Trump Claims Iran Nuclear Deal Progress: What Proposed Agreement Could Mean for Italy

President Donald Trump claims significant progress toward a nuclear deal with Iran that would see Tehran suspend uranium enrichment indefinitely, though the claims remain unverified by international bodies and critical details are disputed. Speaking to Bloomberg this week, Trump stated that Iran has agreed to halt its nuclear program "unlimited" in time—rejecting earlier proposals for a 20-year moratorium—and that no frozen funds held by Washington would be released to the Islamic Republic.

Why This Matters

• Indefinite suspension claim: Trump says Iran accepted an open-ended freeze on nuclear activities, not the limited pause previously discussed.

• Enriched uranium removal: US personnel would work "side by side" with Iranian counterparts to extract uranium from the country and transfer it to the United States, according to Trump's account.

• Port blockade leverage: The US naval blockade of Iranian ports will remain in force unless a final peace accord is signed, putting pressure on Tehran ahead of a Wednesday ceasefire deadline.

• IAEA access unresolved: The International Atomic Energy Agency has warned it cannot verify Iran's stockpile location or composition, raising doubts about enforcement and complicating any sanctions relief that Italy and other EU nations might seek.

The Proposed Terms

In a series of interviews aboard Air Force One and with US broadcasters, Trump outlined an agreement framework he described as "wonderful" and "a great deal." Under the terms he presented, Iran would suspend all uranium enrichment activities without a predetermined endpoint, moving beyond earlier negotiating positions that envisioned a finite moratorium.

According to Trump, American and Iranian teams would collaborate to remove enriched uranium from Iranian territory, transporting the material to the United States. "Our people together with the Iranians will work side by side to recover it. Then we'll bring it to the United States," he told CBS, emphasizing that the operation would not require "boots on the ground" in a traditional military sense.

The president also confirmed that none of the roughly $20 billion in Iranian assets frozen in US-controlled accounts would be unfrozen as part of the deal—a reversal of earlier proposals floated during back-channel negotiations mediated by Pakistan. That sum represents oil revenue and other funds blocked under sanctions originally imposed after the 2018 US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the 2015 nuclear accord negotiated by the Obama administration.

What This Means for Regional Stability

For residents of Italy and the broader European Union, any potential accord carries significant implications for energy markets, regional security, and diplomatic alignment. Italy imports a portion of its natural gas from Middle Eastern suppliers, and prolonged tension in the Persian Gulf disrupts shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz—a chokepoint for roughly one-fifth of global oil transit.

Iran had briefly reopened the strait earlier this week but threatened to close it again if the US maintained its port blockade. Trump confirmed Thursday that the blockade would stay "fully in effect" until negotiations conclude, and he left open the possibility of not extending a temporary ceasefire set to expire Wednesday. "I might not extend it, but the blockade will continue," he told reporters, though he added he expected a peace agreement to materialize.

European policymakers, who have long sought to preserve the remnants of the 2015 nuclear deal, now face a diplomatic dilemma. The EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs has historically supported multilateral verification frameworks, yet the Trump administration's approach bypasses the original JCPOA structure and sidelines the other signatories—France, Germany, the United Kingdom, China, and Russia.

Verification Challenges and IAEA Concerns

The feasibility of enforcing any agreement hinges on independent monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has raised alarm bells about the current state of transparency. In a confidential February 2026 report, the agency stated it cannot verify whether Iran has suspended all enrichment-related activities and lacks information on the location, size, or composition of Tehran's uranium stockpile.

This verification challenge is particularly critical for Italy and EU member states because EU sanctions relief typically requires IAEA certification before European companies can safely re-engage with Iranian markets. Without clear IAEA confirmation of compliance, Italian businesses and financial institutions face continued regulatory uncertainty and compliance risks that could block their return to Iranian trade in sectors like machinery, pharmaceuticals, and energy.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi stated that while there is no evidence of a systematic weapons program, Iran's accumulation of uranium enriched to 60% purity—just below the 90% threshold for weapons-grade material—poses "serious concerns." As of February, Iran held approximately 275 kg of 60%-enriched uranium, up from 182 kg in October 2024, according to agency figures.

Iran has restricted IAEA inspector access since February 2021, and Tehran has not yet granted the agency entry to nuclear facilities that were reportedly damaged during a 12-day military conflict in June 2025 involving US and Israeli operations. This conflict arose from escalating regional tensions over Iranian military activities and nuclear developments. Grossi emphasized that any deal without "very detailed" verification measures would amount to "only the illusion of an agreement."

Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, pledged in February that inspectors would be allowed into all sites, including underground and mountain facilities, to demonstrate the program's peaceful intent. However, that commitment has not yet translated into full cooperation on the ground.

The Collapse of the 2015 Agreement

The current negotiations unfold against the backdrop of the JCPOA's gradual disintegration. Trump withdrew the United States from that accord in May 2018, calling it a "horrible, one-sided deal," and reimposed sweeping economic sanctions. European allies—France, Germany, and the UK—expressed "regret and concern" at the time and sought to sustain the pact through workarounds such as a blocking statute designed to shield EU companies from US penalties. In practice, most multinational firms abandoned the Iranian market rather than risk American sanctions.

Iran responded by progressively exceeding the JCPOA's limits. The original accord capped enrichment at 3.67% uranium-235 and restricted stockpiles to 300 kg of uranium hexafluoride gas. By 2026, Tehran operates advanced centrifuges at multiple sites and enriches to levels that have no credible civilian application. The JCPOA's key restrictions formally expired in October 2025, removing the last legal guardrails on Iran's program.

Economic and Legal Implications for Italy

Should a verifiable agreement take hold, Italian exporters in machinery, pharmaceuticals, and consumer goods—sectors historically active in Iran—stand to benefit from reduced sanctions risk and renewed access to Iranian markets. Major Italian energy company ENI, along with other European firms, had significant interests in Iranian energy projects before the 2018 sanctions were reimposed. Conversely, a collapse in talks could trigger renewed energy price volatility and complicate Rome's efforts to diversify away from Russian gas and secure alternative energy supplies.

Italy's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation has historically advocated for multilateral diplomacy and adherence to international law. Any unilateral US-Iran arrangement that sidesteps the United Nations Security Council framework may prompt legal and political friction within the EU, especially if sanctions relief is conditioned on terms not endorsed by the broader international community.

Financial institutions in Italy, already navigating complex compliance requirements under EU and US sanctions regimes, will need clarity on whether frozen assets can be safely unfrozen and whether correspondent banking channels to Iran will reopen. The Bank of Italy has issued guidance since 2018 warning lenders to exercise heightened due diligence on Middle East transactions, and that caution is unlikely to ease without formal regulatory change at both the EU and US levels.

Open Questions and Next Steps

Several critical gaps remain. Trump has not specified the technical modalities for uranium removal, the timeline for implementation, or the verification protocol that would govern ongoing compliance. It is also unclear whether Iran's ballistic missile program or regional proxy activities—key concerns for Israel and Saudi Arabia—are covered by the proposed accord.

The European Union, Russia, and China have not publicly endorsed the framework Trump described, raising the prospect of a bifurcated sanctions regime in which US and non-US actors operate under different rules. That scenario would replicate the tensions that followed the 2018 withdrawal and complicate efforts by Italian and other European firms to re-enter the Iranian market.

The Wednesday ceasefire deadline looms as a potential inflection point. If extended, it may signal genuine diplomatic momentum; if it lapses, the naval blockade and the risk of escalation will persist. For now, the details of any final agreement remain unconfirmed and dependent on verification on the ground and buy-in from the international community that originally negotiated the 2015 deal.