For too long, claims the New York Sun, the U.S. government—and the State Department in particular—has undermined its own efforts at peacemaking by treating the status of Jerusalem as an open question. The Sun’s editors write:

For a generation now we have been describing the escalating struggle over Israel’s capital as the Battle of Jerusalem. This is the campaign to wrest Judaism’s holiest city from Israel’s sovereignty. It has been the strategy of the so-called peace process to defer Jerusalem, the knottiest question, to the end of the negotiations. . . . This sets up the entire peace process for perpetual failure, because Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem is not subject to negotiation. It strikes us that an honest approach to peace would require an acknowledgement of this at the beginning rather than the end of talks.

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.