Remarks by Donald Trump on Iran’s highly enriched uranium (HEU) stockpile have stirred fresh debate over the objectives and outcomes of the ongoing US-Israeli offensive. Downplaying concerns, Trump said the material—believed to be stored deep underground—could be tracked remotely, raising questions about whether neutralising Iran’s nuclear capability remains a central war aim.
According to The Guardian, Experts warn that if the conflict ends with Tehran retaining control of its estimated 440kg HEU reserve, the country would remain significantly closer to assembling nuclear warheads than under a diplomatic framework that had been under discussion just before hostilities began on February 28.
Asked about the stockpile by Reuters news agency on Wednesday, Trump said: “That’s so far underground, I don’t care about that.”
“We’ll always be watching it by satellite,” he added.
Strategic concerns over nuclear material
In his address to the nation from the White House on Wednesday night, Trump elaborated: “If we see them make a move, even a move for it, we will hit them with missiles very hard again.”
His comments appear to signal a reluctance to pursue a high-risk military operation aimed at securing or removing the uranium stockpile, which is believed to be hidden in fortified underground facilities. Analysts say such a mission would require a large troop deployment and pose significant operational dangers.
The apparent decision to leave the material untouched has drawn scrutiny, particularly as Trump has repeatedly framed the conflict as necessary to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Critics argue that allowing Tehran to retain the stockpile undermines that stated objective.
Diplomacy vs military approach
According to The Guardian, Non-proliferation experts note that prior to the outbreak of war, negotiations between Washington and Tehran had shown signs of progress. Iranian officials had reportedly indicated willingness to dilute their stockpile and limit enrichment activities, alongside accepting stricter monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Analysts told The Guardian, such measures could have rolled back Iran’s nuclear capabilities more effectively than the current military approach. The cancellation of a planned follow-up meeting in Vienna after the strikes halted what some diplomats described as a promising diplomatic track.
Concerns are now growing that the conflict may have had the opposite effect, potentially increasing Iran’s incentive to pursue nuclear weapons as a deterrent. Experts also stress that satellite monitoring alone cannot replace on-ground inspections and verification mechanisms necessary to control nuclear materials.
The current situation, they argue, leaves the region facing heightened uncertainty, with Iran still in possession of critical nuclear resources and fewer international safeguards in place than before the conflict began.