Source: Getty
commentary

The Iran Deal: No Better Alternative, Now Make The Most Of It

The domestic debate over the Iran deal demonstrates politicians’ increasing aversion to compromise.

published by
The Institute of International Studies at the University of California, Berkeley
 on September 28, 2015

Source: The Institute of International Studies at the University of California, Berkeley

Carnegie’s George Perkovich spoke about the domestic implications of the Iran deal and what the debate over the deal reveals about the capacity of the United States to lead in international affairs. Specifically, he pointed out that the debate demonstrated that a significant fraction of U.S. elected officials—and many commentators—don’t understand the fundamental role of compromise in domestic politics and in foreign policy. Without compromise, he says, the United States runs the risk that negotiated agreements and treaties could become impossible.

In the course of discussing how the domestic debate revealed this aversion to compromise, Perkovich also delivered a thorough analysis of the Iran deal itself. He described its upsides and downsides, discussed the important facets of the deal that were glossed over in the debate, and examined whether or not a better deal could have realistically been achieved.

This talk was originally given at the Institute of International Studies, University of California, Berkeley.

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.