Trump says would bomb Iran again if nuclear activities start
In an extraordinary outburst on his Truth Social platform, Trump blasted Tehran for claiming to have won its war with Israel and said he was halting work on possible sanctions relief.
Trump said the United States would bomb Iran again "without question" if the country was still able to enrich uranium to the grade required for nuclear weapons following US strikes.
The US president accused the Iranian leader of ingratitude after Khamenei said in a defiant message that reports of damage to nuclear sites from the US bombings were exaggerated, and said Iran had beaten Israel and dealt Washington a "slap."
"I knew EXACTLY where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life," Trump posted.
"I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, and he does not have to say, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!'"
Trump also said that he had been working in recent days on the possible removal of sanctions against Iran, one of Tehran's long-term demands.
"But no, instead I get hit with a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust, and immediately dropped all work on sanction relief, and more," Trump added, exhorting Iran to return to the negotiating table.
Iran has denied it is set to resume nuclear talks with the United States, after Trump said at a NATO summit in The Hague that negotiations were set to begin again next week.
Its government on Friday rejected a request by Rafael Grossi, the director of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, to visit facilities bombed by Israel and the United States, saying it suggested "malign intent."
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi hit out at Grossi personally in a post on X for not speaking out against the air strikes, accusing him of an "astounding betrayal of his duties."
'Beat to hell'
Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff had expressed hope "for a comprehensive peace agreement."
Asked earlier in a White House press conference whether he would consider fresh air strikes if last week's sorties were not successful in ending Iran's nuclear ambitions, Trump said: "Sure. Without question. Absolutely."
Trump added that Khamenei and Iran "got beat to hell" in the hostilities involving the United States and Israel and that "it was a great time to end it."
In the Truth Social post, the US president accused Khamenei of "blatantly and foolishly" saying Iran won the 12-day war with Israel, adding: "As a man of great faith, he is not supposed to lie."
The war of words comes as a fragile ceasefire holds in the conflict, which erupted on June 13 when Israel launched a bombing campaign that it said aimed to stop its adversary from developing a nuclear weapon.
"Israel acted at the last possible moment against an imminent threat against it, the region and the international community," Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar wrote Friday on X.
"The international community now has an obligation to prevent, through any effective means, the world's most extreme regime from obtaining the most dangerous weapon."
Speculation had swirled about the fate of Khamenei before his first appearance since the ceasefire -- a televised speech on Thursday.
Khamenei hailed what he described as Iran's "victory" over Israel, vowing never to yield to US pressure.
"The American president exaggerated events in unusual ways, and it turned out that he needed this exaggeration," Khamenei said, rejecting Trump's claims Iran's nuclear program had been set back by decades.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
30 minutes ago
- France 24
Iran's thorny IAEA relations hit new low after Israeli, US strikes
The latest phase in Tehran's troubled relations with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) kicked off not long after Israel launched massive, unprecedented strikes on Iran on June 13, killing top Iranian military officials and nuclear scientists. When EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas declared on X that bloc members 'agree' that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei fired a social media salvo. 'How can you express concern over Iran's peaceful program that is under the most robust IAEA's inspections and ignore the fact that the Israeli regime has a huge arsenal of #NuclearWeapons?!' Baqaei posted on X. As a signatory to the UN's nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran is required to accept IAEA inspections. Israel is exempt from nuclear inspections since it's one of only five countries not party to the NPT. While Israel neither confirms nor denies that it possesses nuclear arms, the country is estimated to have at least 80 nuclear weapons, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). It's an old source of grievance among hardliners in the Islamic Republic, and it picked up steam as Israeli bombardments continued. By June 19, Baqaei had IAEA chief Rafael Grossi in his sights. 'You turned IAEA into a tool of convenience for non-NPT members to deprive NPT members of their basic right under Article 4,' the Iranian foreign ministry spokesman told Grossi on X, referring to the treaty's enshrined right to peaceful nuclear activities. The anti-IAEA rhetoric was put into action this week when the Iranian parliament on Wednesday passed a bill to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. The next morning, Iran's constitutional watchdog, the Guardian Council, approved the parliamentary vote. By the end of the day, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi asserted on state TV that the suspension was "binding" following the Guardian Council approval and added that there was 'no doubt about its implementation'. 'Double standards' of a shah-era treaty Iran's decision to suspend cooperation with the IAEA was a regrettable, but not surprising development for diplomats and experts who have worked on the issue for decades. 'It has always been part of the tactics to stop, to interrupt, and to resume the cooperation with the IAEA,' said Jacques Audibert, a diplomat and former negotiator for France on the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. 'Today, they have obvious reasons, because their facilities are supposed to be obliterated. I can imagine that politically it's difficult for them.' 'They've suspended. It's not a withdrawal. And while they're talking about withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty, they haven't done so. Even so, the suspension of the inspections and of the relationship with the IAEA is going to fuel the narrative that Iran intends to build a weapon,' noted James Dorsey, senior fellow at the Singapore-based S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies and host of the popular podcast, 'The Turbulent World of Middle East Soccer'. Iran signed the NPT in 1968, during the reign of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was ousted in the 1979 Islamic Revolution. For over four decades, the Islamic Republic authorities have railed against the 'double standards' that oblige the country to comply with inspection requirements of a shah-era treaty while Israel goes scot-free, developing nuclear weapons without fear of sanctions or Western disfavour. But Iran, unlike North Korea, has never withdrawn from the landmark UN treaty, fearing a devastating response from Israel, or worse, the USA. That deterrence collapsed this month, with the 12-day war killing at least 627 Iranians and wounding nearly 4,900, according to official figures. Human rights groups say the Iranian death toll exceeds 1,000. Meanwhile Iran's retaliatory strikes on Israel killed 28 people, according to Israeli authorities. While US President Donald Trump announced a 'ceasefire' on Monday, Iran has never used the term, describing the cessation of hostilities as a 'halting of retaliatory strikes' against Israel. At a NATO summit in The Hague this week, Trump compared the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities to the 1945 US nuclear attacks on Japan. "When you look at Hiroshima, if you look at Nagasaki, that ended a war, too," Trump said. "This ended a war in a different way." Experts, however, are not at all sure that Trump's touted end of hostilities will hold. 'I think the reason why the United States is insisting on saying, we've done it, we're finished, is that Trump does not want to be drawn into a longer war,' said Dorsey. Playing the long game Trump may be blindsided by the short term, but Iran has a history of playing the long game by adopting a cat-and-mouse strategy with the IAEA. In 2018, when Trump, under his first presidency, withdrew the US from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also called the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Tehran waited for a year for Washington to come back to the deal before announcing its partial withdrawal in May 2019. Two years later, Tehran halted its implementation of the Additional Protocol stipulated in the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which permitted the IAEA enhanced inspection rights – including snap inspections and continuous surveillance. Iran, however, continued to comply with IAEA's Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement after 2021, which permitted access to Iran's declared nuclear sites, until the Israeli strikes this month cut off access to the country. 'Iran adhered to the 2015 international agreement into 2019. When that didn't persuade the Americans to return to the agreement, they progressively started to abandon adherence to various provisions, including the limit on uranium enrichment,' said Dorsey. 'The original reason for enriching to 60% was to pressure the United States to return to the agreement. Circumstances have since changed.' Following the US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, attention has focused on the infamous 408.6 kg of uranium enriched up to 60% that the IAEA in May declared the regime had amassed. Trump and US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth slammed US media for reporting initial intelligence assessments that the strikes only succeeded in pushing back Iran's nuclear program by mere months. They insist the US-Israeli strikes have 'obliterated' and 'decimated' Iran's nuclear capacity. While some Iranian officials admitted the country's nuclear facilities have been heavily damaged, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Thursday insisted that Tehran's enemies 'did not achieve anything from this war. They attacked our nuclear facilities, but they were unable to do anything important.' Audibert is dismissive of the claims and counterclaims on both sides. 'We are in a posturing phase, which is not taking reality into account,' he noted. 'What Khamenei said has no link with reality. He said it's a big victory [for Iran], that Israel almost collapsed, and that Iran slapped the United States in the face. This doesn't make sense. On the other hand, the US defence secretary is trying to explain to everybody that it has been a full success. I'm not putting the two on the same level, but it's the same posturing phase.' Providing a 'pretext' for Israel's 'unlawful attack' For the facts to be established, evidence must be gathered on the ground. While the war on Iran raged for 12 days, the IAEA deemed it impossible to assess the damage to nuclear sites and material on the ground since the UN agency 'lost visibility [on enriched uranium stocks] from the moment hostilities began", Grossi told French TV station France 2 on Wednesday. 'During a war, we cannot inspect, we cannot move. But as soon as hostilities stopped, and especially given the sensitivity surrounding this material, I believe it is in everyone's interest that we resume our activities as soon as possible,' said Grossi. The IAEA chief also slammed Iran's decision to suspend cooperation with the UN watchdog agency. 'Iran's cooperation with us is not a favour, it is a legal obligation as long as Iran remains a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty,' he noted. But Tehran is particularly piqued with the UN nuclear agency after the IAEA board passed a resolution on June 12 declaring that Iran was breaching its non-proliferation obligations. The next day, Israel launched its attacks on Iran. While Israel did not mention the IAEA resolution, US Vice President JD Vance cited the IAEA resolution to make a case for the military action against Iran. In the initial days of the war, Grossi took to the airwaves to repeatedly explain that the IAEA had not assessed that Tehran was building a nuclear weapon. But Grossi's clarifications failed to mollify Iranian authorities. 'This is too late, Mr. Grossi. You obscured this truth in your absolutely biased report,' Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Baqaei said in a post on X, excoriating the IAEA for providing a 'pretext' for Israel's 'unlawful attack on our peaceful nuclear facilities'. On Friday night, amid mounting pressure to establish the facts on the ground, Iran once again slammed Grossi, rejecting his request to visit its nuclear sites. "Grossi's insistence on visiting the bombed sites under the pretext of safeguards is meaningless and possibly even malign in intent," Araghchi said on X. "Iran reserves the right to take any steps in defence of its interests, its people and its sovereignty." Russia wants Iran-IAEA cooperation But apart from its fiery rhetoric, Iran has very little room for maneouvre in its dealings with the IAEA at the UN Security Council. In the event of non-cooperation, such as refusal of access, concealment of materials, or failure to provide justification for the presence of uranium, the IAEA has the right to refer the matter to the UN Security Council, which could result in sanctions, increased diplomatic pressure, or calls for the resumption of negotiations. On the nuclear issue, Iran is isolated at the top rung of the top UN body, with the five veto-holding permanent Security Council members keen to see Tehran back under inspections. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Thursday spoke out against Iran suspending cooperation with the IAEA. "We are interested in continuing cooperation between Iran and the IAEA, so that everybody respects Iran's repeated statements that Iran does not have and will not have plans to develop a nuclear weapon," Lavrov said at a press conference in Moscow. During the recent war, Iran's closest allies, Russia and China, provided rhetorical, but very little concrete support for Iran. Both Russia and China are nuclear powers and permanent UN Security Council members with little appetite to handle a nuclear armed Iran further destabilising the Middle East powder keg region. Withdrawing from the NPT risks further isolation since a UN Security Council resolution could see sanctions that add further burdens to Iran's long-suffering population. 'Suspending inspections is a violation [of the NPT],' said Dorsey. 'This is not a free membership, you sign up to obligations and those obligations include the degree of enrichment and they include inspections.' While some members of the international community may understand Iran's position in the immediate aftermath of the devastating Israeli and US strikes, there will be pressure on Iran to fall in line with its nuclear commitments. 'If Iran does not comply, it's going to be interpreted as retaining the freedom to develop a weapon,' said Dorsey. 'Iran is a country that has been sanctioned for much of the existence of the Islamic Republic since 1979. Let's be clear about it, in that sense, Iran is its own worst enemy.'
France 24
an hour ago
- France 24
'We only have one exit': Life under blockade in West Bank villages
There are currently nearly 900 movement obstacles in the West Bank, including checkpoints, concrete roadblocks, earthmounds, and, notably, iron gates locked at the entrances to Palestinian villages. The UN's humanitarian agency OCHA recorded 205 of these gates in May 2025, with most being closed or intermittently controlled by the Israeli army. This policy of closure has intensified since the start of the war in Gaza in October 2023, and further, with the Israel-Iran war, making daily life for Palestinians even more challenging. In August 2023, OCHA documented 645 permanent obstacles across the West Bank, including 118 iron gates. In January 2025, the Israeli army erected 18 new gates, obstructing access to major roads from Palestinian urban areas, according to The Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission. 'Here, in Ras Karkar, we only have one entry and exit point' The FRANCE 24 Observers team spoke with Hatem Nofal, head of the local emergency commission: The gates are locked. The army moves from the gate of Dar Ammar to that of Khartbatha, and then elsewhere. These are constant patrols. Here, in Ras Karkar, we only have one entry and exit point, with no alternative routes. This road is very difficult and dangerous: the army can shoot, arrest, or leave you stranded for hours in your car. Since the start of the Israel-Iran war, the gates have been completely closed. For instance, there is a total blockade at the Al-Askar gate. Cars cannot pass through. Only pedestrians are allowed to cross on foot. Within a 500-metre radius of Ras Karkar, five gates are closed, including at Ras Karkar, Deir Ammar, and Kharbatha Bani Harith. Residents have to walk between these gates, sometimes as far as 400-500 metres, and then get a car to go to Ramallah or to work. The Palestinian villages of Ras Karkar and Al-Janiya, home to an estimated 4,000 to 5,000 residents combined, are surrounded by seven to nine Israeli settlements. These settlements include Talmon B, Dolev, Nerya, Harsha, Kerem Reim, and Zayit Raanan. The entrance gate to Al-Janiya has been closed for over 15 years, because it is located less than 100 metres from an Israeli settlement. The Israeli army maintains that this close proximity poses a risk of friction with settlers. The only remaining access for Al-Janiya residents is through Ras Karkar, which itself faces severe restrictions. Colonial pressure significantly reduces the buildable land for Palestinians. Nofal says that out of 20 square kilometres, Israeli authorities have authorised only 600 square metres for construction. In late May 2025, Israel announced the legalisation of 22 new outposts in the West Bank. At least two of them – Harsha and Zayit Raanan – directly impact the Ras Karkar region, being both located in the immediate vicinity of the village. Their regularisation tightens the grip around Ras Karkar and intensifies movement restrictions. 'We have four ambulances prepared to be dispatched wherever there's a need' With his group of volunteers, Nofal is working tirelessly to organise the delivery of food to Ras Karkar, as well as the transport of the sick to Ramallah hospital: We've formed an emergency commission to support the population in times of need. In each village, we have groups of 10 to 30 people, depending on its size. We're connected by radio, ready to intervene in any emergency. We have four ambulances prepared to be dispatched wherever there's a need, such as in case of a fire or a medical issue. We work with local councils, Palestinian authorities, and sometimes even with the Israelis to allow the passage of essential goods like food, medicine, gas, and fuel. Getting to Ramallah: an obstacle race The nearest public hospital to Ras Karkar is in Ramallah, located 14 kilometres away. But getting there means walking 400 to 500 metres between several closed gates, then hoping to find a vehicle whenever possible. Before, it would take barely 15 minutes to get to Ramallah hospital. Now, you have to walk between the gates, sometimes for 400 to 500 metres, and then find a car. It takes at least 45 minutes, sometimes longer if the army blocks the road or confiscates car keys. Since vehicles cannot pass through the gates, Nofal says the goods must be transferred from vehicle to vehicle or carried by hand. Residents are at the mercy of the soldiers to allow essential supplies to pass. We transfer food, medicine, and gas by hand, from one gate to another. Sometimes, we have to cross roads reserved for Israeli settlers, which is forbidden for us. The case of Ras Karkar is emblematic of the fragmentation of the West Bank, where 900 obstacles – including over 200 locked iron gates – have been documented, and colonial expansion continues despite international condemnation.
Euronews
5 hours ago
- Euronews
A placated Trump and an EU-Canada love fest
The leaders of the NATO countries met in The Hague for their annual summit. In view of the latent Russian threat, they agreed on a drastic increase in collective defense spending. But it was also about satisfying the unpredictable man in the White House. Does this solve all the problems now? For decades, Europe has been the most loyal ally of the United States. That's what most political and military leaders on both sides of the Atlantic understood Europe's role on the world stage to be. That today is insufficient, as US president Trump treats his faithful allies as if they were devious freeloaders. That's why the prospect of being abandoned by the US produces existential angst among Europeans. Who would lead the western defense in case of a Russian attack? In The Hague, European NATO allies agreed to invest more in the defense of their own continent: the target is now 5% of GDP over the next few years. Is this realistic for everyone? Is it enough? Does it come with a new strategic role for Europe? And most important: will it placate Washington in the years to come? Questions our guests discussed this week: Kathleen Van Brempt, a Belgian member of the European Parliament from the Social Democrats, Matthew Robinson, director of the Euro-Gulf Information Centre, and Karel Lannoo, chief executive of the Centre for European Policy Studies. The NATO summit was overshadowed by the Middle East conflict. After all, the largest and most important member of the alliance became a party to the war there. The US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities came in support of Israel and ultimately brought about a ceasefire - but this was broken just hours later. Does diplomacy still have a real chance after all? The problem: there are still too few answers to too many questions. Is Trump's decision like kicking a hornet's nest? What real damage have the bombings caused? Is the Iranian nuclear program now history? And what about regime change in Tehran? Does Trump want one or does he not? And how could this be achieved without a military invasion? And finally: what about the ceasefire? Finally: Thank you Donald Trump! The US president's behavior has practically turned his neighbor Canada and the European Union into political lovers. Trump's threat of the 51st federal state was echoed in this country by talk of the 28th member state of the EU. This week, the leaders of the EU and Canada met in Brussels for a summit - which also focused on defence. But that's not all: the bilateral security and defence pact, that was signed here, is the most far-reaching agreement that Europe has ever entered into with a third country. This will open up new avenues for joint work on crisis management, military mobility, maritime security, cyber and cyber threats, and defence industrial co-operation. Is Canada replacing the US as a favorite partner in North America?
