After the 12-day US-Israel campaign that demolished much of Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure, there is only one acceptable objective for any future negotiations: the total dismantlement of what remains. No more illusions. No more incremental deals. No more diplomatic games.
President Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, is reportedly preparing a new round of talks with Tehran, possibly alongside France, Germany, and the UK, perhaps to prevent the activation of the "snapback" mechanism, which reinstates all the UN Security Council sanctions on Iran, at the 90th minute, because the ability to activate it will expire very soon.
But this cannot be "round six" of the same failed diplomacy. As Trump rightly stated, “the old deals and proposals are not on the table anymore.” This is the first round of a new approach, defined by the hard lessons of war, not the naïve approach of past negotiations.
Trump’s ultimatum to Tehran is clear: accept American terms or face the consequences. That warning must be backed by resolve. Before the war, we warned that resuming talks without strict preconditions would be dangerous. Now, with Iran’s capabilities exposed and degraded, the bar for reengagement must be higher. Talks should begin only once Iran meets concrete, verifiable demands.
As Trump bluntly put it: “Iran is stupid to keep pushing for uranium enrichment after being beaten up very badly. We’re not going to allow that to happen.” That clarity must now guide US and allied strategy.
We’ve seen this movie before. The Obama administration began with the right demand—zero enrichment, aligned with binding UN Security Council resolutions—but folded under pressure. The result: the disastrous 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which legitimized enrichment, ignored weaponization evidence, and unlocked billions in sanctions relief.
Had Trump not withdrawn from the JCPOA—and had this war not occurred—Iran might now possess a nuclear bomb. Instead, we have a rare opportunity to ensure it never gets there.
For years, Israel’s position was clear: “0-0-0”, zero enrichment, zero heavy water reactors, zero fissile material. That included full compliance with UN resolutions, removal of enriched uranium, dismantling sites like Fordow, ending heavy water production, and full inspector access. The demands also included: legal accountability, tight controls on dual-use tech, and ballistic missile development oversight.
Those demands were the floor. Today’s reality demands more.
Iran didn’t just enrich uranium, it launched ballistic missiles at Israel before and during the war, firing hundreds of rockets, drones, and cruise missiles at civilian and military targets. That alone justifies new red lines: Iran must dismantle all missile production facilities, eliminate its stockpiles, and halt development of delivery systems capable of carrying nuclear warheads, including ICBMs that can strike the United States.
Tehran’s support for terrorism must also be on the table. Hamas, which carried out the October 7 massacre, along with Hezbollah and the Houthis, which launched hundreds of attacks during the war, are all armed and financed by Iran. Any future agreement must include an end to this "proxy war" network.
For decades, Iran has used diplomacy to stall, deceive, and build its capabilities. Another deal focused on inspections or delayed snapbacks, without dismantling core infrastructure, would repeat the same fatal errors.
A credible agreement must eliminate the three pillars of Iran’s nuclear weapons program: It must begin with the complete destruction of all enriched uranium, centrifuges, and enrichment facilities. It must also require full disclosure and termination of all nuclear warhead design, related research and development, and any remaining weaponization infrastructure. Finally, it must dismantle Iran’s ballistic missile program entirely and subject it to strict international oversight.
There is no peaceful reason for Iran to retain these capabilities. Over 20 countries access nuclear energy without enrichment or heavy water. Iran can too, buying fuel rods and returning the irradiated rods, under strict international control, to power its reactors.
The regime will not accept these terms voluntarily. That’s why the United States—ideally with Israel—must be ready for a long-term campaign: diplomatic, economic, and, if needed, military. The goal is permanent neutralization of Iran’s nuclear and missile threat.
US strikes against a US adversary
Some claim the US “joined” Israel’s war, attacking Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. That’s false. These were American strikes against an American adversary. Israel launched one of the most daring preemptive strikes in its history. The US followed with overwhelming airpower to eliminate a shared threat.
Going forward, US-Israel coordination must deepen. A united front boosts deterrence and operational success. Together, we must finish the job.
The lessons of 2015 are clear: half-measures fail, bad deals collapse, and weak demands empower tyrants. No more appeasement. No more enrichment. No more missiles. No more terror.
The only path forward is total dismantlement—nothing less.
Brig. Gen. (res.) Jacob Nagel is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a professor at the Technion. He served as Israel’s National Security Advisor and acting head of the National Security Council. Mark Dubowitz is CEO of FDD and an expert on Iran’s nuclear program and threat network. He was sanctioned by Iran in 2019 and Russia in 2022.