“The so-called Iran deal was supposed to protect the United States and our allies from the lunacy of an Iranian nuclear bomb …. In fact, the deal allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium and—over time—reach the brink of a nuclear breakout. The deal lifted crippling economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for very weak limits on the regime’s nuclear activity—and no limits at all on its other malign behavior, including its sinister activities in Syria, Yemen and other places all around the world.”

United States President Donald Trump made this statement in 2018 after he pulled the U.S. out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (jcpoa).

President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal was supposed to reduce Iran’s stockpile of near-weapons-grade uranium while leaving its nuclear program intact for civilian purposes. The United Nations was supposed to enforce this—but it had very little power to do so. The agreement did not address Iran’s ballistic missile program. It unfroze billions of dollars in sanctions relief that Iran used to launch terrorist attacks like the Oct. 7, 2023, attack against Israel through its proxy Hamas. And Iran listed especially sensitive sites like the Parchin nuclear complex as off limits.

“At the heart of the Iran deal was a giant fiction: that a murderous regime desired only a peaceful nuclear energy program,” Trump said in 2018. “Today we have definite proof that this Iranian promise was a lie.”

Today, President Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff is negotiating another nuclear deal. Details suggest this new Trump deal is almost identical to Obama’s.

What is going on?

The Details

Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met in Oman on Saturday to establish a framework for future talks.

On Monday, Witkoff told Fox News that he told the Iranians he wasn’t opposed to them having a nuclear program—but it couldn’t be weaponized. He said:

They do not need to enrich past 3.67 percent. In some circumstances, they’re at 60 percent; in other circumstances, 20 percent. That cannot be. And you do not need to run, as they claim, a civil nuclear program where you’re enriching past 3.67 percent. So this is going to be much about verification on the enrichment program. And then, ultimately, verification on weaponization. That includes missiles, the type of missiles that they have stockpiled there, and it includes the trigger for a bomb.

The jcpoa mandated the 3.67 percent level, allowing Iran to hold on to most of its nuclear infrastructure.

An anonymous source confirmed to the Jerusalem Post that the U.S. has accepted that Iran doesn’t have to completely denuclearize. “Trump said Iran will not have nuclear weapons,” the source said. “Military nuclear facilities—no. Civilian nuclear program—yes.”

Ynet News, citing “an Iranian official,” reported that “the draft proposal brought by Witkoff to the first round did not include a demand for dismantling Iran’s nuclear infrastructure or any explicit military threat—conditions that have led to the collapse of previous talks.”

Witkoff claimed there would be stricter examinations of the other components of a weapon, like delivery systems. But Iran has been pushing for talks to be narrower. Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said after Saturday’s talks that future negotiations would only be on “the nuclear issue and the lifting of sanctions.” Iran, he said, “will not have any talks with the American side on any other issue.”

The Guardian reported that Iran is pushing back against the removal of its enriched uranium stockpile. Under the jcpoa, Iran transferred its reserves of enriched uranium to Russia. But now, according to the Guardian, “Iran is arguing the stockpile, amassed over the past four years, should remain in Iran under the strict supervision of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency. Tehran sees this as a precaution, or a form of insurance in case a future U.S. administration withdraws from the agreement.”

What is the U.S. asking for in return? “I think the president has acknowledged that he’s open to an opportunity to clean it all up with Iran,” Witkoff told Tucker Carlson in a recent interview, “where they come back to the world and be a great nation once again and not have to be sanctioned and being able to grow their economy. Their economy—I mean, these are very smart people. Their economy was once a wonderful economy. They’re being strangled and suffocated today. There’s no need for that to happen.”

Iran may have other carrots to offer. Iranian activist Hassan Younesi posted Sunday on X that he got wind that “some groups and organizations stationed at the [old U.S.] embassy building … have been ordered to evacuate it.” Hours later, Younesi deleted the post due to pressure from “responsible authorities.” There has not been a U.S. diplomatic presence in Iran since 1979. Some speculate this may mean Iran is ready to return the U.S. Embassy as a prelude to opening the nation up for U.S. investment.

Reactions

When President Trump announced the negotiations on April 7, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was sitting next to him. Mr. Netanyahu said he would support a nuclear deal only if it were based off the “Libya model” (Libya gave up its nuclear program in its entirety to the U.S. in 2003). The U.S. and Iran have reached no deal yet, but these early signs suggest any deal would fall far short of the Libya standard. Instead, it would be closer to the Obama standard.

“Though not officially stated,” Ynet News reported, “officials in Jerusalem have privately acknowledged that a potential agreement under the current U.S. administration would be viewed as deeply problematic, especially given expectations that Trump will not remain in office beyond his current term.” According to Ynet News, some Israeli officials, “quietly hope the talks collapse, potentially paving the way for a credible military option. One of the central concerns is that Trump might prefer a moderate compromise to avoid a direct confrontation with Iran.”

Europe is also on edge. The United Kingdom, France and Germany were all guarantors of the jcpoa. They still are parties to it and have recently threatened to bring “snapback sanctions” on Iran via the UN. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot stated Monday: “We will be vigilant, along with our British and German friends and partners, to ensure that any negotiations that may take place comply with our security interests with regard to Iran’s nuclear program.” Barrot’s language suggests France is less than optimistic about the talks’ outcome.

The next round of talks, scheduled for April 19, will be in Rome. Italy reportedly felt excluded from the Obama-era nuclear talks and wants a seat at the table this time around.

Concerns at Home

U.S. analysts are also worried that a Trump deal would be more or less identical to Obama’s. “Wouldn’t it be ironic if Trump ends up getting a worse deal than Obama?” stated Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank. “But I worry that it is a real possibility if the administration abandons the demand for dismantlement and settles for no weaponization.”

“[T]he fact that Trump did not say that Iran cannot have a nuclear program, which is what he insisted on when he scuttled Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, is a red flag,” wrote Eli Lake for the Free Press. “The shame of it is that Obama never had this amount of leverage over Iran. Last year, Israel destroyed the regime’s strategic air defense systems, not to mention the leadership of Iran’s two strongest proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. Iran’s economy is crippled, with inflation above 30 percent and a limping currency. So it’s baffling that the Trump administration would signal that they are open to a deal that allows an unpopular regime to keep its nuclear production capability” (“Trump’s Iran Nuclear Deal Looks a Lot Like Obama’s”).

President Trump may genuinely believe Iran’s leaders have had a change of heart. But the same man who created the “giant fiction” of the jcpoa, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, still leads Iran. Araghchi was his main nuclear negotiator back then as well. Iran has been under the same regime for almost half a century. This same regime is bent on perpetual war with America and Israel. It is fighting for Islamic revolution worldwide. It believes martyrdom is better than compromise with infidels.

“Negotiations for the mullahs are simply a sign of strategic necessity,” wrote Majid Rafizadeh for the Gatestone Institute. “The regime needs breathing room—and, more importantly, it needs to preserve what it sees as its ultimate insurance policy: a nuclear arsenal.” He continued:

Tehran has played this game before: Agree to talks. Make vague promises. Extract sanctions relief. Then quietly continue nuclear development under the radar. This formula has worked for more than two decades. …

For the United States, the window for diplomacy has already closed. Further talks will only serve Iran’s interests. Tehran, playing a long game, appears to be willing to wait out the Trump administration, or, worse yet, could announce one day that it already possesses several nuclear bombs—and that there is nothing anyone can do about it. …

After watching what happened to Libya after it gave up its nuclear weapons program, and to Ukraine when it gave up its warheads … Iran’s regime could hardly have any intention of abandoning their quest for the bomb. Diplomacy will not stop them. Appeasement will not deter them. The only solution, sadly, seems to be force. If the U.S. and Israel fail to act now, we will soon be facing a world where the Islamic Republic of Iran has crossed the nuclear threshold and commands its bombs. Then what?

Donald Trump knows this. He said as much in 2018. But he has not only backtracked on his previous view, he has started where President Obama left off.

What Is Going On?

The Trumpet analyzes world events through the lens of Bible prophecy. One prophecy we point to frequently is in 2 Kings 14:26-27: “For the Lord saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter: for there was not any shut up, nor any left, nor any helper for Israel. And the Lord said not that he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven: but he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam the son of Joash.”

In prophecy, the “name of Israel” refers to the modern-day descendants of Israel, particularly the United States. (Request a free copy of The United States and Britain in Prophecy, by Herbert W. Armstrong, for more information.) A prophecy in Amos 7 shows there is an end-time parallel of King Jeroboam ruling Israel—the U.S.—before a final time of trouble. As Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry explains in his book America Under Attack, this makes the history in 2 Kings prophetic. Specifically, this means the bitter affliction of trying to blot out “the name of Israel … from under heaven” is also prophetic. Part of that affliction was the Iran nuclear deal.

Mr. Flurry writes in America Under Attack:

Remember the satanic goal explained in the prophecy of 2 Kings 14:26-27 to “blot out the name of Israel from under heaven.” Iran’s mullahs publicly say they want to “wipe Israel off the map.” That is another way of saying they want to “blot out the name of Israel from under heaven”! Why in the world would an American president align with these murderers? Why permit Russia to give Iran 130 tons of uranium? And why implement a deal that virtually guarantees Iran becomes a nuclear power?

This prophetic passage in 2 Kings 14 explains. President Obama shares the goal to “blot out the name of Israel”!

The Iranians may not know that the Americans are literal descendants of ancient Israel, but they do label America “the great Satan” and the Jewish state “the little Satan.” They want to blot these nations out! And through his Iran nuclear deal, Barack Obama was helping them accomplish this goal. He was implying, You blot out the Jews, and we’ll blot out America. We’ll “blot out the name of Israel from under heaven” by transforming America into a socialist state its founders wouldn’t recognize. He wants to destroy everything good in America because everything good in this nation traces back to God, the God of Israel. Spiritually, he wants to wipe out the faith of Israel—just like the Iranian mullahs want to wipe Israel off the map.

President Obama’s term ended in 2017. He continued America’s fundamental transformation through the puppet presidency of Joe Biden. But as God prophesied, this “bitter affliction” would come to an end through a modern parallel of King Jeroboam. Mr. Flurry identifies this man as President Trump, which is why Mr. Flurry predicted that Trump would regain the White House. This is now a fulfilled prophecy.

Trump has not been back in power long, yet he has already done an impressive job cleaning up America from Obama’s attack domestically. But through naivety or otherwise, he is continuing Obama’s same disastrous foreign policy.

Why? At the moment, it is hard to tell. But he demonstrated a similar lack of judgment when he pressured Israel to accept a ceasefire with Hamas that allowed Hamas to survive and regroup. When the ceasefire deal happened in January, Mr. Flurry wrote “President Trump Betrayed Israel.”

“This deal has exposed Mr. Trump’s flaws in a way that none of us want to see,” Mr. Flurry wrote. “Something is dreadfully wrong here. What Mr. Trump has done here is going to plague him for the rest of his tenure in office! Just watch and see if it doesn’t happen that way—unless he dramatically changes course.”

Mr. Flurry wrote that in the context of the Hamas ceasefire. Resurrecting the jcpoa would be an even greater betrayal of the State of Israel. If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, all it would take to destroy Israel is one push of a button.

For more context on the spiritual realities behind these events, request a free copy of America Under Attack.