Which is the least bad option?
Thank you to Joseph Kaplan for his beautifully written article on
“The Choices We Make” (April 1).
I especially appreciated his humble advice that we should at least contemplate the possibility that we might not always be right about which choice is “less bad.” It is my hope that our community takes his words to heart if a new Iran nuclear deal is struck.
As in the examples Kaplan provided, our options are all bad. Do we sign a new deal and thus help Iran to continue funding terrorism? Do we take military action in a world that has already been destabilized by the Russia – Ukraine war? Or do we just walk away and virtually guarantee that Iran will have nuclear weapons within a very short time?
While there certainly is ample evidence that Iran’s government is evil, the decision on a new nuclear deal is not a choice between good and evil. It is a human judgment call between bad choices. We need to stay away from destructive categorizations, such as the references to “Munich,” which poisoned our dialogue and split our community after the first deal was signed.
Debate the decision? Yes. Vigorously. Hold the administration’s feet to the fire to make sure that a new deal is enforced to the fullest? Absolutely. Fight to make sure that when the deal sunsets, a new, stronger deal takes its place? Without a doubt. But let us direct our moral outrage at the government of Iran, not at each other.