President Donald Trump’s envoy to the Iran talks, Steve Witkoff, found himself on the defensive Tuesday, declaring that “a deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal.” A day earlier, he had suggested that Washington might tolerate low-grade uranium enrichment—an apparent concession that drew swift criticism from Iran-watchers and likely raised concerns among senior figures in the administration.
“Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program. It is imperative for the world that we create a tough, fair deal that will endure, and that is what President Trump has asked me to do,” Witkoff wrote on the social media platform X.
On Monday, in an interview with Fox News, the special envoy had signaled that Iran could continue enriching uranium at 3.67 percent, provided that its nuclear activities be placed under tough inspections.
“This is going to be much about verification on the enrichment program, and then ultimately verification on weaponization,” Witkoff had said.
“It is imperative for the world that we create a tough, fair deal that will endure.”
However, this statement raised eyebrows since it sounded like the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear deal that Trump dumped in 2018. “Obama’s Iran deal” has been a potent attack tool for Republicans for a decade, but now suddenly Trump’s envoy appeared to imply that his deal would be similar to Obama’s. After all, Obama’s JCPOA also allowed the Islamic Republic to enrich at 3.67 percent.
Iran has signaled its willingness to accept this condition, repeatedly having called for a return to the original terms of the JCPOA. While minor disagreements may persist over the scope and nature of inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), this element of the negotiations appears to be one of the least contentious—assuming Witkoff’s earlier statement reflects official U.S. policy.
Last week, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ mouthpiece, Javan newspaper in Tehran, demanded that Iran should keep its right to enrichment. “Preserving the nuclear industry and enriching uranium to a level that meets our non-military needs is exactly what we’ve been saying and seeking for years,” Javan wrote.
As of February 8, Iran had stockpiled 274.8 kilograms (605.8 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60 percent, according to the IAEA—an increase of 92.5 kilograms (203.9 pounds) since the IAEA’s last report in November. This quantity is more than enough for further enrichment to produce six nuclear bombs.
Tehran insists it has the right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. While 3.67 percent enrichment is used for nuclear energy, 60 percent has no credible civilian use and is just a short step from weapons-grade enrichment at 90 percent.
However, in his interview with Fox News, Witkoff listed demands that make the current U.S. position tougher than what was agreed to in JCPOA. The Trump administration is pushing for broader inspections and the inclusion of Iran’s missile program—both points that Tehran long has resisted. Witkoff suggested that monitoring should extend beyond known enrichment sites to potential warhead development facilities and also called for oversight of Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal.
Witkoff’s quick retreat from his suggestion that the U.S. might tolerate limited uranium enrichment is unlikely to sit well with officials in Tehran. He is seen by many within the clerical establishment as relatively moderate—especially compared to Trump, who frequently threatens military action. This was the second time that Witkoff had implied the U.S. might accept low-level enrichment, a detail not lost on Iranian policymakers. With the second round of bilateral talks set for April 19, Tehran’s reaction to Witkoff’s latest statement will offer insight into its negotiating posture.
