Sure it can. Out of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, three are free and two are not. All have nukes.
The French, for instance, are free and have nukes. If the Iranians are free and have nukes, then how are they different than France, or worse than, say, China?
I believe that while most want nuclear energy, a pro-Western goverment would be more interested in stabilizing it’s position internally and internationally by ending the nuclear arms program.
From my knowledge of Iranians, they agree that many there support nuclear energy, but not necessairly nuclear weapons. This is why the regime itself is peddling the propaganda line that they are only defending their right to peaceful nuclear energy.
I think a hopefully soon freed Iran, has higher priorities than having that nuclear arms issue standing in their way.
But I fully understand the Israeli position that it wants the nuclear arms issue off the table ASAP. This is a delicate situation right now, and Obama is doing nothing to make it any better.
“If the Iranians are free and have nukes, then how are they different than France, or worse than, say, China?”
Iran is predominantly Muslim. Muslims with nukes, free or not, is generally a bad thing.
You sound incredibly naive.
Do you really not understand the difference between France and Iran?
Do you really not understand the difference between a non-free country whose nuclear policy is controlled by MAD and one with a large apocalyptic Muslim nihilist population?
How many suicide jihadists come out of China and Russia?
Hamas won the vote. I guess you would feel comfortable if they had nukes too.
Finally, elections should be the end result of freedom not the first step.