Saturday, March 24th | 8 Nisan 5778


Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

July 29, 2015 4:00 pm

UK Paper Says Netanyahu Opposed All Negotiation With Iran, Offers No Evidence to Support Claim

avatar by Adam Levick

Email a copy of "UK Paper Says Netanyahu Opposed All Negotiation With Iran, Offers No Evidence to Support Claim" to a friend
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Photo: GPO.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Photo: GPO.

In a July 28 article (Huckabee likens Iran deal to Holocaust), Times of London Middle East reporter Hugh Tomlinson claimed that Israel’s prime minister not only opposes the current Iran nuclear deal, but actually has opposed negotiations with Iran altogether.

Here’s the relevant passage, in the penultimate paragraph of the article.

Congress has two months in which to review the Vienna accord before voting to accept or reject it. Israel, which bitterly opposed negotiations with Iran from the outset, has been lobbying Congress for months in an attempt to block the deal.

Given that serious negotiations with Iran date back to 2009, Tomlinson is in effect saying that Benjamin Netanyahu has “bitterly opposed negotiations with Iran from the outset.” Indeed, Tomlinson has made this same claim on at least one other occasion.

However, as CAMERA has demonstrated, despite some media claims echoing Tomlinson’s take on Netanyahu’s position, the fact is that the prime minister has consistently supported negotiations with Iran, albeit negotiations that would achieve ‘a better deal’ than the one the six world powers are prepared to accept.

Whilst one can argue with the merits of Netanyahu’s expectations of a good deal with Iran, to argue that he opposed all negotiations does not seem to be supported by the record.  Such a claim of course reinforces the ideologically driven anti-Israel narrative that Netanyahu and other opponents of the deal desire no outcome other than war with Iran – either a U.S.-led attack or one initiated by Jerusalem.

We’ve tweeted Tomlinson asking him to cite a source for his accusation, but have thus far received no reply.

Adam Levick is the managing editor of UK Media Watch, an affiliate of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA).

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • sara rifka

    non jews really are a pain_its a non deal all this crap_and americans not needed in the scheme of things either_too many against_interest in their own viewpoint and anything that will diminish Israel’s place in the world_

    besides if they voted in this pig then their words equal that of the liberal party in canada…

    israel is moving beyond our fears_in all fields_jealousy_hatred_and token jews who are at risk, j street and its jewish terror… america if you can step aboard our growth and right to live peacefully then i must say


  • Meron Medzini

    It would have been useful if Adam Levick and CAMERA would have cited the sources where Netanyahu supported negotiations with Iran withour prior conditions.

    • Julian Clovelley

      I absolutely agree and I begged for months in posts that were frequently not even counted (so I presume repressed by persons unknown) that Algemeiner editors ask – and in the end insist – that articles attacking the existing Iran deal should state an alternative or else be treated as little more than propaganda aimed at getting Jews in America to vote for the Republican Party (who in power would undoubtedly follow the present Administration policy)

      I find Levick – despite his important work monitoring media – a main offender – He constantly attacks without offering alternatives. One of his targets is just about the worlds most responsible paper – one in which he himself has been published, the Guardian

      So far as I can see facts are being distorted in order to press an extreme Right Wing pro Settler Zionist agenda. That is not the way Algemeiner used to be. I came to reading it in order to hear the Jewish point of view but what I am getting is extremist pap dressed up as rational articles

  • ESLombard

    My hunch is that we should build a strong relationship with India. It’s no more than a hunch based on reports of six members of my immediate family have made trips there this year; four traveled poor. I have a personal nurse and caretaker from Sri Lanka which, of course, is not India: a most agreeable fellow. Anyway You don’t depend on hunches in making foreign policy. Israel’s relationship with India has been increasingly productive and supportive.

    • Jack

      And the Indians are much more rational in their expectations by conforming to best practice in their dealings.

  • ART

    With Obamas’ lead and blessing Israel has been cast as the rogue state rather than iran

    • Ben Kramer

      If the shoe fits….

    • Jack

      No one is more rogue than N. Korea, closely followed by Iran, Russia and China.
      This correction in the markets is as a result of Beijing not conforming to ‘best practice’ models across the board.
      What they are doing is corrupt practice, which will cause problems the world over.
      Devaluing the yuan, or rimimbi by mandate is because the real value isn’t there in that currency, or economy.
      That is why Israel will survive.
      No delusion…
      It should be accomplished on the open market, but that would show them up for what they are.

  • David Levy

    Of course he didn’t reply, because his anti-Israel, anti-Netanyahu narrative is much more important to him than the truth.

  • brenrod

    The Times and tomlinson are serial chronic liars. this is nothing new, they are bought whores willing to state any lie or libel against the Jews.

  • Wish our head of state were aligned with Israel instead of Iran.

  • Julian Clovelley

    Levick says “We’ve tweeted Tomlinson asking him to cite a source for his accusation, but have thus far received no reply.”

    Well I know how he feels

    I have written in to Algemeiner in response to articles many times (often the comments merely disappear and do not even appear as a number) asking the writers of the articles to give a clear exposition of their alternative Plan and the same applies here – Where is Netanyahu’s alternative Plan?

    Come on Adam – let’s hear this Plan – lets examine it and dissect it

    I don’t think you have one – I don’t think there is one – I think this is all about maintaining conflict in the interests of the battle cries of the Republican Party of the USA, and about a determination NEVER to close the settlements in the West Bank and end the Occupation

    So where is the Plan?.. If you really think Americans would tolerate another “Vietnam” War, in the Middle East, this time, you have got rocks in your head

    • Nobbly Stick

      ‘I think this is all about maintaining conflict in the interests of the battle cries of the Republican Party of the USA, and about a determination NEVER to close the settlements in the West Bank and end the Occupation’.

      You must be a Guardian contributor.

    • Julian, if you had bothered to click the links in my post you could have read about Netanyahu’s ideas for a better Iran deal. However, your decision to impute bad faith to the critics of the Iran Deal, instead of arguing the merits of deal itself, seems to suggest that you’re not truly interested in hearing those who oppose the agreement. And, finally, please explain how “settlements” have anything whatsoever to do with Israel’s desire to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.