High-stakes nuclear talks between the Trump administration and Iran in Rome on Saturday have reignited the never-ending debate over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and just how far the regime is willing to go—truthfully or otherwise—to strike a deal.

Retired Gen. Jack Keane didn’t mince words on Fox News, labeling Iran’s approach as a "bold-faced lie" reminiscent of tactics used to secure the 2015 deal known as the JCPOA. According to Keane, Iran’s promise to lower uranium enrichment for civilian use is just a fresh coat of paint on the same old strategy. He sounded downright unconvinced that the Trump team would fall for it, especially considering Trump himself pulled the U.S. out of that very deal back in 2018.

Trump’s 2018 withdrawal from the JCPOA was grounded in his belief that the agreement didn’t do enough to curb Iran’s nuclear aspirations. Now, as the two sides circle the negotiating table again, the stakes have only gotten higher: A new report even warned that Iran’s nuclear threat has escalated to "extreme danger."

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department, pressing them on Iran’s checkered record of compliance. The response was measured but firm: The president’s goal is clear—no nuclear weapons for Iran, period. As negotiations progress, the aim is to refine a framework and timeline that achieves these objectives through diplomacy.

President Trump echoed that hard line, telling reporters he’s all for stopping Iran from ever getting a nuclear weapon. The enrichment of uranium, the core process behind nuclear weapon development, remains a major sticking point in the talks. But Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi declared that enrichment is "non-negotiable"—a phrase that pretty much says it all.

Mark Wallace, CEO of United Against Nuclear Iran, reminded everyone that under Bush, the U.N. demanded zero enrichment, but the Obama administration later allowed enrichment up to 3.67%. That shift, Wallace argued, opened the door for Iran to ramp up its efforts and left Trump with a far messier problem.

The International Atomic Energy Agency reported in February that Iran has amassed enough enriched uranium to make six atomic bombs, with little progress on clarifying the remaining issues. That’s enough material to make anyone’s hair stand on end.

Trump has been blunt about considering military action if Iran doesn’t budge. It’s no secret that military pressure was key in drawing Iran into previous talks, especially after the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq left Tehran’s leadership on edge. John Hannah, a senior fellow at JINSA, broke down what "dismantlement with a capital D" would look like: enriched uranium shipped out, centrifuges destroyed, and those secretive underground sites—Fordow, Natanz—put out of commission.

Iran, meanwhile, is sticking to its guns—or centrifuges. A senior Iranian official told Reuters that while Tehran might accept limits on enrichment, they want guarantees that the U.S. won’t walk away from a new deal again. Iran’s "red lines," as dictated by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, include keeping their centrifuges, maintaining enrichment, and refusing to talk about their missile program—no surprise there.

With U.S. negotiators demanding that Iran stop and eliminate enrichment entirely, the two sides seem as far apart as ever. No one said nuclear diplomacy was easy, but with so much history and mistrust in the mix, it’s hard to see either side blinking first.

Reporting includes contributions from Reuters.

Nuclear Deal News

Iran’s Nuclear Promises on Thin Ice as Fresh Talks Stir Up Old Doubts