Shortly after the American declaration acknowledging Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state, the Czech Republic joined suit. Amnon Lord notes that, in doing so, it followed a tradition of sympathy for the Zionist cause that goes back to the War of Independence, when Czechoslovakia sent much-need arms to a nascent Israel. Lord contrasts this reaction to that of Germany:

In Germany, a major news channel devoted ten minutes of a fifteen-minute broadcast to the horrible scandal caused by [U.S. recognition of Jerusalem]. The anchor [explained that] the American president had taken such an unreasonable step . . . “because of his evangelical supporters and ‘rich donors.’” It seems that Germany hasn’t changed. Anti-Semitism is like malaria; it doesn’t go away.

In contrast to the attack [on the White House’s decision delivered by] Germany’s Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel, the stance of the Czech Republic’s President Miloš Zeman shines brightly. The Czechs know what it is to be a small country sold out by a bunch of strong and hypocritical nations. We saw this Sunday in Emmanuel Macron’s chilly reception for Benjamin Netanyahu.

The Czech admiration of Israel in the post-Communist era stems from rebellion. In Czechoslovakia in 1948 there was real admiration for the newly established state of Israel, and the assistance it received from the Czechs will forever be remembered by Israel’s people. . . . In 1967, popular admiration for Israel broke out again after the military victory of the Six-Day War, which is still being mourned by the rest of Europe and the Israeli and American left. But not by the Czechs. . . . [T]he Six-Day War victory gave the Czechs courage and inspiration for the Prague Spring, which then turned into a twenty-year winter. . . .

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.