Since the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action was concluded a year ago next Thursday, Iran has continued to support terror, tested ballistic missiles, waged cyberwarfare against the U.S., captured American sailors (violating international law in the process), and contributed to war and instability in Syria, Iraq, and even Bahrain. Meanwhile inspectors have less access than before to potential nuclear sites in Iran. Asking whether any good at all has come from this deal with Iran, Elliott Abrams answers:

The deal has postponed Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons, but at the cost of legitimizing [its right to obtain such weapons after the deal expires]. That’s the “benefit”: the supposed ten-year postponement.

That benefit accrues, of course, only if Iran sticks to the deal and actually slows its program and does not “break out.”

What is Iran’s breakout time? We were told last year that it was at least one year. The Institute for Science and International Security says the actual breakout time may be only seven months. Because of the limited information that International Atomic Energy Agency reports [on Iranian nuclear activity] now contain, we know less than we used to. . . .

So there you have it. . . . Under the deal, we do not really know Iran’s breakout time; we have legitimized its nuclear program; we have strengthened the regime with money and a propaganda victory; and we see Iran’s support for aggression and terror rising.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.