Analysis & Opinions - The New York Times
The Smart Way to Get Tough With Iran
As the two negotiators who initiated the secret talks that led to the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, we are intimately familiar with the deal’s strengths, its inevitable imperfections and the wider challenge posed by Iran.
In an ideal world, we would have erased Iran’s knowledge of the nuclear fuel cycle, eliminated its missile arsenal, stopped its dangerous use of proxies across the region, and transformed it into a less disruptive regional power.
But we don’t live in an ideal world. Diplomacy requires difficult compromises. And the nuclear deal achieved the best of the available alternatives. It cuts off Iran’s pathways to a bomb, sharply constrains its nuclear program for a long time, and provides for unprecedentedly strict monitoring and verification. Diplomacy avoided another war in the Middle East and averted the kind of crisis we now face with North Korea.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.
For more information on this publication:
Belfer Communications Office
For Academic Citation:
Sullivan, Jake and William J. Burns.“The Smart Way to Get Tough With Iran.” The New York Times, September 21, 2017.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions
- Future of Diplomacy Project, Belfer Center
Conversations in Diplomacy: Jake Sullivan on Deconstructing Trump Foreign Policy
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Press Release
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Barham A. Salih Joins Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and Middle East Initiative at Harvard Kennedy School as Senior Fellow
Analysis & Opinions
- New Straits Times
Gorbachev and the End of the Cold War
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Attacking Artificial Intelligence: AI’s Security Vulnerability and What Policymakers Can Do About It
As the two negotiators who initiated the secret talks that led to the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, we are intimately familiar with the deal’s strengths, its inevitable imperfections and the wider challenge posed by Iran.
In an ideal world, we would have erased Iran’s knowledge of the nuclear fuel cycle, eliminated its missile arsenal, stopped its dangerous use of proxies across the region, and transformed it into a less disruptive regional power.
But we don’t live in an ideal world. Diplomacy requires difficult compromises. And the nuclear deal achieved the best of the available alternatives. It cuts off Iran’s pathways to a bomb, sharply constrains its nuclear program for a long time, and provides for unprecedentedly strict monitoring and verification. Diplomacy avoided another war in the Middle East and averted the kind of crisis we now face with North Korea.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions - Future of Diplomacy Project, Belfer Center
Conversations in Diplomacy: Jake Sullivan on Deconstructing Trump Foreign Policy
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Press Release - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Barham A. Salih Joins Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and Middle East Initiative at Harvard Kennedy School as Senior Fellow
Analysis & Opinions - New Straits Times
Gorbachev and the End of the Cold War
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Attacking Artificial Intelligence: AI’s Security Vulnerability and What Policymakers Can Do About It