
Analysis: An outline is emerging of the US offer to Iran in their high-stakes nuclear negotiations
The outline of the U.S. offer to Iran in their high-stakes negotiations over Tehran 's nuclear program is starting to become clearer — but whether any deal is on the horizon remains as cloudy as ever.
Reaching a deal is one of the several diplomatic priorities being juggled by U.S. President Donald Trump and his trusted friend and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff. An accord could see the United States lift some of its crushing economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for it drastically limiting or ending its enrichment of uranium.
But a failure to get a deal could see tensions further spike in a Middle East on edge over the Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip.
Iran's economy, long ailing, could enter a free fall that could worsen the simmering unrest at home. Israel or the U.S. might carry out long-threatened airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities. And Tehran may decide to fully end its cooperation with the United Nations' nuclear watchdog and rush toward a bomb.
That makes piecing together the U.S. offer that much more important as the Iranians weigh their response after five rounds of negotiations in Muscat, Oman, and Rome.
Possible deal details emerge
A report by the news website Axios outlined details of the American proposal, the details of which a U.S. official separately confirmed, include a possible nuclear consortium enriching uranium for Iran and surrounding nations. Whether Iran would have to entirely give up its enrichment program remains unclear, as Axios reported that Iran would be able to enrich uranium up to 3% purity for some time.
Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, negotiated under then President Barack Obama, allowed Iran to enrich to 3.67% — enough to fuel a nuclear power plant but far below the threshold of 90% needed for weapons-grade uranium. Iran now enriches up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels.
U.S. officials all the way up to Trump repeatedly have said that Iran would have to give up enrichment entirely.
The English-language arm of Iranian state television broadcaster Press TV on Tuesday published an extended article including details from the Axios report. Iranian state television long has been controlled by hard-liners within the country's theocracy. Press TV extensively repeating those details suggests that either they are included in the American proposal or they could be elements within it welcomed by hard-liners within the government.
Iranian media largely have avoided original reporting on the negotiations, without explanation.
Iran's reaction
The idea of a consortium enriching uranium for Iran and other nations in the Middle East also have come up in comments by other Iranian officials. Abolfazl Zohrehvand, a member of Iran's powerful parliamentary committee on national security and foreign policy, said that he understood that one of the American proposals included the full dismantlement of the country's nuclear program in a consortium-style deal.
The Americans will "make a consortium with Saudi Arabia, the (United Arab) Emirates and Qatar ... on an island to keep it under U.S. control,' Zohrehvand told the Iranian news website Entekhab. 'Iran could have a certain amount of stake in the consortium, but enrichment would not take place in Iran.'
Zohrehvand didn't elaborate on which 'island" would host the site. However, the Persian Gulf has multiple islands. The UAE already has a nuclear power plant, while Saudi Arabia is pursuing its own program. Qatar has said that it's exploring small nuclear reactors. A consortium could allow low-enriched uranium to be supplied to all those countries, while lowering the risk of proliferation by having countries run their own centrifuges.
While a consortium deal has been discussed in the past, it has fallen through previously. Now, however, the Gulf Arab states largely have reached a detente with Iran after years of tensions following Trump unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. in 2018 from Tehran's nuclear deal with world powers.
Meanwhile, Fereidoun Abbasi, a former head of the civilian Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, suggested on Iranian state television that one of Iran's disputed islands with the UAE could be a site for the project. Iran, under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, seized three islands in the Persian Gulf in 1971 as British troops withdrew just before the formation of the Emirates, a federation of seven sheikhdoms home to Abu Dhabi and Dubai.
'What do we need the U.S. for?' Abbasi asked. "We have the know-how.'
What happens next
Iran likely will respond to the American offer in the coming days, possibly through Oman, which has been mediating in the talks. There also could be a sixth round of negotiations between the countries, though a time and location for them have yet to be announced.
This coming weekend is the Eid al-Adha holiday that marks the end of Islam's Hajj pilgrimage, meaning talks likely wouldn't happen until sometime next week at the earliest.
But the pressure is on. Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium could allow it to build multiple nuclear weapons, should Tehran choose to pursue the bomb. Western nations may pursue a censure of Iran at the Board of Governors at the International Atomic Energy Agency — which could see them ultimately invoke the so-called snapback of U.N. sanctions on the Islamic Republic. The authority to reestablish those sanctions by the complaint of any member of the original 2015 nuclear deal expires in October.
'There is still time for negotiating an agreement that reduces Iran's proliferation risk. But that time is short,' wrote Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association.
'Given that Iran is sitting on the threshold of nuclear weapons and officials are openly debating the security value of a nuclear deterrent, any escalatory spiral could kill the negotiating process and increase the risk of conflict.'
___
Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Iran, and Matthew Lee in Washington, contributed to this report.
___
EDITOR'S NOTE — Jon Gambrell, the news director for the Gulf and Iran for The Associated Press, has reported from each of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, Iran and other locations across the Middle East and wider world since joining the AP in 2006.
Hashtags

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


North Wales Chronicle
25 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Nato set to approve new military purchases as part of a defence spending hike
The 'capability targets' lay out goals for each of the 32 nations to purchase priority equipment such as air defence systems, long-range missiles, artillery, ammunition, drones and 'strategic enablers' such as air-to-air refuelling, heavy air transport and logistics. Each nation's plan is classified, so details are scarce. 'Today we decide on the capability targets. From there, we will assess the gaps we have, not only to be able to defend ourselves today, but also three, five, seven years from now,' Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte said. 'All these investments have to be financed,' he told reporters before chairing the meeting at Nato's Brussels headquarters. US President Donald Trump and his Nato counterparts will meet on June 24-25 to agree to new defence investment goals. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth said that 'to be an alliance, you've got to be more than flags. You got to be more than conferences. You need to keep combat ready capabilities'. Spurred on by their own security concerns, European allies and Canada have already been ramping up military spending, including arms and ammunition purchases, since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. At the same time, some allies balk at US demands to invest 5% of their gross domestic product in defence – 3.5% on core military spending and 1.5% on the roads, bridges, airfields and sea ports needed to deploy armies more quickly – when they have already struggled to grow their budgets to 2% of GDP. The new targets are assigned by Nato based on a blueprint agreed upon in 2023 – the military organisation's biggest planning shake-up since the Cold War — to defend its territory from an attack by Russia or another major adversary. Under those plans, Nato would aim to have up to 300,000 troops ready to move to its eastern flank within 30 days, although experts suggest the allies would struggle to muster those kinds of numbers. The member countries are assigned roles in defending Nato territory across three major zones – the high north and Atlantic area, a zone north of the Alps, and another in southern Europe. Nato planners believe that the targets must be met within five to 10 years, given the speed at which Russia is building its armed forces now, and which would accelerate were any peace agreement reached to end its war on Ukraine. Some fear Russia might be ready to strike at a Nato country even sooner, especially if Western sanctions are eased and Europe has not prepared. 'Are we going to gather here again and say 'OK, we failed a bit', and then maybe we start learning Russian?' Lithuanian Defence Minister Dovile Sakaliene said. Swedish Defence Minister Pal Jonson also warned that while Russia is bogged down in Ukraine right now, things could quickly change. 'We also know after an armistice or a peace agreement, of course, Russia is going to allocate more forces closer to our vicinity. Therefore, it's extremely important that the alliance use these couple of years now when Russia is still limited by its force posture in and around Ukraine,' Mr Jonson said. If the targets are respected, the member countries will need to spend at least 3% of GDP on defence. Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans said his country calculates in the medium term that 'we should spend 3.5% at least on defence, which in the Netherlands means an additional 16 to 19 billion euro (£13-16 billion) addition to our current budget.' The Netherlands is likely to buy more tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and long-range missile systems, including US-made Patriots that can target aircraft, cruise missiles and shorter-range ballistic missiles.


The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Biden probe to focus on alleged use of autopen
The Trump administration has launched an investigation into former President Joe Biden 's actions, alleging his aides concealed his 'cognitive decline' and questioning who was truly running the country during his presidency. The investigation will examine Biden's executive actions and the alleged use of an 'autopen' to sign official documents, for which no evidence has yet been presented. Biden has responded to the claims as 'ridiculous' and 'false,' saying that he made all the decisions regarding pardons, executive orders, and legislation during his presidency. White House counsel David Warrington will lead the investigation, with Attorney General Pam Bondi consulting. Democrats, including Congressman Dan Goldman, have criticized the investigation as a distraction from President Donald Trump's controversies.


The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
Elizabeth Warren claims Musk enriched himself to the tune of $100B during his time in the White House
Senator Elizabeth Warren has accused Elon Musk of using his role in the Donald Trump administration to increase his net worth by $100 billion, issuing a report that cites more than 100 instances in which he might have benefited financially from his position. The world's richest man's 130-day tenure as a special government employee came to an end on Friday, drawing a line under a chaotic four months in which he led DOGE in its mission to cut excess spending, waste, and fraud and oversaw the mass firing of tens of thousands of federal employees. Senator Warren has greeted his departure from the political scene with the publication of a new report alleging large-scale profiteering during his time in Washington, entitled: Special Interests Over the Public Interest: Elon Musk's 130 Days in the Trump Administration. 'Before Trump took office, Musk's companies faced at least $2.37bn in potential liability from pending agency enforcement actions,' her report states. 'Now many of those enforcement actions have stalled or been dismissed.' She continues: 'Musk's companies have received or are being considered for large contracts with the federal government, with foreign governments, and with other private sector companies. 'Musk and individuals acting on his behalf have been involved in dozens of questionable actions that raise questions about corruption, ethics, and conflicts of interest.' Once an enthusiastic Trump supporter who poured $288m into the Republican's presidential campaign last year, Musk has since cut a disgruntled and beleaguered figure, angrily attacking the president's 'big beautiful bill' as a 'disgusting abomination' as it makes its way through the Senate, winning the support of conservative fiscal hawks in the process. Warren makes clear that not all of the instances she goes on to cite constitute lawbreaking but argues that Musk 'violated norms at an astonishing pace' and, in some cases, 'engaged in action that may have violated the statutory prohibition regarding federal employees' participation in particular matters in which a government official has a financial interest.' Her report lists 130 alleged offences in total, one for every day he served, some of which occurred in plain sight, notably Trump using the White House lawn as a showroom forecourt from which to promote Musk's Tesla electric vehicle range and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick advising Fox News viewers to invest in Tesla stock during an interview with Jesse Watters. Warren also gives behind the scenes examples of conduct she argues might have benefited the billionaire, including his recommending changes at Nasa to suit SpaceX and alleged attempts to convince federal agencies to use his Starlink satellite technology, a rejection of which has been mooted as one of the central reasons for Musk's relationship with Trump beginning to disintegrate.