Which clauses angered Israel in the Iran-US agreement?

The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu maintains a "strict silence" regarding the memorandum of understanding signed between the United States and Iran, early Thursday.

The Hebrew newspaper "Yedioth Ahronoth" reported that the disclosure of the agreement's details was not a surprise, but it is believed in Israel that this agreement is "bad," despite not mentioning the word "Israel" in it, while sources said: "This is not what we were promised."

The newspaper explained that "regarding the expected negotiation period, which is 60 days, US President Donald Trump stated on Wednesday that from his point of view 'this is not a strict deadline as long as the Iranians are behaving well.'"

The Iranian Foreign Ministry announced that the US and Iranian presidents signed the memorandum of understanding "electronically," remotely, amidst simultaneous statements from both countries about canceling the in-person official ceremony that was scheduled in Geneva on Friday.

Trump confirmed signing the memorandum while in France, and the White House published a video clip of him signing the document, while the official "IRNA" agency published pictures of President Pezeshkian signing the agreement.

Concurrently, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said the agreement will enter into force and will open the Strait of Hormuz "immediately," and the US blockade on Iranian ports will be lifted.

"Yedioth Ahronoth" highlighted some clauses that it said are problematic for Israel, explaining the reasons they represent that state for the political and security leadership in Tel Aviv, which are as follows:

Article No. 10

The newspaper says the memorandum states: "Immediately upon signing the memorandum of understanding, and until the lifting of sanctions, the US Treasury Department will issue exemptions for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products and distillates, and all related services, including banking, insurance, transportation transactions and the like."

It pointed out that the problem lies in Israel seeing this clause as granting Iran billions of dollars without providing anything in return. It will enable it to sell oil, and later - according to the agreement - its frozen assets will be released (under Article 11), subject to the measures it takes. Israel sees this as a grave mistake, as the Iranian economy was on the verge of collapse, and now it will receive urgent support.

Article No. 8

According to the newspaper, the memorandum states: "Iran reaffirms that it will not seek to acquire or develop nuclear weapons. The US and Iran have agreed to resolve the issue of dealing with the stockpile of enriched materials according to a mechanism agreed upon between the two parties, and according to the timetable referred to in Article 7, with the minimum method being on-site dilution under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The two sides also agreed to discuss the issue of enrichment and other agreed matters related to Iran's nuclear needs, based on the legal framework to be agreed upon in the final agreement."

It explained that the problem lies in Israel seeing this as a worrying retreat by the US; Iran is not committed to removing enriched uranium, but to reducing its concentration on its territory under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Israel has always believed that Tehran refuses to hand over uranium and will not give up its right to enrichment. President Trump did not rule out this option in recent days, stating that he would agree to enrich uranium to a low level.

Article No. 1

The newspaper quoted from the memorandum: "The US, Iran, and their allies in the ongoing war declare that by signing this memorandum of understanding, an immediate and permanent cessation of military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, begins, and they pledge from now on not to wage any war or military operation against each other, and to refrain from threatening or using force against each other, and to guarantee the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. The final agreement will affirm the permanent cessation of war on all fronts, including Lebanon, in addition to the other provisions contained in this article."

It commented by saying: "The problem lies in this clause being controversial, and Israel opposed it due to the linkage it creates between the arenas. However, Israel analyzes the agreement from the perspective of there being no demand for withdrawal before the signing of the final agreement, and this will not happen tomorrow morning. There are now 60 days of negotiations with the option of extension, and in any case, Israel does not believe a permanent agreement will be signed this quickly. As mentioned, Trump said last night that for him 'this is not a strict deadline as long as the Iranians are behaving well.'"

The Hebrew newspaper said that "meanwhile, sources in Israel indicate that Tel Aviv is not the only one opposing the 'unification of arenas' between Iran and Lebanon, as the Beirut government also opposes it for fear of Hezbollah gaining immunity."

It mentioned that "in this regard, the Israeli army submitted 3 demands to the political leadership. First, the necessity of maintaining freedom of action throughout Lebanon; second, the necessity of maintaining a buffer line - i.e., a security strip in southern Lebanon, across the border, where the Israeli army is present; and third, the disarmament of southern Lebanon, which was addressed by all ground operations and area clearance operations in recent months."

The newspaper added that "in any case, negotiations with the Lebanese government will continue in the meantime, with progress towards a framework agreement." The Americans want to speed up the pace of talks, and the fifth round - political and military - will be held in Washington next week.

It is understood in Israel that pressure will increase on Tel Aviv to avoid launching attacks in southern Lebanon except for the purpose of self-defense against emerging threats.

A source told the newspaper: Israel opposes withdrawal before reaching an effective agreement with Lebanon.

The newspaper pointed out that Iran interprets the clause differently. Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei stated last night: "The continuation of Israel's occupation of Lebanon is a violation of the memorandum of understanding, and necessary measures will be taken."

Baghaei added after Iran announced the signing of the memorandum by Presidents Trump and Pezeshkian: "If Israeli attacks on Lebanon continue, it will be considered a violation of the agreement."

"Yedioth Ahronoth" focused on the statement of Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf who said: "Naturally, Iran will impose fees on services in the Strait of Hormuz, which will not return to its pre-war status, but this does not mean we will violate international law."

An Israeli source said after the publication of the memorandum's clauses: "Iran is the biggest winner and Israel is the loser in this conflict. The stock market is declining because expectations were that Israel would become the investment center in the Middle East, but it is emerging as a loser."

The source added to the newspaper: "Iran has emerged as a global power, while Israel has transformed from a regional power into the weakest link in the eyes of the world. Under these circumstances, it will be very difficult for Netanyahu to oppose withdrawal from Lebanon. Pressure will increase."

The Hebrew newspaper quoted senior defense officials as saying that "the greatest damage resulting from the agreement lies in distorting the public image and undermining future deterrence capability."

They added: "We will face the tragedy of this major war in the US elections in two years. It seems, according to the current situation, that we will lose the next elections at the national level, regardless of who succeeds Trump."

They continued: "First, the operational achievements and the reduction of (Iranian) capabilities are important and impressive, and will cast a shadow for a certain period. Second, regarding the agreement, from the positive side - despite all the loopholes in it, there is an opportunity that it may push the nuclear project back by 10 to 15 years, as the Iranians will have to occupy themselves with reconstruction, and their support for proxies will be less, among other things."

They saw that "the state of justified frustration stems from the shock gap between promises and reality, in addition to the established fact that all wars ultimately end with settlements; the current crisis lies not in the clauses of the agreement itself, but in the narrative and awareness, and in the rush towards battle without a real strategy or prior planning for the day after."

Erem News