Iranian officials and politicians send mixed signals on nukes

At the end of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's November 2 speech to a handpicked audience, a young man described by media as "a student" urged him to equip Iran with nuclear weapons. Khamenei replied, "Iran will be armed with whatever we need to confront the enemies."

State-controlled media interpreted Khamenei’s response as a positive answer to the young man's question. However, within hours, the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman, who had previously stated, “The nature of the Islamic Republic is peaceful, but we will be armed with anything needed to defend Iran,” backtracked, clarifying, “We rule out weapons of mass destruction, but we will be armed with whatever is necessary.”

Iran’s military and regional influence has recently weakened, as Israel has significantly degraded Hamas and Hezbollah’s capabilities and launched an offensive strike on Iran on October 26 with dozens of warplanes. In response, Islamic ruling establishment's officials and commentators in Tehran have hinted at possible shifts in military doctrine, including the potential pursuit of nuclear weapons.

On November 1, Iran’s former foreign minister and currently an advisor to Khamenei, Kamal Kharrazi said in an interview that "If the Islamic Republic of Iran faces an existential threat, we would have no choice but to adjust our military doctrine.”

Subsequently, political observers from various insider factions came up with their own justifications and denials about the Islamic Republic's plans to make nuclear bombs.

Hardline commentator Abbas Salimi-Namin stated, “We are not bluffing about making nuclear weapons, but we do not believe in it!” He continued, “We have conventional weapons to defend ourselves with dignity. At the same time, we are on course to end the Zionist regime at the lowest possible cost.”

Salimi-Namin clarified that Kamal Kharrazi was not suggesting a shift in Iran’s nuclear doctrine. Instead, he indicated that Iran does not intend to address the issue of Israel through military force. “Although we have the [nuclear] capability, we adhere to our previously declared position of not using nuclear weapons,” he stated.

This reflects a retreat by both an official close to Khamenei and a hardline commentator from earlier bold statements about potentially going nuclear.

Salimi-Namin also reiterated that Iran’s solution for the Palestinian issue remains a referendum. “We believe in this approach and do not need nuclear weapons,” he emphasized.

He added that Iran has only acted in response to aggression and argued that it is in the West’s interest to control Israel, as global condemnation of Israel also implicates the United States.

Centrist politician Ezzatollah Yousefian-Molla emphasized in an interview with Nameh News that “nuclear weapons are meant to boost a country’s deterrence power; they are not necessarily intended for use.”

However, he added, “If we find our weapons inadequate compared to those of our enemy, the fatwa [religious decree by Khamenei] prohibiting nuclear bomb development might be reconsidered.”

Discussing potential shifts in Iran’s nuclear doctrine, Yousefian-Molla explained that religious decrees are often adaptable. He cited the 19th-century fatwa banning tobacco, which was later revised by Muslim scholars when the political context changed. He reiterated that religious rulings can be modified to protect the regime, while noting, “We will never strike first; we respond only if attacked.”

Meanwhile, hardline lawmaker Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani remarked, “A shift in our nuclear doctrine will enhance our deterrence power,” clarifying that the goal is not to produce nuclear weapons but to strengthen Iran’s defense capabilities.

“We have already paid the price,” he stated referring to years of economic sanction, “and now we need to take the final step. The Supreme Leader has said our response to Israel will be proportionate to their attack. But what will we do if Israel uses nuclear weapons?”