Iran could sell nuclear material to the US under a new deal to limit its uranium enrichment currently under negotiations, according to a new report.
Sources close to the talks told Reuters that the proposed agreement is unlikely to differ substantially from the 2015 version, which was dumped by President Trump during his first term in office.
The Join Comprehensive Action Plan (JCPOA), agreed under President Obama, has been widely derided by conservatives for failing to limit Tehran’s nuclear ambition.
While the enrichment of uranium was restricted under the deal, Iran breached those terms years ago and continues to deny access to UN observers. Indeed, it was this very issue which led Trump to dramatically pull out of the accords in 2018.
However, sources suggest that the new version will not be radically different to the one so roundly rejected by the White House, with one even going so far as to dub it “JCPOA two".
The report suggests that terms under discussion include renewed monitoring from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and a commitment from Iran to dilute or export its stock of enriched uranium, possibly including selling some of it to America.
Iran could also limit its stock of centrifuges used to enrich the material and import the remainder of what it requires for atomic energy from Russia.
This would be traded for extensive relief from the economic sanctions that are crippling the Iranian economy.
But there would be no requirement for Tehran to completely abandon nuclearisation – an omission likely to cause alarm in Jerusalem. The regime has also reportedly demanded absolute assurances that Trump will not pull out of the deal again.
Nonetheless renewed negotiations over the prospective nuclear deal appear to have stalled.
A fourth round of talks, which had been scheduled for this weekend, has now been postponed indefinitely. Iran has claimed that the delay was the result of new US sanctions, while the White House is still refusing to confirm its participation in the subsequent rounds.
Omani mediators, meanwhile, claimed that the impasse was over a logistical issue and expressed confidence that it could be resolved.
No deal is yet in place as Trump’s two-month deadline, after which he claimed the US would bomb Iran, rapidly approaches.
Administration insiders, though, told Axios last month that even American officials remained divided on the issue, with Vice President JD Vance apparently leading the push for a diplomatic solution, backed by Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff.
On the other side, now former National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are said to take a more hawkish line, favouring a military strike against the Islamic Republic.
Waltz’s dismissal following the accidental addition of a journalist to a group chat discussing US strikes in Yemen may seemingly tip the balance in favour of the doves, though his role has since been absorbed by Rubio, who reportedly remains a strong critic of the negotiated approach.
It comes after Trump threatened to impose new secondary sanctions on importers of Iranian oil and petrochemicals as the tension ratchets up over a nuclear deal.
The measures, if imposed, would apply some of the brutal sanctions regime implemented against the Islamic Republic to its trading partners.
Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump said: “ALERT: All purchases of Iranian oil, or petrochemical products, must stop, NOW.
"Any country or person who buys ANY AMOUNT of OIL or PETROCHEMICALS from Iran will be subject to, immediately, secondary sanctions.”
He added that sanctioned nations “will not be allowed to do business with the United States of America in any way, shape, or form”.
It is not clear when or how such a wide sanctions regime would be implemented, with the administration yet to offer any details behind the President’s pronouncement.
But China, which buys the majority of the 1.6 million barrels of crude oil released by Tehran every day, would stand to be the worst hit by the regulations if they are brought to bear.
