
Daily Kickoff: Pontiff passes post-Yontiff
Good Monday morning.
In today’s Daily Kickoff, we look at the state of U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations, and how Israeli officials are viewing the progression of talks. We spotlight Lee Jacobs and Arielle Zuckerberg’s Long Journey Ventures and interview Democrat Cait Conley, who is mounting a bid to challenge Rep. Mike Lawler. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Larry David, Richard Baker and Amb. Mike Huckabee.
What We’re Watching
- Pope Francis died this morning, setting up a weekslong succession process.
- Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is speaking virtually today at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s nuclear policy conference.
What You Should Know
All eyes will be on Oman this week as technical negotiations begin on Wednesday over Iran’s nuclear program, days after the most recent round of talks between the U.S. and Iran wrapped in Rome, Jewish Insider Executive Editor Melissa Weiss reports.
The parallels between the Obama administration’s early negotiations with Iran and the Trump administration’s current activity are evident.
American and Iranian negotiators are speaking through mediators, not fully disclosing the details of the conversations that took place over the weekend. Israeli officials and U.S. lawmakers most concerned about Iran’s nuclear intentions are sounding increasingly concerned about the direction of the talks.
But despite the similarities, there are some notable differences. Most significantly, President Donald Trump’s support for any deal means that many Republicans could fall in line, given the nature of partisanship in Washington. Democrats, outside of pro-Israel stalwarts, are unlikely to loudly object to the diplomacy, given their widespread support for former President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.
That’s why Israel is also seeking buy-in — Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer was in Rome over the weekend, staying at the same hotel as Trump’s Middle East special envoy, Steve Witkoff. Dermer and Mossad chief David Barnea reportedly met with Witkoff prior to the start of the weekend talks. (More below on the Israeli reaction to the talks.)
In addition, the negotiations have the backing of the Arab world, which finds itself in a markedly different position now than it did a decade ago, when the original Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal was signed.
The Arab Gulf States Institute’s Kristin Smith Diwan told The New York Times that “under Obama, the Gulf States feared U.S. and Iran rapprochement that would isolate them. Under Trump, they fear U.S. and Iran escalation that would target them.” Now, the Times notes, Arab states are being approached by Iran, which is seeking the buy-in of its neighbors to bolster support for an eventual deal.
At least publicly, Iran and the U.S. still appear divided on the talks’ endgame: Iran is pushing for a verification mechanism that would allow it to continue enriching uranium at set levels. The Trump administration, meanwhile, appears split over what, if any, nuclear enrichment capabilities Iran should be allowed to have, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz pushing for full dismantlement of the Iranian nuclear program, while others in the administration, including Witkoff, have said that dismantlement as a red line would collapse any potential deal.
“I think the odds are we’re being taken for a ride,” the American Enterprise Institute’s Danielle Pletka told JI. Pletka acknowledged the ideological split within the White House on the negotiations. Writing in her Substack, she said, “More likely — and I’ll be delighted to eat crow if I’m wrong — the ongoing battle between the Ronald Reagan wing of MAGAland and the Charles Lindbergh wing is causing the President to hedge his bets.”
It’s a sentiment being shared by numerous officials from the first Trump administration. In response to leaked details of what the final deal could entail, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley called the proposal “Obama 2.0.”
It remains an open question as to how Republicans on Capitol Hill will respond to an agreement if one is made — and if they’ll have any leverage to affect the outcome of the deal. The 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act technically requires congressional approval for an administration-brokered deal with Iran — but as with many things in Washington, it’s possible that the Trump administration could find a way to bypass the mandated approvals.
One criticism of the 2015 JCPOA was that it only addressed Iran’s nuclear program, and not its human rights violations, ballistic missile program, support for terrorism and other malign activities. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who is leading the talks for Tehran, said that the American negotiators limited their scope in Saturday’s meetings to nuclear issues.
Writing in The Free Press over the weekend, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned that “a fake deal focused solely on nuclear enrichment will result in far less happiness and more death, not the reverse — not only for the Iranian people but for human beings all across the world.”
There are also echoes of 2015 in the levels of access given to nuclear inspectors — Iran has pushed back on allowing international inspectors full access to all sites. The problem here is the same as it was in 2015 — that it is impossible to verify Iran’s compliance with any agreement if there isn’t a full accounting of Iran’s nuclear work at the deal’s outset.
“Implementing a new deal without having a clear inventory of what nuclear material and infrastructure Iran currently has would be extremely risky,” Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said on X. “Without that baseline, it is next to impossible to ensure that Iran is complying with detailed limits on its nuclear enrichment under a deal.”
Dubowitz pointed out that Araghchi, who was also Iran’s lead negotiator in 2015, “ran circles around [Secretary of State John] Kerry and [Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy] Sherman, who didn’t even know their file.”
“If we repeat 2015,” Dubowitz wrote on Sunday, “shame on us.”
the view from Jerusalem
Israel vows no retreat amid U.S.-Iran nuclear talks

Israel is unhappy with the direction U.S.-Iran talks appear to be taking but continues to be in direct communication with the Trump administration, an Israeli official told Jewish Insider’s Lahav Harkov on Monday after a second round of talks between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic concluded over the weekend. “It sure does look like the JCPOA,” the official said, comparing the details that have been made public from the negotiations to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. “Are we happy with it? I don’t think that’s come across in any of the statements the prime minister has made.”
Key communication: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continued to talk tough on Iran, saying in a recorded statement on Saturday night, “I am committed to preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons. I will not give in on this; neither will I slacken or retreat on this, not even a millimeter.” Still, the official told JI, “at least there is a sense that we are very much a participant in this exercise, in the sense that we are in continuous contact with the U.S. The main thing when you think about our communications with the [Trump] administration and what distinguishes them from the situation with [former President Barack] Obama is that Obama did the talks behind our back. We found out about them from the Mossad, not from the Americans. Here [with the Trump administration] the conversation is intense, multifaceted and continuous.”