Here are five things to look out for in the coming days, as we all assess the text of the agreement and reactions to it.
"Indeed, even 15 years from now, Iran will still possess an industrial-size nuclear infrastructure, and by the president’s own admission, the capacity to “break out” potentially at will. We’ve created a mechanism to constrain Iran’s nuclear weapons pretensions, not eliminate them," writes Aaron David Miller.
"Both of these deals provide better outcomes than failed negotiations would have. They demonstrate that dedicated diplomacy can still achieve positive solutions within an integrated global system that is more or less still functioning," writes Jack A. Goldstone.
"The terms, however, are likely to give both proponents and opponents new arguments for their positions. No party got all it wanted; there’s a shortcoming to every benefit," writes Robin Wright.
"If an agreement eventually emerges, both parties will have to sell it to constituencies that remain skeptical because of the even more tortured history between the two countries," writes Robin Wright.
"In short, Washington could manage the fallout from no agreement. And in that case, it’s more than likely that Iran would become a problem for the next administration, which, frankly, wouldn’t be such a bad outcome for this one," writes Aaron David Miller.
“Dr. Barkey’s exceptional work on Middle East issues at top academic institutions and the U.S. Department of State epitomizes the combination of deep scholarship and policy application we pursue here at the Wilson Center,” said Jane Harman, Director, President and CEO of the Wilson Center. “He will continue the Middle East Program’s reputation as a critical resource for the Washington policymaking community and beyond.”
"Obama has argued that regardless of Iran's behavior at home and in the region, a constrained nuclear program is worth achieving in its own right because Iran will be less dangerous," writes Aaron David Miller.
"Much depends on how the talks collapse: Who takes the hit will be important in the political positioning that inevitably follows the demise of a deal," writes Aaron David Miller.
"The Iraq war still haunts Iran—and shapes the theocracy’s positions at the negotiating table—partly because tens of thousands are still dying from chemical weapons, according to the Society for Chemical Weapons Victims Support," writes Robin Wright.