The most serious challenge to the nuclear deal may be that it does not at all address the human rights record of the Tehran theocracy or statements challenging the legitimacy of Israel. However, from the perspective of the Obama Administration and most U.S. allies, the nuclear deal is seen as a first step in empowering a more progressive trend with Iran.
A month after former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling was convicted on nine felony counts with circumstantial metadata, the zealous prosecution is now having potentially major consequences -- casting doubt on the credibility of claims by the U.S. government that Iran has developed a nuclear weapons program.
As the deadline for the final nuclear deal between the P5+1 and the Islamic Republic becomes closer, and as the world powers appear to be softening their demands on Iran's nuclear capabilities, Netanyahu's fear in the signing of a final nuclear deal and his objective is to postpone this process between Iran and six world powers.
For congressional hawks claiming to take a tough line against Iran's nuclear program, cutting off funding for enhanced International Atomic Energy Agency inspections over that program seems like an odd approach. Yet a new bill introduced by the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee would threaten to do just that.
There are two intertwined implications for the Gulf States and Israel in particular that a nuclear Iran presents: the physical and the psychological. Whereas Iran's physical possession of nuclear weapons can be neutralized through deterrence and containment, the psychological aspect will linger as it will constantly bear a high degree of uncertainty.
Ensuring peaceful resolution of Iran's nuclear issue, by supporting the interim agreement to eventually culminate in a comprehensive solution, and marshaling nuclear safety efforts in the Persian Gulf constitute realization of what Eisenhower promised the world some 60 years ago in the "Atoms for Peace."