Donald Trump said Friday that Tehran had agreed to miƙa its uranium as part of a deal to stop the war, that Iran would stop enriching on its soil and that the United States would jointly dig up enriched material and transfer it to the United States. "The US will get all nuclear dust," Trump said, adding, "You know what the nuclear dust is? That was that white powdery substance created by our B-2 bombers."
Within hours, Iran’s deputy foreign minister Saeed Khatibzadeh denied the claim to, using the phrase "babu wannan maganar," and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf rejected the assertions on X, saying, "With these lies, they did not win the war, and they certainly will not get anywhere in negotiations either." The statements came after a two-week ceasefire was reached on April 8 and follow a string of events tied to Iran’s nuclear sites.
The raw numbers behind the dispute underscore why the exchange matters. Uranium is a substance found underground and most of it is made up of two isotopes: U-238 and U-235. About 99 percent of uranium is U-238 and is not useful for making nuclear weapons; no more than 0.7 percent of uranium is U-235 in its natural form. To be useful, uranium must be enriched — natural uranium is processed into a gas and then spun in a machine at high speed to separate the isotopes.
Different enrichment levels have different uses: U-235 at 3 to 5 percent is used for nuclear power, material enriched to about 20 percent can serve research reactors, and roughly 90 percent enrichment is needed for a weapon. Under a 2015 agreement among China, France, Germany, Russia, the United States and Britain, Iran was barred from possessing uranium enriched above 3.67 percent.
The supplementary article says Iran’s enriched uranium had been raised to 60 percent and was stored in canisters about the size of large scuba tanks, and that much of the near-bomb-grade material was believed to be stored at a complex outside Isfahan after the United States struck three key nuclear sites in June 2025. American intelligence officials, the article says, believe the Iranians dug down to gain access to the material; it also says there is no evidence any of the material has been moved.
Those reported facts — high enrichment levels, compact storage and a site outside Isfahan — are what make Trump’s claim consequential if true: material enriched to 60 percent is far closer to weapons grade than the 3.67 percent ceiling set in 2015, and moving or securing such material would be a sensitive, technically complex operation. They also help explain why verification and custody are central to any claim about transfers.
But the public statements contain a direct contradiction. Trump said Iran had agreed to stop enriching on its soil and to a joint excavation and transfer; Iranian officials deny that arrangement. At the same time, the supplementary article reports no evidence that material has been moved, a gap that leaves the claim uncorroborated in open reporting.
The uranium dispute sits inside a broader picture of US‑Iran tensions and stalled negotiations over enrichment limits. The timing — remarks coming after an April 8 ceasefire and following the June 2025 strikes that reportedly damaged nuclear sites — means any assertion about custody or movement of enriched material could immediately affect diplomacy and on-the-ground trust between the parties.
The single most consequential unanswered question now is whether independent verification — on the ground inspection or other credible evidence — will be allowed to confirm whether any enriched uranium will be excavated, transferred or indeed whether Iran has agreed to stop enriching on its soil. Until an impartial account is produced, the competing public claims will stand as opposing realities with real potential to shape the ceasefire and the next round of talks.
