Iran will not give up its right under international nuclear treaties to which it is a signatory (and Israel is not), to enrich nuclear fuel below weapons grade. From Trita Parsi at responsiblestatecraft.org:
Iran will see it as a trap and the window for a deal will be lost
Steve Witkoff, Donald Trump’s hard-charging envoy, is doubling down on “zero enrichment” as the red line in nuclear talks with Iran — a rigid stance that risks sabotaging diplomacy altogether.
“We have one very, very clear red line, and that is enrichment. We cannot allow even 1% of an enrichment capability,” Witkoff tells ABC’s “This Week.”
“Everything begins… with a deal that does not include enrichment… because enrichment enables weaponization, and we will not allow a bomb to get here,” he addsed.
As I recently argued in The American Conservative, this demand has, for 25 years, proven both futile and counterproductive. It gives Iran more time to advance its nuclear program while stalling the realistic, verification-based deals that could actually constrain it. Unless Trump reverts to his original red line — weaponization — this rare chance to stop both an Iranian bomb and a war could slip away.
Witkoff’s maximalist posture may be a bargaining tactic, but airing it publicly risks poisoning the atmosphere. As soon as Iran starts reciprocating, optimism could curdle into confrontation, slamming shut Trump’s narrow window for diplomacy.
Even if tensions don’t boil over immediately, this strategy still squanders critical time. With the UN snapback deadline looming, delays are dangerous. Secretary Marco Rubio may believe triggering snapback boosts pressure, but in reality, it could produce a volatile and uncertain situation.
China and Russia will challenge the snapback’s legitimacy, severely blunting its power. Rallying Global South nations to reimpose unilateral sanctions — already far tougher than in 2011 — will likely fall flat. Western diplomats admit this privately, yet still argue that snapback must proceed for appearances, not impact.
