In an interview with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC Monday, David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, disputed the idea that the only alternative of the deal being negotiated with Iran was a war. The relevant segment of the interview is embedded below. When Mitchell asked if “we’re better not to have a deal at all,” Albright responded:

Well I think a bad deal is worse than no deal. I think I’ll repeat what the U.S. government has said many times. And I’ll also repeat what other U.S. [government] officials have said to me privately and publicly. There are alternatives to not having a deal and one of them as stated by very senior treasury official recently is that they would work with Congress to increase pressure on Iran. I think one of the mistakes is to think that somehow if there’s no deal it’s war. I think that’s good in a kind of the rhetorical war that takes place within the Washington Beltway but in real life … those are not the only two choices by any means.

Albright echoed the assessment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who told Mitchell two weeks ago, “I think there are other options as well. I think you can get a better deal. And I think the one that I would have is to reduce Iran’s nuclear capabilities so you increase the breakout time. I mean, if I had a vote on that negotiating team, I would say zero centrifuges.”

[Photo: Washington Free Beacon / YouTube ]