Jerusalem (AFP) - A framework nuclear deal between Iran and world powers will be remembered as a "historic mistake" giving Tehran legitimacy in its bid to get the bomb, Israeli officials said Thursday.

"If an agreement is reached on the basis of this framework, it is a historic mistake which will make the world far more dangerous," said the government officials.

"It is a bad framework which will lead to a bad and dangerous agreement," they said on condition of anonymity in a briefing to journalists.

"The framework gives international legitimacy to Iran's nuclear programme, the only aim of which is to produce a nuclear bomb," said their written comments.

The outline agreement aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear drive was clinched after marathon talks in Switzerland and marks a major breakthrough in a 12-year standoff between Iran and the West, which has long feared Tehran wants to build an atomic bomb.

Israel has warned relentlessly against such a deal and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier Thursday that an agreement would have to "significantly roll back Iran's nuclear capabilities".

View gallery

US President Barack Obama gestures while making a statement at the White House in Washington, DC, on …

He says that any potential for a nuclear-armed Tehran threatens the Jewish state's very existence.

US President Barack Obama said Thursday he would speak to Netanyahu to reassure him of steadfast US support for Israel's security.

Israeli Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz said earlier that all options were open for Israel.

"If we have no choice, we have no choice... the military option is on the table," he said.

The Israeli government officials slammed the emerging deal as "folding to Iranian dictates".

"It will not lead to a nuclear capability for peaceful purposes but to a nuclear capability for war," they said.

"Iran is not being required to stop its aggression in the region, its worldwide terror or its threats to destroy Israel."

The "parameters" for the accord between Tehran and six world powers are to be fleshed out into a comprehensive agreement by June 30 in an attempt to end more than a decade of tensions with the Islamic republic.

Failure may set the United States and Israel on a road to military action to thwart Iran's nuclear drive and keep Tehran out in the cold on the international stage.

The so-called P5+1 group -- the United States, Britain, China, France and Russia plus Germany -- hope that the deal will make it virtually impossible for Iran to make nuclear weapons.

Iran, one of the world's major oil producing countries, has always denied seeking the atomic bomb saying its activities are for energy generation and research.

Tehran (AFP) - Hundreds of Iranians took to the streets in Tehran early Friday to celebrate a breakthrough in talks with the West that may end the country's 12-year-long nuclear crisis.

The capital's longest street, Val-e-Asr Avenue, was lined with cars as drivers sounded their horns in approval of a framework deal intended to lead to a comprehensive agreement with world powers in June.

"Whatever the final result of the negotiations, we are winners," 30-year-old Behrang Alavi said on Val-e-Asr at around 1:00 am as the noise reverberated around him.

"Now we will be able to live normally like the rest of the world," he said, as people flashed V-signs for victory and danced while waving white handkerchiefs in a traditional Iranian celebration.

The scenes came after Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said key parameters of the framework for a deal had been agreed with the West, paving the way for a final deal by June 30.

It marks a major step to address the West's concerns that Iran wants to build a nuclear bomb, with curbs being placed on Tehran's nuclear programme.

In exchange Iran will see sanctions that have hobbled its economy being removed upon verification that the nuclear programme is peaceful.

US President Barack Obama welcomed the "historic understanding" with the Islamic republic but cautioned that more work needed to be done before a deal can be sealed.

When Aaron Stein was studying nuclear non-proliferation at Middlebury University's Monterey graduate program, the students would sometimes construct what they thought would be the best possible nuclear inspection and monitoring regimes.

Years later, Stein is now a Middle East and nuclear proliferation expert with the Royal United Services Institute. And he says that the Iran nuclear framework agreement, announced on Thursday, look an awful lot like those ideal hypotheticals he'd put together in grad school.

"When I was doing my non-proliferation training at Monterey, this is the type of inspection regime that we would dream up in our heads," he said. "We would hope that this would be the way to actually verify all enrichment programs, but thought that would never be feasible."

"If these are the parameters by which the [final agreement] will be signed, then this is an excellent deal," Stein concluded.

The framework nuclear deal establishes only the very basics; negotiators will continue to meet to try to turn them into a complete, detailed agreement by the end of June. Still, the terms in the framework, unveiled to the world after a series of late- and all-night sessions, are remarkably detailed, and almost astoundingly favorable to the United States.

Like many observers, I doubted in recent months that Iran and world powers would ever reach this stage; the setbacks and delays had simply been too many. Now, here we are, and the terms are far better than expected. There are a number of details left to be worked out, including one very big unresolved issue that could potentially sink everything. This is not over. But if this framework does indeed become a full nuclear deal in July, it would be a huge success and a great deal.

Iran gives up the bulk of its nuclear program in these terms

Iran's then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad looks over centrifuges at the nuclear facility at Natanz (Photo by the Office of the Presidency of the Islamic Republic of Iran via Getty)

The framework deal requires Iran to surrender some crucial components of its nuclear program, in part or even in whole. Here are the highlights:

• Iran will give up about 14,000 of its 20,000 centrifuges
• Iran will give up all but its most rudimentary, outdated centrifuges: its first-generation IR-1s, knock-offs of 1970s European models, are all it gets to keep. It will not be allowed to build or develop newer models.
• Iran will give up 97 percent of its enriched uranium: it will hold on to only 300 kilograms of its 10,000 kilogram stockpile in its current form.
• Iran will destroy or export the core of its plutonium plant at Arak, and replace it with a new core than cannot produce weapons-grade plutonium. It will ship out all spent nuclear fuel.

Iran would simply not have much of its nuclear program left after all this.

A shorthand that people sometimes use to evaluate the size of Iran's nuclear program is its "breakout time." If Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei woke up tomorrow morning and decided to kick out all of the inspectors and set his entire nuclear program toward building a nuclear warhead — to "break out" to a bomb — right now it would take him two or three months. Under the terms of the framework, his program would be so much smaller that it would take him an entire year to build a single nuclear warhead.

These terms are not abject surrender. Iran is allowed to keep a small nuclear program, and it won some concessions of its own. For example, what little uranium enrichment is allowed will be done at Iran's facility at Natanz — a hardened, reinforced-concrete structure that was once used for covert enrichment and that the US had hoped to close.

Iran will also be allowed to do some research at another hardened facility the US had wanted to close, at Fordow, though the research is restricted and will be barred from using fissile material. These are not big concessions, and they matter mostly for their symbolic value, but it's something.

Still, when you look at many of the specifics laid out in the framework, the hard numbers and timetables and the detailed proscriptions, those all tend to be quite favorable to the United States.

The core issue that the framework really nails

IAEA nuclear inspectors at Iran's nuclear facility at Natanz in 2014 (KAZEM GHANE/AFP/Getty)

Even though the agreement is only a framework, the summary released on Thursday goes into striking detail on an issue that was always going to be among the most crucial: inspections.

Whatever number of centrifuges Iran has or doesn't have, whatever amount of uranium it's allowed to keep or forced to give up, none of it matters unless inspectors have enough authority to hold Tehran to its end of the deal — and to convince the Iranians that they could never get away with cheating. To say that the US got favorable terms here would be quite an understatement; the Iranians, when it comes to inspections, practically gave away the farm.

"I would give it an A," Stein said of the framework. When I asked why: "Because of the inspections and transparency."

There are two reasons that inspections are so important. The first is that super-stringent inspections are a deterrent: if the Iranians know that any deviation is going to be quickly caught, they have much less incentive to try to cheat, and much more incentive to uphold their side of the deal.

The second is that, if Iran were to try a build a nuclear weapon now, it likely wouldn't use the material that's already known to the world and being monitored. Rather, the Iranians would secretly manufacture some off-the-books centrifuges, secretly mine some off-the-books uranium, and squirrel it all away to a new, secret underground facility somewhere. That would be the only way for Iran to build up enough of an arsenal such that, by the time the world found out, it would be too late to do anything about it.

Really robust inspections would be the best way stop that from happening. They would prevent Iran from sneaking off centrifuges or siphoning away uranium that could be used to build an off-the-grid nuclear weapons program, without the world finding out.

The inspections issue has not gotten much political attention. When I spoke to Jeffrey Lewis, the director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at Middlebury's Monterey Institute of International Studies, on Tuesday before the framework was announced, he seemed worried that negotiators would not focus on it much. Rather, overwhelming political focus in Washington and Tehran on issues like Iran's number of allowed centrifuges seemed likely to push inspections from the top priorities.

Lewis suggested that a top item on his wish-list would be inspections so robust that inspectors don't just get to visit enrichment sites like Natanz and Fordow, but also centrifuge factories. That, he said, "would be a big achievement."

Sure enough, come Thursday, Lewis got his wish, and then some: centrifuge factory inspections is one of the terms in the framework, and it's pretty robust. For the next 20 years, inspectors would have "continuous surveillance at Iran's centrifuge rotors and bellows production and storage facilities."

"I was shocked to read that they got them to agree to let us walk around their centrifuge production facilities. That's amazing," Stein said.

It's not just centrifuge factories. Inspectors will have access to all parts of Iran's nuclear supply chain, including its uranium mines and the mills where it processes uranium ore. Inspectors will also not just monitor but be required to pre-approve all sales to Iran of nuclear-related equipment. This provision also applies to something called "dual-use" materials, which means any equipment that could be used toward a nuclear program.

"The inspections and transparency on the rotors, and the bellows, and the uranium mines is more than I ever thought would be in this agreement," Stein added.

Other favorable items buried in the terms

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks in Tehran in 2004 (BEHROUZ MEHRI/AFP/Getty)

Stein pointed out two details in the framework that I'd missed, both of which appeared to be pretty significant concessions by the Iranians.

First, Iran has finally agreed to comply by a rule known as Modified Code 3.1 of the Subsidiary Arrangements General Part to Iran's Safeguards Agreement, shorthanded as Modified Code 3.1. It says that Iran has to notify inspectors immediately on its decision to build any new facility where it plans to do nuclear work — long before construction starts.

Iran in the past has either rejected this rule or stated that it would only notify inspectors a few months before introducing nuclear material at a facility — a "cover your ass" move in case the world caught them building a new nuclear site. Tehran's promise to comply may signal that it intends to stop building such covert facilities.

Second, Stein reads the framework as including Iran's ballistic missile program — something that critics of the deal warned would be left out. Indeed, even many supporters of the negotiations have said that it would be unlikely that American negotiators could get the deal to cover ballistic missiles or other conventional weapons programs; it would simply be asking for too much in one agreement.

"It looks like they were able to expand the scope beyond just nuclear issues," Stein said. He pointed to a line in the section that explains that the UN Security Council would replace its old resolutions imposing sanctions on the nuclear program with a new resolution that incorporated the finalized deal.

The line reads, "Important restrictions on conventional arms and ballistic missiles, as well as provisions that allow for related cargo inspections and asset freezes, will also be incorporated by this new resolution."

"The way I read that is that they address the ballistic missile issue, that that will remain in the new UN Security Council resolution," Stein said. "So you're going to keep the restrictions on ballistic missiles that are already present."

The giant gaping hole in the framework terms

Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif at nuclear negotiations (RONALD ZAK/AFP/Getty)

Still, this is just a framework deal on the basic terms; it covers a lot, but not everything. And there is one really important topic that is referenced only vaguely: how and when the world will lift its economic sanctions on Iran.

This has been a major sticking point throughout negotiations. Iran demands that all sanctions be lifted right away; their country needs a functioning economy, they say, and if they're complying with all of the restrictions as of day-one then they shouldn't have to endure crippling sanctions on day-two. But the US and others worry, with good reason, that if they lift all sanctions immediately then Iran will have far less incentive to follow through on its commitments, as it would be very difficult to re-impose those sanctions. And Iran has cheated on such agreements before.

This is a really difficult issue; each side has to trust, to some degree, that the other side will uphold its end of the deal. And someone has to go first. After decades of enmity, that's hard.

The terms in the framework do not come near solving this issue. Iran and the world powers, apparently failing to find a solution, have largely punted.

"I read the fact sheet as confirming that they are still far apart on scheduling sanctions relief," Lewis said in an email. "Still a very large devil — a Great Satan if you will — in the details."

What the terms do say is that the US, Europe, and UN Security Council will remove their sanctions after Iran fulfills its end of the deal. But it is still very unclear how exactly that gets determined, when that happens, or whether it means the sanctions are lifted all at once, or over time.

The terms do suggest that the IAEA will have "teeth," as Stein put it, in punishing Iran if they conclude that the Iranians are not upholding their commitments. And if Iran breaks its end of the bargain, the sanctions will in theory "snap back."

Russia, though, opposes putting any sort of automatic enforcement mechanism into UN Security Council sanctions. So it's not clear if "snap back" means that sanctions will automatically trigger back into place (unlikely) or if the US would have to try to coral the necessary votes to bring them back manually (very difficult).

This was always perhaps the hardest issue. It remains the hardest issue. That the negotiators could not find anything more detailed to say is concerning.

This, so far, is about the best we could ask for

Kerry and Zarif shake hands in 2014 as Omani Foreign Minister Yussef bin Alawi and former EU top diplomat Catherine Ashton watch. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images)

"Really, it's a very strong framework," Jeffrey Lewis said when I asked him what he thought.

"As a framework it's very good," tweeted Mark Fitzpatrick, the director of the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. He added, "A sharp critic of Iran and skeptic of the talks told me after the announcement that it seemed to be heavily tilted in favour of the West."

The Arms Control Association issued a statement saying that the "historic" agreement "promises to lead to one of the most consequential and far-reaching nuclear nonproliferation achievements in recent decades."

Everyone is very careful to note that this is a provisional framework. It could fall apart before it becomes a full, final deal. The negotiators, between now and the end-of-June deadline, could get bogged down in details like sanctions relief. It will be hard and it could fail.

But we do have something substantial and important in this framework. The terms in the agreement are just about the best that we could hope for — even better, in some ways, than many had thought possible. The concessions from Iran are painful and many; the concessions by the US minor and few; the details surprisingly robust.

President Obama is framing the deal, somewhat defensively, as the best alternative to war. Indeed it is that. But it is also the start of what could become a substantial and long-term curb to Iran's nuclear program, a major step toward reducing the hostility between Iran and the West, and thus a potentially transformative change for the region.

WATCH: President Obama's remarks on nuclear deal with Iran

(VOX)

Watch video

Israel cool to Iran deal, may struggle to rally opposition

NowThis
Obama To Netanyahu On Iran Deal: This Is The Best Option

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the international community's framework nuclear agreement with Iran early Friday, putting him on a collision course with the United States and other close allies as the world tries to close in on a final deal in the coming months.

Netanyahu, who had been outspoken critic of the world's negotiations with Iran, said he voiced his "strong opposition" to the deal, negotiated by world powers and Iran in Lausanne, Switzerland, in a phone call with President Barack Obama. "A deal based on this framework would threaten the survival of Israel," he said.

But with the deal being welcomed around the globe, Netanyahu could find have a tough time trying to rally opposition to it as it is finalized ahead of a June 30 deadline. His best bet could lie with the Republican-dominated U.S. Congress.

Netanyahu believes Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb — a concern that has been shared by much of the world. He considers a nuclear-armed Iran a threat to Israel's very existence, given Iranian leaders' calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, Iran's support for hostile militant groups across the region and its development of long-range ballistic missiles.

The framework deal includes a system of limits and inspections on Iranian nuclear facilities, but falls short of Israeli demands to dismantle the program. Netanyahu believes Iran cannot be trusted, and that leaving certain facilities intact would allow the Iranians to reach the capability of building a bomb.

"Such a deal would not block Iran's path to the bomb. It would pave it," Netanyahu said.

View gallery

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu makes a statement to the press about negotiations with Ira …

Yuval Steinitz, his Cabinet minister who monitors the Iranian nuclear program, said Israel would continue to push to cancel or at least improve the deal as it is finalized ahead of a June 30 deadline.

Yoel Guzansky, a former Iran analyst in the Israeli prime minister's office and a research fellow at the INSS think tank in Tel Aviv, said Thursday's announcement was a game changer.

The deal starts a process "where Iran will stop being a pariah state," he said. "Israel will need to see how to inspect Iran on its own, and not rely on the international community."

A key factor, he said, would be how other Arab countries that share Israel's concerns about Iran will react. "Israel will have to cooperate and talk to them about the mutual fear about Iran," he said.

Netanyahu has warned of Iran's nuclear intentions for years, and has said that preventing Iran from developing a bomb is the mission of his lifetime.

View gallery

Iranians flash the victory sign from their car while celebrating at a street in northern Tehran, Ira …

In recent weeks, he stepped up his rhetoric. Last month, Netanyahu harshly criticized the emerging agreement in a speech to the U.S. Congress, enraging the White House because the visit was arranged behind its back with Republican lawmakers.

But the speech, and furious Israeli lobbying to other participants in the Iran talks, appeared to have made little difference.

Britain, Germany, France and Italy — all key European allies and all directly or indirectly involved in the negotiations in Switzerland— welcomed the deal.

"We are closer than ever to an agreement that makes it impossible for Iran to possess nuclear weapons," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said. "That is a great credit to all negotiating partners."

French President Francois Hollande saluted the work of the foreign ministers, but cautioned that sanctions remained on the horizon if the final agreement set for June 30 were not respected.

View gallery

President Barack Obama pauses while speaking in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, Th …

Russia, another participant in the talks, said the deal could have a "positive influence" on the region. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the framework "paves the way" for a historic agreement that could "contribute to peace and stability in the region."

In Washington, Obama, who has had a rocky relationship with Netanyahu over Iran and other matters, tried to soothe Israeli concerns. At a news conference, he called the deal "the best option" for preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

In his phone call with Netanyahu, Obama said the framework would bring a deal "that cuts off all of Iran's pathways to a bomb," according to the White House. It said the deal "in no way diminishes" U.S. concerns about "Iran's sponsorship of terrorism and threats toward Israel" or America's commitment to Israel's security.

Earlier, Obama said had spoken with the Saudi king, and announced that he was inviting the leaders of six Gulf nations, including Saudi Arabia, to Washington this spring.

Netanyahu has said moderate Arab states see "eye to eye" with him on Iran.

View gallery

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, centre, US Secretary of State John Kerry, centre right and …

While Netanyahu has threatened in the past to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, that option seems to be a long shot at this stage.

His best bet for foiling the deal could lie with the Congress, where Israel enjoys bipartisan support. Lawmakers have been threatening to try to delay the agreement or even push for new sanctions against Iran.

Reaction from Republicans who control Congress ranged from caution to dire warnings that the pact would be a mere prelude to Tehran obtaining nuclear weapons.

House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican from Ohio, was among many insisting that Congress be allowed to vote on details of any agreement and expressing distrust of Iran.

"It would be naïve to suggest the Iranian regime will not continue to use its nuclear program, and any economic relief, to further destabilize the region," said Boehner, who visited Israel and met with Netanyahu during a Mideast tour this week.

View gallery

US Secretary of State John Kerry gestures as he speaks to the press at the Swiss Federal Institute o …

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, a Republican senator from Tennessee, said that as planned, his panel will vote this month on bipartisan legislation requiring congressional review of any final nuclear deal reached by June 30. "The administration first should seek the input of the American people," he said.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said he was "cautiously optimistic" about the framework. "Now is the time for thoughtful consideration, not rash action that could undermine the prospects for success," the Nevada Democrat said.

In the Iranian capital of Tehran, hundreds of drivers began honking and flashing their headlights in celebration after the deal was announced. Many motorists, returning home from the Nowruz holiday, the Persian New Year, got out of their cars and began dancing and singing in celebration,

Earlier, President Hassan Rouhani welcomed the deal, saying on his Twitter account that "solutions on key parameters" have been reached and that the final deal will be struck by the end of June.

___

AP writers Alan Fram in Washington, Ian Deitch in Jerusalem, Jim Heintz in Moscow, Cara Anna at the United Nations, Jill Lawless in London, Nicole Winfield in Rome, Elaine Ganley in Paris and Nasser Karimi in Tehran contributed to this report.