■"Iran's New Alliance With China Could Cost U.S. Leverage," by Robin Wright, Washington Post, 17 November 2004, p. A21.

■"Nuclear Deal With Iranians Has Angered Hard-Liners," by Nazila Fathi, New York Times, 17 November 2004, p. A4.

■"Group Says Iran Has Secret Nuclear Arms Program," by Douglas Jehl, New York Times, 16 November 2004, p. A4.

■"Iran, EU Differ on Nuclear Suspension," by Marc Champion, Wall Street Journal, 16 November 2004, p. A22.

■"Europeans Say Iran Agrees to Freeze Uranium Enrichment: An accord is hailed in Europe, but greeted cautiously in the U.S.," by Elaine Sciolino, New York Times, 16 November 2004, p. A3.

How good is this deal between the EU and Iran? Probably as solid as the paper it's printed on. Iran has played word games before, and will do so as long as it can, because the more it delays, the more time it has to develop the bomb. Plus the deal seems to have pissed off plenty of Iran's political hard-liners in its parliament.

But the worse reality is that Iran is probably pulling the old Saddam trick: agree to suspension on facility A, only to proceed with facility B ("Oh, you didn't say anything about facility B!"). This is going to go on and on until Iran announces suddenly one day that it has the bomb.

And you know what? There wont' be much we can do about it, especially as Tehran cleverly draws China more and more to its side. China needs Iranian oil and gas, and we need China economically. It's that simple and that complex.

Washington needs to get real ASAP on Iran. Calling them names is one thing, dealing with the reality of their power in the region that we now find ourselves deeply embedded within militarily is another.

Get used to Iran having the bomb.