US Envoy Calls Enrichment 'Red Line' Ahead Of New Iran Talks
Trump, who will visit three other Gulf Arab monarchies next week, has voiced hope for reaching a deal with Tehran to avert an Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear program that could ignite a wider war.
Three previous rounds of talks in Oman and Rome ended with notes of optimism, with the two sides saying the atmosphere was friendly despite the countries' four decades of enmity.
But they are not believed to have gone into technical detail, and basic questions remain.
Steve Witkoff, Trump's friend who has served as his globe-trotting negotiator on issues including on Iran, had initially suggested flexibility on Tehran maintaining low-level enrichment of uranium for civilian purposes.
But in an interview published Friday, Witkoff gave his clearest message yet that the Trump administration would oppose any enrichment.
"An enrichment program can never exist in the state of Iran ever again. That's our red line. No enrichment," he told right-wing Breitbart News.
"That means dismantlement, it means no weaponization, and it means that Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan -- those are their three enrichment facilities -- have to be dismantled," he said.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier raised the possibility of Iran importing enriched uranium for any civilian energy.
Trump in his first term withdrew from a nuclear agreement with Tehran negotiated by former president Barack Obama that allowed Iran to enrich uranium at levels well below what is needed for weapons.
Many Iran watchers doubted that Iran would ever voluntarily dismantle its entire nuclear program and give up all enrichment.
But Iran has found itself in a weaker place over the past year. Israel has decimated Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite militia backed by Iran that could launch a counter-attack in any war, and Iran's main ally in the Arab world, Syria's Bashar al-Assad, was toppled in December.
Israel also struck Iranian air defenses as the two countries came openly to blows in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, which is also supported by Iran's clerical state.
Trump himself has acknowledged tensions in his policy on Iran, saying at the start of his second term that hawkish advisors were pushing him to step up pressure reluctantly.
In an interview Thursday, Trump said he wanted "total verification" that Iran's contested nuclear work is shut down but through diplomacy.
"I'd much rather make a deal" than see military action, Trump told the conservative radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt.
"There are only two alternatives -- blow 'em up nicely or blow 'em up viciously," Trump said.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that Oman, which has been mediating, had proposed Sunday as the date and both sides had accepted.
"Negotiations are moving ahead and naturally, the more we advance, the more consultations we have, and the more time the delegations need to examine the issues," he said in a video carried by Iranian media.
"But what's important is that we are moving forward so that we gradually get into the details," Araghchi said.
The Trump administration has kept piling on sanctions despite the talks, angering Iran. On Thursday, the United States imposed sanctions on another refinery in China, the main market for Iranian oil.
Since Trump's withdrawal from the Obama-era deal, the United States has used its power to try to stop all other countries from buying Iranian oil.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
8 minutes ago
- DW
Trump's DC intervention may be less likely in other cities – DW – 08/14/2025
US President Donald Trump has sent the National Guard into Washington, may well have other major cities in his sights. But could he replicate his capital intervention elsewhere? The arrival of 800 US National Guard troops in Washington, D.C. at the direction of President Donald Trump has been framed as an "authoritarian push" by the mayor of the nation's capital. Trump cast his decision to involve the National Guard in Washington and put the city's police force under the supervision of Attorney General Pam Bondi and Drug Enforcement Administration chief Terry Cole as a crime crackdown. He's calling the move a "Liberation Day" and claiming the city needed rescuing from "crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor." He's also named other cities, including New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and Baltimore, as possible future targets if they don't address their own local crime issues. But federal data contradicts that claim, with statistics showing that violent crime is at a 30-year low. Critics say that based on this, there is no emergency that requires a military presence in the capital. "The numbers simply do not justify this measure," said Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser. So if crime has been going down in Washington, why the intervention? "It does look, if you look at the data, [like] crime is going down," said Laura Dickinson, a law professor at George Washington University, US. "City officials have not asked for help [from the president] so it really does seem at best questionable." "This is really problematic and contrary to our tradition in the United States, where we've been very cautious about using the military to do law enforcement functions," Dickinson added. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video In part, because he can. Washington, D.C. (which stands for District of Columbia) is not part of any US state and largely falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Under the 1973 Home Rule Act, presidents can take control of the DC police during emergencies for 30 days without congressional approval. And because it's a federal enclave, the president also commands the city's National Guard. Some US commentators have observed the move could be a political attempt to distract from ongoing controversy related to the Epstein Files and the release of jobs figures that showed a rise in unemployment. Trump's popularity in his flagship policy areas — in particular immigration — has also recently declined. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video While Trump and his allies have pointed to city crime as justification for the move, his opponents inside and outside of congress say the action is designed to exact control over cities that do not support Congressional Black Caucus, which currently has no Republican members, also said the cities named by Trump as potential targets all have the common thread of being led by Black mayors, labelling the move a "blatantly racist and despicable power grab." The presidency has fewer powers outside of the nation's capital. The governors of the 50 US states preside over the National Guard within their own borders. It's a key distinction that William Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University, US, said would make it far more difficult for Trump to follow through on threats to extend interventions beyond the federal enclave of Washington, D.C. "It would be unwise, I think to generalize this example and apply it to other places in the United States," Banks told DW. "He can't go to Chicago or Philadelphia or New York City or Los Angeles and do the same thing. He simply doesn't have the authority." But what about in June, when he deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles? Banks said there are provisions for limited interventions to protect federal property and personnel, but Trump "was walking on very thin ice." "His argument was that they were needed to ensure that the protesters didn't destroy federal property or harm ICE and other immigration personnel who are on the ground there doing their job." While they can protect federal assets, military personnel are banned from being actively used in domestic policing by the Posse Comitatus Act. In California, a three-day trial investigating whether the deployment of the National Guard was in breach of this law, and potentially unconstitutional, has recently wrapped up, with a decision pending. Dickinson said the use of military forces by the federal government in American cities could also impact how these institutions are perceived by the public. "It could damage the credibility and respect that Americans have for the military and the National Guard," Dickinson told DW. "These are some of the few institutions in the United States that enjoy very broad bipartisan support." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Federal command of the DC police ends after 30 days, unless the Republican-controlled Congress approves an extension. The National Guard can remain active indefinitely. Despite alarms being raised by Trump's opponents, who are calling the move an authoritarian flex, Banks expects a return to the status quo is more likely, particularly when it comes to threats to other states. He said the United States' foundational history overthrowing the British military, and the norm that law enforcement should be maintained by civilian police, are crucial in understanding what Americans will accept in their communities. "Our situation is somewhat unique in the United States in not having any expectation of military involvement in law enforcement," Banks told DW. "We don't like military uniforms on our streets, we don't like men and women with guns patrolling our streets, it just rubs against the grain. "Posse Comitatus codifies that principle, but I think the norm is even more important and more fundamental."
Int'l Business Times
38 minutes ago
- Int'l Business Times
UN Warns Russia, Israel Of Conflict Sex Crimes Listing Risk
The United Nations warned Israel and Russia on Thursday that their militaries faced being listed as parties suspected of committing sexual violence in conflict in light of credible evidence of violations. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres's report said the two countries risked being added to a list of parties thought to use sexual violence including rape in conflict that includes Myanmar's military, Sudan's army and the Palestinian militant group Hamas. "Due to significant concerns regarding patterns of certain forms of sexual violence perpetrated by Israeli armed and security forces and Russian armed and security forces and affiliated armed groups, these parties have been put on notice for potential listing in the next reporting period," said the annual report. "These concerns relate primarily to violations recorded in detention settings." In the case of Israel, the report alleges "credible information" military and security forces perpetrated patterns of sexual violence including "genital violence, prolonged forced nudity and repeated strip searches conducted in an abusive and degrading manner." In February, the Israeli army said it had charged five soldiers for abusing a Palestinian detainee at a site used to hold Palestinians following the start of the war in Gaza in the wake of the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas. Among the charges was an allegation that the accused had stabbed a man with a sharp object "which had penetrated near the detainee's rectum." The report said there was "credible" evidence of violations "against Ukrainian prisoners of war, in 50 official and 22 unofficial detention facilities in Ukraine" and Russia. "These cases comprised a significant number of documented incidents of genital violence, including electrocution, beatings and burns to the genitals, and forced stripping and prolonged nudity, used to humiliate and elicit confessions or information," it said. In 2024, the human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine documented 209 cases of conflict-related sexual violence, including rape, the report added. Israel has cooperated with a special representative on the issue of sexual violence in conflict, whereas Russia has not, the report said. The report said however that Israel's refusal to grant access to inspectors had frustrated her ability to determine patterns and trends. Israel rejected the report's findings and called a letter that accompanied it from Guterres "unusual." "The UN must focus on the shocking war crimes and sexual violence of Hamas and the release of all hostages," Israel's ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said. "Israel will not shy away from protecting its citizens and will continue to act in accordance with international law." Russia's embassy to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment.
DW
an hour ago
- DW
Europe holds its breath as Trump meets Putin in Alaska – DW – 08/14/2025
Europe hopes that Trump will threaten Putin with secondary sanctions if he doesn't agree to a ceasefire but dread a deal over their heads and against their interests. In a bid to influence the outcome of the meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, key European leaders got on a video call with the US president as Germany hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Berlin. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen posted on X that Europe, the US and NATO"strengthened the common ground for Ukraine," and will remain in close coordination. The EU's diplomatic intervention was aimed at impressing upon Trump the bloc's collective desire for peace, but also to brief him on the suspected motives of his Russian counterpart ― and warn against conceding Ukrainian territory in the talks. There was some hope that the European allies may have managed to convince Trump against selling out Ukrainian and European interests. Still, since they will remain far away while Trump and Putin hold closed-door talks, tensions over what may transpire remain palpable. During Wednesday's call, Ukraine and its European allies said they wanted a ceasefire before commencing any negotiations with Russia. Trump seems to have made a note of that, though it's not a precondition for him ― he believes a ceasefire "would be a show of goodwill from Russia," reported CNN. Even though Trump is meeting Putin without Zelenskyy in Alaska, he indicated there might be a trilateral meeting including the Ukrainian president soon. French President Emmanuel Macron said the trilateral could take place in a neutral country in Europe after the tete-a-tete in Alaska. Trump has said earlier swapping some territory may be necessary to end the war. But after speaking to the Europeans, he said no such concessions would be made without Zelenskyy at the table. And while Trump is still opposed to Ukraine joining NATO ― which Kyiv has long said was essential as a security guarantee, experts suggest the US may be more open to offering some other sort of assurance to deter future Russian aggression. "The nature of US security guarantees and practical contributions would be subject to further negotiations," Kristine Berzina, a Washington, D.C.-based senior fellow of the German Marshall Fund (GMF), told DW. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Ukraine and the EU also expect the US to ask Russia to pay part of the massive reconstruction bill as part of future negotiations. It is estimated to cost between $500 billion and $1 trillion to repair the damage caused by Russian bombings in Ukraine. Kyiv and its supporters argue a part of that should come from frozen Russian assets, about €200 billion of which are located in Belgium, predominantly in a bank called Euroclear. There is also a push for President Trump to ask for the return for thousands of Ukrainian children abducted by Russia, as well as Ukrainian prisoners of war. The bloc also hopes the US will tighten its screws and impose secondary sanctions on Russia if the Russian president refuses to hold fire. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Despite some relief after the call there are still fears that Putin may outwit Trump. Europe faces a difficult scenario if Putin convinces Trump to cut off weapons supply to Ukraine, even through European partners, and intelligence sharing, since Ukraine needs both US military equipment and reconnaissance. Another one of Europe's fears is that the US may withdraw its assets from the continent and make the alliance weaker. "Russia wants to push the US out of eastern Europe and assert military dominance. Putin could use this meeting to encourage the US to withdraw troops from Europe," said Rafael Loss, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR). This is a worrying possibility since, "the US is already reviewing its global force posturing." "In that case first and foremost the Europeans would need to shore up their own defenses" in eastern European nations, Loss said. "US force reductions are anticipated, though the scale of the withdrawal is not yet clear," said Berzina of the GMF. "But of course, this process is happening at the same time as the Ukraine and Russia negotiations are taking shape. It will be tricky for the US to withdraw troops from Europe if it wants to signal to Russia that the US is deeply committed to European security." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
