Iran refuses to halt uranium enrichment despite new U.S. sanctions and increasing diplomatic pressure from the Trump administration.

At a Glance

• Iran considers uranium enrichment a “right” of its people and non-negotiable, rejecting U.S. demands to rely solely on imported nuclear fuel
• U.S. negotiators led by Secretary Rubio and Special Envoy Witkoff demand complete cessation of enrichment as condition for lifting sanctions
• The U.S. has imposed new sanctions targeting companies concealing Iranian oil exports believed to fund military and terrorist activities
• Former CIA Director William Burns doubts Iran will ever agree to zero domestic enrichment
• President Trump remains open to negotiations but insists Iran must stop supporting terrorism and pursuing nuclear weapons

Iran’s Firm Stance on Uranium Enrichment

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has drawn a clear line in ongoing nuclear negotiations with the United States, declaring that Iran will not compromise on uranium enrichment activities. The Iranian position remains unchanged despite escalating economic pressure from the U.S. in the form of new sanctions. For Tehran, the ability to enrich uranium domestically represents more than just technical capability – it has become a matter of national pride and sovereignty that Iranian officials consistently frame as a fundamental right of their people.

“Defending the rights of the Iranian people in the nuclear field, including [uranium] enrichment, is one of these principles and rights of the people that we will not compromise on.”, said Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

While Iran maintains that its nuclear program serves purely civilian purposes, Araghchi has suggested that Iran might consider temporary limitations on enrichment activities as a trust-building measure.

However, he insists that the fundamental right to enrichment remains non-negotiable. Iranian officials have also emphasized their compliance with the inspection regime established under the 2015 nuclear deal and have expressed interest in building additional nuclear power plants, even inviting American firms to bid on these projects.

America’s Hardening Position

The United States, under President Trump’s direction, has taken an increasingly firm stance on Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff have both emphasized that Iran must completely cease enrichment activities as a precondition for sanctions relief. Witkoff’s position represents perhaps the most hardline approach from the administration, establishing what he calls a “red line” in negotiations.

“An enrichment program can never exist in the state of Iran ever again. That’s our red line.”, said Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff.

The U.S. position centers on offering Iran access to civilian nuclear power without the domestic capability to enrich uranium. Secretary Rubio has framed this approach as consistent with international norms, pointing out that many countries operate civilian nuclear programs without domestic enrichment. U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz has advocated for the complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, reflecting concerns that any enrichment capacity potentially leaves the door open to weapons development.

There are still gaps to bridge in nuclear talks with the United States, an Iranian source familiar with negotiations told Reuters.

“The issue is that America is not willing to lift major sanctions in exchange,” the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the…

— Iran International English (@IranIntl_En) May 15, 2025

Sanctions and Diplomatic Impasse

Rather than yielding progress, recent diplomatic talks have resulted in additional U.S. sanctions targeting Iranian oil exports. These new sanctions specifically focus on companies involved in concealing the origin of Iranian oil, which American officials believe funds missile development and support for proxy groups designated as terrorist organizations. This economic pressure comes as part of a broader strategy to force concessions from Tehran on multiple fronts, including its nuclear program, missile development, and regional activities.

“If America’s only demand is that Iran not have nuclear weapons, this is an achievable demand, but if it has impractical and illogical demands, it is natural that we will run into problems.”, added Abbas Araghchi,

The impasse highlights significant challenges in reaching any agreement. Former CIA Director William Burns has expressed doubt that Iran would ever accept zero domestic enrichment, noting the practical difficulty of limiting enrichment to under 5% for civilian use while preventing weapons-grade production.

Meanwhile, Andrea Stricker, a prominent critic of previous nuclear deals, has warned about the risks of an interim agreement that leaves Iran’s “breakout capability” intact, predicting potential difficulties for President Trump in securing Congressional approval for any deal seen as insufficient.

Prospects for Resolution

The fundamental gap between Iran’s insistence on maintaining enrichment capabilities and the U.S. demand for their complete elimination creates a seemingly insurmountable obstacle to a comprehensive agreement. While Iranian officials have suggested openness to temporary limitations similar to those in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Trump administration has clearly signaled that such arrangements would be unacceptable. President Trump has maintained that he remains open to negotiations, but with the firm condition that Iran must cease support for terrorism and abandon nuclear weapons ambitions.

“I don’t personally think that this Iranian regime is going to agree to zero domestic enrichment. And again, in the comprehensive agreement, that was limited to under 5%, which is what you need for a civilian programme, not for a weapons programme. But that’s going to be one of the big challenges.”, said William Burns.

The negotiations face additional complications with the appointment of Michael Anton to lead a U.S. technical team, despite his limited nuclear expertise. As sanctions continue to impact Iran’s economy and regional tensions persist, both sides appear entrenched in positions that leave little room for compromise. The standoff over uranium enrichment remains not just a technical dispute but a clash over national sovereignty, security concerns, and fundamental questions about Iran’s place in the international order.