Iran has doubled the number of advanced centrifuges it is operating, the head of the country’s nuclear program announced on Monday. This will allow the Iranians to produce enriched uranium at 10 times the speed permitted by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, better known as the Iran nuclear deal.
A simplistic analysis would cast this as a move toward nuclear armament, but that interpretation is shortsighted and dangerous. It misses the broader context of months of escalating Iranian provocations on all fronts, and in doing so, pushes us closer to unnecessary and catastrophic conflict.
The reality is Tehran’s Iran deal violations are part of the Islamic Republic’s broader strategy of increased aggression. Their tactics include capturing tankers, downing a U.S. drone, and allegedly launching an attack on Saudi oil facilities. Tehran’s goal is to demonstrate that the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” policy is backfiring, to pressure the nations that are still participating in the Iran deal to help Iran achieve sanctions relief, and to bring Washington to the negotiating table.
Iran isn’t trying to start a war — it’s trying to start a new round of talks.
Tehran’s decision to publicly announce its increased centrifuge operation makes this evident. If building nuclear bombs were actually Iran’s intention, it would make far more sense to keep these enrichment activities secret until after the weapons were complete. Debuting a completed nuclear arsenal to the world would help Iran deter foreign military intervention and forcible regime change. By contrast, publicly constructing nuclear weapons would all but invite invasion, as Iran’s leaders undoubtedly realize. The lack of secrecy here is a huge clue to what Tehran actually desires.
Another pointer is the mixed rhetoric coming from Iran. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Sunday spoke against diplomacy with the United States, arguing that it would be pointless “because [Washington] certainly and definitely won’t make any concessions.”
But just a month ago, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani agreed to a four-point deal brokered by French President Emmanuel Macron as a basis for renewed U.S.-Iran talks. Rouhani accepted the proposal precisely because it included meaningful concessions from both sides — including that the U.S. would “lift all the sanctions re-imposed since 2017” and “Iran [would] have full ability to export its oil and freely use its revenues.” Rouhani only backed out of the plan after President Trump said he would target Iran with even more punitive sanction measures in the near future, contradicting the agreed-upon terms.
Taken together, these comments suggest Iran would like to negotiate with the U.S but will only do so if significant concessions, chiefly sanction relief, are offered as a baseline for productive talks. The Trump administration should meet that demand for two primary reasons.
First, Rouhani’s acceptance of the Macron agreement indicates Iran is willing to offer real concessions of its own. In fact, the other three points were all limits on Iranian activity, dictating that Tehran would “never acquire a nuclear weapon,” would “fully comply with its nuclear obligations and commitments and … accept a negotiation on a long-term framework for its nuclear activities,” and would “refrain from any aggression and … seek genuine peace and respect in the region through negotiations.”
An arrangement like this is a win for both sides, and it could provide the foundation for further diplomatic accomplishments, including effective restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program.
Second, making a good-faith deal to resume talks is the only way to get Iran to halt or at least decrease its provocative behavior and move away from the risk of war. Maximum pressure is a proven failure. Iran has emphatically demonstrated it will not be cowed by this approach, and Tehran will continue to lash out until the Trump administration changes course. Maximum pressure is counterproductive for U.S. interests, and, by limiting our policy options, it has become a liability for the U.S.
“Maximum pressure” is backing us into a conflict we must avoid.
A shift toward viable and sincere diplomacy, which by definition, includes mutual concessions such as sanctions relief, is the only prudent path forward. This centrifuge announcement is not a nuclear threat. It is a desperate invitation to negotiate, and Washington should take Tehran upon it.
Bonnie Kristian is a fellow at Defense Priorities and contributing editor at The Week.
