At the end of May, the administration of Donald Trump made an unprecedented move by submitting a written proposal outlining Washington’s desired terms for a new nuclear agreement with Iran. The document was delivered by Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East and chief negotiator, Steve Whitcoff, to the Sultanate of Oman—the key mediator between Tehran and Washington.
Since the delivery of the proposal, speculation has swirled regarding its contents, especially after Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivered a fiery address on June 4, during the annual commemoration of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic Republic. In his speech, Khamenei sharply criticised the U.S. proposal, reaffirming Iran’s non-negotiable red lines—especially its sovereign right to enrich uranium.
His uncompromising tone raised pressing questions: Has diplomacy between Tehran and Washington hit a wall? Or is Iran drawing a hard line while still leaving the door to negotiations slightly ajar?
A Temporary Enrichment Arrangement
Iranian diplomatic sources describe the U.S. proposal as “ambiguous,” particularly regarding uranium enrichment rights—an issue that was met with outright rejection by Iranian leadership.
According to one Iranian diplomat close to the negotiation team, Washington proposed that Iran temporarily reduce enrichment levels below the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) threshold, followed by a complete ban on domestic enrichment.
The U.S. suggested Iran limit enrichment to 2% purity, while the JCPOA had allowed up to 3.67%. However, following Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the deal in 2018, Iran increased enrichment levels to over 60%, approaching weapons-grade.
Washington’s proposal included:
-
- A temporary period of low-level enrichment (1–2 years),
-
- Construction of new nuclear power plants for Iran,
-
- Creation of a regional uranium enrichment consortium—outside Iranian territory—with international oversight,
-
- Cessation of enrichment activities inside Iran once the external system is operational.
An informed Iranian political source revealed that the U.S. wants Iran to shut down its key nuclear facilities in Natanz and Fordow and join a U.S.-led regional enrichment alliance with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Oman—under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Iran would receive low-grade nuclear fuel from this external body, but its own enrichment program would be dismantled.
A Repackaged Iranian Proposal?
Interestingly, the regional enrichment consortium concept was originally proposed by Iran’s own lead negotiator Abbas Araghchi in the third round of indirect talks with the U.S., as a gesture of goodwill to prove the peaceful intent of Iran’s nuclear program.
The idea, as explained by a senior government source close to President Massoud Pezeshkian, was to allow regional partners to monitor Iran’s uranium enrichment on Iranian soil, under full IAEA supervision.
Iran’s vision included:
-
- Hosting the consortium within Iran,
-
- Retaining a majority stake in operations,
-
- Allowing only minimal U.S. participation,
-
- Prohibiting U.S. involvement in inspection or oversight.
However, the U.S. proposal diverges significantly, removing Iran’s territorial role in the enrichment process and increasing U.S. control—an affront to Tehran’s red lines.
The goal of the U.S. plan is clear: limit Iran to peaceful, low-level nuclear energy production, while permanently stripping it of the ability to enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels.
Will Iran Accept the Deal?
According to multiple Iranian sources, the U.S. proposal permits Iran to enrich uranium to 2% for a short time, followed by:
-
- Complete shutdown of Iran’s enrichment facilities,
-
- Decommissioning of advanced centrifuges,
-
- Transfer of enriched uranium stockpiles abroad (e.g., to Russia),
-
- U.S.-supervised provision of nuclear fuel for new Iranian power plants.
In his June 4 speech, Ayatollah Khamenei rejected the core of the U.S. plan, stating:
“Our response to America’s nonsense is known. Uranium enrichment is essential to our nuclear industry. Without it, even a hundred power plants are meaningless.”
He continued:
“Why are you meddling in Iran’s internal affairs? What business is it of yours if we enrich uranium?”
Iran has consistently affirmed to the West that it has no intention of building a nuclear weapon, but will not surrender its sovereign right to enrichment.
A Strategic Pushback, Not a Shutdown
Following Khamenei’s remarks, some media outlets reported a total Iranian rejection of the U.S. plan. But according to a political analyst close to the Supreme Leader’s office, this interpretation is inaccurate.
“Khamenei didn’t close the door on diplomacy—he simply reminded both sides of Iran’s red lines,” the analyst told Arabi Post. “This has been his approach since the lead-up to the 2015 nuclear deal.”
Similarly, foreign policy expert Abbas Gholami, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said:
“The leadership is committed to diplomacy. Khamenei’s speech wasn’t a rejection of the U.S. offer—it was a reaffirmation of the Islamic Republic’s principles.”
Another government official close to President Pezeshkian added:
“Now more than ever, Iran wants a deal. Khamenei knows economic recovery hinges on it. But Iran will not accept a deal that sacrifices its enrichment rights or leaves room for future betrayal by Washington.”
Iran’s Expected Counter-Proposal
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei confirmed that Tehran will not rush its response. It will be deliberate, strategic, and anchored in the interests of the Iranian people.
According to sources close to the Iranian negotiating team, Iran’s counter-proposal will:
-
- Insist on preserving low-level enrichment inside Iran (even if capped),
-
- Reaffirm its sovereign right to host the enrichment consortium on an Iranian island in the Gulf,
-
- Reject closure of major nuclear facilities (e.g., Natanz),
-
- Reject U.S. involvement in constructing Iranian nuclear plants,
-
- Reject U.S. inspection rights (limited strictly to IAEA oversight).
A political analyst added:
“Iran knows it cannot trust the West to provide fuel. Europe once refused to supply us with reactor fuel. After investing billions into nuclear science, Iran won’t trade its independence for promises.”
According to insiders, Iran views uranium enrichment as its strongest bargaining chip in talks with Washington—both for sovereignty and leverage.
What About the Sanctions?
One critical omission in the U.S. proposal, Iranian officials argue, is the lack of concrete sanctions relief.
A source close to President Pezeshkian noted:
“Lifting sanctions is a top priority. These illegal measures forced Iran to the table. Any deal must guarantee sanctions relief, not just the unfreezing of a few bank accounts.”
He added that the U.S. must discuss:
-
- Reversal of Trump-era sanctions,
-
- Suspension of secondary sanctions that block foreign investment,
-
- Broader economic relief—not token gestures.
What’s Next for U.S.–Iran Negotiations?
Sources expect Tehran to agree to another round of indirect negotiations, likely the sixth, to address remaining ambiguities.
A senior Iranian diplomat stated:
“This isn’t the end. We’ll send our response soon. But more dialogue is needed to settle unresolved issues and clarify Washington’s vague points.”
