As the debate over Iran’s nuclear program continues to intensify, one of two bad outcomes seems increasingly likely – a nuclear armed Iran and a war with Iran that may or may not involve the U.S. But is there a way to avoid both?

Iran continues to claim that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, including nuclear power and medical research. But over the last decade it has repeatedly refused to give International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors full access to all of its nuclear sites.

Although IAEA inspectors have not seen all of Iran’s nuclear facilities, they have never definitively stated that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. Nevertheless, at times, the inspectors have been suspicious of some of Iran’s nuclear activities.

Both the U.S. and Israel as well as the European Union and several countries in the Persian Gulf have concerns about the Iranian nuclear program, but there is no consensus on how to deal with the issue. The U.S. and Israel in particular have been at odds over how exactly to approach the problem.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently visited the U.S. and met with President Obama to discuss the ongoing problems surrounding the Iranian nuclear program. Netanyahu seems to be beating the drum of war while Obama has been more cautious and willing to let sanctions run their course.

Obama did clarify his stance recently stating that he does not have a policy of simply containing a nuclear armed Iran once it has a nuclear weapon. His stated policy is that he is committed to the prevention of an Iranian nuclear weapon.

If Israel does decide to unilaterally attack Iran, several questions remain unanswered. Will the U.S. involve itself in another war? Does Israel have the military capability to destroy Iran’s nuclear program?

Answers to these questions are critical in Israel’s decision on whether or not to unilaterally attack Iran.

President Obama’s more cautious approach and his reliance on sanctions do seem to be taking their toll on Iran. Most notably Iran’s currency, the rial, has lost over half its value since September according to the Economic Times.

In a recent interview on CNN Senator Diane Feinstsein, the chairperson of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Iran is one to two years away from being able to create a nuclear weapon. If this intelligence is correct it may strengthen Obama’s position of allowing sanctions to continue to impact Iran before rushing to military action.

Last week brought an agreement to resume negotiations between Iran and the permanent members of the UN Security Council along with Germany. There have been no details released about these negotiations but if all parties are indeed willing to return to the negotiating table, this may be the best way to avoid a military confrontation.

For the time being these new negotiations seem to be President Obama’s best option. Preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon without taking military action against Iran, would certainly be the best case scenario.

But Israel is still a wild card. Prime Minister Netanyahu does not appear to be as patient as President Obama. President Obama and defense and intelligence officials need to continue to advise Israel against a unilateral attack while making Iran realize the U.S. is both willing and able to launch a military strike. But this will be easier said than done.