The world waits to hear whether the latest apparent breakthrough in U.S.-Iran negotiations has actually made progress or is another exercise in dashed hopes. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Friday that the two sides had crafted a “final, agreed-upon text of the peace deal,” but the substance of that text seems to vary based on which side is talking. President Trump blasted Iranian state media as “dishonorable” for leaking out alleged terms which, he said, “have NOTHING to do with the terms that were agreed to, in writing.”

With so many claims circulating about the deal, it is difficult to know what it contains until the final version is signed and published. However, it is less difficult to ascertain what features would make the deal a good one. “I don’t know what’s going to happen,” said Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on “This Week on Capitol Hill.” But “I know the difference between a good deal and a bad deal.”

At a bare minimum, he said, the deal must be better than the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA) agreed to by President Obama in 2015, which enabled the Iranian regime to nearly obtain a nuclear weapon. “I’m going to take the JCPoA, the Obama deal, which was horrible, terrible, and I'm going to overlay this current deal, if there is one, against the JCPoA,” he said.

1. Good Deal = No Nuclear Enrichment

“What am I looking for? A deal on the nuclear program that does not allow Iran to enrich at all,” Graham said. “They can have a nuclear reactor. They can get the fuel like the UAE does, from outside the country. We can provide, Russia can provide fuel rods to run the reactor. They don’t need to enrich to have a peaceful power program. They do need to enrich to make a bomb.”

“If there’s any enrichment capability in this new deal, it will be no better than the JCPoA,” he asserted. “The JCPoA allowed enrichment to continue at low levels. Iran took their small enrichment program. They cheated. They made 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium. … There were a couple of weeks away from 90% highly-enriched uranium that can make 8 or 10 bombs, and that’s why Midnight Hammer happened.”

“If there’s any enrichment program allowed in the Trump deal, if they can enrich anywhere for any reason, that’s a bad deal, in my view,” Graham asserted. “They will cheat after Trump leaves.”

2. Good Deal = No Support for Terrorists

But banning Iranian nuclear enrichment is not the only necessary factor to prevent them from maintaining an evil presence in the region. Iran also maintains a network of terrorist proxies in other countries, which it has insisted on injecting into the negotiations, particularly demanding a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. “Hezbollah is Iran’s biggest proxy. They’re trying to protect their proxy,” Graham explained.

“I’m looking for a deal that would punish Iran if they continue to support Hezbollah and Hamas in the future,” Graham asserted. “It needs to be clear in this deal.”

3. Good Deal = No Money for Iran

Another important consideration is that any potential deal should reward Iran for being a bad actor, Graham added. “There are some things I hear about this potential deal that bother me: a $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran? Really? I mean, that’s like trying to rebuild Germany while the Nazis are still in charge,” he exclaimed.

The source for this provision was Iranian state media, so it may not be reliable. “I don’t know if that’s true or not,” Graham said, “but who would give money to the Ayatollah and his regime to rebuild the country after they killed 42,000 of their own people?”

4. Good Deal = Protects Israel

Finally, Graham said, a good deal with Iran would secure the protection of Israel. “I worry about Israel in this deal,” he mused. “I’ve been told that Lebanon may be part of the deal — a cease-fire in Lebanon. The last thing I want to do in a deal with Iran is [to] tie Israel’s hands so they can’t defend themselves against Hezbollah.”

Graham insisted this was a non-negotiable point. “When it comes to national security and defending Israel, it’s not about party. It’s about reality,” he declared. “And I’ll tell you what the reality is of this deal when I look at it.”

“I hope it’s a good deal,” Graham concluded. “President Trump deserves a lot of credit for taking Iran on. But at the end of the day, how different is it than the JCPoA? How much money does Iran get? What kind of nuclear deal do we have? Do we know now or is it to be negotiated later? Do we tie Israel’s hands in Lebanon?” These are the all-important questions that determine, irrespective of partisan or personal loyalties, whether the resulting deal is objectively good.