Nuclear specialists say Iran’s claim to a uranium “right” is unfounded and back Trump’s firm stance

(SeaPRwire) –   Amidst ongoing tensions between President Trump and Iran’s fractured leadership regarding the regime’s demand to maintain its nuclear enrichment capabilities, prominent experts on Iran’s atomic program are backing the President’s firm stance on dismantling the infrastructure entirely.

A primary point of contention in the high-stakes negotiations between Washington and Tehran is Iran’s assertion that it possesses a legitimate right to enrich and hold weapon-grade uranium—the essential component for nuclear weaponry. This dispute over enriched material is expected to be a critical factor in any future nuclear discussions, potentially scheduled to take place in Pakistan.

Last week, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmael Baqaei publicly dismissed Trump’s demands on state television, stating, “Iran’s enriched uranium is not going to be transferred anywhere under any circumstances.”

President Trump has referred to Iran’s 440-kilogram stockpile as “nuclear dust,” following U.S. military operations that targeted the facilities where the material was stored.

“The United States should insist on a permanent ban of Iranian enrichment and its full dismantlement in negotiations. Iran retaining any enrichment infrastructure in anticipation of the end of a moratorium would allow it to cheat as soon as Trump leaves office and resume its path to nuclear weapons,” Andrea Stricker, deputy director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ nonproliferation program, told Digital.

Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow for American strategy at JINSA, agreed with the necessity of ending Iran’s enrichment program. He told Digital, “An acceptable deal would have to embody many of Trump’s stated redlines from his first administration, and from the run-up to last summer’s 12-Day War. This means permanent bans on enrichment, reprocessing and weaponization capability – and equally importantly, full verification of Iran’s compliance with these strictures.”

In 2018, President Trump exited the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear agreement established under President Obama. At the time, Trump argued that while the deal was intended to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon, it actually permitted Iran to continue enrichment and move closer to a potential nuclear breakout.

Ruhe noted, “The JCPOA failed to ensure IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] inspectors could monitor, and account for, the entirety of Iran’s program and its compliance with the deal. This problem has worsened significantly in the decade since, as Iran systematically stonewalled inspectors.”

He added, “Iran’s negotiators always drag out talks and avoid giving clear answers. They still think time is on their side, with their blockade hurting the global economy and their missile arsenals being dug out and prepared for renewed conflict. Trump should insist on a definitive response from Tehran, and be ready for renewed operations.”

“As a cautionary tale: the Obama team first entered nuclear talks with stringent redlines, but then they let Iran call their bluffs, ignore their deadlines and wear down their demands until we ended up with the JCPOA,” Ruhe stated.

Although Iran is a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits the enrichment of uranium for military purposes, U.S. and European intelligence have documented evidence of Iran’s covert proliferation efforts.

Ruhe remarked, “This regime cynically wants it both ways: they insist the NPT gives the ‘right’ to peaceful enrichment, yet they flout the treaty’s safeguards. By claiming this ‘right,’ they try to make certain core issues non-negotiable. By this logic, they should get to retain enrichment capacity, so the questions then become how much and what the U.S. has to give in return for this supposed sacrifice by Iran.”

He further argued that “As the Nonproliferation Treaty’s name indicates, it’s an agreement to prevent proliferation, not to promote nuclear development.”

Stricker pointed out that IAEA head Rafael Grossi recently clarified that the NPT does not explicitly mention “enrichment” within its provisions for peaceful use. Furthermore, the U.N. Security Council has legally demanded that Iran cease enrichment and adhere to its nonproliferation commitments. For nearly 25 years, the IAEA has been unable to verify that all of Iran’s nuclear activities are strictly for peaceful purposes.

She concluded, “Iran’s enrichment program began through illicit procurements and covert facilities, under a nuclear weapons program that planned to use enriched uranium as fuel. Iran was clearly stockpiling material for an apparent nuclear weapons breakout.”