Mike Whitney – The Unz Review May 20, 2025

We have one very, very clear red line, and that is enrichment. We cannot allow even 1% of an enrichment capability,” Steve Witkoff, U.S. Special Envoy, ABC’s “This Week”

“Demanding zero uranium enrichment means NO DEAL”, Sayed Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s Foreign Minister

You could have spotted this from a mile away.

President Trump—who sabotaged the most stringent and comprehensive nuclear agreement in history (The JCPOA)—ordered his special envoy to make a surprise announcement that crosses all of Iran’s “red lines” and makes war between the US and Iran inevitable. Anyone with half a brain could see that this was the strategy from the very beginning. Just as Washington encouraged Kiev to intensify its bombardment of the Donbas forcing Putin to send Russian forces into Ukraine, so too, Washington lured Tehran into nuclear “talks” with the clear intention of creating a pretext for launching a war on Iran. In both cases, US war-planners ‘moved heaven and earth’ to make it look like the opposite party provoked the conflict when, in fact, Washington was the primary instigator. Let me explain:

On Sunday, US special envoy Steve Witkoff said the following on ABC’s “This Week”:

“We have one very, very clear red line, and that is enrichment. We cannot allow even 1% of an enrichment capability.”

Full Stop. Witkoff’s comments require thorough and unbiased analysis, mainly because they are designed with one purpose in mind: To sabotage the nuclear talks. There’s no other explanation. The Trump administration and anyone who has followed this issue over the last decade and a half knows that Iran’s biggest and brightest red line is enrichment. In the four meetings that have been conducted in Oman since April, US negotiators were told explicitly that nuclear enrichment was “non-negotiable” and ‘off the table’. In other words, they agreed that the issue would not be discussed or even brought up. (Non-negotiable means non-negotiable.) So, we must assume that the reason Witkoff decided to make this unexpected announcement was either because he wanted to torpedo the negotiations or because he doesn’t understand plain English. Which is it?

We think Witkoff understands plain English, in fact, we’re sure of it. So, what was his motive; why did he decide to deliver this bombshell on national TV to an American audience instead of Iranian negotiators who would have challenged him on the issue? Why?

There can only be one reason; he wants to sabotage the talks. He wants to force the Iranians to terminate the meetings so it appears that they do not sincerely seek peace. That is how Trump and Co. intend to turn-the-tables and make it look like Iran is the “bad guy.” More importantly, any suspension of the talks by Iran will be used as a justification for US-Israeli air strikes on targets in Iran. Trump has already threatened that—if the talks broke down—he would unleash holy hell on Iran. Witkoff has now laid the groundwork for those attacks.

Other analysts are starting to figure out what is going on behind the smokescreen of the nuclear talks. Here’s how Michael Tracey summed it up:

If anyone suspected that the purpose of this “negotiating” exercise was to set up an impossible endpoint (humiliating Iranian capitulation) and then when Iran balks, use that as a pretext to bomb Iran (“We tried to negotiate first!”) there is growing evidence for your suspicions

He’s right, isn’t he? The talks were a “set up” that was concocted to create a justification for war. It’s clear as day. Much of the public’s confusion on this matter is attributable to Witkoff himself, who seems like an affable and credible fellow, whose position on nuclear enrichment is identical to rabid ‘foam-at-the-mouth’ warmongers like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo. Think about that for a minute; Witkoff’s position is the same as Bolton’s and Pompeo’s. There’s no difference.

So, why is nuclear enrichment such a big deal that Iran won’t even discuss it?

Because Iranians have great pride and they will not allow themselves to be treated like second-class citizens by the likes of the US and Israel. That’s why.

Look: Iran’s right to nuclear enrichment is not a privilege granted by executive fiat or presidential edict. It’s a fundamental right that is enshrined in international law under the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. President Donald Trump does not have the authority to forbid Iran from engaging in activities that are not only perfectly legal under NPT statutes but also affirmed under the treaty’s “inalienable right” clause. Inquisitive people might want to read the section of the treaty itself to corroborate what we are saying here:

NPT Article IV and the Right to Nuclear Technology

Article IV Text (on the Right to Nuclear Technology):

Paragraph 1: “Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.”

Paragraph 2: E ncourages cooperation in sharing nuclear technology for peaceful uses, particularly for developing countries.

What part of the above statement is ambiguous?

There is nothing ambiguous about this statement. Iran clearly has “the inalienable right… to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.” That means that neither Trump nor anyone else can selectively order Iran to stop doing what is clearly permitted under an internationally recognized treaty.

And we should also pay special attention to the language that is used in the passage. The treaty does not simply refer to the “rights” of the participating parties; they refer to “inalienable right” which means that nuclear enrichment is a “fundamental, natural right that cannot be taken away or surrendered, either by a government or individual.”

The wording was formulated to avoid the situation we have today in which an impulsive and domineering despot arbitrarily repeals the laws (and rights) that don’t align with his own dubious political objectives. By refusing to comply with Trump’s executive edict, Iran is basically defending the global system upon which international law rests. It is a rejection of Trump’s iron-fisted unilateralism. We should all be grateful for Iran’s gutsy perseverance.

By the way, just to underscore Witkoff’s hypocrisy on this matter, here is a short video on Fox News of Witkoff stating unequivocally that Iran would be permitted to enrich at 3.67% which is a position he now rejects. The interview was conducted in April, a month before he banned all enrichment activities.

What conclusions can we draw from this sudden about-face on the part of the administration that has put us all on the path to war?

First of all, we can assume that the US-Iran negotiations were set up to fail, in fact, the plan to create a justification for war required that the talks fail.

Second, we can assume that Trump—who presented himself as an opponent of foreign interventions and who promised “to pursue a new era of peace, understanding, and good will”—is following in the footsteps of his warmongering predecessors and has no intention of keeping his word to the American people.

And third, we can assume that Trump is zeroing in on Iran in order to repay the wealthy billionaire Zionists who filled his campaign coffers (with over $100 million) and helped him win the 2024 election. We never believed for a minute that the millions in campaign donations were given without “strings attached”. Bibi and his Zionist allies want the US to spearhead a war on Iran, and Trump is the man who can deliver that war. All he needs is some type of credible justification for launching his preemptive attacks…. which the failed negotiations will provide.

Source