Iran nuclear deal unlikely as US and Israel tensions rise

Energy Secretary Chris Wright told ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that a fresh Iran nuclear deal “may not” materialize, a rare public admission that diplomatic patience is wearing thin. The comment came as the United States and Israel have stepped up a war‑like posture toward Tehran, reviving concerns about non‑proliferation, regional security and global energy markets.

Wright’s assessment marks a shift from the tentative optimism that has guided talks to replace the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Negotiators have struggled to bridge gaps on inspection protocols, sanctions relief and Iran’s ballistic‑missile program, and recent U.S.–Israel strikes on Iranian sites have further strained the diplomatic atmosphere. Analysts warn that without a viable deal, Iran could resume steps toward a nuclear weapons capability, destabilize the Middle East and add volatility to oil prices already sensitive to geopolitical risk.

Efforts to revive a JCPOA‑style pact began after the United States withdrew from the original agreement in 2018. Over the past year, European, Gulf and Asian partners have pressed for a framework that would curb Iran’s uranium enrichment while offering limited economic relief. Progress stalled in early 2024 when Tehran demanded broader sanctions relief and Washington insisted on stricter verification measures. Since then, the United Kingdom, France and Germany have warned that the window for a diplomatic solution may be closing.

At the same time, the United States and Israel have intensified a campaign of targeted airstrikes and cyber operations against Iranian facilities linked to missile production and nuclear research. The Guardian described the coordinated pressure as part of a “U.S‑Israel war on Iran,” a narrative that has heightened Tehran’s rhetoric and raised the risk of miscalculation. While no formal policy shift was announced, Wright’s remarks reflect an internal assessment that the diplomatic track is losing traction.

Energy markets have already reacted to the heightened uncertainty. Brent crude futures edged higher on Sunday as traders priced in the possibility of supply disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz. Regional actors, including Israel and Gulf Cooperation Council states, are reportedly updating threat assessments and considering contingency plans that could involve additional military coordination with Washington.

Domestically, the statement is likely to draw sharper scrutiny from Congress, where bipartisan concerns about the United States’ non‑proliferation strategy have resurfaced. Lawmakers are expected to demand clearer metrics on the administration’s approach, especially as public opinion remains wary of both nuclear escalation and prolonged military engagement.

Humanitarian implications cannot be ignored. An escalation in hostilities would exacerbate the already dire conditions faced by Iranian civilians, who endure shortages of medicine, food and basic services amid sanctions and war‑zone disruptions.

Wright did not outline alternative pathways, and no official decision to shift toward a military option was disclosed. The administration has said it will continue to pursue diplomatic avenues while keeping “all options on the table.” The next concrete step is a high‑level diplomatic meeting in Geneva later this month, where U.S., European and Iranian officials hope to gauge whether a revised framework can still be salvaged. Until then, the prospect of a new nuclear pact remains uncertain, and the region’s stability hangs in a delicate balance.