President Donald Trump’s nuclear negotiations with Iran bear striking resemblance to the very deal he famously tore up in 2018, Reuters reports. The rapid commencement of talks last month has stunned regional allies, most notably Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had arrived in Washington expecting a green light for military action against Iran — only to learn hours before a joint appearance that the U.S. was heading back to the negotiating table. Since then, three rounds of high-level U.S.–Iranian talks have taken place with a fourth expected soon in Rome. According to eight sources familiar with the discussions who spoke with Reuters, the framework being developed largely preserves the architecture of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Trump repeatedly branded “the worst deal ever made” during his first term. But this time, the agreement is being tweaked for political palatability. Officials say it would extend the timeline of constraints to 25 years, tighten verification mechanisms, and stretch the so-called sunset clauses. Still, the core remains unmistakably similar: Iran agrees to limit uranium enrichment, reduce centrifuge counts, and allow increased international inspections in exchange for sweeping sanctions relief. For Netanyahu, this represents a stunning reversal and a strategic setback. His government has demanded “zero enrichment,” aiming for a Libya-style dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. But Iranian officials insist their right to enrich uranium is non-negotiable — though they are reportedly willing to cap enrichment at 3.67%, as under the JCPOA, and ship portions of their uranium abroad or dilute their stockpiles under IAEA scrutiny. “This is essentially JCPOA 2.0,” said one senior official, “with just enough window dressing for Trump to call it a win, and just enough flexibility for Tehran to maintain core capabilities.” Underscoring the strange symmetry of these developments, Trump is now seeking concessions that go further than what his first-term deal exit demanded, yet is also prepared to accept many of the same limitations the original accord imposed. Former U.S. negotiator Dennis Ross warned that without dismantling Iran’s infrastructure — including cutting centrifuges to a mere 1,000 and shipping out all enriched uranium — “the threshold threat remains.” The irony, he noted, is that Trump’s 2018 withdrawal has left the U.S. facing a much more advanced Iranian program, with the Islamic Republic enriching uranium at 60% and operating banned advanced centrifuges. Some U.S. officials are pressing to incorporate Iran’s ballistic missile production into the deal — a demand consistently rejected by Tehran. Iranian sources said they are only willing to forgo missile designs capable of carrying nuclear warheads as a “gesture of goodwill,” echoing the constraints of the original JCPOA. Adding complexity to the talks are Iranian demands for ironclad guarantees: that no future U.S. president — including Trump himself — could abandon the deal unilaterally again. Whether such guarantees are legally or politically feasible remains in question. Meanwhile, Israeli calculations are shifting rapidly. With Hezbollah’s capabilities reportedly degraded and Iran’s air defenses weakened by recent conflicts, Netanyahu sees what one Middle East official called “a historic window” for a preemptive strike. Still, Washington is discouraging such action, wary of backlash from Gulf allies and regional destabilization — though U.S. military positioning suggests quiet preparation for contingencies. The Pentagon has recently deployed B-2 bombers to Diego Garcia and bolstered its naval presence in the […]