The deadline for a deal in the West’s nuclear negotiations with Iran is next Tuesday, June 30. And a group of former advisers to United States President Barack Obama on the subject of Iran are warning that this deal is a mistake.

Five of the president’s one-time inner-circle advisers wrote an open letter saying that the agreement emerging from these negotiations “may fall short of meeting the administration’s own standard of a ‘good’ agreement.” They’re not concerned it will fall short of Benjamin Netanyahu’s standard, or even Europe’s standard—but of the White House’s considerably lower standard.

Why the concern? The New York Times June 24 report on this letter said these officials fear “that Mr. Obama’s negotiators were headed toward concessions that would weaken international inspection of Iran’s facilities, back away from forcing Tehran to reveal its suspected past work on weapons, and allow Iranian research and development that would put it on a course to resuming intensive production of nuclear fuel as soon as the accord expires.”

Those are major concerns. Yet Washington is so determined to make this deal that it is lowering the bar again and again to ensure Iran can clear it. Now the bar is a broomstick on the carpet.

The main justification President Obama has used for the deal is that it will lengthen Iran’s breakout time to the bomb from two months to 12 months. That hardly instills a lot of confidence. But in another New York Times article this week, Prof. Alan Kuperman, head of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project at the University of Texas, shows that this justification is a lie: The deal will actually only prolong that breakout time about one additional month.

America is making this deal to slow Iran down for one more month.

The U.S. has already agreed that Iran will be able to keep enriching uranium—a massive concession to the Iranians. But for some time Washington has been publicly insisting on two key demands: 1) that Iran reveal previous nuclear work that it hasn’t yet admitted to; and 2) that it open its program to unrestricted inspections of its nuclear installations. Iran has responded by consistently, steadfastly refusing to concede to both of these demands. And now, as these officials are saying, it looks like the U.S. is giving up even these.

The evidence is mountainous that this is a terrible deal—even by the Obama administration’s own publicly stated standards.

But meanwhile, at the same time the deal itself is getting watered down to the point of being practically useless, we are also witnessing more and more behavior by Iran that shows the entire process is a farce.

Last Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted almost unanimously—199 votes out of 213—“to ban access to military sites, documents and scientists as part of a future deal with world powers over its contested nuclear program,” the Associated Press reported. They are willing to discuss their nuclear program, but any access to military facilities or activities is strictly forbidden.

But, of course, it is military use of nuclear power that is the central concern. The West could only accept such a request if it were willing to accept Iran’s absurd assertion that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful. Yet it appears this is exactly what it is doing.

The bill “also demands the complete lifting of all sanctions against Iran as part of any final nuclear accord,” AP wrote (emphasis added).

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made the same demand in a live television broadcast on Tuesday this week: “All financial and economic sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council, the U.S. Congress or the U.S. government should be lifted immediately when we sign a nuclear agreement.” He also ruled out a long-term halt to nuclear work, saying, “Freezing Iran’s research and development for a long time like 10 or 12 years is not acceptable,” Reuters reported.

Who is in the power position in these negotiations? Supposedly it’s America and other Western states that are trying to restrict Iran—but Iran is the one dictating all the terms.

The real kicker in that AP story is this: While Iran’s parliament was taking that vote last Sunday, some of the lawmakers were chanting, “Death to America.”

It makes me wonder: What would Iran have to do in order for the U.S. to say, You know, maybe these negotiations aren’t such a good idea?

Forget the terms of the deal—Iran is proving in countless ways that the negotiations themselves are absurd. The idea that they will do anything to change Iran’s conduct or tether its nuclear ambitions is a joke.

The New York Times report on the skittish former Obama advisers made the additional point that the ayatollah on Tuesday “heightened the pressure facing negotiators by appearing to back away from several preliminary understandings reached between Iran and the West in early April, including in areas where Mr. Obama’s former advisers urged a hardening of the American position” (emphasis added). So even those few areas where it appeared the U.S. had achieved something resembling modest concessions from Iranian negotiators were undone with a wave of the ayatollah’s hand.

The list is long, and growing continually longer, of all that Iran has done to demonstrate its bad faith, its double-dealing and deceit during these negotiations. It is not backing down at all. It continues to refuse to make concessions; instead it makes demands. It accuses the U.S. of lying, while talking out of both sides of its mouth. It makes provocations that undermine Western interests—take for example the revelation from last week that even as negotiations are supposed to be winding down, Iran is ramping up its support for the Taliban in Afghanistan, which is fighting the U.S.! It continues to demonstrate its determination to do as it pleases regardless of what comes of the talks.

Iran is sitting at the negotiating table—while making demands, and openly and brazenly carrying on with its nuclear program and sponsorship of terrorism. It has done virtually nothing to curb the behavior that is so concerning to other nations, and that necessitated the economic sanctions and other steps to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

And yet the talks continue. And now a deal looms.

Are these the most insane negotiations in history?

Has there ever been a time in international negotiations when the nations supposedly in control and working to bring a rogue nation to heel were so willing to overlook such open contempt, such hostility?

The mind tracks back to the peace talks with Adolf Hitler before World War ii, and recalls just how naive, how blind, Western nations were to consider this tyrant a reliable negotiating partner. But even there, the führer was at least making a pretense of seeking peace. He was not all demands and dictates, at least not publicly. You didn’t have German lawmakers chanting “Death to France! Death to Britain!” Did you? Maybe I’m wrong, but while negotiations were taking place, weren’t the Nazis a bit more genteel and subtle? Didn’t they at least try to play along and to give the Chamberlains and peaceniks of the day some semblance of hope that it wasn’t all a complete ruse and a fraud?

Iran feels no such obligation. Washington has given it no reason to.

And this time, it is nuclear weapons at stake.