Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-15980House OversightOther

Internal Israeli memo discusses Netanyahu's stance on peace talks and US‑Israel security cooperation

The passage provides general political commentary and mentions high‑profile figures (Netanyahu, Dan Meridor, US officials) but offers no concrete allegations, transactions, or actionable leads. It lac Mentions Netanyahu (Bibi) steering discussions away from peace initiatives. References internal Group of Eight meetings and Dan Meridor’s support for initiatives. Notes concerns about US support for

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #011887
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage provides general political commentary and mentions high‑profile figures (Netanyahu, Dan Meridor, US officials) but offers no concrete allegations, transactions, or actionable leads. It lac Mentions Netanyahu (Bibi) steering discussions away from peace initiatives. References internal Group of Eight meetings and Dan Meridor’s support for initiatives. Notes concerns about US support for

Tags

israelpolitical-strategyiran-nuclearnetanyahupalestinian-peace-processusisrael-relationshouse-oversightforeign-policy

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
/ BARAK / 130 up in our inner Group of Eight discussions, I could usually count only on Dan Meridor, and occasionally a handful of others, to argue in favor of any form of initiative on our side. In private meetings, Bibi did sometimes engage in discussion about what Israel might do. But he invariably steered the conversation elsewhere, insisting that the real issue was the Palestinians’ lack of any interest in making peace. My main worry wasn’t the immediate future of the negotiations. For now, the chances of an agreement seemed close to zero. It was the longer-term damage Bibi’s approach would do in further delaying any serious move by Israel to put our relations with the Palestinians on a more stable and sustainable footing. The dithering, delay and deadlock suited him politically. Ironically, my own efforts on the security front had also made it easier for us to do next to nothing. Intermittent outbreaks of violence always remained a threat. Yet the West Bank security fence, along with our military, police and intelligence measures, meant it was very unlikely we’d see a return to the full-blown terror war of the second intifada. I was also working to secure US support for our development of increasingly effective anti-missile weapons to reduce the threat from Hamas in Gaza. The overall result was that for many, if not most, Israelis, the conflict with the Palestinians didn’t impact on their day-to-day lives. It was unseen and largely unfelt. Still, the effect of the stalemate on our relationship with Washington did matter: both for our security cooperation on things like the anti-missile weapons and, crucially, the challenge which had led me into Bibi’s government in the first place: keeping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. It was a race against time. The Iranians were producing more and more yellowcake, building more advanced centrifuges, accumulating more low-enriched uranium. They were getting better at hiding and protecting the network of facilities being used to try to produce a nuclear weapon. And in the early months of Bibi’s Prime Ministership, the question we faced wasn’t even whether to take military action against Iran — something I knew, from Bob Gates and others, that the Obama administration viewed no more favourably than George W. Bush. It was 416

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.