On the 36th anniversary of Imam Khomeini’s passing, Ayatollah Khamenei, his successor, rejected the U.S. plan for Iran’s nuclear program, declaring it completely opposed to the “We Can” doctrine. He emphasized that Iran will continue its uranium enrichment activities, which he stated are no concern of the United States.
Iran’s “We Can” (Persian: Mitevanim) doctrine is a strategic approach that highlights the country’s capacity to overcome obstacles and fulfill its goals through self-reliance and confidence in its own strengths. It represents a pragmatic blend of revolutionary principles with practical national interests.
Speaking at the mausoleum of Imam Khomeini, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei strongly rejected U.S. proposals on Iran’s nuclear program, stating, “The first word of the U.S. is that Iran should not have a nuclear industry and should rely on the United States.” He added, “Our response to America’s nonsense is clear: they cannot do a damn thing in this matter,” and questioned, “Why do you interfere with whether Iran has enrichment or not? It does not concern you.”
Clearly, the old man is angry and willing to accept the consequences of rejecting the only U.S. president who has consistently shown a strong aversion to military conflict.
Khamenei’s comments were in response to proposals from President Donald Trump during indirect nuclear talks, in which the U.S. reportedly insisted that Iran be barred from any uranium enrichment. According to Western media, the latest U.S. proposal, delivered Saturday, would permit limited low-level uranium enrichment on Iranian soil for an unspecified period.
Iran has repeatedly stated that it will not agree to any deal that prohibits uranium enrichment for civilian purposes—a firm red line that directly contradicts the current U.S. position.
While the White House has not denied details of the proposal, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “President Trump has made it clear that Iran can never obtain a nuclear bomb. Special Envoy Witkoff has sent a detailed and acceptable proposal to the Iranian regime, and it’s in their best interest to accept it. Out of respect for the ongoing deal, the Administration will not comment on details of the proposal to the media.”
The NY Times reported on Tuesday that the Trump administration had put forward a proposal that would permit Iran to continue low-level uranium enrichment while the U.S. and its partners work toward a more comprehensive agreement aimed at blocking Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon, allowing it access to fuel for future nuclear power plants.
The plan is designed as a diplomatic bridge meant to transition from the current situation, in which Iran is rapidly producing uranium close to weapons-grade, toward the U.S. objective of eliminating all uranium enrichment on Iranian soil. However, it remains uncertain whether Iran will agree.
According to the proposal, the U.S. would support the construction of nuclear power reactors in Iran and negotiate the establishment of enrichment facilities overseen by a regional consortium. Once Iran begins receiving benefits from this arrangement, it would be required to cease all domestic enrichment activities.
Israel has expressed deep skepticism toward any agreement that permits Iran to retain nuclear capabilities. It has repeatedly argued that the current moment presents a strategic opportunity for a military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, pointing to Tehran’s weakened air defense systems and the diminished strength of its regional allies, Hamas and Hezbollah.
Foreign Policy argued on Monday that the U.S. is presenting a false binary in its standoff with Iran: either Tehran agrees to restrict its nuclear program, or the U.S. will resort to military action. According to the publication, there is a third, more realistic option: maintaining the status quo. FP suggests that Washington should acknowledge that Iran’s nuclear latency is not a sudden crisis but a long-standing reality. The U.S. has effectively been living with a near-nuclear Iran for years, and refusing to recognize this reality, the article warns, will ultimately undermine American interests.
This approach would align neatly with Wall Street’s nickname for the president: “TACO” – Trump Always Chickens Out – in this case reflecting the perception that he avoids direct military confrontations despite his tough rhetoric.
Works with tariffs, too.
