Iran’s talks with Moscow and now Beijing appear to be moving forward with Tehran “sounding more receptive to an enrichment joint venture with Russia….” But is any deal better than no deal? Back in 1994, Sen. McCain was a vocal opponent of the deal President Clinton struck with North Korea. He told PBS’s Robert MacNeil that the US would come to “regret [the deal] very, very much” because Pyongyang gets to keep the handful of nuclear weapons it had already likely produced but also much more. McCain continued that even though North Korea has “violated the nonproliferation treaty egregiously time and time again, … we are now rewarding them…. And not only are we saying it’s okay to Korea, but we’ll be saying that it’s okay to Iran and other countries who will demand a similar deal.” Today the Russians are doing the primary negotiating, but in the end Washington and Europe will have to make a judgment on whether to sign on to any deal struck. To this end, Gary Milhollin and Valerie Lincy of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control have offered some useful yardsticks in which to judge any “breakthrough” agreement. From the February 1, 2006 New York Times: