Iran hawks warn Trump’s nuclear talks risk ‘Obama 2.0’

Hawkish national security experts are slamming President Trump’s opening bid for nuclear talks with Iran as little more than a rehash of the Obama-era nuclear deal, leading his top negotiator to backtrack on his previous position.

Trump's point person for talks with Iran, Steve Witkoff, said Monday night that the Islamic Republic could maintain a program enriching uranium up to 3.67 percent, the limit included in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by the Obama administration.

But by Tuesday morning, Witkoff reversed, saying the president's position was to eliminate Iran's ability to enrich uranium — the fuel needed for a nuclear weapon. 

“Any final arrangement must set a framework for peace, stability, and prosperity in the Middle East — meaning that Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program,” Witkoff wrote on social platform X. 

“It is imperative for the world that we create a tough, fair deal that will endure, and that is what President Trump has asked me to do.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) welcomed Witkoff’s reversal. “Well said and right on!” he replied to the post. 

The reversal came on the heels of outrage among Iran hawks — including Trump supporters. 

“Given Iran's secret nuclear weapons research, Iran cannot be trusted to do ANY uranium enrichment,” said Fred Fleitz, vice chair of the America First Policy Institute, the think tank staffed by officials who served in Trump’s first administration. Fleitz was chief of staff of Trump’s first National Security Council. 

Fleitz described the Obama-era deal, which Trump withdrew the U.S. from during his first term, as “disastrous” and said Iran’s nuclear program is far more advanced today than it was at the start of negotiations during the Obama administration in 2013. He said Iran could convert “reactor-grade uranium to weapon grade much faster” today.

U.S. intelligence agencies assess that while Iran has not made the decision to weaponize its uranium stockpile, the Islamic Republic is enriching uranium up to 60 percent. Experts say that reaching weapons-grade uranium of 90 percent for one bomb could happen within a matter of days, and Tehran could make enough fuel for multiple bombs within a matter of months. 

Opponents of the JCPOA said that even the 3.67 percent enrichment was unacceptable. While they were glad to see Witkoff’s shift, their statements have indicated a fear over what Trump might agree to as part of a deal.

“Be careful of Obama 2.0 nuclear deal with a Trump sticker,” Mark Dubowitz, CEO of Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington-based think tank, wrote on X. 

“Mr. President: Don’t get played. Dismantle the Iran nuclear program — don’t fall into Khamenei’s dangerous trap,” referring to the nation's supreme leader.

“It took only one meeting with [Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas] Araghchi for Witkoff to concede that Iran's regime had a right to enrich at 3.67%, after zero enrichment was the first Trump administration's position,” said Jason Brodsky, policy director of United Against Nuclear Iran. 

“Imagine what more concessions Tehran believes will come from future meetings.”

Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow with the FDD, reacted to Witkoff’s reversal and a reported Situation Room meeting among Trump and his top national security officials Tuesday morning as taking seriously the stakes of negotiating with the Islamic Republic. 

“If the change in sentiment by Steve Witkoff, coupled with the Situation Room meeting on Iran today is any indication, the U.S. realizes that it better have a unified and strong position going into negotiations, because the Islamic Republic has always entered talks — be they nuclear or otherwise — with a weak hand and be able to leave with a strong hand,” he said. 

Rep. Brad Schneider (Ill.), a hawkish Democrat who opposed the JCPOA, said Witkoff’s mixed messaging undermines American credibility and gives Iran room to maneuver. 

“This moment requires strategy, discipline, and unity of purpose. Iran negotiates with focus and precision. Every contradictory statement from the Trump administration erodes our leverage and undermines deterrence, unnerving our allies and emboldening our adversaries,” he said in a statement. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for the total dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program and has pushed for Trump to provide U.S. military support for a strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Trump has suggested he could use military force against Iran, if necessary. 

“What must be eliminated is Iran's axis of terror and its nuclear weapons program,” Netanyahu said in a video posted Tuesday to X. He said Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei posted a graphic online calling for the destruction of Israel. 

“Here you have the ruler of Iran openly declaring again that his goal is to destroy the State of Israel. And the most brazen thing about this, is that he issues this while he's negotiating, supposedly negotiating, peace with the United States,” Netanyahu said. “Well, Israel will not be eliminated.”

It’s a hawkish position supported by key Republicans in Congress. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) pressed Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of Defense, Elbridge Colby, to commit to providing the president with credible military options to stop Iran from “going nuclear.”

Colby had earlier advocated for tolerating a nuclear Iran and working to contain it rather than launch a military strike. 

The U.S. and Iran are expected to meet for a second round of talks in Rome on Saturday. Trump signaled on Monday he was upset with the weeklong gap between the talks, warning Iran against “tapping us along.” 

Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, said it’s a positive signal that the U.S. and Iran are moving toward a second round of talks, but she warned Witkoff’s flip-flopping on messaging risks emboldening hard-liners in Iran who apprehensive over Trump’s commitment to any deal. 

“The Trump administration needs to be disciplined about its message to Iran on what the negotiating parameters are,” she said, adding that Witkoff’s first remarks on limiting enrichment and preventing weaponization reflected a pragmatic course of action. 

“Trump's instincts for a deal are sound. His instinct to focus on preventing weaponization, that's where the U.S. focus should be, given how advanced Iran's nuclear program is and the reality that Iran is not going to completely dismantle its nuclear infrastructure,” Davenport said. 

“Iran sees its nuclear program as an important part of its security architecture, and it’s not going to dismantle key leverage, particularly when it has reason to be concerned that Trump won’t follow through with U.S. commitments under a deal.”