I'm Oppenheimer's grandson. We can still go from crisis to conversation on Iran.
Dialogue alone won't solve the problem. But it's where every solution begins. It also allows us to talk about the hopeful side of nuclear science. So I'm proposing something unconventional.
The war in Iran has been terrifying. It pushed the threat of nuclear weapons back to the forefront of global consciousness. And yet – somehow – we've made it through this conflict in better shape than many feared, assuming the ceasefire holds.
We now have an unexpected opportunity to turn this narrow escape into something bigger: a chance to expand global peace and security.
Like many, I have serious criticisms of how we got here. A nation that has never signed the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty, Israel, used its undeclared nuclear status as leverage to launch a war against a country, Iran, that has no nuclear weapons and has submitted to international inspections. This directly sabotaged promising diplomatic efforts between Iran and America. When the United States entered the conflict with a military strike June 21, Americans braced for another endless war in the Middle East.
And yet, remarkably, we've arrived at a ceasefire. That outcome wasn't inevitable. It required restraint from Tehran and surprising restraint from Washington. Credit must be given where it's due: President Donald Trump played a central role in stopping the escalation, using his signature unconventional diplomacy. That success offers a model ‒ if we're willing to learn from it.
Lesson 1: Stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons fuel
Since the first atomic breakthrough, one truth has remained: Safety in the nuclear age requires cooperation ‒ even with adversaries.
Nuclear science is not a secret that can be kept, it's a fact of nature.
From J. Robert Oppenheimer onward, scientists knew the only real safeguard was shared control of enriched uranium that can be used for bombs. We need more cooperation to prevent nuclear proliferation ‒ not just in Iran, but everywhere.
Gen. Wesley Clark: This is the moment for American leadership in Middle East. We can't miss it.
Lesson 2: Strengthen the institutions that have kept us alive
The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is more than a piece of paper. It is the backbone of the global nuclear order. It has slowed the spread of weapons, legitimized peaceful nuclear energy and built mechanisms for trust.
The International Atomic Energy Agency ‒ through science and diplomacy, not force ‒ upholds this system.
We must double down on supporting countries that respect these rules and hold accountable those, like Israel and North Korea, that operate outside them.
The real nuclear threat before us
The dangerous gamble to start a war in order to stop a single weapon from being developed must not become the global standard. Because the far greater danger isn't Iran or any one rogue nation ‒ it's a nuclear exchange between superpowers.
That remains the true and growing risk, and it could even happen by accident. A false alarm, a cyberattack or a miscommunication could trigger an unstoppable chain reaction.
Once missiles fly among the United States, Russia and China, no leader or even unconventional diplomacy can stop it. There won't be time.
Opinion: Our nuclear weapons are much more powerful than Oppenheimer's atomic bomb
So what can we do?
We build on what has worked. Trump's success in brokering a ceasefire should now be expanded ‒ first to end the Gaza conflict, and then to revive stalled denuclearization dialogue.
Trump has previously called for nuclear talks among America, China and Russia. That is exactly the right idea ‒ and this could be the moment.
Charles Oppenheimer: I support President Trump's pursuit of nuclear diplomacy
Some will call that impossible. They'll point to rising tensions, trade wars, proxy conflicts. They'll say the moment isn't right. But history teaches the opposite: It is precisely in moments of danger that real diplomacy must begin.
Waiting for peace before negotiating peace is a contradiction. This is a time for bold action – of the Nobel Peace Prize variety – if done right.
We are still living under a nuclear arms strategy called mutual assured destruction. Even its acronym ‒ MAD ‒ tells us how unsustainable it is. The threat is too vast, too fast and too complex for any one nation or leader to control.
Most of us, as individuals, feel powerless in the face of such a system. But we're not without agency. Some people do have real influence, and that includes the leaders of the United States, China and Russia. They cannot be expected to make unilateral concessions, but they can be expected to sit down and talk.
I'm not president. But I'm doing what I can ‒ using the name and ideas of my grandfather J. Robert Oppenheimer to push for a safer future.
So I'm proposing something unconventional: an 'Oppenheimer Dinner,' inviting representatives from Washington, Beijing and Moscow to a private, off-the-record dialogue about how to reduce the risk of real nuclear war ‒ and discuss the positive side of nuclear energy.
Dialogue alone won't solve the problem. But it's where every solution begins. It also allows us to talk about the hopeful side of nuclear science. The same technology that could destroy civilization can also power it, giving us clean energy, medical breakthroughs and global prosperity.
It's up to us to choose which future we want ‒ and there is no time like the present.
'We can have each other to dinner. We ourselves, and with each other by our converse, can create not an architecture of global scope, but an immense, intricate network of intimacy, illumination, and understanding.' — J. Robert Oppenheimer, 1958
Charles Oppenheimer is the founder and co-executive director of the Oppenheimer Project. He is the grandson of J. Robert Oppenheimer, the director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory during the Manhattan Project.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Indianapolis Star
29 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
What is a vote-a-rama? Senate vote marathon ahead of Trump legislative package
An exhaustive series of Senate votes are about to begin around President Donald Trump's major tax, spending and policy legislative package − a marathon known in Washington parlance as a "vote-a-rama." It'll be time-consuming political theater centering around scores of amendments aimed at tweaking key parts of a measure that Trump has said is his signature piece of second-term legislation that he wants to sign into law by a self-imposed July 4 deadline. Few if any of the amendments are expected to win enough support to add or remove provisions from the bill. But it is still a rare occasion when senators can get votes on nearly any subject before the final vote to approve the entire legislative package. Here's what you need to know about a vote-a-rama. A vote-a-rama is a legislative event that was born out of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, according to the Senate's website. Following a debate on a budget resolution or reconciliation bill, senators can introduce an unlimited number of amendments with each receiving a vote. Republicans on June 28 offered up different interpretations on the importance of the amendment process, with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, signaling she too had things she'd seek to revise that will go a long way toward helping her support the package. "There's some very good changes that have been made in the latest version, but I want to see further changes,' Collins said. Collins' GOP colleague, Sen. Brian Moreno of Ohio, painted a different and more partisan picture on the amendment slog ahead. 'I want everybody watching this to remember this as you listen to probably what's going to be 30-plus hours of complete nonsense from the other side," the freshman Republican said on the floor. The Senate previously defined a vote-a-rama as a piece of legislation voted on 15 times or more in a day. Daniel S. Holt, Associate Historian for the U.S. Senate Historical Office, told USA TODAY in an email that the change was made to align the chamber's definition with its connections to budget bills. "While the term is completely colloquial and has no firm definition in any official manner, we thought this was more in-line with the historical use of the term," Holt said. The Senate credits the first vote-a-rama to votes on a budget resolution taken on May 12, 1980. The chamber's website states that staff had been using the term as early as 1992. When Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi was quoted by United Press International in 1996 using the phrase to refer to the event, it stuck. The Senate counts 45 vote-a-ramas. The vote-a-rama held on March 13, 2008, holds the current record for most amendments voted on: 44. Votes in a vote-a-rama work differently than during regular Senate order. Senate rules preclude debate on an amendment during the marathon of votes, though they can be waived to allow an opponent and a supporter of an amendment to speak for 30 seconds – according to former Senate aide Keith Hennessey. Votes are taken consecutively, and senators agree to shorten the window for votes from 15 minutes to 10 minutes, according to Hennessey. Senate rules prohibit food on the floor. But the good news is they do not have to remain on the floor for the entirety of the proceedings. One quirk in precedent allows for members to drink milk while in the chamber. On January 24, 1966, then Sen. Everett Dirksen, R-Illinois, asked the presiding officer if a page could go to a restaurant and return with a glass of milk while debating a bill to repeal a portion of the Taft-Hartly Act. The Congressional record from the day shows the presiding officer saying that there was nothing in the rules prohibiting it.


UPI
32 minutes ago
- UPI
Trump reveals group of 'wealthy people' wants to buy TikTok in U.S.
1 of 2 | A group of "very wealthy people" wants to buy the Chinese-owned TikTok social media app that is facing a ban in the United States, President Donald Trump said. File photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo June 29 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump said a group of "very wealthy people" wants to buy the Chinese-owned TikTok social media app that is facing a ban in the United States. During an interview Friday with Maria Bartiromo that appeared Sunday on Fox News, Trump said, "We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way," declining to name the potential buyers. "I'll tell you in about two weeks," he added. The president said he believes Chinese President Xi Jinping "will probably" approve the deal for U.S. ownership of the video service, which was founded in September 2016. President Joe Biden signed a law in 2024 requiring TikTok to be blocked in the United States unless its parent company, ByteDance, sold it to a non-Chinese company over concerns that sensitive user data could be acquired by the Chinese government. The U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously on Jan. 17 that TikTok must be banned from U.S. app stores unless the company divested from the platform and sold to an American company by Jan. 19. Biden said he didn't want to intervene in the final days of his presidency, the app went dark around 10:30 p.m. ET on Jan. 18 and the app ceased to appear on Apple and Google's app stores. The 170 million U.S. users and around 1 million creators lost access to the app for at least one day of the 23 million new videos uploaded daily. Those using the app spend about an hour a day looking at some of the 23 million new clips uploaded daily, with teens using it for 2-3 hours a day, according to Exploding Topics. But the next day, the company restored service after Donald Trump said he would pause the deadline for 75 days when he was sworn in as president on Jan. 20, and signed an executive order to do so on his first day in office. He has since pushed off the deadline two more times, with it now delayed until Sept. 17. In April, the White House said it was close to a deal in which 50% of the app would be owned by an American company. Negotiations ended when Trump announced tariffs on goods coming from China to the United States. Trump proposed 134% tariffs on most goods but it has been scaled back to 30% for some items exempt. During his first presidency, on Aug. 6, 2020, Trump signed an executive order "action must be taken to address the threat posed by one mobile application in particular, TikTok" from China. Trump later credited TikTok with gaining more young voters in the 2024 election and seemed to soften on his stance. ByteDance has also been reluctant to turn over rights to the app's algorithm. It is the fifth-most social network with 1.6 billion users in the world behind Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and WhatsApp, according to Statistica. In April, Adweek compiled a list of suitors for U.S. rights, including Applovin, Amazon, Oracle, Blackstone and Andreessen Horowitz. None confirmed negotiations to Addwek. "It does not feel like these are serious bids for TikTok," David Arslanian, managing director of Progress Partners, told Adweek. "It is hard to imagine any of these companies, like Amazon and Oracle, successfully operating just a piece of TikTok."


Bloomberg
35 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trade Talks Make Progress in Countdown to US Deadline
Good morning. Trade talks gather pace as Donald Trump's tariff deadline nears. Oil traders are catching their breath. And these robots are really bad at soccer. Listen to the day's top stories.