Despite growing pressure to make him cancel his plan to address the US Congress in Washington on March 3, two weeks before general elections in Israel, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has make clear on Sunday that he would continue to try to stop an expected deal between the so-called P5+1 world powers (US, China, Russia, Britain, France plus Germany) and Iran over the Tehran’s nuclear programme as reports predict such a deal as being a matter of weeks.
At a weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday, Netanyahu declared: “The international powers and Iran are racing forward with an agreement that will allow Iran to arm with nuclear weapons, something that will threaten the existence of the State of Israel.”
“At the end of the week, Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif announced their intention to complete the framework agreement by the end of March, and that is what gives rise to the urgency in our efforts to try and halt this bad and dangerous agreement,” he said.
“We will continue to act and to lead the international efforts against the arming of Iran with nuclear weapons and we will act in every way to foil the bad and dangerous agreement that would cast a heavy cloud over the future of Israel.”
Netanyahu believes he cannot delay his Congress speech until after the elections ‘’as it will be too late.’’ ‘’Current negotiations are a path ‘’leading to Iran becoming a nuclear threshold state with international consent,’’ he repeated.
Netanyahu has been invited to speak about the Iranian nuclear threat to both houses of Congress by House Speaker John Boehner reportedly without prior notice to the White House, as Congress debates a bill that would increase sanctions on Iran.
The planned speech has provoked tensions in US-Israel relations. US Vice President Joseph Biden said he would not attend, claiming he was scheduled to travel abroad at that time. US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry said shortly after the speech was announced on January 20 that they would not meet with Netanyahu during his visit, citing the proximity to Israeli elections. And according to press reports at least 60 Democratic members of Congress will stay away from Netanyahu’s speech.
Even within the Jewish community, some have asked Netanyahu to reconsider delivering his speech at this time. In n interview with the Jewish daily Forward, Abraham Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) didn’t dispute the urgency of dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions but called the Prime Minister’s plan to address Congress “a tragedy of unintended consequences’’, deploring the ‘’media frenzy’’ around the issue.
What is at stake ?
The Join Action Plan agreement between the P5+1 and Iran reached in Geneva in November 2013 doesn’t resolve international suspicions over Tehran nuclear weapons programme. It merely suspended some of the most immediately concerned aspects of Iran’s programme, pending a more comprehensive agreement that gobal powers have been struggling for more than a year to pin down.
After missing two previous deadlines, the group set a March 31 deadline for a framework agreement and have given themselves until July 1 to reach a final agreement.
So far, Iran has frozen some of its nuclear enrichment program in return for limited sanctions relief.

Some members of the U.S. Congress had expressed frustration over the pace of nuclear talks. They threatened to move to impose additional sanctions on Iran if there is no sign of progress.
Last week, Senator Robert Menendez, who has been leading an effort to impose more sanctions, agreed to hold off until after the March 24 deadline for a framework agreement. He said lawmakers remained “hopeful” that diplomacy would succeed in reversing Iran’s chance of developing nuclear weapons.
“Many of my Democratic colleagues and I have sent a letter to the president," he said, "telling him that we will not support passage of the Kirk-Menendez amendment on the Senate floor, until after March 24th, and only if there is no political framework agreement, because, as the letter states, we remain hopeful that diplomacy will succeed in reversing Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon capability.”
Menendez said he remains skeptical that Iran truly wants to reach a deal.
Even the Washington Post, in an unusual editorial, raised concerns over a potential nuclear deal with Iran, warning that ‘’an accord with far-reaching implications" could be "imposed unilaterally by a president with less than two years left in his term.’’
‘’Though we have long supported negotiations with Iran as well as the interim agreement the United States and its allies struck with Tehran, we share several of those concerns and believe they deserve more debate now -- before negotiators present the world with a fait accompli," the editorial reads.
The editorial divided the problems of the potential deal into three main concerns. The first was that the process, which began with the aim of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, would "evolve into a plan to tolerate and temporarily restrict that capability."
The second was that as long as the talks were ongoing, the Obama administration would avoid confronting Iran's aggressive efforts to increase its influence in the Middle East, and that the U.S. "seems ready to concede Tehran a place as a regional power at the expense of Israel and other U.S. allies."
The third was that the White House hinted that they would implement the future agreement without Congressional approval. "Instead, an accord that would have far-reaching implications for nuclear proliferation and U.S. national security would be imposed unilaterally by a president with less than two years left in his term."
The EU, which has been coordinating the P5+1/Iran talks, considers that the prospect of a deal is an ‘’historic opportunity’’. ‘’For the first time we have a real chance to resolve one of the world's longstanding problems,’’ EU’s foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini told the Munich security conference last week. ‘’ We are now in the critical phase of intensive work towards a comprehensive solution that both recognises Iran's right to access peaceful nuclear energy, and gives us the necessary insurance that the programme will be exclusively peaceful,’’ she added.
For the EU, which has worked hand in hand with the US, the sanctions strategy has been successful in bringing the Iranians back to the table. But Europeans fear that ‘’time is running out’’ as legislation on tougher new sanctions against Iran is looming in the Congress as Netanyahu is expected to address US legislators. President Barack Obama has vowed that he would veto any such new sanctions.
How close is Iran to an atomic bomb ?
Contrary to Iranian claims that its nuclear programme was civilian, through the 1980s and 1990s Iran was buying materials and designs to build nuclear facilities in secret, such as a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and a heavy water production plant and reactor at Arak that could produce weapons grade plutonium. Neither are necessary for civilian power.
The International Agency for Atomic Energy (IAEA) issued a report in November 2011 which detailed evidence of Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.
Iran has enough low enriched uranium (up to 5% enriched) for six bombs, if further enriched, and an array of advanced centrifuges which could convert it into weapons grade uranium within a few months. It has developed warhead designs and has missiles that can carry a warhead. The Arak reactor, capable of producing plutonium could potentially be activated within a year.
The threat posed by Iran to Israel
The Iranian regime is ideologically opposed to Israel’s existence and its leaders regularly call for its destruction. Even President Rouhani, who is viewed as a ‘’moderate’’ by the West, has described Israel as a ‘’cancer.’’
Iran actively opposes Israel, Palestinian moderates and the Middle East peace process. It positions itself as the regional leader of radical anti-Western and anti-Israel forces. It supports the Assad regime in Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and armed Palestinian groups in the Gaza Strip. Iran arms, trains and support armes groups that operates against Israel and Jewish targets. In March 2014, Israel captured the Klos-C ship carrying advanced missiles with a range of 100-200 km from Iran to Gaza. These heavy missiles would have put most Israelis in range.
Hundreds of rockets fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip were supplied by Iran.
Iran already has missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads that can reach Israel.
If Iran acquired nuclear weapons, Israel would be in the shadow of a power which openly called for its destruction. Analysts debate whether Iran would use a nuclear weapon against Israel but any such possibility constitutes an unbearable threat. Much of Israel’s population and industry are concentrated in its coastal plane and would be affected by a single strike.