Middle East & Beyond
April 15, 2025
Steve Witkoff, the United States Special Envoy to the Middle East, made a startling announcement on Fox News Monday night—one that flies in the face of Israel’s uncompromising stance on nuclear issues. According to Witkoff, the Trump Administration is prepared to allow Iran to enrich uranium at 3.67 percent, shifting away from its previous demand for total denuclearization. Israeli officials have vehemently rejected this position, insisting that no nuclear industry should be allowed to develop on Iranian soil under any circumstances.
Witkoff, the highest-ranking American official currently engaged in negotiations with Tehran, claims that his approach will secure an improved nuclear agreement compared to the deal signed under the Obama administration—a deal that Trump famously abandoned during his first term. Yet instead of pursuing the total dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, he emphasized an agreement based on robust supervision and limited enrichment. This is essentially a repackaged version of the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal, repurposed as a “better deal” for the current moment.
Critics argue that this pivot is not merely a change in strategy—it is a dangerous retreat from key principles. While Witkoff has identified weapons proliferation as a problem that requires addressing, he notably omits any mention of combating the global spread of terrorism—a demand that was vocal among Trump administration officials just last week.
This dangerous shift is compounded by the fact that such a policy of “limited enrichment” plays directly into the hands of Tehran, a regime that is renowned for its negotiation prowess and its mastery over the art of strategic delay. Iranian leadership, inheritors of an empire that once reigned with the cunning of Cyrus the Great, is not interested in short-term concessions. They have the strategic know-how to transform any such agreement into a stepping stone for greater nuclear capability and regional influence.a
By retreating from total denuclearization, Witkoff’s approach not only weakens the longstanding U.S.-Israeli consensus but may also embolden Iran and its proxies. This softening of demands under the guise of “verification” could have serious long-term implications for regional security and global nuclear nonproliferation efforts.
In short, by endorsing a model that resembles the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal, Witkoff reveals himself as the wrong person to negotiate with a regime that thrives on playing the long game. His approach undermines the hardline posture that has historically kept Iran in check, while simultaneously disregarding the unyielding security concerns of Israel. This isn’t strategic diplomacy—it’s a dangerous capitulation that risks fueling further instability.
As the world watches these negotiations unfold, the message is clear: if America is to maintain its credibility and protect its allies, it must return to uncompromising principles. The stakes are too high for half-measures.
----
Witkoff reverses stance
Steve Witkoff, the U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East, has recently reversed his stance on Iran’s nuclear program. After initially suggesting that Iran could maintain low-level uranium enrichment under strict verification, Witkoff now asserts that Iran must completely dismantle its nuclear infrastructure. This shift aligns more closely with Israel’s position and has been seen as a response to concerns raised by Israeli officials.
This reversal follows indirect talks between the U.S. and Iran in Oman, where Witkoff’s earlier comments had sparked apprehension in Israel. His latest statements aim to reassure allies that the U.S. remains committed to preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
The situation remains fluid, with further negotiations anticipated. Observers will be watching closely to see how these developments influence the broader dynamics of Middle East diplomacy.