Carnegie’s James Acton talked to CNBC about why Tuesday’s nuclear deal with Iran is better than existing alternatives. Acton argued that the agreement has very stringent limits on Iran’s nuclear activities lasting between ten and twenty-five years, as well as some very stringent verification provisions to detect cheating.
“It’s not a perfect deal, but the result I believe is better than any of the reasonably achievable alternatives at this point,” Acton said.
Acton added that it would be very hard to undo the deal and that that is “a good thing.” Responding to criticisms of the deal, Acton pointed out that the Soviet Union lied and yet the United States successfully did arms control with the USSR.
“This idea that the Iran deal is somehow based on trusting Iran is simply wrong. There are stringent verification provisions associated with this deal,” Acton said.