Trump rules out nuclear strike on Iran, signals possible military response if tensions resume

US President Donald Trump has ruled out using nuclear weapons against Iran, saying conventional military action has already been sufficient and that nuclear force should never be used. He said Iran may have used a temporary ceasefire to rebuild parts of its military, but claimed the US could quickly respond if needed. Trump also pushed for a long-term agreement with Iran, while warning that tensions could still affect global energy prices and stability around the Strait of Hormuz.

US President Donald Trump has ruled out the use of nuclear weapons against Iran, while making a series of wide-ranging comments on the ongoing tensions between Washington, Tehran, and Israel, as well as the fragile ceasefire arrangement currently in place.
Speaking at the White House, Trump dismissed the idea of nuclear escalation, saying there was no need for such weapons given what he described as significant US military success against Iran using conventional force. He insisted that Iran had already been “decimated” without nuclear arms and added that nuclear weapons should never be used by any nation under any circumstances, reinforcing his stated position against nuclear escalation in the conflict.
Trump also addressed the recent ceasefire, suggesting that Iran may have used the temporary pause in fighting to rebuild or reposition parts of its military capacity. However, he argued that even if this had occurred, the United States would be capable of quickly neutralising any renewed threat. He claimed that Iran’s navy, air force, and air defence systems had been heavily damaged during the conflict, significantly reducing its military capability.
Despite this, he acknowledged the possibility that Iran may have taken advantage of the two-week truce to “reload” certain weapons systems or restore limited capacity, but maintained that US forces could “knock that out” in a very short time if necessary. His remarks reflected continued US readiness to respond militarily if the ceasefire breaks down or if hostilities resume.
On the diplomatic front, Trump said he was focused on securing a long-term and durable agreement with Iran rather than a temporary arrangement. He stated that while a deal could potentially be reached quickly, his preference was for a lasting settlement that would prevent future conflict. He also referenced earlier warnings issued during the height of tensions, including threats of severe consequences, but noted that a ceasefire had since been agreed upon and extended following negotiations.
Trump further commented on the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical shipping routes for oil exports. He claimed that the United States had “total control” over the waterway and suggested that Iran had agreed to reopen it as part of broader discussions. He linked the issue directly to global energy markets, arguing that control of the strait had significant economic implications, including Iran’s ability to generate substantial daily revenue from oil exports.
The US president also warned that American consumers could experience higher energy prices in the short term as global oil markets continue to react to instability in the Middle East. He attributed recent price pressures to the ongoing conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran, which has disrupted regional stability and raised concerns about supply routes.
Reiterating his central foreign policy objective, Trump said the United States is seeking to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, which he described as a major threat to both regional security in the Middle East and global safety. He argued that such weapons could endanger major cities and escalate conflicts beyond control. Iran, however, continues to deny any intention of developing nuclear weapons, and international nuclear monitoring agencies have previously stated that there was no evidence indicating an imminent move toward building a nuclear bomb.
The comments come amid continued geopolitical tensions in the region, with the ceasefire viewed as fragile and dependent on ongoing diplomatic efforts, military posturing, and broader negotiations involving energy security, regional stability, and nuclear non-proliferation concerns.