To Nuke or Not to Nuke

This weekend's deal between Iran and the six nations (including, obviously, the US) to limit Iran's nuclear program for six month in return for an easing of economic sanctions is a good one.

Obviously it has its critics, and plenty of them, and some of the criticisms are legitimate. The deal is a good one, but Iran does have to prove it is trustworthy, and a healthy dose of skepticism to whether or not they can live up to their end of the bargain is understandable and validated. But let's talk about the good, and why it's good.

For starters, we must ask ourselves what we are trying to achieve. The short answer is preventing Iran from building a nuke, but so far we have only been moderately successful on that end, slowing their march towards joining the "end-the-world" club, without making it unavoidable and antagonizing an already-prone-to-be-antagonized nation. In short, while sanctions were working, they weren't going to prevent Iran from getting a nuke, and were only increasing that nation's propensity for violent outbursts. Furthermore, the sanctions were designed to drive Iran to the bargaining table. Is that not what was achieved? If Iran is willing to rollback its program, have the sanctions not been effective?

The long-term goal isn't simply to prevent Iran from going nuclear, it's to bring Iran into the global community as a functioning and peaceful nation. We are only ever going to achieve that end through diplomacy and trust, and realistically we are only going to achieve that end if Iran is allowed to participate in the global economy. If sanctions were designed to make Iran bargain, then a complete dismantling of their nuclear armaments program should allow them access to the global marketplace. Only by taking this route will we truly be able to bring Iran into the global community as a peaceful and stable member. Short term deals to roll back parts of the nuclear program in exchange for an easing of some sanctions is a great way to test Iran's resolve and trustworthiness while negotiators work to develop a more comprehensive deal that formally and permanently ends Iran's nuclear quest.

We can go on forever punishing Iran, and ultimately ensure through force that they do not acquire a bomb, but does anyone really want that? As much as I have - and still do - advocate for intervention in Syria, that is a far different situation. Force in Syria would be warranted, whereas diplomacy and sanctions in Iran seem to have been successful so far. Sure, Iran must prove it can be trusted, but we won't know if we don't try. While there is reason to doubt and work to be done, this accord is a great starting point to the peaceful resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue, and hopefully the footing upon which a more trusting relationship can be built between Iran and the global community, a relationship that will ultimately mean Iran's reintegration into that community. Creating the conditions for Iran's re-entry into this community could go a long way towards making the Middle East a more peaceful region.

Overall, I applaud team Obama (or team Kerry, or for that matter perhaps even team Rouhani) for making this deal possible. Moving forward with both a healthy dose of optimism and a healthy dose of skepticism will be necessary to ensure that this framework becomes permanent, and that long term goals are met, but if you are looking for an example of diplomatic success, look no further. Now let's see if we can make the good deal a better one.