FOLLOWING the acrimonious hearing on the nuclear accord with Iran on Capitol Hill last Thursday, it seemed at times that critics had expected the United States to dictate what amounted to terms of surrender to Iran.

But in reality, the talks between the United States (and Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany) and Iran involved a bargaining process under which all sides had to make concessions and reach a compromise. So it's not surprising that an American assessment of the agreement could lead to a conclusion that at best, it's not a perfect agreement, and at worst, it's a flawed bargain as far as the interests of the United States are concerned.

"I believe that you've been fleeced," Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Corker, a Republican from Tennessee, told Secretary of State John Kerry during the hearing. Iran, he argued, went from being "a rogue nation that has a boot on its neck" with crippling international sanctions to a country that would reap a windfall from lifted sanctions and be allowed to develop an "industrial strength" nuclear programme.