Share and Follow
In the midst of heated discussions between President Trump and Iran’s divided leadership over the country’s nuclear ambitions, prominent experts on Iran’s nuclear weapons program are backing the president’s firm objective to dismantle it.
A central issue in the fraught negotiations between Tehran and Washington is Iran’s assertion of its right to enrich and hold weapons-grade uranium, the critical component necessary for constructing a nuclear weapon.
The dispute over enriched uranium could prove to be a pivotal obstacle if forthcoming negotiations aimed at achieving a nuclear deal proceed in Pakistan.
Last week, Esmaeil Baqaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, firmly dismissed Trump’s demands during a broadcast on state-run television.
“Under no circumstances will Iran’s enriched uranium be relocated,” Baqaei stated unequivocally.
President Donald Trump signs a proclamation to withdraw from the JCPOA Iran nuclear agreement in the Diplomatic Room at the White House in Washington on May 8, 2018. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)
Trump claimed Iran had agreed to “give us back the nuclear dust that’s way underground.” The President terms Iran’s 440 kilograms of enriched uranium as “nuclear dust” after sustained U.S. military strikes on Iranian sites that store the country’s stockpile of uranium.
“The United States should insist on a permanent ban of Iranian enrichment and its full dismantlement in negotiations. Iran retaining any enrichment infrastructure in anticipation of the end of a moratorium would allow it to cheat as soon as Trump leaves office and resume its path to nuclear weapons,” Andrea Stricker, deputy director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ nonproliferation program, told Fox News Digital.
Jonathan Ruhe, fellow for American strategy at JINSA, echoed Stricker on the importance of abolishing the Iranian enrichment program. He told Fox News Digital, “An acceptable deal would have to embody many of Trump’s stated redlines from his first administration, and from the run-up to last summer’s 12-Day War.
“This means permanent bans on enrichment, reprocessing and weaponization capability and, equally importantly, full verification of Iran’s compliance with these strictures.”
Heavy weapons, including ballistic missiles, air defense systems and unmanned aerial vehicles, are displayed during the 44th anniversary of the eight-year war with Iraq, known as Holy Defense Week, at Baharestan Square in Tehran, Iran, Sept. 25, 2024. (Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)
President Trump withdrew from President Obama’s widely criticized nuclear deal with Iran, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), in 2018.
“In theory, the so-called ‘Iran deal’ was supposed to protect the United States and our allies from the lunacy of an Iranian nuclear bomb, a weapon that will only endanger the survival of the Iranian regime,” Trump said at the time. “In fact, the deal allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium and, over time, reach the brink of a nuclear breakout.”
Ruhe said, “The JCPOA failed to ensure IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] inspectors could monitor, and account for, the entirety of Iran’s program and its compliance with the deal. This problem has worsened significantly in the decade since, as Iran systematically stonewalled inspectors.
“Iran’s negotiators always drag out talks and avoid giving clear answers. They still think time is on their side, with their blockade hurting the global economy and their missile arsenals being dug out and prepared for renewed conflict. Trump should insist on a definitive response from Tehran and be ready for renewed operations.
Mojtaba Khamenei, son of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, attends a demonstration marking Jerusalem Day in Tehran. (Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
“As a cautionary tale: The Obama team first entered nuclear talks with stringent redlines, but then they let Iran call their bluffs, ignore their deadlines and wear down their demands until we ended up with the JCPOA,” Ruhe said.
Iran is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that obligates it not to enrich uranium for military purposes. However, U.S. and European intelligence reports have documented Iran’s illicit proliferation activities.
Ruhe said, “This regime cynically wants it both ways: They insist the NPT gives the ‘right’ to peaceful enrichment, yet they flout the treaty’s safeguards. By claiming this ‘right,’ they try to make certain core issues non-negotiable. By this logic, they should get to retain enrichment capacity. So, the questions then become how much and what the U.S. has to give in return for this supposed sacrifice by Iran.
“As the Non-Proliferation Treaty’s name indicates, it’s an agreement to prevent proliferation, not to promote nuclear development.”
Stricker said Rafael Grossi, the head of the IAEA, recently said, “It’s fiction that the NPT specifically mentions ‘enrichment’ in its peaceful uses clause. Moreover, the prevailing legal demand from the U.N. Security Council is that Iran stop enriching and come back into compliance with its nonproliferation obligations.
For nearly 25 years, the IAEA has been unable to conclude that all of Iran’s nuclear material and activities are devoted to peaceful uses.”
She added that “Iran’s enrichment program began through illicit procurements and covert facilities, under a nuclear weapons program that planned to use enriched uranium as fuel. Iran was clearly stockpiling material for an apparent nuclear weapons breakout.”