Trump pushes for Iran nuclear deal

[MIDDLE EAST] In a recent press conference, former U.S. President Donald Trump revealed that he had warned Israel against launching a military strike on Iran. Trump stated he was on the verge of securing a new deal with Tehran over its nuclear program, one that would give U.S. inspectors unprecedented access to Iran’s nuclear sites. This proposed deal goes beyond current UN inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), aiming for stronger verification measures while avoiding violent conflict.

Central to the proposed agreement is Iran’s insistence on retaining the right to enrich uranium on its own soil. This has been a key sticking point in five rounds of U.S.-Iran negotiations, mediated by Oman. While Trump seemed open to allowing uranium enrichment under strict U.S. oversight, the issue remains highly sensitive for Iran’s leadership. Iran’s nuclear chief, Mohammad Eslami, and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi have both stressed that sovereignty over enrichment is non-negotiable, even as they express a willingness to allow U.S. inspections.

Tensions escalated after the UK’s ambassador to Washington, Peter Mandelson, appeared to suggest that Britain supported a “zero enrichment” policy—something Iran views as a breach of past agreements and international treaties. Iran swiftly pushed back, threatening to halt all diplomatic talks with Europe if that position is upheld. The British government, however, reaffirmed its long-standing commitment to diplomacy and preventing nuclear weapons proliferation, while backing Trump’s push for renewed negotiations.

Implications

For Businesses

Any easing of tensions between the U.S. and Iran could reshape global markets, particularly oil and energy. A new nuclear deal could pave the way for lifting some sanctions, potentially increasing Iranian oil exports and affecting global supply chains and prices. Energy companies, insurers, and multinational firms operating in the Middle East should be closely monitoring these developments for shifts in market conditions and geopolitical risk.

For Consumers

Consumers worldwide, especially in energy-dependent economies, could see downstream impacts in fuel prices if a U.S.-Iran agreement reduces the risk of conflict and stabilizes oil markets. Additionally, a reduction in regional tensions might improve global investor confidence, possibly softening inflationary pressures tied to energy costs. However, without a deal, continued instability could keep prices volatile.

For Public Policy

If Trump’s approach gains traction, it signals a shift toward bilateral U.S.-Iran verification mechanisms, potentially sidelining multilateral agreements like the JCPoA. This could strain relations between the U.S. and European allies who have invested in the multilateral framework. Moreover, the insistence on allowing enrichment under U.S. watch raises complex questions about nuclear non-proliferation norms and the balance between national sovereignty and global security demands.

What We Think

Trump’s comments highlight both the promise and the peril of a highly personalized diplomatic style. While his push for a tougher, U.S.-centered inspection regime could break the deadlock, it risks sidelining international frameworks and alienating key allies. Iran’s firm stance on its right to enrich uranium underscores a deeper struggle over sovereignty and trust—issues that won’t be solved by technical agreements alone.

The rift between the U.K. and Iran after Mandelson’s remarks also illustrates how fragile these diplomatic efforts are; even a perceived policy shift can threaten to derail months of negotiations. If Trump’s proposed deal materializes, it could mark a short-term diplomatic win, but it would need careful long-term management to prevent future breakdowns.

Ultimately, while the immediate focus is on inspections and enrichment levels, the larger stakes involve regional stability, international trust, and the credibility of global non-proliferation norms. Navigating this terrain will require more than bold statements—it will demand patient, coordinated diplomacy that integrates both bilateral ambitions and multilateral commitments.