Negociating with any dictator & especially with a religious fanatic is denying the reality that such despote cannot make any substantial, any reliable concession without puting himself in great danger at home. His aim is at best to fool the democracy in the short term to regain more power over the longer term to hold his country tightly by the usual violence, lies & corruption. The long term ambitions are never given up voluntarlly in a regime like the regime of the Ayatollahs who are actors or supporters of worldwide terrorism.

This article reminds me of 1941 Japan telling the world one thing and attacking Pearl Harbor in the same breath. They only got the message when the US dropped the bomb. Same should be done to Iran and only then will there be peace.

One should ask the author what benefits a historic "reconciliation" between Chamberlain-Daladier and Hitler brought to the countries involved, the world in general and Jews in particular. The spineless and clueless politicians who find themselves wielding high power will give anything to achieve worthless "peace in our time".

this type of articles: totally devoid of actual value, full of theoretical ramblings that disregard most basic common sense. Why publish them? Are there Israeli willing to buy into this? Evidently: Yes. Whaddaya Gonado.....

Ordinary I do agree with Ron's analysis and long-term strategic assessments, however, this one is so much out of touch with reality, totally naive and pink-tinted so I question what was the purpose for this article? Was he trying to be original thinker and twist a new perspective on this issue? I am sorry, if it looks like crap, it smells like crap and it tastes like crap - well it must be crap and no words will make me think otherwise. Putting a modern face on Iranian's dogmatic hate to Israel still does not change their objectives - destroying the state of Israel whether directly or indirectly. Without a regime change there - nothing will make Iran's policy towards Israel to change. The author is completely naive and wishful.

"but it is very reasonable to expect that these activities will subside .." Why,pray tell.. Would USA abandon cozy relations with Iran for the sake of Israel ?? Even if it would,who says Iran wouldn't assume USA was indifferent,just like Saddam assumed in case of Kuweit,egged on by April Gilespie,the US Ambassador to Bagdad. Difference being Kuweit wasn't destroyed,Israel would

guarded optimism and bringing iran into the 21st century is the way to go.

...or just a continuation of State Department PR campaign ?

I agree totally. A diabolical Islamic Jihad theocratic dictatorship is going to voluntariiy disarm, and give up its nuclear weapons? The earth is also flat.

This article is based on mistaken assumptions. It also gives signs of weakness. The Iranian regime cannot be trusted and they are only playing political games with a weak and impotent Obama. Make no mistake, Iran is not only an enemy of Israel, but of all the Sunni world.

It would have eased so many things if Iranian politicians and other hate preachers would have made clear to the world, that all their harangues are only folklore. So little gestures would have spared them crippling sanctions. A reconciliation between the US under a president Obama and Iran may not be enough to really benefit Israel, too.

peace in our time. (sarcasm on)

benefit the populous and that is indeed good for their bellicose, belligerent leadership. NOT for Israel. The people will not be hungry anymore. They are satisfied and praise their government. Their evil leaders are now on top of the world for having defeated "big and little satan". What good will come out of that?

I have been reading Ben-Yisha for years. This is the only time I have had a problem. Of course it would be good for everyone if Iran negotiated giving up it's a nuclear plans. That is no journalistic insight -- no one serious prefers war to peace. However, where is the analysis supported by facts that Iran will give up its nuclear ambitions and where is the evidence that Obama can or will cut a good deal? That's the type of article we usually get from this author -- not wishful thinking.

continuing Iranian enrichment?

sheer nonsense

iran's nuclear programme is not economic (their natural gas is plentiful and cheaper), or defensive (conventional arms are much cheaper). nor is it reasonable that they should expect to defeat america (or israel) with a handful of primitive bombs. the real purpose is "mahdaviat", the fulfillment of the shiite prophesy of apocalypse, and the return of the 12th imam. after the world is destroyed by fire. and "strategically", that won't be so good for israel, or any other country in the middle east. the current rapprochement between iran and america will only result in the lifting of sanctions, and the propping up of the mullahcracy. which is precisely the opposite of america's (and israel's) strategic interests, namely regime change in tehran.

Setting the Iranian nuclear program 2 years back in time won't stop it permanently, and stopping it permanently is the whole idea. Everything else is a complete waist of time. This article is a waist of my time. Lifting sanctions, will improve Iranians' lives, make Rohani and Khamenei more popular, they'll be at the top of the world again, USA and Israel would have been diplomatically and politically defeated, USA's and Israel's deterrence damaged, its image of strength tarnished, and its ability to act - questioned. Islamic political, ideological, theological and diplomatic attacks on Israel, USA, Europe and the West will only intensify, and the West will start doubting itself. Sure recipe for disaster. And letting Iran having civilian nuclear technology is complete folly since a nation, with detailed nuclear knowledge, can easily transform civilan nuclear technology into military nuclear technology. Once or if sanctions against Iran are lifted, and once Iran has minute understanding of nuclear technology - civilian and military, who will prevent the Iranian Islamic nutcases from getting the bomb? The Iranian populace? As long as Iran is a brutal theocratic Islamic dictatorship with apocalyptic dreams, even civilian nuclear technology is a threat to mankind. And if Iran gets nukes, there'll be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Iran musn't get nukes because that's the end of Israel - period. Iran needs to yield to Israel, USA, or Iran must be bombed to hell - with everyone and everything in it. Let's end the nonsense shall we?

Iran wants the bomb so that it will be able to threaten the world and help it enforce fundamentalist Islam on the world. Only bombing the nuclear sites will help and then bombing them again a few years from now. The Iranian people overthrowing the fanatics would be the best solution but the West didn't support them last time around.

It is so obvious this article is inspired by the PR section of American embasy. Shame on you, Ron Ben Yishai.

The Iranian gov't has ideology and patience...a very dangerous combination. I doubt anything but a military strike will stop Iran's nuclear ambitions.

While Ben Ishai gives away his sleeping pills we are facing a ever more agressive nuclear race by Iran.So Mr Ben Ishai you want to sedate the opinion before we face the iranian bombing ?