Peloni: In a WSJ Op Ed, Trump’s Mideast Envoy, Steve Witkoff has already signaled a position of retreat in place of what should have been clear US resolve to have Iran, itself, retreat. Stating that “Where our red line will be, there can’t be weaponization of your nuclear capability” Witkoff has indicated a significant weaking of Trump’s own message to Iran. Indeed, after assembling the greatest military presence in history in the region, alongside the equivocating threat from Trump himself, Witkoff’s prevarication will unfortunately betray US resolve while strengthening Iranian resistance. This portends a very unfortunate outcome should Witkoff’s statements indicate Trump’s true position in this negotiation. If Trump’s position has not changed, the FDD assessment below should have been used in place of the Witkoff strategy of weakness.
Orde Kittrie, Andrea Stricker & Behnam Ben Taleblu | FDD | April 11, 2025
Click on Photo for Video
The United States and Iran are set to hold landmark talks on April 12, President Donald Trump announced earlier in the week, just weeks after Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei refused the idea. The watershed event follows the president’s letter to Khamenei in early March in which he posed a stark ultimatum to Tehran: negotiate a deal within two months that removes the nuclear threat, or face punishing U.S. sanctions and possibly strikes on the regime’s nuclear facilities.
“I’d rather see a peace deal than the other [option],” Trump said, referring to military action against the Islamic Republic’s nuclear facilities. “But the other will solve the problem.” Two weeks later, the president reiterated his threat: “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing. It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.”
While any agreement with the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism — which continues to talk about assassinating Trump — would be fraught with moral, strategic, and political risks, definitively ending Iran’s atomic quest rightly remains a top U.S. national security priority.
The U.S. negotiating team in Oman — reportedly led by U.S. Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff — must insist upon a new nuclear deal that is based on one simple premise: Iran’s full, permanent, and verifiable nuclear disarmament.
First and foremost, this means Iran must verifiably dismantle, export, or destroy all assets, equipment, and facilities which enable the regime to enrich uranium or produce plutonium — the key fuels for nuclear weapons. Iran has no need to produce such fuels.
Tehran must also completely disclose and terminate all work on nuclear weaponization — its efforts to build a nuclear explosive device. While evidence shows Iran has worked on nuclear weapons since the mid-1980s, it has never been forced to fully account for or verifiably end such efforts.
Tehran must also allow the International Atomic Energy Agency — the UN’s nuclear watchdog — to have unimpeded access to all suspect sites and to ensure full verification of an Iranian nuclear deal. Over the past several decades, Iran has repeatedly moved or destroyed evidence of nuclear weapons work, restricted access to suspicious sites, and weakened or backed out of its monitoring agreements. This cannot continue.
Iran must also fully and permanently implement its legal nonproliferation obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Chemical Weapons Convention, both of which it has long thwarted. It is essential that an Iranian obligation to permanently abide by its NPT obligations override the NPT’s withdrawal provisions, as Iran has periodically threatened to withdraw from the NPT.
In addition, Iran must accept the reimposition of UN Security Council sanctions on its missile and arms programs, as well as giving up its nuclear-capable missile delivery systems and space-launch vehicles, which could be used to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile to target the U.S. homeland.
Tehran must also terminate and disclose proliferation cooperation with states like China, Russia, and North Korea.
The Trump administration must refuse any offers of a limited and reversible deal like President Barack Obama’s flawed nuclear agreement from 2015. President Joe Biden also pursued a similarly limited and reversible deal. Both efforts let Iran maintain and eventually expand much of the infrastructure needed to develop nuclear weapons. Trump withdrew from the Obama-era accord in 2018 and levied tough sanctions in pursuit of a better deal. Settling for a limited and reversible agreement would only enable Tehran to resurrect its weapons program once Trump leaves office.
Should Iran refuse his terms for a disarmament deal, Trump must double down on the pressure and make good on his threats.
The president has already begun to increase sanctions against Iran, with a February restoration of his first term’s “maximum pressure” policy that cratered Tehran’s economy and leveled its oil exports. These must be scaled up if Iran stalls at the negotiating table.
Trump has also signaled a willingness to carry out strikes, moving significant military assets into the region which could destroy Iran’s deeply buried nuclear facilities.
If Iran fails to promptly agree to dismantle its nuclear program, the president should also pivot aggressively to support the Iranian people’s quest for a representative government. After all, so long as Tehran’s theocrats are at the helm, they are likely to pursue the world’s most dangerous weapons.
If the president can peacefully obtain the full, permanent, and verifiable disarmament of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program, such an agreement would surely be worthy of U.S. Senate ratification.
It would also solidify Trump’s role as a historic dealmaker.
Orde F. Kittrie is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and law professor at Arizona State University. Follow him on X @ordefk. Andrea Stricker is a research fellow and deputy director of FDD’s Nonproliferation and Biodefense Program. Follow her on X @StrickerNonpro. Behnam Ben Taleblu is a senior fellow and senior director of FDD’s Iran program. Follow him on X @therealBehnamBT. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focused on national security and foreign policy.
Trump says remove the nuclear threat. To combat the poison of Jeffrey Sachs et al pro Iran propaganda then this needs spelling out…that the threat is to Israel as to the world in general.
Because the interpretation of Islam is involved.