My latest column is up at AND Magazine!
Here is an excerpt:
At first blush, it looked like President Obama’s new agreement with Iran could be a good thing – the global community eases up on sanctions against Iran, and in return, Iran will ease up on uranium enrichment, supposedly ensuring that they will not be manufacturing nuclear weapons any time soon.
Here at home, the agreement has been hailed by the Left as a great diplomatic success, while on the Right, comparisons to Neville Chaimberlain’s “Peace in our time” agreement with Adolf Hitler run rampant. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly criticized the agreement, calling it “a historic mistake,” and comparing it to a 2005 agreement with North Korea, in which that regime agreed to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for food and other forms of aid…and then conducted its first underground nuclear test just one year later.
The agreement is already off to a rocky start, with the Iranian regime claiming that information published by the White House about the agreement “is a one-sided interpretation of the agreed text in Geneva and some of the explanation and words in the sheet contradict the text of the Joint Plan of Action.” The Iranian government released their own version of the agreement, which they claim is the actual text of the deal, and does not hold the regime to the strict standards claimed in the White House fact sheet.
It is rather odd that, just days after reaching a major diplomatic agreement, the two main parties can’t seem to agree to just what, exactly, they agreed to. The only thing that is absolutely clear here is that someone (or perhaps everyone) is lying. The big question is: Who?
Continue reading here?