and an estimated 92,000 Russian troops now placed close to the border — the warnings have grown. 

US and NATO intelligence now fear Moscow’s troop buildup is preparation for a military operation over Ukraine’s eastern border from multiple locations, much like when Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. 

“Our concern is that Russia may make the serious mistake of attempting to rehash what it undertook back in 2014, when it amassed forces along the border, crossed into sovereign Ukrainian territory and did so claiming — falsely — that it was provoked,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said last week.

Asked about the possible military package, a State Department spokesperson told The Hill that they had nothing to preview or confirm. 

They did note, however, that the administration has “demonstrated that the United States is willing to use a number of tools to address harmful Russian actions and we will not hesitate from making use of those and other tools in the future.”

"We continue to have serious concerns about Russian military activities and harsh rhetoric towards Ukraine, and call on Moscow to de-escalate tensions," they added.

Russian officials, meanwhile, have maintained that the troops and military units are in the area as part of exercises and a response to threats from NATO. They also have called reports that they may soon invade Ukraine “false.”

Asked on Tuesday about the possibility that the US will send additional assistance to Ukraine, Russia spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Tuesday suggested that should it happen, it could lead “to a further aggravation of the situation on the border line.”

 

50 million barrels crude oil to be released from Strategic Petroleum Reserve

The Department of Energy will release 50 million barrels of oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the White House announced Tuesday, as the Biden administration seeks ways to control rising costs at the pump.

Of the 50 million barrels, 32 million will eventually be returned to the strategic reserve over the years ahead once fuel prices come down in a bid to ensure the reserve remains stocked, officials said. 

Another 18 million barrels will be released as an acceleration of an oil sale Congress had already authorized.

Tuesday's announcement was made in concert with China, India, Japan, South Korea and the United Kingdom, which will also tap into their own strategic reserves.

The Biden administration had reportedly discussed the strategic reserve option in recent weeks to increase supply as consumers faced higher gas prices amid broader concerns about inflation as the economy rebounds from the coronavirus pandemic.

The Labor Department earlier this month released statistics showing consumer prices grew far faster than expected in October and that annual inflation had hit a 30-year high.

The consumer price index, which tracks inflation for a range of staple goods and services, rose 0.9 percent last month and 6.2 percent in the 12-month period ending in October. The rise in prices was driven largely by a 4.8 percent increase in energy costs for the month, including a 1.6 percent increase in gasoline prices.

In a bid to rein in gas prices as inflation contributed to sinking poll numbers, Biden last week asked the head of the Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether oil companies are illegally increasing prices.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said on Tuesday that Biden's own policies were to blame for needing to tap into the strategic reserve.

“We are experiencing higher prices because the administration and Democrats in Congress are waging a war on American energy," Barrasso said in a statement, arguing Tuesday's announcement would not fix the problem alone.

"Begging OPEC and Russia to increase production and now using the Strategic Petroleum Reserve are desperate attempts to address a Biden-caused disaster," Barrasso added. "They’re not substitutes for American energy production."

Congress is negotiating a roughly $2 trillion reconciliation package that is the cornerstone of Biden's agenda and features billions of dollars in investments in programs to combat climate change, with investments in renewable energy, electric cars and more.

The White House insisted Tuesday's announcement was not at odds with Biden's goals to shift away from fossil fuels in the years to come.

"Today’s announcement reflects the President’s commitment to do everything in his power to bring down costs for the American people and continue our strong economic recovery," the White House said in a statement.

"At the same time, the Administration remains committed to the President’s ambitious clean energy goals, as reflected in the historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Law signed last week and the House-passed Build Back Better Act that together represent the largest investment in combating climate change in American history and is a critical step towards reaching a net-zero emissions economy by 2050 and reducing our dependence on foreign fossil fuels."

Israel about to separate West Bank from Jerusalem

Israel has reached the final stage of separating the West Bank from Jerusalem, European Union Representative to the Palestinian Authority Sven Kuhn von Burgsdorff warned on Sunday. He was talking to The Jerusalem Post along with the representatives from more than 20 European and like-minded countries at the site of the former Kalandia airport.

He voiced concern over two Israeli projects which they fear would destroy any prospects for a future Palestinian state. The first is the construction of close to 3,500 settlement homes in an unbuilt area of the Ma’aleh Adumim settlement, known as E1.

The project has been largely frozen for decades, but former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu advanced the project during the last elections and allowed for the deposit of its building plans with the Higher Planning Council for Judea and Samaria.

The council is now in the process of hearing objections to the projects, with the next hearing date set for December 13, 2021, the last obstacle to the E1 project’s final approval.

The second project of concern to the EU is the pending construction of 9,000 homes in the Atarot area of east Jerusalem on the site of what was once the Kalandiya airport, which opened in 1924 and closed in 2000. It is presumed to be designated mostly for Jewish Israelis.

The Jerusalem District Planning Committee is scheduled to hold a December 6, 2021 hearing on the matter.

Burgsdorff and his delegation visited both sites, where they were briefed by the left-wing NGO Ir Amim. They paused to speak to reporters in Atarot. Behind the delegation was the construction site for a new bypass road with a tunnel that will go underneath the projected homes.

To the delegation’s left stood the security barrier that separated Atarot from apartment buildings in the east Jerusalem Palestinian neighborhood of Kafr Akab.

“We are here at the very last stage of completely cutting off Jerusalem from the West Bank, which makes it impossible to discuss between the parties a future, independent, contiguous, viable Palestinian state with Jerusalem as the capital of both, based on negotiations on that matter,” he said.

He told reporters that the plans run contrary to statements the Israeli government has made about shrinking the conflict and maintaining the status quo.

“The current Israeli government clearly said we do not want to jeopardize the status quo, but the things we are seeing on the ground seem to suggest something else,” Burgsdorff said.

“Israeli settlements are in clear violation of international law and constitute a major obstacle to a just, last[ing] and comprehensive peace between Israelis and Palestinians,” he explained. The EU can’t “close its eyes” to such actions, he added.

The EU and much of the international community believe in a two-state resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on the pre-1967 lines with Jerusalem as the divided capital of the states.

Israel has been blunt about its belief that Jerusalem must remain the united capital of the Jewish state and that projects like those in Atarot and the E1 area play an important role in protecting a united Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty.

It has also been argued that such projects, which provide access roads that would improve traffic flow, do not cut off Palestinians from the West Bank.

Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Fleur Hassan-Nahoum said that “Jerusalem is a living, breathing, growing capital city of the State of Israel.”

Due to work already done in the area of Atarot, the municipality had turned Atarot into a thriving industrial zone with it’s first-ever [shopping] mall for aast Jerusalemites, with factories and workplaces providing hundreds of jobs.

“The housing project will provide thousands of much-needed housing units,” Hassan-Naboum said. “The European Union should stop talking in the language of the past and join the development of the future catering for Jews and Arabs alike and providing opportunity and not empty rhetoric and false hopes.”