NEW YORK – Most of the debate
about how to address Iran’s efforts to develop nuclear-weapons capacity
focuses on two options. The first is to rely on deterrence and live
with an Iran that has a small nuclear arsenal or the ability to assemble
one with little advance notice. The second is to launch a preventive
military strike aimed at destroying critical parts of the Iranian
program and setting back its progress by an estimated two or more years.
But
now a third option has emerged: negotiating a ceiling on the nuclear
program that would not be too low for Iran’s government and not too high
for the United States, Israel, and the rest of the world.
In
fact, such an option has been around for years – and in several rounds
of negotiations. What has changed, however, is the context. And changes
in context can be critical; indeed, what happens away from the
negotiating table almost always determines the outcome of face-to-face
talks.
