Dr. Akram Salehi

Translated by: Majed Kiasat

For many years, Iran's nuclear program has been one of the most fundamental issues in the world at the international level. Accordingly, the publication of the text of Join Comprehensive Plan of Action on July 14, 2015 was an important step in advancing Iran's nuclear program.

In this regard, the consequences of Iran's nuclear deal with the West, while increasing Iran's regional role in resolving the current crises in the region, were among the issues that have been raised since the beginning of the nuclear talks. With the formation of JCPOA and its implementation by the parties, this issue became more real than ever. It is obvious that the Iranian nuclear deal has attracted the attention of the Middle East countries, and in the meantime, we can mention the role of Israel during the nuclear talks. In fact, at the beginning of Iran's negotiations with the 5 + 1 group, the Israeli regime always made extensive overt and covert efforts to thwart these negotiations and prevent the formation of a nuclear deal. In the meantime, following the America’s unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA, Iran implemented its decision to reduce its obligations under this international treaty. Thus, one of the important foundations of the nuclear deal was shaken. Therefore this study seeks to answer the question of what effect does the reduction of Iran's nuclear obligations have on Israel's military threats against Iran? In response to this question, it seems that reducing Iran's nuclear commitments and enriching it by more than 60 percent will make Israel feel a security threat and put attacks on Iran's nuclear and military facilities on the agenda.

Reducing Iran's nuclear commitments and its impact on the Israeli threat:

Israel's opposition to the JCPOA and its hostile stance on the agreement has been repeatedly stated by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu since the opening of the nuclear talks until the parties agreed. In fact, the US withdrawal from the JCPOA agreement changed many regional and international equations. Although the Islamic Republic of Iran did not immediately withdraw from the nuclear deal in response, after adopting a one-year strategic patience approach, it announced that it would gradually reduce the level of its commitments. This action was taken by Iran against the violation of the nuclear agreement by the United States in one hand and the inability of European countries to fulfill their obligations on the other hand. In any case, it has affected the situation in the surrounding areas of Iran and the main actors in this region. In the meantime, some countries in the region, which had a different approach to the nuclear deal, faced a new atmosphere and tried to advance their goals and aspirations in a new framework. Accordingly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Iran's steps "very dangerous" and called Iran's actions to increase the percentage of uranium enrichment a sign that Iran is moving towards building a nuclear weapon. Netanyahu called on world powers to increase sanctions against Iran, noting that Iran had violated its obligations under the nuclear deal. Netanyahu also accused Iran of hostile actions at the international level. He claimed that now is not the time to talk to Iran, but the time to increase pressure on Iran. "Israel will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, so we will continue to confront those who want to destroy us," he said.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states have always sought to marginalize Iran. In this regard, the situation gained in the context of reducing Iran's nuclear obligations has been assessed as an opportunity to increase their movements to further spread Iran phobia in the world. Hence, the rulers of the Arab countries tried to show Iran's insecurity. In fact, this issue paved the way for the Arab countries to get closer to Israel and encouraged Israel to repair its relations with these countries.

In order to understand why Israel opposes the Iran nuclear deal, it is necessary to emphasize the prevalence of realistic approaches, and in particular the priority of the security phenomenon in Israeli foreign policy. In general, based on the Israeli security structure, anything that leads to an increase in Iran's power is considered a threat to Israel's power, and such is the case with Iran's nuclear deal with the West. In other words, Israel sought to portray Iran's peaceful nuclear activities as a threat to humanity by inducing a threatening image of Iran. In this way, Israel has been able to insinuate that Iran, as a sponsor of terrorism, would have the potential to jeopardize global security if it had ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction, such as the atomic bomb. Therefore, Israel wants to convince the countries of the world that if Iran acquires nuclear technology, Iran will be able to build a nuclear bomb in a short time. In this situation, we must imagine a world in which al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and all the terrorists in the world will acquire a nuclear bomb. In this way, it shows Iran's peaceful nuclear activities in the line of terrorist acts and activities. In fact, the prevailing realistic views and power-hungry policies of Israel and Saudi Arabia towards Iran after the nuclear deal have the potential to change the balance of power in the region in a new way. In this case, the two countries will work together to prevent a shift in the balance of power in the region in favor of Iran. It is clear that Iran's nuclear deal with powerful Western countries has failed to meet the demands and concerns of Israel and Saudi Arabia. For this reason, the two countries do not accept any level of nuclear capability for Iran and call for the lifting of sanctions against Iran. In this way, the nuclear deal has caused concern among Saudi Arabia and Israel, and has brought the views of the two countries closer together. They believe that the nuclear deal, in addition to increasing Iran's regional power, has also enhanced Iran's regional bargaining power and influence. The two countries equate increasing Iran's capability with reducing their power, which is why they have come together in the form of a coalition to counter Iran's military capabilities as well as Iran's ability to acquire nuclear technology. These two countries believe that Iran's behavior is unpredictable and it is not clear what Iran will do after the nuclear deal, so they will come together within the concept of a security puzzle and form an informal alliance against Iran. Given the realist atmosphere in the Middle East, Israel considers any Iranian empowerment to be against its interests and will play against Iran by playing with a score of zero. These include increasing military power, inciting Iran to start a war, attacking Iran's nuclear facilities, intensifying military strikes on targets in Syria, assassinating Iranian scientists and resistance commanders in the region, and trying to overturn the nuclear deal and Through Israeli lobbying in the United States and efforts to downplay Iran's presence in regional crises. In general, the basis of countries' behavior is the fear of regional insecurity, and governments are forced to increase their military capabilities. Therefore, increasing military power is vital and necessary for countries.