Iran's top security official has suggested that Tehran could reconsider its longstanding rejection of nuclear weapons, arguing that US attacks on Iran have strengthened the global case for acquiring an atomic bomb as a deterrent, Iran International reported. The remarks frame Washington's pressure campaign as the trigger for a possible shift in Tehran's nuclear doctrine.

In an interview with state broadcaster IRIB reported by ANI, Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), said that instead of nuclear security, US President Donald Trump had created "nuclear insecurity." He argued that the attacks had pushed the world's desire for the atomic bomb higher, particularly once other countries saw that International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) membership and Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) compliance failed to stop an American strike. The comments mark one of the most direct nuclear signals yet from a figure now sitting at the centre of Tehran's security decision-making.

Rezaei maintained that Iran itself has complied with international nuclear regulations. The country, he said, has remained a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty — which it signed in 1968 as a non-nuclear-weapon state, forswearing atomic arms under a bargain that trades compliance for access to peaceful nuclear technology — and has permitted inspections under international safeguards. Iran's rejection of the bomb also carries a religious dimension that the treaty record alone does not capture: a fatwa from Ali Khamenei, who held the Supreme Leader's office before Mojtaba Khamenei, declaring weapons of mass destruction forbidden has long been cited by officials as the foundation of Tehran's nuclear doctrine. Rezaei framed Washington's campaign as undermining rather than reinforcing the very nonproliferation system it claims to defend.

Rezaei's position gives the remarks particular institutional weight. A former commander-in-chief of the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), he was appointed to the SNSC secretary role on August 9, 2026, replacing Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, and was named in the same decree as Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei's direct representative on the council — a position that places him at the centre of decisions on war, regional proxies and diplomacy. He has previously flagged the possibility of a doctrine shift, telling Iranian media in May that continued threats could push Tehran to withdraw from the NPT altogether — a step the treaty's Article X permits on three months' notice, a route North Korea took with its 2003 exit. Analysts have read his appointment as reflecting a possible shift in Iran's security doctrine toward more assertive deterrence.

The latest remarks land as Trump presses what he has called an "Economic D-Day" against Iran — described as the most crushing economic operation ever taken against any country — targeting the oil smuggling networks, financial transfers, exchange houses, ship registries and front companies used to sustain Tehran's economy, according to reporting cited by the Tribune. The campaign is running alongside a continued shipping standstill at the Strait of Hormuz. Trump has separately insisted that Iran will never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon, and has warned that Washington would not permit its use.

Analysts remain split on how to read Rezaei's rise and rhetoric. Some see his appointment as domestic cover intended to give any eventual negotiated settlement with Washington military credibility and internal buy-in. Others, including international relations academics cited by Al Jazeera, view it as evidence that Iran's security establishment is shifting toward a doctrine of offensive deterrence built on the threat of punishment rather than reliance on diplomacy.

Market commentary accompanying the report noted that any credible signal that Iran might reconsider its non-nuclear posture adds a new layer of geopolitical risk premium to oil markets already pricing in disruption at the Strait of Hormuz — the chokepoint through which roughly a fifth of global oil trade passes — and an active blockade. Because the statement came from the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council rather than a peripheral commentator, it carries more institutional weight than earlier statements from hardline figures and could sharpen market attention on any future move by Tehran to restrict IAEA access or accelerate enrichment activity.

The same commentary suggested that the timing, alongside Washington's escalating economic pressure campaign, indicates Tehran may be using nuclear ambiguity as a bargaining chip rather than signalling an imminent policy change — something traders may treat as rhetorical leverage for now rather than a hard catalyst. It added that continued uncertainty over Iran's nuclear trajectory is likely to keep a floor under risk premia in oil and support safe-haven flows until clearer signals emerge, whether through diplomatic channels or a formal doctrine announcement from Tehran.

With sanctions escalating, the Strait of Hormuz still contested and nuclear ambiguity now being voiced from the top of Iran's security apparatus, the report concluded that the coming weeks are likely to test whether the rhetoric amounts to calculated pressure on Washington or an early marker of a genuine strategic shift.

Earlier, related coverage: Iran dismisses new US sanctions as desperate as Hormuz shipping standstill continues