Iran's Secret Nuclear Plan: 5x JCPOA Enrichment Capacity Revealed

Senior US officials claim Iran presented a secret written proposal during negotiations that would have allowed uranium enrichment capacity roughly five times greater than permitted under the 2015 nuclear deal. The plan included projections for advanced centrifuges and elevated stockpiles, which the US interpreted as leaving a pathway to weapons-grade material. Iran rejected a major US concession of free nuclear fuel forever, insisting on retaining domestic enrichment capability. The talks ultimately collapsed as Iran refused to address ballistic missiles and regional proxy groups, with US officials describing the negotiations as marked by "games tricks stall tactics."

Key Points: US Claims Iran Sought 5x Nuclear Enrichment Capacity

  • Iran presented secret 7-page nuclear framework
  • Plan sought enrichment capacity 5x JCPOA limits
  • Iran rejected US offer of free nuclear fuel
  • US saw insistence on enrichment as a "big tell"
  • Talks collapsed over missiles and proxy groups
3 min read

US claims Iran pushed five times nuclear enrichment

US officials reveal Iran's secret 7-page nuclear proposal aiming for enrichment capacity five times greater than the 2015 JCPOA limits, derailing negotiations.

"roughly five times more than laid out in the JCPOA - Senior US Administration Official"

Washington, March 1

Iran proposed a nuclear framework during the latest round of negotiations that would have allowed enrichment capacity "roughly five times more than laid out in the JCPOA", reinforcing Washington's concerns about Tehran's long-term intentions, senior Trump Administration officials said.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, officials described a detailed written proposal presented by Iranian negotiators during talks with the United States. During the negotiations, the US side was led by senior presidential advisor Jared Kushner and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.

"They brought with them a seven-page plan, which, interestingly enough, they wouldn't leave it with us, but they did hand it to us and allowed us to read it," said a Senior Administration Official who requested anonymity.

According to US officials, the document outlined Iran's internal nuclear energy needs and included a flow chart projecting future enrichment requirements.

The scale of the projected capability, they said, would have significantly exceeded limits under the 2015 nuclear agreement.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), officials said, assessed that the projected framework would result in enrichment capacity "roughly five times more than laid out in the J-C-P-O-A".

The core dispute centred on uranium enrichment.

US negotiators told Iran that if its programme were genuinely civilian, it could operate under internationally accepted guardrails similar to those of other countries.

"We said, okay, there are many countries that have safe, civil nuclear programs," the Senior Administration Official said.

Washington offered a major concession.

"One of the things we offered them was we said, we'll give you a free nuclear fuel forever," the official said.

Iran rejected that offer.

"They basically said that didn't work for them. They needed to enrich uranium," a Senior Administration Official said.

US officials interpreted that insistence as revealing.

"The fact that they weren't willing to take free nuclear fuel was a big tell to us," the official said.

Officials argued that retaining domestic enrichment capability - particularly alongside advanced centrifuge development and higher stockpiles - left open a pathway to weapons-grade material.

They said Iran was simultaneously expanding its ability to manufacture advanced "IR six centrifuges", described as "the fastest ones out there".

Officials also cited stockpiles of enriched material at elevated levels.

Roughly "450 kilograms of 60 per cent material" would be "only one week away from getting to 90 per cent weapons rate", the Senior Administration Official said.

In addition, officials said Iran refused to address ballistic missiles and regional proxy groups in the negotiations.

"They will not even talk about it," one Senior Administration Official said of ballistic missiles.

Following these meetings, the administration concluded that the proposal did not meet President Donald Trump's demand for "a real deal" that would ensure Iran would "never have the ability to possess a nuclear weapon".

"There was no seriousness to achieve a real deal," a Senior Administration Official said, describing the talks as marked by "games tricks stall tactics".

Officials said Washington could have agreed to "another short-term bad deal" but chose not to.

"It wouldn't have dealt with the long-term issue of Iran," the official said.

The 2015 nuclear agreement capped enrichment at 3.67 per cent and imposed limits on centrifuge numbers in exchange for sanctions relief. That framework later unravelled, and tensions have since escalated over enrichment thresholds and missile capabilities.

Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is for peaceful energy use. However, enrichment levels beyond civilian requirements and advanced centrifuge production remain at the centre of international concern.

The disclosure of the written proposal suggests negotiations had moved into detailed technical exchanges before collapsing.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
While Iran's actions are worrying, we must also question the US's role. They walked away from the JCPOA first! How can they now blame Iran for not trusting them? The "games tricks stall tactics" comment could apply to both sides. India should advocate for dialogue, not more sanctions that hurt ordinary people.
R
Rohit P
Five times the enrichment capacity? That's not for energy, that's for a bomb. Plain and simple. The details about the IR-6 centrifuges and the stockpile being a week away from weapons-grade are terrifying. The world cannot allow this. India must stand with the international community on this one.
S
Sarah B
As an expat in Mumbai, I follow this closely. The refusal to even discuss ballistic missiles is the biggest red flag. Those are only for delivering warheads. This isn't about energy security for Iran; it's about regional dominance. It puts all of Iran's neighbors, and global trade routes India depends on, at risk.
V
Vikram M
Complex situation. India has good relations with both Iran and the US. We need Iranian oil, and the Chabahar port is strategically vital. But we also cannot ignore nuclear proliferation in our backyard. Our diplomacy will be tested. We need to be a voice for peaceful resolution, not escalation.
K
Karthik V
The article says the proposal was seven pages but they wouldn't leave it? Sounds like posturing from both sides. The real issue is trust, which is completely broken. Without it, no deal is possible. Maybe a country like India, which is trusted by many in the Gulf, could help mediate? Just a thought.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50