mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
The Nuclear Deal
Polls: An Iran Deal, Yes. This Iran Deal? Maybe.

As President Obama campaigns for support for the deal with Iran—what he calls the “once in a lifetime” shot at peace and nuclear non-proliferation—and skeptics from Congress to Presidential candidates to Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu line up to try to “kill” it, what do the American people think?

Polls show Americans supportive but deeply skeptical of the framework nuclear deal announced with Iran last week. A Washington Post/ABC poll found people supportive of the framework agreement by a 59 to 31 percent margin, though only 37 percent felt they were “very” or “somewhat” confident the deal would succeed in containing Iran. A Pew poll released this week found respondents saying that Iran is “not serious” about addressing nuclear concerns by a margin of 63 to 27 percent, with around the same number of people favoring Congress having the final say in the deal.

Differences between what was agreed and how it’s being sold in both Washington and Tehran are either quite substantive or not that significant, depending on whom you ask. Not only will this give those who mistrust the deal room to try to sink it; it should give those who are skeptical but open to a deal, including the American public, reason to keep wondering how Iran understands the deal it’s just signed up for—and how sincerely it means to stick by it.

Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Arkeygeezer

    This agreement was put together by the P5+1 — United States, Russia, China, France, United Kingdom and Germany — plus the European Union. That’s a lot of cats to herd! If all of them agree to it, it is probably the best deal we can get and it is better than no deal at all.
    However, the Congress can kill it by refusing to lift economic sanctions on Iran. This is where Obama’s leadership skills, or lack thereof come into play. His lies, arrogance, and petulance may come home to roost to America’s detriment. The League of Nations was probably a good idea too, but Wilson had the same leadership problem.

    • FriendlyGoat

      If the GOP Congress decides to nix the best deal it’s going to get, let’s just blame those GOP guys, okay?

      • Arkeygeezer

        No, Lets let the blame lay where it lies. No effective or intelligent leadership from the top.
        Nice try Goat, but you can’t spin this one!

        • FriendlyGoat

          It’s not spin to blame the objectors if the objectors are the ones objecting. Obama is not a “failure” for not somehow converting Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and the entire Republican Party.

          • Arkeygeezer

            This agreement has 5 nations and the European Union involved. Each of the parties has a block of countries following its lead. The United States is no longer the most influential country involved as it has alienated a lot of its allies.

            Effective Sanctions require that all nations participate in the sanctions against Iran. If all the other parties agree to this deal, it doesn’t matter what the U.S. does. The U.S. influence in international affairs will continue to decline.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Some people might think that America has the most influence in concert with China, Russia, Britain, France and Germany—-not by trying to act as though we believe they don’t matter.

  • Boritz

    “…supportive but deeply skeptical”

    That’s an understandable position to take when your daughter announces her engagement to someone you have doubts about. Why would this be applied to foreign policy?

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service