NYT: Three demands at heart of Trump’s escalating showdown with Iran

President Trump has dramatically intensified pressure on Iran, warning that refusal to meet US demands could lead to a swift and violent military strike, according to the latest analysis by The New York Times.

The threat coincides with a major US military buildup in the region, including the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, additional naval vessels, bombers, and fighter jets positioned within striking distance of Iranian territory. Trump explicitly compared the current posture to last year’s operation near Venezuela that culminated in the nighttime capture of Nicolás Maduro, signalling a willingness to pursue similarly forceful action against Tehran’s leadership.

While Trump has offered few public details about the proposed deal, US and European officials say Washington has presented Iran with three central demands: a permanent halt to uranium enrichment, strict limits on the range and quantity of ballistic missiles, and an end to Iranian support for proxy groups across the Middle East, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen. These conditions would significantly weaken Iran’s remaining strategic leverage following last summer’s 12-day war with Israel.

Conspicuously absent from US demands is any mention of Iran’s recent wave of protests, which shook the country in December and reportedly resulted in thousands of deaths. While Iranian authorities put the toll at just over 3,000, human rights groups estimate between 3,400 and 6,200 victims, with figures expected to rise as communications restrictions ease.

Iranian leaders have pushed back against US threats. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran has not sought talks with Washington and warned that diplomacy cannot succeed under military pressure. He added that a war between Iran and the United States would destabilize the entire region and noted that several Middle Eastern countries oppose such a conflict. Araghchi previously cautioned that a full-scale confrontation would be prolonged and far more destructive than US officials anticipate.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the military buildup as largely defensive, arguing that tens of thousands of American troops in the region are within reach of Iranian drones and ballistic missiles. However, he acknowledged that US forces retain the option of preemptive strikes if necessary.

The confrontation follows US air attacks last June on Iran’s major nuclear sites at Natanz, Fordo, and Isfahan — facilities that formed the backbone of Tehran’s nuclear program. Although Trump has repeatedly said the program was “obliterated,” US strategic documents have described the damage as substantial but not total, a more cautious assessment also noted by the New York Times.

Washington’s demand that Iran abandon uranium enrichment altogether would be difficult to enforce, given the possibility of covert facilities and the existence of highly enriched uranium stockpiles. Limiting missile capabilities would strip Iran of its primary deterrent against Israel, while cutting off proxy support may be the most achievable demand as Iran’s weakened economy struggles to sustain foreign operations.

By Tamilla Hasanova