Iran nuclear deal: negotiators announce 'framework' agreement Read more

Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Sunday stepped up his attack on a nascent deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program, calling the framework agreement announced in Switzerland last week “a very bad deal”.

The framework did not do enough to dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, Netanyahu said, and world powers were making a mistake by offering Iran a path to sanctions relief without demanding more in return.

“A better deal would roll back Iran’s vast nuclear infrastructure, and require Iran to stop its aggression in the region, its terror worldwide and its calls and actions to annihilate the state of Israel,” Netanyahu said on CNN. “That’s a better deal. It’s achievable.”

Netanyahu has been a critic of the negotiations with Iran from the outset, but the announcement of a framework agreement has set off a new round of lobbying against the negotiations by the Israeli leader, who was scheduled to appear on three Sunday morning news shows in the US. Netanyahu was apparently working from a new set of talking points drafted by advisers over the weekend to attack the deal, the Associated Press reported.

The Israeli leader said the deal should have included a provision to curtail Iranian efforts to develop an international ballistic missile. “Those missiles are only used for you,” Netanyahu said, referring to the US. “No one is asking Iran in this deal to stop its aggression in the region.”

US energy secretary Ernest Moniz, who negotiated the technical side of the deal, said Netanyahu’s assessment was wrong.

“We certainly have a very, very different view of the facts,” Moniz said on CBS News. “Certainly today, the breakout time [for Iran to acquire a weapon] is about two months. This will immediately get us over a year. It will get us there with almost instantaneous recognition of any attempt to evade the deal, and it will give us plenty of time to respond diplomatically or otherwise.”

“If they fail to meet any of these requirements, we are immediately going to know.”

Moniz said compliance could be assured because of “unprecedented access and transparency” for inspectors. “We’ll have continuous surveillance of centrifuge production,” he said.

Netanyahu was also sharply rebuked by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the long-time head of the intelligence committee who followed the Israeli leader on CNN and warned that he was intervening at the wrong time.

“I don’t think it’s helpful for Israel to come out and oppose this one opportunity to change a major dynamic, which is downhill, a downhill dynamic in this part of the world,” Feinstein said.

Netanyahu on Iran nuclear deal: 'We’re better off without it' – as it happened Read more

“To be candid with you, this can backfire on him,” Feinstein warned, going on to criticize an appearance by Netanyahu before the US Congress early last month. “I wish that he would contain himself. Because he has put out no real alternative in his speech to Congress, no real alternative. Since then, no real alternative.”

Netanyahu denied that he was acting out of personal spite against President Barack Obama, with whom he has had a strained relationship, especially as the Iran negotiations have coalesced.

“I think it’s not a question of personal trust,” Netanyahu said. “I always respect the presidency of the United States, and also this president of the United States.”

The two leaders spoke for about an hour after the announcement last week of the framework deal.

Netanyahu said he had continued to talk with American legislators in an effort to build opposition to the Iran deal. “I’ve talked to about two-thirds of the House of Representatives, and probably about an equal number of senators,” he said. Legislation in both houses threatens the deal by setting restrictions on the timeline for rolling back sanctions and other rules.

Feinstein said she would likely vote against such legislation sponsored by Senator Bob Corker, chairman of the intelligence committee. “Having watched this for a long time, I think it’s the best that’s going to get done,” Feinstein said of the initial agreement with Iran.

“A couple of years now have gone in to get this far. It’s a better agreement than I thought it was ever going to be.”

Corker said on Sunday there were many details to the agreement with Iran that needed to be closely examined and that congressional participation was vital.

“I don’t know how anyone could ascertain at this point whether this is good or bad for the American citizenry,” the Tennessee senator said on Fox News. “On behalf of the American people, Congress needs to be playing a role.”

Iran disputes US nuclear deal 'fact sheet' Read more

Corker listed “red flags” in the framework agreement including the timeline for relieving sanctions on Iran; guarantees of access for inspectors; and the nature of ongoing Iranian nuclear research and development.

Corker said Congress would seek to pass binding legislation as opposed to a nonbinding resolution that would merely register its opinion on the deal. Obama has warned that he will veto any legislation from Congress that would derail the deal.

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina condemned the deal by definition because it was negotiated by Obama, who Graham said was not sufficiently “feared or respected” by Iran to be an effective negotiator.

“He’ll never be able to get the best deal,” Graham told CBS. “The best deal, I think, would come with a new president. Hillary Clinton would do better. I think everybody on our side except maybe Rand Paul could do better.”

