From Peaceful Energy to the Atomic Bomb: Record Calls for Nuclear Weapons in Iran

Calls within Iran demanding the abandonment of previous commitments not to develop nuclear weapons, and a shift toward possessing an atomic bomb, are widening. This transformation has begun moving from hardline circles into the core of political and religious debate, coinciding with rising fears of a renewed war with the United States and the Israeli army.

According to a report published by the American newspaper "The New York Times," voices of Iranian clerics and officials have begun publicly demanding a change in the country's nuclear doctrine, arguing that possessing nuclear weapons has become a necessity for rebuilding deterrence power after the war Iran suffered during the past year.

The report quoted Ali Sabbahvand, the Friday prayer imam in Kuhdasht city in western Iran, saying during last week's sermon: "We must possess nuclear weapons so we can fight criminal America forcefully, God willing," amidst chants from worshippers who repeated: "Nuclear deterrence is our inalienable right."

These demands come at a time when the Iranian leadership is intensifying its diplomatic moves to avoid the outbreak of a new confrontation with Washington and Tel Aviv, amid estimates indicating the possibility of war resuming after the US midterm elections.

A Shift in Position on Nuclear Doctrine
For many years, Iranian authorities publicly adhered to the fatwa of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei prohibiting the development and use of nuclear weapons, considering it a binding religious reference for state institutions, including the military establishment and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

But the report indicated that Western intelligence agencies had detected indicators in previous years of Iran enriching uranium to levels approaching those necessary to develop a nuclear weapon, while American and Israeli officials accused Tehran of seeking to possess the bomb despite its stated position.

In an attempt to contain these concerns, Iran and world powers reached an agreement in 2015 to restrict Iranian nuclear activities, before US President Donald Trump withdrew from it three years later.

Regional analysts believe that Khamenei's previous strategy was based on keeping Iranian nuclear intentions in a gray area, aiming to deter attacks without actually becoming a nuclear state. However, this approach did not prevent the outbreak of two wars launched by the United States and the Israeli army against Iran since June 2025, one of which ended with Khamenei's death last February.

The report quoted Iranian affairs researcher Mohammad Ali Shabani as saying that Tehran found itself in a situation where it paid the price of possessing a nuclear bomb without actually having one, adding that there is a growing feeling inside Iran that the absence of this weapon makes the country vulnerable to pressure and American and Israeli attacks at any time.

The report also noted that Trump's statements regarding the impact of Iran possessing a nuclear weapon on how Washington deals with it may reinforce this trend, as he said during a Republican conference last September that if Iran possessed a nuclear bomb, he would deal with its Supreme Leader differently instead of bombing him.

Withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty
Since the American and Israeli attacks in 2025, calls within Iran have increased for withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which prohibits non-nuclear states from developing such weapons.

During recent weeks, more political and religious figures joined those demanding this direction; prompting analysts to question whether these voices reflect spontaneous debate or a move encouraged by circles within the Iranian leadership.

It remains unclear whether the discussion about changing the nuclear doctrine has reached the new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, but Mohsen Rezaei, a prominent Iranian security official, said in an interview with state television on Saturday that the leadership is indeed discussing the future of this doctrine.

Rezaei added: "No new decision has been taken yet," clarifying that the debate revolves around whether Iran will continue to adhere to the doctrine it followed before the war in case a new confrontation breaks out.