In a dramatic twist that shocked even close allies, former U.S. President Donald Trump launched surprise negotiations with Iran to prevent the country from developing a nuclear bomb—just as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was hoping for American support for military action.
Sources familiar with the situation revealed that Netanyahu flew to Washington last month expecting to solidify a tougher stance on Iran’s nuclear activities. But in less than 24 hours before a scheduled press conference, he was blindsided by news that the U.S. had already planned to open direct talks with Tehran. This pivot left Netanyahu stunned and scrambling to respond.
Within three weeks, the U.S. and Iran have already held three rounds of talks, with a fourth expected in Rome. While the new framework under discussion is built on the bones of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—which Trump famously withdrew from in 2018—it comes with crucial extensions and stricter enforcement mechanisms.
Key elements of the proposed deal include extending the agreement’s duration to 25 years, tightening verification protocols, and lengthening the “sunset clauses” that dictate when certain restrictions expire. Iran would be required to cap uranium enrichment at 3.67%, limit its stockpile, and operate fewer centrifuges—all under rigorous inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
While Iran is showing flexibility on several technical issues—including exporting or diluting enriched uranium and expanding access to nuclear sites—it insists that its right to enrich uranium is non-negotiable. Netanyahu, however, is demanding a complete halt to enrichment and a full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, similar to Libya’s disarmament model.
One possible compromise could involve Iran agreeing to long-term restrictions on enrichment, using only 5,000 centrifuges and importing enriched uranium from countries like Russia. Interestingly, Iran has even floated the idea of selling enriched uranium to the U.S.—a concept once unthinkable.
Iran is also demanding assurances that no future American president, including Trump himself if re-elected, can unilaterally exit the agreement again. This stems from Iran’s bitter experience with Trump’s 2018 withdrawal, which severely damaged trust.
But there’s another roadblock: Iran’s ballistic missile program. While Washington insists it must be part of any new deal, Tehran has rejected this outright, citing its right to self-defense. Iran says it may agree not to develop nuclear-capable missiles but refuses to end its missile development entirely.
The challenge for Trump is political as much as it is diplomatic. Having previously slammed the JCPOA as the “worst deal ever,” he now risks being accused of reviving the same agreement under a new name. Former U.S. diplomat Dennis Ross notes that any new pact must significantly weaken Iran’s nuclear capability—reducing centrifuge numbers and uranium stockpiles, while allowing unprecedented international oversight—to be considered a genuine upgrade.
In essence, what’s unfolding could be dubbed “JCPOA 2.0”—a deal with enough new terms to satisfy Washington, while still preserving Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy. Whether this fine balance can be struck remains to be seen.
