Iran has put forward a comprehensive three-stage proposal in its indirect negotiations with the United States over its controversial nuclear program, according to details published by the Iran International news agency. The plan, which would see Iran gradually limit its uranium enrichment and allow heightened international oversight in exchange for phased sanctions relief, has prompted immediate concern from Israel, which views the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions and regional activities as critical threats to its national security.
The details of the Iranian proposal break down as follows: In the initial stage, Iran would temporarily reduce uranium enrichment to the 3.67% limit set by the original 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In exchange, the United States would begin releasing billions in frozen Iranian funds and ease sanctions on Iran’s oil industry, granting the regime new access to international markets and cash flows.
The second stage calls for Iran to halt all enrichment above this lower threshold and allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to resume close and intrusive inspections of its nuclear facilities. This step would be matched by US guarantees that its European allies will not trigger the JCPOA’s snapback sanctions mechanism. Critics warn this could restrict the West’s ability to respond should Iran breach the agreement again.
In the final stage, Iran would transfer its stockpile of highly enriched uranium to a third country, effectively removing immediate proliferation risk. In return, the US would lift all remaining sanctions and commit the new agreement to Congressional approval, giving the regime legitimacy and an open route to economic recovery.
While the proposal represents a potential breakthrough in one of the Middle East’s most intractable disputes, Israeli officials and strategic analysts remain deeply skeptical, citing Iran’s long history of nuclear deception and its well-documented role in sponsoring terror networks throughout the region. The Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, regards any framework that fails to destroy Iran’s nuclear infrastructure or impose airtight monitoring as unacceptable, warning that even temporary reductions could allow Iran to rebuild its program at a time of its choosing.
Israel’s concerns are rooted in experience. Since the exposure of Iran’s clandestine nuclear activity two decades ago, Tehran has repeatedly violated previous agreements, expanding its stockpiles and developing advanced centrifuges. The US withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, citing ‘maximum pressure’ as the only effective deterrent to Iranian nuclear advances and malign regional conduct. In the years since, Iran has increased its enrichment levels and repeatedly blocked IAEA inspectors from full access. Intelligence assessments from Israel’s security establishment, led by IDF Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, have testified to Iran’s technical capacity to reach weapons-grade enrichment on short notice—posing an existential threat to Israel and destabilizing the regional balance.
Iran’s regional strategy depends on a vast network of proxy groups, including Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Judea and Samaria and Syria, and the Houthis in Yemen. These Iranian-backed terror organizations have coordinated and carried out attacks against Israel for years. The October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre—the deadliest antisemitic atrocity since the Holocaust—is widely assessed by Israeli and international intelligence as bearing Iran’s financial, logistical, and technological imprint.
Israeli leaders emphasize that any sanctions relief for Iran will likely accelerate the regime’s efforts to fund these terror proxies and pursue regional expansion. The risk is twofold: Enhanced nuclear capabilities under a guise of civilian purposes, and the empowerment of forces committed to Israel’s destruction. Diplomats have repeatedly warned European governments and the United States that failing to address Iran’s entire destabilizing apparatus—not just nuclear infrastructure—undermines both Israel’s security and the wider international order.
The Iranian offer comes against a fraught geopolitical backdrop, with Israel’s relations with the US and key Sunni Arab states framed by new security realities. The Abraham Accords, Israel’s normalization agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, are viewed as dependent on a credible guarantee against Iranian nuclearization or unchecked influence. Gulf Arab capitals worry that a weak or poorly enforced nuclear agreement might prompt a cascade of proliferation across the region.
Within Israel, the ongoing hostage crisis following the October 7th massacre—all hostages being innocent civilians forcibly abducted by Hamas—remains a pressing reminder of the stakes. Israeli leaders draw a stark line between the legitimate right to self-defense of a democratic state and the actions of Iran’s terror proxies, whose atrocities are extensively documented but often downplayed or obfuscated by international media and diplomatic forums.
As negotiations progress, American spokespeople have maintained that preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon is a matter of national priority and that Israel’s right to self-defense remains non-negotiable. US officials have not formally confirmed whether these new Iranian terms are under active consideration. Congressional leaders in Washington remain divided, with some warning that any perceived concession will embolden the Iranian regime and its regional networks.
Israel’s security cabinet, defense leadership, and intelligence community are intensely focused on all diplomatic and military options. Clandestine operations, international lobbying, and coordination with friendly Arab states continue in parallel. Many Israeli officials point to past intelligence coups and sabotage efforts, such as the 2018 acquisition of Iran’s secret nuclear archives, as proof that assertive action can delay or disrupt the Iranian program where diplomacy may fail.
Looking forward, Israel has made clear that it will not accept any agreement that allows Iran to preserve its nuclear breakout capability or strengthen its regional proxy network under cover of sanctions relief. Defense Minister Israel Katz has emphasized the existential nature of the threat, affirming that Israel will act independently if necessary to guarantee its security and that of the broader region. Israeli officials are calling on the United States and Europe to stand firm on enforcement, verification, and rapid reimposition mechanisms, ensuring that Tehran faces consequences for any violations.
In conclusion, Iran’s latest proposal represents both an opportunity and a test for Western resolve. For Israel, the stakes are existential—not only in the direct nuclear sense but in the broader confrontation with a regime whose declared mission is Israel’s destruction, and whose proxy strategy continues to inflict violence and instability across the Middle East. The coming weeks will reveal whether Western powers uphold their commitments or risk empowering a regime at the center of the world’s most dangerous conflict nexus.
