A leading Israeli news outlet is sharply attacking President Donald Trump’s developing agreement with Iran, warning that the proposed arrangement could undermine the goals of the recent military campaign against Tehran and leave much of the regime’s nuclear infrastructure untouched.

In a strongly worded opinion article published Wednesday, Times of Israel founding editor David Horovitz argued that the emerging deal amounts to a “catastrophic capitulation to” Iran’s aggressors and could leave Israel exposed to future threats while limiting its ability to respond.

Horovitz contended that the draft memorandum of understanding currently under discussion would grant Tehran substantial economic benefits while delaying decisive action on the central issue of Iran’s nuclear program.

The criticism comes as the Trump administration moves toward completing a framework agreement following months of warfare, diplomatic maneuvering, and negotiations between Washington and Tehran.

According to Horovitz, the proposed framework falls well short of the objectives previously articulated by Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. Earlier this year, Witkoff stated that any acceptable agreement would require Iran to end its nuclear activities, dismantle its ballistic missile program, and cease support for regional proxy organizations.

Horovitz highlighted comments Witkoff made in March concerning Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium. At the time, Witkoff referenced Iranian claims that the regime possessed roughly 460 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity, material that experts say could potentially be further refined for weapons purposes.

The opinion piece argues that permitting Iran to maintain its current nuclear posture during a proposed 60-day negotiating period could provide the regime with additional opportunities to move closer to nuclear weapons capability.

Horovitz also pointed to reports indicating that American intelligence officials remain skeptical about Iran’s willingness to make meaningful compromises in any final agreement.

In addition, he criticized portions of the framework that he believes would significantly restrict Israel’s ability to launch future military operations against Iran, while raising doubts about whether the deal would permanently block Tehran from eventually acquiring nuclear weapons.

The article also scrutinized Trump’s recent remarks regarding Israel and Hezbollah. The president has repeatedly called for restraint in Israeli military actions and has suggested that regional actors, including Syria, could help contain Hezbollah’s influence and activities.

Trump, however, has vigorously defended his approach, maintaining that American military action combined with diplomacy successfully prevented Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and strengthened Israel’s overall security position.

Speaking during the G7 summit, Trump asserted that Israel had benefited enormously from U.S. intervention and argued that Iran was nearing nuclear weapons capability before American forces acted.

Horovitz disputed that conclusion, insisting that the proposed agreement effectively rewards Tehran and risks leaving Israel to confront ongoing dangers from both the Iranian regime and its network of regional proxies.

{Matzav.com}