Like zucchini butter and horchata overnight oats. 

​Like zucchini butter and horchata overnight oats. 

Foreign Affairs

Trump Might Not Be Able to Skirt Iran’s Red Line

Tehran has made clear their nation has a right to enrich uranium at low levels.

Credit: Photo Agency/Shutterstock

The U.S. and Iran held their fifth round of nuclear negotiations in late May. Iran said the talks “strengthened the possibility of achieving progress,” and the U.S. called the talks “constructive” and said that “further progress” was made, though “there is still work to be done.” A hopeful sign of real progress is that, following the talks, the U.S. sent Iran a detailed written proposal that attempts to resolve the key disagreement between the two sides: Iran’s right to enrich uranium for their civilian nuclear program.

A creative solution that seems to have first been proposed by the Omani mediators is that Iran join Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in a nuclear enrichment consortium that would allow Iran to continue to enrich uranium up to the 3.67 percent enrichment required for civilian nuclear energy. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who would gain access to Iran’s nuclear technology, would be shareholders and funders.

The proposal is based on a consortium idea first proposed by Princeton physicist Frank von Hippel and former Iranian nuclear negotiator Seyed Hossein Mousavian. Von Hippel explained to me that the advantage of a consortium is that it allows nuclear experts from each country to “visit each other’s facilities to assure themselves that the activities are peaceful.” He added that “decisions that might have proliferation implications are made by the [partner] governments.” Saudi Arabia’s, the Emirates’ and Iran’s watchful eyes would all help the International Atomic Energy Agency ensure that the program is peaceful.

The U.S. proposal stipulates that the nuclear consortium be monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United States. However, a source with knowledge of the issue told Axios that the U.S. wants the enrichment facilities to be located outside of Iran. And there are now competing versions of where the Trump team’s proposal stands on this point. After sources with direct knowledge of the proposal said that, as part of the consortium, Iran would be allowed to enrich uranium to the low levels needed for civilian purposes, President Donald Trump posted that “Under our potential Agreement — WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANY ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM!.”

Despite the creativity and the progress of the negotiations, if the U.S. insists on that point, it could mean the death of the negotiations. 

Iran has drawn a red line at its right to enrich uranium on its own soil for peaceful, civilian purposes. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has allowed his team to negotiate, but he has made clear that Iran will not negotiate “the full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.” Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian insists that “Iran has never sought, is not seeking, and will never seek nuclear weapons” but that “Iran will not give up its peaceful nuclear rights.” On the eve of the fifth round of talks, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, who is leading the talks for Iran, formulated the red line as “Figuring out the path to a deal is not rocket science: Zero nuclear weapons = we DO have a deal. Zero enrichment = we do NOT have a deal. Time to decide….”

Iran has placed a firm red line around its right to enrich uranium for civilian nuclear purposes for two main reasons.

The first is that the U.S. demand to fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear program is outside the framework of international law. Iran is adamant that, in the words of its Foreign Ministry spokesman, “Enrichment is an integral part of our peaceful nuclear program, which stems from our inalienable right under the NPT and is also enshrined in UNSC Resolution 2231.” Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which Iran is a signatory, guarantees that “Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.”

Mousavian, who is now a visiting research collaborator at Princeton, told The American Conservative that “denying Iran this right means subjecting it to discrimination as the only member state deprived of such a right. This constitutes a national humiliation.”

The second reason is that, historically, Iran has been made vulnerable by agreeing to limits on its domestic enrichment.

When Iran started down the path of a nuclear program, they were only enriching uranium to 3.5 percent, the level needed to run its power reactors to produce energy. They didn’t need or intend to enrich higher because, in 1988, they signed an agreement with Argentina to receive 23 kilograms of fuel enriched to 20 percent so they could produce medical isotopes in their medical research reactor for imaging and treating cancer. When that 23 kilograms was nearly used up, Iran requested that the IAEA help it purchase more under that body’s supervision, which Tehran has the right to do as a signatory to the NPT. But the U.S. and Europe put up roadblocks and prevented the purchase.

The U.S. then proposed that Iran send its 3.5 percent enriched uranium out of the country to be enriched into fuel rods for medical reactors and then sent back to Iran. As described by Trita Parsi in Losing an Enemy, Iran agreed in principle, but the deal died when the U.S. and its allies insisted Iran ship out all of its 3.5 percent uranium in one batch, even though it would take nine months or more to receive the 19.5 percent enriched uranium needed for its medical reactors. Iran would have been emptied of enriched uranium. When Iran offered the counterproposal that the 3.5 percent uranium be sent out in batches in a “simultaneous exchange” for the more highly enriched uranium, the U.S. ignored the offer.

Later, Brazil and Turkey would attempt to broker a deal with a similar simultaneous swap. Iran agreed to the deal; the U.S. not only ignored it but reprimanded Brazil and Turkey and pressed ahead with sanctions on Iran.

According to Gareth Porter, the U.S. also pressured France not to provide enriched uranium to Iran when Tehran turned to Western Europe for enriched uranium as an alternative to enriching their own.

For both of these reasons, Iran’s red line is very firm. It is so firm that Mousavian recounts that Khamenei once told then-top Iranian nuclear negotiator (and future President) Hassan Rouhani that “if Iran is to abandon its right to enrich, it will either have to happen after my death, or I will have to resign from leadership.”

Trump has made it clear that “There are two ways Iran can be handled: militarily, or you make a deal.” What if the U.S. stands firm in its insistence that no enrichment can take place on Iranian soil? I asked Mousavian if the red line is so firm that Iran would refuse to negotiate its civilian enrichment program even if the U.S made it clear that the alternative to that deal was war. His answer was one simple sentence: “Iran will not dismantle its enrichment facilities under any circumstances.”

The talks between the U.S. and Iran are making progress, and, for the first time since the U.S. pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear agreement, there is hope for a peaceful, diplomatic solution. But it may all hang on Iran’s red line and America’s willingness to allow Iran to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes on Iranian soil.

The post Trump Might Not Be Able to Skirt Iran’s Red Line appeared first on The American Conservative.

Culture

Magnus Carlsen Slam Rattles Chess World

The Norwegian Grandmaster lost his cool on the big stage.

It was the bang heard around the chess world. 

With his clock running low and defeat at his doorstep, perhaps the greatest chess player of all time couldn’t hide his anger any longer. Norwegian grandmaster Magnus Carlsen slammed his fist on the table at the 2025 Norway Chess tournament and, for the first time in his career, conceded to rising Indian chess star Gukesh Dommaraju in a classical chess game. 

Though Dommaraju has defeated Magnus before in rapid and blitz formats, the 19-year-old from Chennai, India captured his first long-form victory over Carlsen, rallying from a losing position as Carlsen withered under the pressure. For Carlsen, who was playing in his home country of Norway, the loss was especially brutal, as he had firm control over the game during the early and mid stages of the match.

It was the endgame with time running low where Carlsen blundered. With 47 seconds left on his clock, Carlsen used his 52nd move to check Dommaraju’s white king. It was a mistake. With his two black pawns in advanced positions at the center of the board, Carlsen calculated that he could race his pieces to the other side and promote at least one to a queen. But Carlsen, who is known as the master of endgame theory, miscalculated. 

“And the entire world gasped,” remarked the American Levy Rozman, a chess international master and YouTube star. Dommaraju launched a devastating counterattack that blindsided Carlsen. The Norwegian grandmaster was paralyzed. With the tables turned and Dommaraju only a few moves away from promoting a pawn to a queen himself, Carlsen struck the table with primal fury. “Oh my God!” grunted a clearly exasperated Carlsen. He then quickly shook hands with Dommaraju who appeared overwhelmed by the results of the time scramble. 

“First classical win against Magnus, I mean, not the way I wanted it to be, but okay I’ll take it,” said Dommaraju who called his victory “lucky.” In a fitting stroke of irony, and with many of both men’s chess pieces scattered across the board, Dommaraju’s king remained upright despite Carlsen’s fists. 

Though casual observers were struck by Carlsen’s physical outburst to a heartbreaking loss, many top chess players empathized with the Norwegian’s pain. “If I lose a game like that, I will maybe drink for a whole night or some other things,” said the top-ranked Chinese grandmaster Wei Yi. “We would all feel the pain of that loss, he just gave a more visceral reaction,” noted American superstar Fabiano Caruana.

Carlsen, however, expressed dismay with his visceral reaction during a post-match interview. “I wish I had a different reaction, but it is what it is.” It was the pair’s second meeting of this week’s tournament. Carlsen captured the first match which was an even affair until Dommaraju collapsed down the stretch where Carlsen is usually best. But on Sunday, it was Dommaraju who benefited most from the time crunch. 

Though Carlsen retains his top ranking according to the International Chess Federation (FIDE), Dommaraju’s ascent aligns with other Indian chess players who have rocketed up the rankings. For the first time in history, India now boasts four active players ranked in the top 10 according to Chess2700. 

Carlsen, who is 34, suggested his days in the classical chess format may be nearing an end following the blunder on Sunday. “Situations like yesterday, I’m just wondering, why am I doing this?” Carlsen asked. “What’s the point?” The Russian world champion Garry Kasparov retired at age 42 and questions about Carlsen’s future, especially considering his comments following this weekend’s loss, will grow in the coming weeks and months. 

Carlsen had hoped to rebound from Sunday’s blunder with a victory over Wei in Tuesday’s round of the tournament but made another uncharacteristic blunder, giving his knight and the game to Wei. Carlsen could only laugh this time. The man who has sat atop the chess world for 15 years and captured five world championships in that time suddenly looks beatable. 

For the first time in a long time, commentators are quietly beginning to discuss a future in the sport of chess where Carlsen no longer strikes fear into the hearts of his opponents. That’s a good thing. For chess and for Carlsen, who has shown a great interest in the social side of life. If anyone has earned a respite from the years of grinding to be the best, it’s the young man from Tønsberg who has dedicated a third of his life to the game of kings. 

As for the future, Dommaraju will now look to cement himself as the game’s next great player. In response to his “lucky” victory over Carlsen on Sunday, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi congratulated the 19-year-old from the Bay of Bengal in eastern India.

“An exceptional achievement by Gukesh! Congratulations to him for triumphing over the very best,” wrote Modi. “His first-ever win against Magnus Carlsen in Round 6 of Norway Chess 2025 showcases his brilliance and dedication.” 

Speaking of his victory, a stunned Dommaraju admitted he would lose the same game against Carlsen “99 out of 100 times.” In chess, as in sports, as in life, there’s always that one time. On Sunday, in Norway, Dommaraju made his breakthrough. 

The post Magnus Carlsen Slam Rattles Chess World appeared first on The American Conservative.

Foreign Affairs

CPAC Budapest Brings Alice Weidel Up on the Stage

Germany’s AfD is a vital ally in the ideological battle over the future of European civilization. 

The decision to invite German politician Alice Weidel to speak at the recent CPAC gathering in Hungary was an important step on the road to breaking the elite establishment’s dominance in Europe. Weidel is the leader of the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), the main opposition party to Berlin’s ruling coalition, headed by Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The AfD offers the best hope of fundamentally changing the direction of Germany.

Merz and his Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) are nominally a center-right political force in Germany, but the chancellor has decided to run the national government in coalition with the left-wing Social Democrats. Instead of trying to lead Germany in a new direction, particularly on key issues like migration and the priorities in the European Union (EU), Merz has thrown himself into maintaining the establishment’s so-called political “firewall” that isolates the AfD and protects Berlin’s politically corrupt status quo. 

For too long, European and Anglo-American conservatives have been reluctant to partner with Weidel and her AfD, keeping them at arm’s length at international conferences and cooperation activities. This was a mistake that CPAC Hungary has now finally corrected. Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the CPAC organizers should be congratulated for recognizing that the AfD is an authentic European conservative party despite an intense campaign by German elites and their media allies to demonize it as “far right” and “undemocratic.” 

By inviting Weidel to speak at CPAC Budapest, conservatives are making clear that Merz and his CDU/CSU leadership are part of the problem. They are the unauthentic conservatives who have failed to adapt to new times and new challenges. When he was running for office, candidate Merz duplicitously pledged on the campaign stump to advance conservative principles on debt, borders, immigration, and crime. Merz specifically promised the voters to keep in place a constitutional amendment against deficit spending while also announcing his firm commitment to closing the national borders to illegal immigrants. 

These were the AfD’s bread and butter themes, and there was a glimmer of hope that Merz might actually build bridges toward Weidel. But after the balloting was over, Merz reached back to the old Berlin ruling establishment: he embraced Social Democrats as coalition partners and onboarded ideas from the Greens. Merz’s personal vision of Germany and Europe is hopelessly intertwined with the failing status quo that dominates in EU institutions in Brussels, and he has shamelessly partnered with Germany’s left to keep the rotten structure in place. 

As Weidel said in her CPAC Budapest remarks: “Politics have turned Germany into a danger zone. Its people suffer from mass migration, exploding crime rates, high taxes, energy prices, inflation, and the destruction of wealth. That is why they voted out the old left-green government only to get a government that continues down the same disastrous path.”

In her hard-hitting speech, Weidel denounced the Berlin establishment’s lawfare campaign, explaining that Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is dedicated to discrediting the AfD and creating a phony legal predicate for banning it outright as a political party. It is a German version of the lawfare playbook that the Biden administration used to try to take down Donald Trump. And it is being directed against the AfD with unthinking Teutonic rigor and the usual blindness of German officialdom.

Weidel spoke in English and clearly relished being among international friends at CPAC. She also displayed her political toughness: “Influential politicians in Germany have their minds made up to ban the strongest opposition political party, the Alternative for Germany. They would eliminate a political force that will soon form the government in several East German (states); furthermore, they want to ban a party that has caught up with and overtaken the Chancellor’s party itself. It is grotesque, it is authoritarian, and yet this is the path they pursue—but they will not prevail.” 

At issue is not only the future direction of Germany, but of Europe itself. Most Anglo-American conservatives believe, rightly, that Europe and its historic treasures are worth defending as the homeland of our shared Western civilization. While we quarrel about U.S.-European defense burden-sharing and dispute transatlantic trade issues, we recognize that our common civilization will be fundamentally diminished if the globalist left-wing agenda ultimately prevails and remains deeply entrenched on the old continent. 

We must cooperate with our friends to help topple the current political stewards of Europe, who hopelessly carry the same intellectual Marxist baggage of self-loathing about national identity as do their woke cousins in America. The EU political class would happily throw out Europe’s Hellenic heritage to permanently install modern Greece’s values of wokeness and socialism.

The EU elite in Brussels is determined to remake the European identity via mass migration, just as the Biden administration sought to blot out long-standing American values through the same tactic. Today, the foreign-born U.S. population is now over 15 percent of the total, unprecedented in modern times, and, while the statistics are muddled, the figures in both France and Germany are also approaching the same level and growing. 

Germany’s Green party wants to see the country disappear in a global wave of non-European migrants. As the party platform explains: “Our land is more diverse than ever. This diversity is a key strength of our society. More and more people [in Germany] with different perspectives and experiences are actively contributing to negotiation processes on how we want to live together as a community.”

To upend the EU’s priorities in Brussels requires changing the German national government in Berlin. It is Berlin, through its checkbook and political pressure, that ultimately conducts the music that comes out of the EU. The plan to end the Brussels agenda, with all its meddling in European national politics, such as the recent elections in Romania, requires winning the battle for Berlin. 

That is why lifting Alice Weidel and her AfD cause is so vital. Vice President J.D. Vance, speaking at the Munich Security Conference back in February, rightly condemned the undemocratic firewall that keeps the AfD and its more than 10 million voters marginalized in Germany’s national politics. Under President Trump, Washington is rightly out of the business of managing domestic politics in other countries. But American leaders do closely observe and can express their opinions, in private and when necessary, in public, on what our putative allies say and do. That is called diplomacy. 

It is true that Anglo-American conservatives, because of history and language, often have a hard time finding common cause with their German counterparts. We must remember that Weidel is fully in step with, say, Nigel Farage and other consequential European conservative leaders who recognize that the out-of-touch political elites in Berlin, Brussels, and Paris are actually climate extremists and woke radicals on a mission. Unlike Merz, Weidel is part of the solution. Let us continue to welcome her and other thoughtful AfD colleagues into our public square. Three cheers for the Hungarians and CPAC Budapest. 

The post CPAC Budapest Brings Alice Weidel up on the Stage appeared first on The American Conservative.