David Siegel, Israel’s consul general in Los Angeles, recently spoke with The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board to discuss the Iran nuclear deal and U.S.-Israel relations. Here are edited excerpts.

Q: Now that the president seems to have the Iran deal assured, what next for Israel?

A: Unfortunately, whatever happens in Congress is not going to end the Iran issue. So we’re going to continue expressing our views very clearly about the agreement. And about Iran and what Iran’s doing. They seem to be in violation of the agreement already as we speak. They say they won’t be beholden to the Security Council resolutions. There are constant attempts to continue to transfer weaponry both to Hamas and Hezbollah. I think more and more people understand what’s at stake for the American public. We believe that disagreement will not stop Iran. That even if Iran complies to the agreement, they would become a threshold nuclear state and industrial nuclear capability, as early as 10 years from now. I think they’re already violating the agreement, and they’ve never made an agreement they haven’t violated. You have to assume that this agreement as well will be violated. So we will be paying a very close eye on everything Iran’s doing and saying. This is a long-term process. And we’ll continue expressing what we believe is at stake. Not just for us, but for the world.

Q: But what are the options open to Israel now? And are you planning any specific steps in the near term?

A: Well, we have to see first what happens in Congress. I will continue to express our concerns in a very clear way. There’s nuclear aspects that are very, very significant. But also about the implications for terrorism,

Q: The United States and Israel pretend to be on friendly terms these days and obviously they have all kinds of formal ties. But it’s tough to look at the emails from Hilary Clinton’s informal advisers that came out in recent weeks and not consider the relationship close to broken. They depict (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu as unable to come up with deals because of internal political pressures and because of his mental health. The idea that the United States secretary of state is being told by her closest advisers that the Israeli prime minister is mentally incapacitated is pretty striking stuff.

A: There’s enough statements, information and facts out there that underscore the strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Everything from security relations and strategic relations to commercial relations both between our countries and our economy, so the relationship is robust. The United States is and remains Israel’s strongest partner and ally. And the strongest partner of the United States in the Middle East. And we’re intent on making that continue despite very strong disagreements that we have right now on this issue of the nuclear agreement.

Q: The Republican leadership in Congress is still searching for ways that they might in essence block the agreement. They’re talking about possibly re-enacting the sanctions. But what good would that do given the fact that the other signatories to the agreement are very insistent that they will lift their sanctions no matter what the United States does?

A: The countries of the world follow the leadership of the United States simply because of the power, the U.S. economy, the U.S. marketing, U.S. financial system. Which is pretty much the most dominant power in the global financial markets. And the history of the sanctions showed repeatedly that various countries said various things. In practice, they follow the leadership of the United States. It is very important to send a clear message both to Iran and to the nations that might be considering trading with Iran what the point of view of the American public, and the American Congress, is. This is why we believe it’s so important. The history of sanctions shows that when the United States led, every other nation followed. No country can afford not to trade with the United States. And if given a clear choice between the ability to trade with Iran, which is an economy of less than $400 billion. And the ability to trade with the United States of America, which is an economy of $17 trillion and much more than that. I think the choice is clear. We’ve seen that in the past, we’ll see it in the future. And it really depends on American leadership.

Q: So you’re saying that if Congress does go ahead and succeeds in reimposing sanctions that the other signatories to the agreement will go along with that?

A: It’s more complex than that. But you leverage vis-à-vis individual companies and individual countries, these are the conversations that are long-term conversations and not just about next week or next month.

Q: Does the likelihood that the Iran deal goes through, does that increase the likelihood or any possibility that Israel will act militarily on its own against Iran?

A: Well [our focus is] only diplomatic and economic. The whole idea of economic sanctions on Iran is an idea that we subscribed to very early over two decades ago, which is why we’re so concerned about the lifting of those economic sanctions. And the concern is, that if you release, relinquish all the leverage you have on Iran, and Iran does violate the agreement, which they surely will, you lose the leverage you have short of the military option in the years to come. And everything we see happening on the ground right now indicates to us [that is happening] -- whether it’s Iran’s declared intention to continue [funding] the terror groups at Israel’s borders, mainly Hezbollah, or Iran’s statements about introducing new missiles. The declaration they will ignore the U.S. Security Council resolutions. All of this is taking place before our eyes. So we see Iran continuing to be a danger to the region. And we’ll have to find ways to try to mitigate that danger in years to come. It’s too early to talk about military options, I certainly don’t do that. [Our goal] is to stop Iran peacefully, to do it through diplomatic, political, economic pressure. That’s always been our position and it’s our position today

Q: What would you say to those who argue that much of Iran’s rhetoric and stance, the death to America stance, is just political theater to assuage the anger of the hard-liners in Iran? And that the government of Iran is really much more capable of negotiating with its neighbors than its rhetoric would indicate?

A: We follow their rhetoric very, very closely. Their record is to kill as many Israelis as they can get their hands on. And as many Americans as they can get their hands on. They killed American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. They killed Israelis around the world. They blew up your embassy in Lebanon. Embassies in Africa and in the Middle East. Our embassy in Argentina, the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires. They have a global terror network. They call for Israel’s destruction. It’s obvious that they’re moving very rapidly toward a military nuclear capability. They deny the Holocaust. They have sponsored and supported, they created Hezbollah, that has more rockets and missiles than most of the nations on this Earth. They’re working on nuclear capabilities, right now as we speak. We take Iran’s threats very seriously. We see them expanding throughout the Middle East. They’re sitting on the oil checkpoints, both in the Persian Gulf and now by taking over Yemen. They’re sitting at Saudi Arabia’s borders. They’re south of Egypt and the Suez Canal. They are a very, very significant threat to all of us.

Sandiego Union Tribune