Skip to content
Briefings are running a touch slower this week while we rebuild the foundations.See roadmap
European Tech Sovereignty
13APR

Enrichment gap blocks any nuclear text

3 min read
17:09UTC

Iran's 10-point plan claims a right to enrichment; the US demands zero. The gap is publicly irreconcilable.

TechnologyDeveloping
Key takeaway

Both sides published irreconcilable enrichment positions with no verification architecture to bridge the gap.

Iran tabled a 10-point plan at Islamabad listing "acceptance of enrichment" as non-negotiable. The United States tabled a 15-point plan demanding a zero nuclear weapons commitment, removal of Iran's HEU stockpile from the country, limits on defence capabilities, and unconditional Hormuz reopening. Donald Trump posted that "there will be no enrichment of Uranium" ; Iran's plan explicitly claims the right to it.

Sanam Vakil, Chatham House's Middle East and North Africa director, assessed that Iran is "unlikely" to surrender its HEU stockpile and that downblending to lower enrichment levels is the realistic floor for any deal. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had publicly offered downblending on CBS in March, but Islamabad's US demands went further: full removal of the material from Iranian territory.

The last verified stockpile figure is 440.9 kg of uranium enriched to 60%, recorded by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) in September 2025, before the strikes. At 60% purity, that quantity requires relatively modest further enrichment to reach weapons-grade; the IAEA defines a "significant quantity" for a single device at 25 kg of 90%-enriched uranium. Since the Majlis voted 221-0 to suspend all IAEA cooperation on 3 April , no independent verification has been possible.

The Arms Control Association assessed in March that US negotiators were "ill-prepared for serious nuclear negotiations." The JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) took 20 months of structured talks with continuous IAEA access to bridge a comparable enrichment gap. Islamabad attempted the same in two days, without inspectors.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Enriched uranium is nuclear fuel. You enrich it a little (3-5%) and it powers a reactor. You enrich it a lot (90%+) and you can make a bomb. Iran is enriching to 60%, which is well above reactor grade and much closer to weapons grade than is comfortable. The US wants Iran to hand over this stockpile and never enrich again. Iran says that enriching uranium is its sovereign right, like any country operating nuclear power. The two positions are like arguing whether someone should be allowed to own a gun: one side says no guns at all, the other says guns are a constitutional right. The extra complication is that the international inspectors who would verify any deal, the IAEA, have been banned from Iran since early April. So even if both sides agreed on something, there is currently no one to check whether Iran is doing what it promised.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Iran's enrichment programme is not purely a weapons issue, it is tied to domestic electricity generation ambitions and to a sovereignty narrative built over 20 years of sanctions. Accepting zero enrichment would require Iran's leadership to abandon a national project that predates the current conflict by decades.

The IAEA monitoring blackout since the Majlis vote of 3 April means any enrichment concession Iran makes cannot be verified by a neutral third party. Without verified downblending, the US cannot make a political case domestically that a deal has worked. The monitoring gap is therefore a prerequisite problem, not a technical footnote.

The post-strike status of the 440.9 kg stockpile is unknown. If strikes have degraded or destroyed some portion of it, Iran may be offering to 'downblend' material it no longer holds in its pre-strike form, a concession with less strategic cost than it appears.

What could happen next?
  • Risk

    The Majlis 221-0 vote suspending IAEA cooperation means any nuclear concession Iran makes cannot be verified, removing the technical foundation for a deal that would satisfy US domestic and Congressional scrutiny.

    Immediate · High
  • Consequence

    Iran's public 10-point plan listing enrichment as non-negotiable has created a domestic accountability problem: any Iranian delegation that walks back enrichment rights now faces parliamentary backlash, shrinking the negotiating space even if leadership privately wanted to move.

    Short term · High
  • Opportunity

    Araghchi's March downblending offer and the Oman FM's 'irreversible fuel conversion' claim suggest a middle position exists if both sides can find face-saving language, a JCPOA-style 'limited enrichment under monitoring' framework could provide that cover.

    Medium term · Medium
First Reported In

Update #66 · Islamabad collapses: 10 days to expiry

Times of Israel· 12 Apr 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
ASML / European tech industry
ASML / European tech industry
ASML's Q2 2026 guidance came in €300m below consensus as China DUV revenue collapsed 17 percentage points; the company's CEO wrote US export-control outcomes directly into 2026 guidance. European tech firms named on the USTR retaliation list alongside SAP, Siemens and Spotify face the same calculus: US trade exposure constrains what Brussels can legislate on their behalf.
France / Anne Le Henanff
France / Anne Le Henanff
Le Henanff chaired the G7 Digital Ministerial at Bercy on 29 May with CAIDA off the agenda, pivoting France's presidency to AI safety principles it had not designed the week around. France backs CAIDA but cannot override Berlin's tariff calculus, so the ministerial produced no new French-led commitment.
Germany / Federal government
Germany / Federal government
Berlin's automotive sector faces up to $200bn in threatened US tariffs, a commercial exposure that dwarfs any benefit CAIDA's public-sector cloud rules would deliver to German digital firms. Federal silence inside the College of Commissioners functions as a block under consensus adoption rules without requiring a formal veto.
USTR / Ambassador Andrew Puzder
USTR / Ambassador Andrew Puzder
Puzder's public warning on 25 May that CAIDA is inconsistent with the EU-US trade framework was the first time Washington made its bilateral pressure visible before a Commission adoption vote rather than after. The USTR Section 301 determination on 24 July provides the enforcement backstop.
European Commission / Henna Virkkunen
European Commission / Henna Virkkunen
Virkkunen framed the third slip as a procedural delay in finalising a 400-page text without addressing Puzder's trade-framework red line publicly. The Commission enforces existing law against Google while losing the legislative timeline on CAIDA, exposing an asymmetric position: enforcement holds; new sovereignty legislation does not.
OpenForum Europe / open-source community
OpenForum Europe / open-source community
The EUR 350m Sovereign Tech Fund has no Commission host, no budget line, and no commissioner's name attached six weeks after the April conference, while Germany is already paying maintainers to staff international standards bodies. The CRA open-source guidance resolves contributor liability but leaves the financial-donations grey area open with the 11 September reporting clock running.