As the United States prepares for reported talks with Iran in Oman on Saturday, President Trump has a narrow and powerful window to demand complete and irreversible denuclearization. With Tehran at its weakest point in decades, the administration must avoid past mistakes and insist that no deal be made unless Iran completely and verifiably dismantles its nuclear program. U.S. law, national security, and regional stability demand no less.
“We cannot afford another deal that legitimizes Tehran’s enrichment capacity. The U.S. must insist on total dismantlement, full stop. Anything less will fuel instability and embolden this terrorist regime. This weekend’s talks are a chance for the U.S. to press its advantage: insist that Iran denuclearize and do so on an extremely tight timeline, or else. The U.S. maintains tremendous leverage over this regime, both through maximum pressure and potential military action. No deal is better than a deal that allows Iran to continue enriching or retain aspects of its nuclear program.”
– Nick Stewart, Senior Director of Government Relations
“Since 2012 when Congress passed the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (CISADA), U.S. law has been clear: Iran must cease all nuclear weapons-related activity and dismantle its infrastructure to receive meaningful sanctions relief. Any agreement that falls short of this commonsense, bipartisan standard would not only violate congressional intent, it would endanger U.S. national security.”
– Matt Zweig, Senior Director of Policy
1. The U.S. must demand total, irreversible, and immediate denuclearization and be prepared to walk away if Iran refuses.
• President Trump’s objective entering these talks must be unambiguous: the complete and verifiable dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program. Anything less would allow Tehran to continue leveraging nuclear brinkmanship to extort the international community and destabilize the region.
• Iran has a long history of using negotiations to stall for time, relieve international pressure, and bog down talks in procedural delays and endless processes. We cannot allow this playbook to succeed again.
2. The JCPOA failed by rewarding Iran with sanctions relief in exchange for temporary, reversible restrictions on its nuclear program.
• The 2015 deal legitimized Iran’s nuclear program and broke with years of U.S. policy demanding disarmament. Iran retained the capacity to rapidly resume enrichment, while the regime’s access to funds enabled it to double down on terrorism and regional aggression.
• The JCPOA deviated from the “Gold Standard” of nuclear cooperation agreements, which prohibit enrichment and reprocessing. Instead, it granted Iran international legitimacy to enrich uranium. It left a vast nuclear infrastructure in place, imposed only short-term restrictions, and provided a clear glide path to nuclear threshold status.
• Key provisions, including limits on advanced centrifuge use, uranium stockpiles, and enrichment levels, began expiring after just 8–10 years. The deal also failed to halt Iran’s missile development, overlooked its weaponization work, and lacked provisions for anywhere/anytime inspections. These flaws made the JCPOA structurally incapable of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear-armed state.
3. Denuclearization isn’t just smart policy — it’s the law.
• Section 401(a) of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (CISADA) conditions sanctions relief on Iran ceasing all nuclear weapons-related activities and dismantling related infrastructure.
• This statutory requirement, signed into law by President Obama, makes clear that temporary restrictions like those under the JCPOA do not actually qualify for meaningful sanctions relief.
4. Maximum pressure is working. The U.S. has tremendous leverage, and Iran is entering talks from a position of profound uncertainty.
• Years of sanctions have devastated Iran’s economy, forced cuts to proxy funding, and spurred mass protests. Tehran’s military strength has also diminished following strikes on key capabilities, while its diplomatic isolation has grown. These are outcomes of maximum pressure.
• From 2018 to 2021, maximum pressure weakened Tehran’s capacity to fund proxy warfare and accelerated public dissatisfaction within the country, giving the U.S. unprecedented leverage. While the Biden administration squandered much of this leverage, the reimposition of maximum pressure today will continue to weaken the regime.
5. Tehran’s current willingness to engage in indirect talks is a product of this sustained pressure. The U.S. must press its advantage.
• Iranian officials have long refused engagement with Washington. Their reversal is a clear sign of vulnerability.
• President Trump must hold firm and press his advantage. This rare moment of leverage should be used to extract nothing less than the full dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program.
• “Iran’s Nuclear Disarmament: The Only Deal That Protects U.S. and Allied Security,” Orde Kittrie, Andrea Stricker, and Behnam Ben Taleblu, FDD Monograph, March 14, 2025
• “Tehran’s Diplomatic Gambit Aims to Forestall Pressure While Advancing Nuclear Program,” Janatan Sayeh and Behnam Ben Taleblu, FDD Policy Brief, April 4, 2025
• “How Trump Can Counter Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions,” Reuel Marc Gerecht and Mark Dubowitz, The Wall Street Journal, January 22, 2025
• Backgrounder: “Detecting and Halting an Iranian Weaponization Effort,” Andrea Stricker, FDD Memo, February 19, 2025
• “Iran Is Developing Plans for Faster, Cruder Weapon, U.S. Concludes,” David E. Sanger and Julian E. Barnes, The New York Times, February 3, 2025
• “Tehran’s Trump Trap,” Behnam Ben Taleblu, The National Interest, February 18, 2025
• “Tehran May Tempt Trump With Talks,” Reuel Marc Gerecht and Ray Takeyh, The Wall Street Journal, December 9, 2024