"Trust but verify" - a phrase popularized in the 1980s by former President Reagan while negotiating with the Soviet Union - does not apply to the nuclear accord the U.S. and and five key allies completed with Iran.
First, the U.S. does not trust Iran. If it did, our leaders would believe Iranian leaders who consistently have maintained their nuclear ambitions are peaceful and not designed to develop nuclear weapons.
Second, although the deal allows United Nations inspectors to press for visits to monitor compliance, inspections are not guaranteed.
The accord, then, was founded on mistrust and finalized with no guarantee of verification.
Iran stands to benefit immensely. Under the accord, sanctions gradually will be lifted. An Associated Press story said: "Iran stands to receive more than $100 billion in assets that have been frozen overseas and benefit from an end to various financial restrictions on Iranian banks."
The AP adds: "Centrifuges will keep spinning, though in lesser quantities, and uranium can still be enriched, though at lower levels."
The U.S. largely gets the promise of less hostility. President Obama, who sought an accord, sees "an opportunity to move in a new direction."
The deal does afford opportunities to eliminate the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapons program and to lessen conflict in the Middle East.
But those can come to fruition only if Iran upholds its end of the bargain, which remains unverifiable.
Opposition to the accord comes from home and abroad.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu characterized it as a "stunning historic mistake."
U.S. House Speaker John Boehner vows to fight the accord in Congress, which has 60 days to review it and can attempt to prevent Obama from waiving sanctions. Obama has vowed to veto any obstacle to the pact.
We hope history proves us wrong, but we have serious reservations about the nuclear accord.
Opportunities are founded on mutual trust and forged through the confidence that comes from verification. This deal offers neither.