Skepticism on the Iran deal

James Jay Carafano is right to be skeptical that the agreement recently concluded with Iran will permanently prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons (“The president is rolling the dice on the nuclear deal with Iran,” Editorial, Aug. 7).

He notes that the public shares his skepticism. Further, the skeptical seem worried that keeping one country A-bomb free for a decade or two falls far short of keeping us safe. Some good instincts are at work in these skeptical minds.

But these ideas are as old as the nuclear age. The scientists who invented America’s bomb warned that because what they had done was science-based, scientists anywhere could duplicate it. History has borne this out: even tiny and impoverished North Korea has the bomb.

Relatively few countries have nuclear weapons only because the rest have chosen not to develop one. The agreement can succeed because it creates circumstances that make not developing such weapons a good choice for Iran. But of course the agreement does not solve the larger issue: governments look around and see a world in which nuclear weapons confer a peculiar respect. Those who lack one may choose to get one.

There can be no long-term solution that does not disarm the present possessors of atomic weapons and turn the respect they confer to scorn.

Chuck Baynton Whitefish Bay