Nuclear d jà vu

Just three days have passed since six world powers and Iran reached a framework nuclear agreement, yet the first creaks are already being heard and many more are expected. A nuclear deal with Iran turned into an obsession for U.S. President Barack Obama, but it appears that opponents of the deal also know how to be obsessive.

There were some in Israel who welcomed the news of the nuclear agreement. Yet these were the same exact people who saw the 1993 Oslo Accords as an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the 2005 disengagement from the Gaza Strip as a brilliant move and the 2008 election of Obama as a huge step forward for peace and humanity. They were wrong at those times and they are wrong now.

It was not surprising when white smoke rose on Thursday from the Beau Rivage Palace Hotel in Lausanne, Switzerland. Did anyone really think there would not be serious differences between the delegations? Would anyone have gambled that the talks would not be extended past the original deadline (like in the talks leading up to the November 2013 interim agreement)? Did anyone truly believe U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry would return to Washington empty-handed?

And what was to come next was also not surprising. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif was quick to tell his people that the restrictions on Iran would be far less significant than what was told to the world by Obama, who lied to Congress. For those who were not already aware, the Iranians also know how to speak in two languages.

France's behavior -- it had a very skeptical attitude yet ultimately fell in line with the rest of the world powers -- should also have been expected.

On one hand, a cornerstone of French foreign policy is the principle of nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, meaning France should have opposed the deal. On the other hand, France needs America as a partner in managing numerous conflicts around the world, including the Ukrainian front against the Russians and the war against jihadist terrorism.

But another wrinkle for France is that its Arab partners -- Egypt and Saudi Arabia -- fear a nuclear Iran no less than Israel does.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, the toughest foreign minister among those representing the world powers, indicated on Friday that France had wanted a better deal.

Some were enthusiastic about the soothing words uttered by Obama in the Rose Garden at the White House. It would be advisable for those who felt this way to listen to then-President Bill Clinton said in 1994 after a framework nuclear agreement was reached with North Korea. "This is a good deal for the United States," Clinton said. "North Korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program. South Korea and our other allies will be better protected. The entire world will be safer as we slow the spread of nuclear weapons. ... The United States and international inspectors will carefully monitor North Korea to make sure it keeps its commitments. Only as it does so will North Korea fully join the community of nations."

I tip my hat to Iran for its ability to bring the U.S. down again after the failed experiment with North Korea. Only Iran could have pulled this off.

By the way, the signing of the agreement with North Korea in 1994 sparked an outcry in the U.S., particularly from Republicans, who felt Clinton gave too much in the deal.

It just so happens that the Republicans were right then. And they are right now.

טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו