Ahead of Saturday's second round of indirect talks between the United States and the Islamic Republic, Iran hawks are urging the Trump team to avoid a repeat of the 2015 nuclear deal

The Trump administration's shifting red lines on Iran's nuclear program, punctuated by special envoy Steve Witkoff's mixed messaging, have fueled concerns among skeptics of the ongoing diplomatic efforts.

The inconsistencies within the Trump administration, which will undertake its second round of indirect talks with Iran on Saturday, are particularly focused on whether the Americans will permit limited nuclear enrichment.

Hawkish skeptics of Trump's efforts have been quick to point out the similarities between his potential acceptance of such stipulations with the Obama administration's 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

Already aggrieved by Trump's support for diplomacy over potential military action, whether undertaken by the United States or in conjunction with Israel, the potential for an agreement mirroring the Obama deal has only added insult to injury for these skeptics.

While subsequent clarifications from senior U.S. officials and spokespeople have been welcomed, the events of the past several days have only amplified concern about Trump's capacity to adequately negotiate a deal addressing all concerns over Iran's nuclear program.

The simmering tensions boiled over following Witkoff's interview on Monday with Fox News' Sean Hannity, where the special envoy alluded to the acceptability of Iranian uranium enrichment capped at the 3.67 percent required for a civilian nuclear program, subject to verification.

"This is going to be much about verification on the enrichment program and then ultimately verification on weaponization," said Witkoff, who has parlayed his close personal friendship with Trump into being his key negotiator on the world's most hot-button conflicts.

His comments were roundly criticized from normally steadfast Trump allies who have found themselves alienated by his amorphous Iran policy.

One of the most significant attacks came from Mark Levin, Hannity's fellow Fox News host. Like Hannity, Levin also enjoys a close personal relationship with Trump.

"The appeasers who've been dead wrong about Iran call us wide-eyed realists [sic] warmongers, as they give aid and comfort to the enemy with their moronic propaganda and abundant ignorance. They assure us a terror state with nuclear weapons is not to be feared. We can manage it. As they desperately seek to have President Trump follow the same suicidal path Obama and Biden have blazed," he wrote.

Another diplomatic solution with an Islamist-Nazi Regime that has killed our troops, sought to assassinate our President, has sworn to destroy our country, that funds terrorism around the world, is attempting to conquer much of the Middle East, supplies drones to Russia to kill…

— Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) April 15, 2025

Levin asked "how will this great deal be enforced? What's the magical formula? Let's hear it. Otherwise, our party and administration will be responsible for one of the greatest failings ever — ushering in a nuclear Iran with intercontinental missiles armed with nuclear warheads aimed at we, the American people.

He added: "I've great faith in President Trump. Not in some of those trying to pressure him to appease the Iranians, and who none of us voted for and who most Americans know nothing about. ... Either Iran provably and immediately dismantles its development of nuclear weapons or we will do it for them."

Levin's criticism was echoed by other key Trump foreign policy allies in Washington, including Sen. Ted Cruz. He wrote: "Anyone urging Trump to enter into another Obama Iran deal is giving the President terrible advice. [Trump] is entirely correct when he says Iran will NEVER be allowed to have nukes. His team should be 100% unified behind that."

The great @marklevinshow is exactly right.

Anyone urging Trump to enter into another Obama Iran deal is giving the President terrible advice.@realDonaldTrump is entirely correct when he says Iran will NEVER be allowed to have nukes. His team should be 100% unified behind that. https://t.co/DpTARDasHA

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) April 15, 2025

Columnist Eli Lake, another influential critic of diplomacy with Iran, added his criticism of Witkoff's Fox interview in a Free Press column.

"Yikes. Leaving aside the imprudence of announcing your real red lines at the start of negotiations, this appears to be a recipe for accepting a nuclear deal that is at best as weak as Obama's in 2015. At least, that is the opinion of several hawks in Washington and inside the Trump administration," Lake wrote.

Foundation for Defense of Democracies' Executive Director Jonathan Schanzer, meanwhile, noted that "we are watching Mr. Witkoff learn the Iran file in real time. This is a steep learning curve. So it's no surprise to see him change his positions as he gains a greater understanding of Iran's positions, and Israel's positions."

Schanzer, whose organization is among the most foremost critics of the Obama – and later Biden – administration's Iran nuclear deal proposals, added that "making all this more challenging is President Trump's previous (and completely justifiable) opposition to the Obama nuclear deal of 2015. Whenever Mr. Witkoff takes a step reminiscent of the Obama deal, critics are quick to point them out. Trump is not immune to this."

Amid the criticism, Trump spoke with Omani Sultan Haitham bin Tariq – who mediated the first round of talks – before convening a Situation Room meeting with key foreign policy advisers over the efforts, as reported by Axios.

While senior officials representing both advocates and skeptics of Iran diplomacy were present at the White House meeting, it ended with Witkoff publicly clarifying that no enrichment will be acceptable – a sign that Trump sided with the hawks following the outcry.

"A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal," Witkoff posted on X Tuesday. "Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program."

“A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal. Any final arrangement must set a framework for peace, stability, and prosperity in the Middle East -- meaning that Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program. It is imperative for…

— Office of the Special Envoy to the Middle East (@SE_MiddleEast) April 15, 2025

The clarification is much more in line with previous comments from figures like National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who has insisted on the nuclear program's total dismantlement, as well as comments from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alongside Trump in the Oval Office last week.

Criticism from Democrats hurts more

Some key observers note that neither Witkoff's original red line on Hannity, followed by his apparent about-face on X, occurred in a vacuum.

"U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, a close friend of President Donald Trump, has said in the past that he speaks for the president and always talks to him before making a decision. It's clear that the 3.67 percent enrichment Witkoff noted in the Fox News interview, which was exactly found in the Barack Obama-era nuclear deal that Trump withdrew from despite Tehran not violating the deal at the time, was something the president had accepted," noted Washington Institute for Near East Policy senior fellow Holly Dagres.

"However, the public change in rhetoric appears to be tied to the meeting in the Situation Room, which showed a divide between top officials in the administration – the Iran hawks – regarding what should be in the negotiations," she added.

Other skeptics, meanwhile, are actively considering Witkoff's clarification as the administration's new position despite any perceived ambiguity.

"I applaud Special Envoy Witkoff's clarifying tweet," said United Against Nuclear Iran Policy Director Jason Brodsky. "It reflects President Trump's long-standing position on the flaws of the Obama nuclear deal with Iran, which have been spot on from the very beginning, since 2015. The Trump doctrine on Iran has long held that either the regime verifiably dismantles its nuclear program, or the U.S. and Israel will do it themselves."

Potentially most grating to Trump will be the sharp criticism emerging from Democrats who are attacking both the administration's policy prescriptions and its questionable negotiating strategy ahead of this weekend's second round.

Phil Gordon, former national security adviser to Kamala Harris, posted on X: "Only four days ago, Witkoff said dismantlement was only 'our position today' and that red line was weaponization. Yesterday he said Iran could enrich to 3.67 percent. Now Iran 'must stop and eliminate its enrichment.' This is as incoherent as tariff policy with likely similar results."

Only four days ago, Witkoff said dismantlement was only “our position today” and that redline was weaponization. Yesterday he said Iran could enrich to 3.67%. Now Iran “must stop and eliminate its enrichment.” This is as incoherent as tariff policy with likely similar results. https://t.co/8fSGhOehpp

— Phil Gordon (@PhilGordonDC) April 15, 2025

Ned Price, former U.S. deputy envoy to the UN and State Department spokesperson, noted that Trump's position "has shifted entirely over the course of 18 hours and after the first negotiation with Iran. Some will claim this is a win for the 'Iran hawks.' In truth, it's another win for Iran; it just shows how unserious and unprepared this team is."

Rep. Brad Schneider, a Jewish Democrat who voted against the 2015 deal, stressed that "this moment requires strategy, discipline, and unity of purpose. Iran negotiates with focus and precision. Every contradictory statement from the Trump administration erodes our leverage and undermines deterrence, unnerving our allies and emboldening our adversaries."