Editorial
Quicktabs: Keywords
The Washington Post editorial board argues that a unilateral push by the U.S. to undermine the nuclear deal with Iran would threaten the cooperation with U.S. allies that is needed to constrain Iran's non-nuclear behavior.
[ More ]The LA Times Editorial board argues that the Trump administration's confusion and incoherence on its Iran policy is not serving either its purported policy or U.S. national security.
[ More ]The New York Times editorial board finds that "[o]ne year later, the nuclear deal between Iran and the major powers is working. It has substantially restricted Iran’s ability to produce fissile material, the key ingredient for a nuclear bomb, and in that way has made the world safer."
[ More ]The final deal with Iran announced by the United States and other major world powers does what no amount of political posturing and vague threats of military action had managed to do before. It puts strong, verifiable limits on Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon for at least the next 10 to 15 years and is potentially one of the most consequential accords in recent diplomatic history, with the ability not just to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon but also to reshape Middle East politics.
[ More ]The Chicago Sun-Times editorial board argues that the nuclear deal "appears to be the very best — and most certainly the only realistic — shot at preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon."
[ More ]