Behind the News
Trump Hardens Iran Deal Terms As Nuclear Dispute Takes Center Stage
The war began with U.S. officials emphasizing missiles, drones, Iran’s navy and Hormuz. Now the proposed deal hinges on enriched uranium, enrichment limits and Iran’s refusal to surrender leverage
- Brian Racer
- | Updated
ShutterstockPresident Donald Trump is delaying approval of the draft U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding and demanding tougher terms, with the main focus now on Iran’s nuclear program, its enriched uranium stockpile and the future of its enrichment activity.
According to reports released today, Trump asked for changes during a Situation Room meeting at the White House on Friday. The proposed agreement would extend the ceasefire for 60 days, reopen the Strait of Hormuz and launch further negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. But the president is not yet prepared to sign the text as presented.
Trump himself framed the dispute around the nuclear guarantee in an interview with Lara Trump released on Saturday. “One guarantee that I have to have is that there will be no nuclear weapons. They’ve agreed to that,” he said. He added that the wording could not only say Iran would not develop a nuclear weapon, because it also had to prevent Tehran from buying one.
“They originally said, ‘We will not develop a nuclear weapon.’ I said, ‘Well, what happens if you buy a nuclear weapon?’” Trump said.
Vice President JD Vance was even more specific about the unresolved points. “There are a couple of issues on the nuclear stuff, the highly enriched stockpile and also the question of enrichment,” he told reporters on Friday.
Axios reported that Trump wants clearer terms on how the United States would obtain the nuclear material and on the timeline for doing so. “It’s more specifics about how the US gets the material and the timing,” a senior administration official said.
The dispute highlights a central shift in the administration’s public messaging. Operation Epic Fury began with concrete military goals: destroying Iran’s missile and drone capabilities, its navy and its defense-industrial base. Now, the test of the deal is whether that campaign can produce clear nuclear concessions from Iran.
The war began on February 28, when Operation Epic Fury was launched. The clearest official summary of the original objectives came later, in an April 8 White House statement after the ceasefire took hold. The statement said Trump had ordered three military objectives at the start of the operation: destroying Iran’s ballistic missile and drone capabilities, destroying the Iranian navy and destroying Iran’s defense-industrial base.
The nuclear issue was not absent from the administration’s language at the beginning. On March 12, less than two weeks after the war began, Vice President JD Vance said Trump’s “primary objective” was to ensure Iran did not build a nuclear bomb. But the concrete operational goals described by officials focused on Iran’s ability to project military power, especially missiles, drones, naval forces and weapons production.
The administration has said the military operation achieved its goals. But the enriched uranium question remains unresolved. Secretary of State Marco Rubio made that pivot clear on May 5, when he said, “Operation Epic Fury is concluded. We achieved the objectives of that operation.” At the same time, Iran had still not handed over more than 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium, leaving the nuclear issue for diplomacy rather than the battlefield.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth added another layer to the administration’s position. He said the nuclear issue could be handled later in the process, while insisting Iran would eventually have to give up its ambitions. “Although Iran may refuse to give up its nuclear ambitions at the present time, over time and around the negotiating table it will be forced to do so,” he said.
Hegseth also said Trump would only sign an agreement if it is “great for the country and for world security.” He added that the United States remains ready for military action if needed. “We’re ready,” he said.
That is the tension now facing Washington. Trump wants a deal, but he also wants one he can present as a strong nuclear achievement. At the same time, renewed fighting carries risks. The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most important energy routes, and another round of escalation could threaten oil markets, gas prices and the administration’s claim that the military phase already succeeded.
Iran, on the other hand, is pushing back. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of the Iranian parliament, said Sunday that Tehran would not sign under pressure. “No agreement will be signed until all our rights are respected,” he said.
“We have no trust in the enemy’s promises, only in clear results on the ground,” he added. Ghalibaf said Iran would meet its obligations only if it is certain that the rights of the Iranian people have been preserved.
That leaves three realistic paths forward.
Option 1: The White House refuses to approve any agreement unless Iran agrees to clear terms on its highly enriched uranium stockpile, future enrichment limits, timelines and verification measures.
Option 2: Trump concludes that Iran is using negotiations to delay difficult decisions, abandons the draft framework and returns to military or economic pressure.
Option 3: A narrower deal moves forward. Washington accepts an agreement focused on keeping the Strait of Hormuz open, extending the ceasefire and continuing negotiations, while postponing the most difficult nuclear questions for later talks.
The administration is arguing that the military phase of the war succeeded. Iran's missile force was degraded, its navy was damaged, and its ability to threaten shipping through Hormuz was sharply reduced.
What remains unresolved is the issue that mattered most from the beginning: Iran's nuclear program. Trump is now demanding clearer answers on enriched uranium, enrichment and verification before approving any agreement. Iran says it will not surrender its rights under pressure.
The question is no longer whether the military campaign achieved its objectives. The question is whether those battlefield gains can be converted into a nuclear agreement that both sides are willing to accept. If not, the hardest part of the confrontation may still lie ahead.

