Referring to the fail-safe point, he added: "If we've reached a situation in which, god forbid, Iran possesses nuclear weapons and we're too late, it doesn't mean it will stay that way forever. We're not there yet."
- 'Iran didn't halt higher-grade enrichment'
- US: No sanctions easing at front end of Iran talks
- Iran lawmaker: No need for more 20% uranium
Nehoshtan also said that "deterrence, composed from military ability and the readiness the use it, not only exists, but is also strong. Israel has a reputation for significant military force, varied capabilities combined with exact intelligence and when it (Israel) feels it has to, it does."
Regarding the negotiations with Iran he said: "We're at the outset of one of the most important processes in the Middle East. We got there because sanctions work. Rohani was elected to change the internal economic situation. We've found leverage over the Iranians which brought them to the negotiating table, but the Iranians are good in negotiations. They're masters of the art. And when you run negotiations with a group of countries it's harder to find common ground."
Analyzing the possible results of the talks, Nehoshtan said there are four possibilities, two winning and two losing: "One win is that the talks will succeed. The Americans and we are on the same page: Prevent the Iranian from having nuclear weapons. The second win is exposing them, showing their bluff.
"There are also two dangerous scenarios: One is to fall into a bad deal. We're concerned they'll manage to convince the world with a good Powerpoint presentation while giving nothing away. The other is the drawing out of the process. Some are experts at that. Leave smiling and draw it out."
Nehoshtan said: "We – the free world – have to prevent the losing scenarios. Not let a bad deal come into being and not let the process to last forever."
"For a bomb high-grade is needed," he said. "Enrichment is possible but it takes time."
Regarding a possible military strike against Iran, Nehoshtan said: "No one is eager to pursue military action; you do it when the alternative is worse. There's no telling what will follow a military strike."
- Receive Ynetnews updates
directly to your desktop