Putin Allegedly Urges Iran to Accept "Zero Enrichment" Nuclear Deal with U.S., But Denials Follow

In a surprising twist to the ongoing saga of Iran’s nuclear program, Russian President Vladimir Putin has reportedly urged Iran to accept a nuclear deal with the United States that would prohibit uranium enrichment entirely—a condition dubbed "zero enrichment."

This claim, reported by Axios and based on anonymous sources, suggests a potential shift in Russia’s longstanding support for Iran’s nuclear ambitions. However, both Iran and Russia have denied these reports, adding layers of uncertainty to an already volatile situation.

Background: Iran’s Nuclear Program and Recent Escalations

Iran’s nuclear program has been a flashpoint in international relations for decades. In 2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was signed by Iran, the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the European Union. The deal limited Iran’s uranium enrichment to 3.67%—sufficient for civilian energy but far below weapons-grade levels—and reduced its stockpile of enriched uranium, in exchange for sanctions relief.

However, the U.S. withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 under President Donald Trump, prompting Iran to incrementally abandon the deal’s restrictions. By 2025, Iran had reportedly enriched uranium to 60%, a level that alarmed Western nations due to its proximity to the 90% threshold for nuclear weapons.

Tensions reached a boiling point in June 2025, when a 12-day war erupted between Israel and Iran. Israel, citing fears of an imminent nuclear threat, launched preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, including the Natanz and Fordow sites.

The United States joined the fray, bombing additional targets. While the attacks damaged Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, they did not eliminate its stockpile of enriched uranium. This conflict disrupted negotiations that had been underway since April 2025, mediated by Oman, aimed at freezing Iran’s nuclear program in return for lifting economic sanctions.

The Axios Report: Putin’s Alleged Stance

According to Axios, citing multiple sources including European and Israeli officials, Putin has privately endorsed a nuclear deal that would bar Iran from enriching uranium altogether. This "zero enrichment" condition is far stricter than the JCPOA’s terms and aligns with a key demand of the United States and Israel. Axios reports that Putin conveyed this position to both President Trump—in a call last week—and to Iranian officials in recent discussions.

A European official quoted by Axios said, "Putin would support zero enrichment. He encouraged the Iranians to work towards that in order to make negotiations with the Americans more favorable. The Iranians said they won’t consider it." Similarly, a senior Israeli official confirmed, "We know that this is what Putin told the Iranians." If true, this stance marks a dramatic departure from Russia’s public position, which has historically defended Iran’s right to a civilian nuclear program, including limited enrichment under international oversight.

Iran’s Firm Rejection

Iran wasted no time in refuting the Axios report. Tasnim, a semi-official Iranian news agency, cited an "informed source" denying that Putin had sent any such message to Tehran. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reinforced this position, stating in a meeting with foreign envoys, "No agreement will be accepted without enrichment. Any negotiated solution must respect Iran’s right to enrichment." This aligns with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s long-held view that abandoning enrichment entirely is "100 per cent" against Iran’s national interests.

Iran’s refusal to consider zero enrichment is rooted in both practical and symbolic considerations. Enrichment is seen as a sovereign right and a point of national pride, as well as a bargaining chip in negotiations. Despite the damage to its facilities from the June war, Iran retains a stockpile of enriched uranium and likely aims to preserve some nuclear capability as leverage.

Russia’s Denial and Diplomatic Posturing

Russia also dismissed the Axios report as baseless. The Russian Foreign Ministry labeled it "a new political defamation campaign aimed at exacerbating tensions around Iran’s nuclear program." In a statement, the ministry reiterated its commitment to a diplomatic resolution and expressed readiness to facilitate "mutually acceptable solutions." This denial aligns with Russia’s public role as Iran’s key ally, often shielding Tehran from harsher UN Security Council measures.

The discrepancy between the Axios claim and Russia’s official stance raises questions. Is Russia publicly supporting Iran while privately pushing for concessions? Or is the report a misinterpretation—or even misinformation—circulated by Western sources? Without official confirmation, the truth remains elusive.

The 12-Day War: A Game-Changer?

The June 2025 conflict between Israel and Iran provides critical context for these developments. Israel’s strikes targeted key nuclear sites, such as the underground enrichment facility at Fordow, while U.S. bombings hit additional locations, including Natanz and Isfahan. Experts estimate that Iran’s nuclear program has been set back by months or even years, though its existing stockpile of enriched uranium remains intact.

This escalation likely influenced the positions of all parties. For the U.S. and Israel, the war underscored the urgency of preventing Iran from rebuilding its nuclear capabilities. For Russia, it may have shifted the calculus, prompting Putin to reconsider his approach—either to avoid entanglement in a broader conflict or to seize an opportunity to broker a deal that could stabilize the region and improve ties with the U.S.

Analysis: Implications and Uncertainties

If Putin indeed supports a zero-enrichment deal, the implications are profound. Russia’s backing could isolate Iran diplomatically, given Moscow’s role as Tehran’s primary defender on the global stage. With Russia holding veto power in the UN Security Council, its support for stricter terms might pressure Iran into concessions it has so far resisted. Moreover, a successful deal could ease tensions in the Middle East, particularly between Iran and Israel, and pave the way for broader détente.

However, Iran’s unwavering stance on enrichment complicates this scenario. Tehran may view zero enrichment as an unacceptable capitulation, especially after the June war heightened its resolve to assert sovereignty. Russia’s public denial further muddies the waters—Putin may be playing a double game, balancing private diplomacy with public solidarity, or the Axios report may simply be inaccurate.

The U.S., now led again by President Trump, is likely to insist on zero enrichment as a cornerstone of any new agreement. Israel, still reeling from the June conflict, will echo this demand. Yet, the feasibility of such a deal hinges on Iran’s willingness to compromise, which seems remote given its current rhetoric.

Negotiations remain in flux. Plans for talks in Oslo were abandoned, but alternative venues are under consideration. Araghchi has indicated that Iran is assessing the "timing, location, form, and ingredients" of future discussions, suggesting openness to dialogue but on Tehran’s terms. The coming weeks will reveal whether a breakthrough is possible or if the parties are headed for further stalemate—or escalation.