Trump Threatens Iran with Military Action Over Nuclear Program as DNI Gabbard Claims Tehran Isn’t Building Bombs

Washington, D.C., April 1, 2025 – President Donald Trump escalated tensions with Iran this week, issuing a stark warning of military action if Tehran refuses to negotiate a new nuclear deal, even as Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard testified that U.S. intelligence finds no evidence of an active Iranian nuclear weapons program. The conflicting narratives—Trump’s aggressive rhetoric versus Gabbard’s measured assessment—have thrust the U.S.-Iran standoff into the spotlight, raising questions about the administration’s strategy and the potential for a miscalculation that could ignite conflict in the Middle East.

Trump’s Ultimatum: “Bombing or a Deal”

On March 30, Trump delivered a blunt message to Iran during a phone interview with NBC News, saying, “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing, and it will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.” The threat followed Iran’s rejection of direct negotiations, with President Masoud Pezeshkian insisting on March 31 that trust must be rebuilt after years of broken promises, per the Associated Press. Trump doubled down aboard Air Force One later that day, hinting at secondary tariffs—“like I did four years ago”—if Tehran stalls, though he gave no firm timeline beyond “a couple of weeks” for progress.

The president’s rhetoric marks a return to his “maximum pressure” playbook from his first term, when he withdrew the U.S. from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and reimposed crippling sanctions. Trump’s latest push stems from a letter sent to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei earlier this month, urging talks to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program—a demand Tehran rebuffed via Oman, according to Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. “They cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Trump reiterated on March 27, framing the issue as non-negotiable.

Posts on X reflect the public’s unease, with some users warning, “Trump’s itching for a fight,” while others speculate he’s bluffing to force concessions. The White House has not clarified whether “bombing” would involve U.S. or Israeli strikes—or both—leaving allies and adversaries guessing.

Gabbard’s Testimony: No Nukes in Sight

Complicating Trump’s saber-rattling, DNI Tulsi Gabbard told the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 25 that “the intelligence community continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” Her remarks, part of the annual threat assessment, directly undercut the premise of an imminent Iranian nuclear threat, aligning with decades of U.S. intelligence findings since the George W. Bush era.

Gabbard acknowledged Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile—now at 274.8 kilograms at 60% purity, per the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—is “unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.” Experts note this puts Tehran within weeks of weapons-grade material (90% purity) if it chose to pursue a bomb, yet Gabbard stressed there’s “no evidence” of that intent. She flagged an “erosion of a decades-long taboo” in Iran on publicly discussing nuclear weapons, suggesting internal advocates may be gaining ground—a nuance Trump’s threats could amplify.

Her testimony drew sharp reactions. On X, one user hailed it as “proof Trump’s getting real intel, not WMD lies,” while critics like Yahoo News’ Mark Toth argued Gabbard “threw Iran a nuclear lifeline,” accusing her of downplaying the danger. European intelligence, per Fox News, reportedly diverges, suspecting Tehran is covertly advancing toward a testable weapon, though no hard proof has surfaced.

A High-Stakes Standoff

Trump’s threats come amid a volatile regional backdrop. Iran’s missile attacks on Israel in 2024, coupled with its support for proxies like the Houthis and Hezbollah, have heightened fears of escalation. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, appearing on CBS’ Face the Nation on March 30, warned Iran to “give [its nuclear program] up or there will be consequences,” hinting at military readiness. Reports of B-2 Stealth Bombers deploying to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, noted by The War Zone on March 31, signal U.S. preparations, while Iran has readied ballistic missiles in underground silos, per the Tehran Times.

Meloni’s government in Italy, a key U.S. ally, watches warily as Vice President JD Vance plans an April 18-20 visit to Rome—potentially a platform to align on Iran policy. Meloni, who met Trump at Mar-a-Lago in January, has backed his hardline stance but urged diplomacy, a tension Vance may navigate.

Iranian hardliners, meanwhile, are seizing on Trump’s rhetoric. Lawmaker Ahmad Naderi told parliament last week that “perhaps it’s time to rethink our nuclear doctrine,” per Al Jazeera, a sentiment echoed by Khamenei adviser Ali Larijani on March 31, who warned an attack would push Tehran toward weaponization. Khamenei’s 2003 fatwa against nuclear arms holds, but his March 8 vow of a “tooth-breaking response” to U.S. and Israeli aggression suggests a tipping point looms.

Global Ripple Effects

The U.S.-Iran clash reverberates beyond the Middle East. China and Russia, hosting Iran in Beijing talks on March 14, aim to counter Western sanctions, while France, Germany, and the UK threaten to “snap back” UN sanctions via the JCPOA—a move Tehran calls provocation. The Iranian rial hit 1,000,000 to the dollar on March 31, per Al Jazeera, reflecting economic strain that could either force negotiations or harden defiance.

For Trump, the standoff tests his “America First” doctrine. Allies worry his unilateral threats—echoing his Munich Security Conference jabs at Europe—could fray NATO cohesion, especially if Gabbard’s isolationist leanings shape intelligence sharing. Posts on X speculate Musk’s influence, given his Meloni ties, might nudge Trump toward tech-driven solutions over bombs.

What’s Next?

As April dawns, the U.S. faces a paradox: Trump’s war drums clash with Gabbard’s no-nukes verdict, risking a policy built on shaky ground. Will he greenlight strikes absent clear evidence, or pivot to tariffs and talks? Iran’s next move—diplomacy via Oman or defiance via missiles—could dictate the outcome. For now, the world braces for a showdown where bluster meets reality, and the stakes couldn’t be higher.