The Trump administration has secretly proposed a new nuclear deal to Iran that would permit limited low-level uranium enrichment on Iranian soil for an unspecified period. According to the New York Times and Axios that broke the story, the latest proposal contradicts long-standing public declarations by senior US officials that no enrichment would be allowed.
Although both White House envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have insisted publicly that the US would demand Iran’s full dismantlement of its nuclear programme and allow no enrichment whatsoever, the secret proposal signals a significant softening. It attempts to build a diplomatic bridge between Iran’s growing stockpile of near-weapons-grade uranium and Washington’s stated goal of halting all enrichment activity within Iranian borders.
The outline of the deal, handed to Iranian negotiators last weekend, offers a phased arrangement. Initially, Iran would be allowed to continue low-level enrichment for civilian energy purposes while broader discussions take place to develop an internationally managed nuclear fuel programme. This arrangement is designed to eventually curtail Iran’s domestic uranium production, but not immediately.
In return, the United States would facilitate the construction of nuclear power reactors in Iran and negotiate the establishment of uranium enrichment facilities managed by a consortium of regional countries. Iran would be required to halt all domestic enrichment once the benefits of the new programme, such as access to nuclear fuel, began to materialise.
Iran has historically insisted on its right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, making it clear that prohibiting enrichment outright would be unacceptable. On June 3, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reaffirmed this position, saying Iran did not need anyone’s permission to enrich uranium.
The latest offer carries significant political risk for the Trump administration, particularly in the US Congress and among close allies such as Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly urged Washington to maintain a zero-enrichment policy and to press for the dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Republican senators have echoed this stance, warning that any perceived compromise could weaken deterrence and embolden Tehran.
Nevertheless, the proposal marks the first tangible sign since Trump took office that the US and Iran may be inching toward a negotiated resolution that avoids an attack on Tehran’s nuclear facilities. Trump had earlier withdrawn from the 2015 Obama-era nuclear deal and escalated tensions by ordering the killing of top Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani in 2020. Iran, in response, was accused by US intelligence of plotting to assassinate Trump during his 2024 re-election campaign, a charge Tehran has denied.
At the heart of the new US plan is the idea of a multinational consortium of the US, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and others, which would oversee nuclear fuel production for Iran’s civilian use. Such a system would ideally prevent Iran from diverting enriched uranium for weapons development while giving it access to energy resources. The US and the west expect the International Atomic Energy Agency to oversee the project and spot violations, if any.
There are several outstanding issues, however. For instance, while the US insists that the enrichment facility must be outside Iran, Tehran wants it to be within its territory. To address this concern, Omani and Saudi officials have floated the idea of constructing the facility on a Persian Gulf island, which might allow both sides to claim success. Iran, for its part, has suggested it could accept the plan if the island in question were Kish or Qeshm, both within its territorial waters.
Another unresolved issue is the scope of sanctions relief. The US proposal does not specify which sanctions would be lifted as part of a final agreement. Iran has stated that all sanctions, including those unrelated to its nuclear programme, would need to be lifted for a deal to be signed. Outstanding issues include Tehran’s alleged support for terrorism, human rights abuses and involvement in global and regional conflicts.
International watchdogs confirm that Iran currently possesses enough enriched uranium to build at least ten nuclear bombs. Iranian sources say the country is unlikely to give it up without concrete guarantees about immediate sanctions relief. A key factor that could influence this decision is the economic crisis facing Iran, worsened by years of US sanctions on oil exports and banking transactions.
Above all, Iran remains wary of American intentions, and it has not forgotten Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the previous nuclear deal. Absence of binding guarantees that a future US administration will not again abandon the agreement is a clause on which Iran is unlikely to compromise. Negotiators are pressing Washington to provide a mechanism that would protect Iran’s interests in the event of a political shift in the US.
Domestically, both sides face political resistance. In Washington, hardliners are incensed at the proposal’s apparent concessions, while in Iran, too, conservatives want the government to walk away from the proposal. The Iranian leadership is also grappling with the implications of shuttering its main nuclear facilities at Natanz and Fordow, both of which cost billions of dollars to construct and employ hundreds of scientists. Many of them are regarded as national heroes, and Iranian officials worry that closing the facilities could trigger a brain drain. Iran has previously accused Israel of assassinating several top scientists, including Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, fuelling its determination to maintain domestic capabilities.
The proposed deal also includes the possibility of US support in building a second nuclear power plant in Iran. Tehran’s only nuclear reactor, located at Bushehr, was built by Russia. Iran has stated an ambition to build ten more. A similar promise was once made to North Korea by the Clinton administration, though that agreement eventually collapsed, and Pyongyang tested a nuclear weapon shortly thereafter.
The prospect of a nuclear fuel consortium is seen by some analysts as a way to contain the proliferation risk while offering Iran an honourable path forward. By involving multiple regional actors, the plan aims to foster transparency and reduce the likelihood of a regional arms race.
Still, it remains unclear whether Iran will agree to cease all enrichment on its own soil, even if enrichment occurs on an island it controls. The visibility and vulnerability of such a facility could undermine Iran’s sense of security, particularly in the face of Israeli threats. Netanyahu’s government continues to hint at military action, citing Iran’s weakened regional allies and degraded air defences as an opportune moment.