In an unprecedented move, the United States and its five partners — Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany — known as the P5+1 — dealt the arrogant Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, a slap in the face when they signed last Sunday a historic agreement with Iran compelling it to temporarily freeze its disputed nuclear programme for six months.

In response to the exaggerated outcry over the accord by Netanyahu and the American friends of Israel, especially the pro-Israeli lobby in the US, led by Aipac (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), some Congressmen and others, President Barack Obama retaliated by declaring unabashedly, “tough talk and bluster may be the easy thing to do politically, but it’s not the right thing to do for our security.”

Aaron David Miller, a former State Department senior official who had dealt for a long time with Middle Eastern issues, wrote this week in Politico that “this accord is less worrisome than Netanyahu believes, but not as compelling and reassuring as US officials maintain.”

The agreement, the first between the two sides in over three decades, temporarily halted parts of Iran’s disputed nuclear programme and allowed for more intrusive international monitoring. In return, Iran will reclaim from the United States some $7 billion (Dh25.7 billion) that was sequestered in response to its past actions, as well as relief from other stiff economic sanctions.

A key issue that remains to be settled is whether Iran will be allowed to enrich uranium at lower levels.

There is no doubt that this significant agreement helped boost President Obama’s standing, which had lately been diminished by his controversial domestic policies. He is now more likely to focus on foreign policy issues, hopefully on specific Middle East problems like the seemingly suspended Palestinian-Israeli peace negotiations.

Nevertheless, it is amazing, if not disappointing, that the unyielding and arrogant Netanyahu was hardly reminded by any US official or the media about his own nuclear and chemical arsenals. The Israeli prime minister had blasted the international deal with Iran as a “historic mistake” and stressed that Israel was not bound by the agreement. He was further infuriated with the news that this agreement with Iran had been secretly negotiated by two US officials and their Iranian counterparts in Oman, an Arab Gulf state. At one point, he reiterated veiled threats against Iran although there are doubts that Israel could undertake any such action before April, the deadline for a final deal with Iran over its nuclear schemes.

In turn, British Foreign Minister William Hague has meanwhile warned that “we would discourage anybody in the world, including Israel, from taking any steps that would undermine this agreement and we will make that very clear to all concerned.”

On the other hand, an Israel columnist, Nachum Barnea of Yediot Ahronot, a leading Israelis newspaper, wrote that “Netanyahu has his work cut out for him. Let him get up from the floor, this is no time for empty threats and self-pity.”

What has turned the tables further on Netanyahu’s head has been the news that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states who were initially disturbed by the Iranian deal, have now welcomed the agreement with the P5+1 in the hope that it could lead to a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, including Israel’s arsenal.

Another prominent Israeli columnist, Akiva Eldar, had this sharp comment: “The most intriguing question now is whether Obama intends to remain on the path of conflict with Netanyahu on all that’s related to the Israeli-Palestinian track. Will Russia, China and the European powers agree to cooperate in this arena as well? Will they dare advance, in opposition to the position of Israel’s prime minister, another agreement that would prevent the use of violence in order to solve this bloody [Palestinian-Israeli] conflict?”

There is no doubt that the beleaguered Israeli leader is hoping that the conflict with western leaders over their Iranian deal would allow him to sulk and refuse, as he has been doing at present, to negotiate a final Palestinian-Israeli settlement before next April, the established deadline for these negotiations.

What is equally intriguing about the agreement with Iran, especially if a final accord is reached, is whether it would have any repercussions on Syria’s civil war since the Iranian regime is supportive of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad, while Saudi Arabia is reportedly supporting the rebel movement there. Whether Iran will play a role in the upcoming peace conference between the Syrian president and the rebel movement there is anyone’s guess. The likelihood of a settlement there is still too early to tell.

If, as anticipated, Obama will now be focusing on diplomacy, he may find many battles to win as he has just done with Netanyahu.

— George S. Hishmeh is a Washington-based columnist. He can be contacted at ghishmeh@gulfnews.com.