Last month, the Israeli government outlawed the Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement, which has played a major role in inciting the ongoing wave of terror attacks. It played a similar role in the outbreak of Israeli-Arab riots in 2000 and in the second intifada more generally. Raffa Abu Tareef gives a history of the organization, and explains its pernicious impact:

The Northern Branch . . . seeks to reduce Muslim participation in the Israeli political system to the minimum necessary to serve the interests of the Muslim community, and reduce the community’s dependence on state institutions. Its guiding principle is that the entirety of Israel is an “Islamic waqf,” sacred Muslim property. Even though both [the Northern Branch and the somewhat less extreme Southern Branch] of the Islamic Movement have condemned terrorism in the past, emphasizing that their activities are conducted within the law, the Northern Branch often addresses the issue in vague and amorphous terms, especially in regard to the activities of Palestinian organizations. . . .

Because the Islamic Movement took its ideology from the world of Islamic concepts and symbols, it has the potential for wide popular support. [I]t . . . grew stronger throughout the 1990s. . . . Between the split from the Southern Branch of the Islamic Movement in 1996 and the outbreak of the 2000 riots, the leaders of the Northern Branch exploited every opportunity to [convince] the Arab public that their holy places on the Temple Mount were in immediate danger and that they must rise up to defend them.

That incitement continues to this day.

In 2003, the Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, spooked by the American display of might in Iraq, decided to destroy or surrender his entire nuclear program. Informed observers have suggested that the deal he made with the U.S. should serve as a model for any agreement with Iran. Robert Joseph provides some useful background:

Gaddafi had convinced himself that Libya would be next on the U.S. target list after Iraq. There was no reason or need to threaten Libya with bombing as Gaddafi was quick to tell almost every visitor that he did not want to be Saddam Hussein. The images of Saddam being pulled from his spider hole . . . played on his mind.

President Bush’s goal was to have Libya serve as an alternative model to Iraq. Instead of war, proliferators would give up their nuclear programs in exchange for relief from economic and political sanctions.

Any outcome that permits Iran to enrich uranium at any level will fail the one standard that President Trump has established: Iran will not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. Limiting enrichment even to low levels will allow Iran to break out of the agreement at any time, no matter what the agreement says.

Iran is not a normal government that observes the rules of international behavior or fair “dealmaking.” This is a regime that relies on regional terror and brutal repression of its citizens to stay in power. It has a long history of using negotiations to expand its nuclear program. Its negotiating tactics are clear: extend the negotiations as long as possible and meet any concession with more demands.