JERUSALEM – After 12 days of fighting, President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared victory against Iran’s nuclear program. 

Trump declared three nuclear sites had been obliterated, as Netanyahu announced that Israel had ‘removed an immediate dual existential threat: both in the nuclear domain and in the area of ballistic missiles’ – achievements the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) failed to reach throughout some 20 years of monitoring Iran’s nuclear activities. 

Dr. Or Rabinowitz, a nuclear proliferation scholar from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a visiting associate professor at Stanford University, told Fox News Digital that the IAEA ‘cannot, by itself, stop a country that wants to divert nuclear material and technology from its civilian program to its military program.’ 

‘It can warn, and that’s what it has been doing,’ she said. ‘Sometimes these warnings led to United Nations Security Council resolutions, and sometimes they didn’t, but the IAEA by itself, can’t do more than that – it is only as strong as the board members and the countries that participate in it.’

Days before Israel launched its military assault on Iran with the aim of removing the nuclear – and conventional – weapons threat, the global nuclear watchdog reported that Iran had an estimated 408.6 kilograms (nearly 901 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60%, enough to make some nine nuclear bombs. 

The report, which also criticized Iran’s lack of cooperation with the IAEA, prompted the agency’s board of governors, for the first time in 20 years, to declare that the Islamic Republic was in breach of its non-proliferation obligations.

‘We shouldn’t be surprised by this failure, and we should add to this failure, the failure of the United Nations,’ said Dr. Yoel Guzansky, a senior fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University. 

Guzansky highlighted the fact that just a week ago, in the midst of launching hundreds of ballistic missiles into Israeli towns and cities, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi addressed the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva. 

‘Iran was welcomed there, and Israel was bashed,’ he noted.  

‘It just shows that the U.N. system has long failed, and is long in need of remodeling, remaking, rebuilding,’ Guzansky continued, adding that compared to other U.N. bodies, ‘the IAEA is fairly okay.’

‘It’s not black and white, it has had some achievements, but it depends on what your expectations are,’ he continued. ‘I don’t think anyone expected that the IAEA would entirely prevent Iran.’

Guzansky said that two decades of inspections and such reports had actually allowed Israel, and the U.S., to ‘gather intelligence and an understanding of Iran’s nuclear program’ – a fact that was tested over the past week and a half. 

Iran has consistently maintained that all its nuclear activities were entirely peaceful and that it would never seek to develop or acquire nuclear weapons. 

‘The real problem here isn’t necessarily the IAEA, it’s that Iran has been cheating for 20 years and has not been playing a straight bat,’ said Alan Mendoza, Executive Director of the Henry Jackson Society.

‘Iran has been confusing and tricking and secretly developing programs, which the IAEA has not been able to access,’ he said, adding, ‘so, in many ways, it’s not the IAEA fault, per se, it doesn’t have any enforcement capabilities — its job is just to monitor.’ 

Mendoza also said that Iran’s ability to advance its nuclear ambitions and enrich uranium to weapons grade level was ‘really the fault of the international community, rather than an agency.’ 

‘This could have been cracked down upon years ago, as we have now seen, whether by military or other means, to actually force Iran into compliance,’ he said. 

‘What this ultimately shows you is that when you have an international malefactor who continues to want to game the system, the only way to deal with them is to blow up the system and say, ‘Okay, you want to play it that way,’ well, here’s our response.’

Despite the U.S. and Israel’s successful use of force, the IAEA has held back from commending their actions. 

At an emergency session of the agency’s board members on Monday, Rafael Grossi, the IAEA’s Director General, was still urging diplomacy and warning that fighting risked ‘collapsing the global nuclear Non Proliferation regime.’ 

‘There is still a path for diplomacy, we must take it, otherwise violence and destruction could reach unimaginable levels, and the global Non-Proliferation regime that has underpinned international security for more than half a century could crumble and fall,’ he said, without a word about Iran’s lack of transparency and its clear violation of international agreements over more than two decades. 

But on Tuesday, two days after the U.S. military carried out massive precision strikes on three key nuclear sites in Iran, Grossi told Fox News’ Martha MacCallum that his agency did not know where nearly 900 pounds of potentially enriched uranium is now located, after Iranian officials said it had been removed for protective measures ahead of the US strikes on nuclear facilities in Iran.

‘Like all the international bodies who have been condemning US and Israeli action, these organizations exist for the purpose solely of diplomacy,’ Mendoza said, adding, ‘The agency doesn’t have any military function. It has no recourse to it. It can’t call for it, so, if you think about it, all they’re doing is merely protecting their position within the international system.’

Requests for a response from the IAEA were not immediately answered on Wednesday.

A Democratic lawmaker hurled profanity at White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller on Wednesday, going on to imply that Miller is a Nazi.

Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wisc., made the statement on social media in response to some of Miller’s commentary on New York City. Miller was discussing democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani’s victory in the Democratic primary for New York City’s mayoral election, saying unchecked immigration was a major contributor to the city’s leftward slide in recent years.

‘NYC is the clearest warning yet of what happens to a society when it fails to control migration,’ Miller wrote.

Pocan chimed in: ‘Racist ****. Go back to 1930’s Germany.’

Pocan weighed in on Mamdani’s win multiple times, lashing out at another user who claimed the democratic nominee, who is Muslim, supports ‘Sharia Law.’

‘I love watching MAGA nut jobs spinning total bull**** to overcome blatant racism and xenophobia,’ Pocan responded to the post. ‘People want progressive populism that focuses on making their lives better, not redistribution of wealth from working people to the wealthiest. Trumpism is on the decline.’

Republicans have capitalized on Mamdani’s victory as evidence of the extremism of the current Democratic Party. The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) was among the first to make the connection.

‘The new face of the Democrat Party just dropped, and it’s straight out of a socialist nightmare,’ they wrote in an email.

Aiming to tie House Democrats to Mamdani, NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella argued that ‘every vulnerable House Democrat will own him, and every Democrat running in a primary will fear him.’

Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York, a top ally of President Donald Trump who is seriously considering a run for Empire State governor next year, also pounced. Stefanik claimed that ‘a radical, Defund-the-Police, Communist, raging Antisemite will most likely win the New York City Democrat Mayoral primary.’

Vice President JD Vance also weighed in, writing, ‘Congratulations to the new leader of the Democratic Party’ in a post on Blue Sky, a social media platform frequented by progressives.

Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.

Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, wants President Donald Trump to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

The lawmaker is introducing a resolution Wednesday that declares the U.S. Senate ‘calls on the Norwegian Nobel Committee to award President Donald John Trump the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize,’ ‘urges all peace-loving nations to join in that call’ and ‘expresses its deepest appreciation to President Trump for bringing an end both to the nuclear program of Iran and hostilities related thereto in only 12 days.’

President Barack Obama was awarded the prize in 2009, less than one year after taking office.

‘Obama won the Nobel, then he killed hundreds of civilians and did nothing to stop Forever Wars,’ Moreno declared in a post on X. ‘Now President Trump did what neocons said couldn’t be done—destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities & securing a ceasefire. It’s time to formally nominate him.’

Rep. Earl ‘Buddy’ Carter, R-Ga., who is running for U.S. Senate, also nominated Trump for the award this week.

In a nomination letter, the congressman said he was nominating Trump ‘in recognition of his extraordinary and historic role in brokering an end to the armed conflict between Israel and Iran and preventing the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism from obtaining the most lethal weapon on the planet.’

‘His leadership at this moment exemplifies the very ideals that the Nobel Peace Prize seeks to recognize: the pursuit of peace, the prevention of war, and the advancement of international harmony,’ Carter’s letter declared.

Fox News’ Tyler Olson contributed to this report

The Trump White House is waiving executive privilege for key former Biden administration aides who have been summoned by Republicans on the House Oversight Committee.

Chair James Comer, R-Ky., is probing the alleged cover-up of former President Joe Biden’s mental decline. 

Letters obtained by Fox News Digital via a source familiar with the matter show the Trump administration will not allow the people of interest in Comer’s probe to use their past White House work as a legal shield.

Deputy Counsel to the President Gary Lawkowski sent the letters to former Biden Chief of Staff Ron Klain, former senior advisors Anita Dunn, Steve Ricchetti, Mike Donilon, Annie Tomasini, Bruce Reed and Ashley Williams, and Anthony Bernal, former advisor to former first lady Jill Biden.

‘In light of the unique and extraordinary nature of the matters under investigation, President Trump has determined that an assertion of executive privilege is not in the national interest, and therefore is not justified, with respect to particular subjects within the purview of the House Oversight Committee,’ the letters said.

‘Those subjects include your assessment of former President Biden’s fitness for the office of the President and your knowledge of who exercised executive powers during his administration.’

Both congressional Republicans and the White House are investigating whether those senior Biden aides played any role in keeping concerns about the elderly former president’s mental acuity shielded from the public eye and even from lower-level White House staff.

It is not clear if any of the aforementioned former Biden aides planned to claim executive privilege in communications with the committee, but it is not unheard of for a new administration to waive it for investigations involving its predecessor.

The Biden administration waived executive privilege for records sought by the now-defunct House select committee on the Jan. 6 Capitol attack in 2021.

The Biden White House also rejected executive privilege claims made by Peter Navarro and Michael Flynn in that panel’s investigation. However, the latest movement in Comer’s probe comes after he and committee staff held their first closed-door interview with one of Biden’s former aides.

Neera Tanden appeared on Capitol Hill for an hourslong sworn deposition Tuesday. As it had for others, the Trump White House waived any claim to executive privilege for Tanden’s sitdown.

She told reporters afterward that there was ‘absolutely not’ any effort by senior aides to disguise Biden’s mental state.

‘I answered every question, was pleased to discuss my public service, and it was a thorough process, and I’m glad I answered everyone’s question,’ Tanden also said.

A source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that Tanden testified she had minimal interaction with Biden in her role as staff secretary.

‘To obtain approval for autopen signatures, she would send decision memos to members of the President’s inner circle. She stated that she was not aware of what actions or approvals occurred between the time she sent the memo and the time she received it back with approval,’ the source said.

Bernal is set to sit down with Comer and investigators for his own testimony on Thursday.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy thanked President Donald Trump after they had a talk Wednesday at the NATO summit in the Netherlands — months after Vice President JD Vance called out Zelenskyy for not voicing more gratitude for U.S. support for Kyiv as it battles Moscow. 

When Zelenskyy visited the White House in February he sparred openly with Trump and Vance in the Oval Office over engaging in diplomacy with Russia to end the conflict, prompting Vance to ask the Ukrainian leader if he’d ‘said thank you once this entire meeting.’

But on Wednesday Zelenskyy made sure to thank Trump and the U.S. in a post on X following their meeting in The Hague. 

‘We covered all the truly important issues. I thank Mr. President, I thank the United States. We discussed how to achieve a ceasefire and a real peace,’ Zelenskyy said in a post on X on Wednesday. ‘We spoke about how to protect our people. We appreciate the attention and the readiness to help bring peace closer. Details will follow.’

Trump, Vance and Zelenskyy’s infamous Oval Office meeting in February started after Zelenskyy challenged Vance’s statements that diplomacy was the correct avenue to end the conflict. Zelenskyy questioned the value of diplomacy, noting that Russian President Vladimir Putin has broken other agreements in the past.

‘What kind of diplomacy, JD, you are speaking about?’ Zelenskyy said. ‘What do you mean?’

Vance said, ‘I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country.’

‘Mr. President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media,’ Vance said. ‘Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the president for bringing it, to bring it into this country.’

Following the tense exchange, Trump announced a halt to peace negotiations and said that Zelenskyy could return to the White House when he was ‘ready’ for peace. Just after leaving the White House, Zelenskyy issued a post on X thanking the U.S., Trump, Congress and the American people for backing Ukraine. 

Although Zelenskyy and Trump continued to exchange harsh barbs at one another following the Oval Office visit, they’ve subsequently spoken over the phone and met in person at St. Peter’s Basilica in Vatican City during Pope Francis’ April funeral. 

Meanwhile, Trump said Wednesday that his administration has not been able to finalize a peace deal with Ukraine and Russia, claiming that both leaders have been more challenging to work with than expected. 

‘Vladimir Putin has been more difficult,’ Trump told reporters Wednesday. ‘Frankly, I had some problems with Zelenskyy. You may have read about him, and it’s been more difficult than other wars.’ 

Still, Trump said that his meeting with Zelenskyy went smoothly, and that he would be speaking to Putin as well. 

‘He’s very nice, actually,’ Trump said of Zelenskyy. ‘A little rough at times. He couldn’t have been nicer. I think he’d like to see an end to this.’ 

An Israeli assessment determined that the U.S. strikes on Iran set the country’s nuclear program back ‘many years.’ 

The Israel Atomic Energy Commission said that the U.S. destroyed ‘critical infrastructure’ at the Fordow nuclear facility and rendered it ‘inoperable.’

‘The devastating U.S. strike on Fordow destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable. We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, have set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years,’ the Israel Atomic Energy Commission said in a statement. ‘The achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material.’

The Israeli assessment seemingly aligns with the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei’s statement on the status of the site. According to The Associated Press, Baghaei said that the country’s ‘nuclear installations have been badly damaged, that’s for sure.’

In the early hours of June 22 local time, Iran’s Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear facilities were hit. U.S. B-2 stealth bombers used 30,000-pound bunker busters on Fordow, which was Iran’s main underground enrichment site. 

Israel hit the site again on Monday as the country carried out strikes on roads leading to the underground facility.

The latest strike on Fordow comes as the Israel Defense Forces said Israel also launched a series of strikes targeting the notorious Evin prison and several Iranian military command centers in an ‘ongoing effort to degrade the Iranian regime’s military capabilities.’

Iran’s nuclear chief, Mohammad Eslami, said on Tuesday that the country was assessing the damage and preparing to restore the facilities, according to Reuters. He added that Iran’s ‘plan is to prevent interruptions in the process of production and services.’ 

Both President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to respond if Iran rebuilds its nuclear program.

Fox News Digital’s Stephen Sorace contributed to this report.

The headlines may proclaim a ceasefire, but let us be clear: the Israeli-Iranian war is far from over. What we are witnessing is not peace—it is a tactical intermission. The guns may be momentarily silent, but the war remains alive in motive, method, and mindset.

Don’t be fooled. Israel-Iran ceasefire represents tactical intermission, not lasting peace

President Donald Trump’s June 23 announcement of a ‘complete and total ceasefire’ between Israel and Iran brought a welcome pause to twelve days of deadly escalation. Yet his own remarks in the hours that followed, including en route to the NATO summit, betrayed the precarious nature of that agreement—and the volatility of the players involved.

Just before boarding Air Force One, Trump issued a pointed public rebuke: ‘Calm down, Israel!’ He warned Prime Minister Benajamin Netanyahu that any strike against Iran after the ceasefire’s effective hour would constitute a violation. His words reflected not only diplomatic urgency but the fragility of the arrangement he had just announced.

And yet, within hours, both Iran and Israel reportedly launched limited retaliatory actions. Trump, visibly frustrated, criticized both sides for breaking faith: ‘They don’t know what the f*** they’re doing.’ He added: ‘I gotta get Israel to calm down now,’ underscoring the degree to which U.S. pressure—not mutual trust—was the linchpin of the ceasefire’s early survival.

Therein lies the truth: the war has not ended. It has simply shifted forms.

Is the war between Israel and Iran over? Only if we define ‘war’ in the narrowest kinetic terms. But if we understand war as a clash of wills, ideologies, and strategic aims—then this war continues, just under a different banner.

There is no treaty, no verification regime, and no mutual recognition of legitimacy between the two states. Iran continues to deny Israel’s right to exist, and Israel views Iran’s nuclear program—and its regional proxy network—as existential threats. A formal cessation of hostilities requires more than silence; it requires resolution. We are nowhere near that.

To understand why this war is not over, consider the strategic objectives of each side. Israel’s campaign was aimed at degrading Iran’s nuclear infrastructure—particularly the underground enrichment site at Fordow. While successful in the short term, it did not eliminate Iran’s scientific knowledge or ideological commitment to nuclear capability. Tehran still possesses the technical talent, the raw materials, and—most dangerously—the motivation to rebuild and accelerate its weapons program.

Iran’s retaliatory missile strikes on Israel and U.S. bases in Qatar and Iraq—though largely intercepted—served as symbolic warnings. More importantly, Tehran signaled that it retains the capacity to strike deep into the region. That message wasn’t just for Tel Aviv—it was for Washington, Riyadh, and the world.

Behind the scenes, the shadow war continues. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps still arms Hezbollah in Lebanon, trains militias in Iraq and Syria, and directs proxy warfare through the Houthis in Yemen. Israeli airstrikes on Damascus and other locations in Syria persist, albeit in a lower-key fashion. Cyber operations, drone surveillance, and intelligence targeting remain on full alert. These are not post-war conditions. These are indicators of an unresolved and evolving conflict.

Even the diplomacy surrounding the ceasefire reflects its fragility. The agreement was brokered through indirect channels, with no official joint communiqué, no UN endorsement, and no follow-on roadmap. Iran has not re-engaged with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Israel, understandably, maintains its right to strike again if necessary. The rhetoric has cooled, but the posture remains hardened.

And then there is the political reality. Leaders in both countries face domestic constituencies who are skeptical of compromise. Hardliners in Tehran see the ceasefire as a pause to reload, not a step toward reconciliation. In Jerusalem, the Israeli public broadly supports preemptive action against a nuclear-armed adversary. Neither side has the political incentive—nor the strategic trust—to walk away from confrontation.

So, is the war over? Only if we define ‘war’ in the narrowest kinetic terms. But if we understand war as a clash of wills, ideologies, and strategic aims—then this war continues, just under a different banner.

The international community must not confuse this quiet with peace. Rather, it must prepare for what comes next: a sustained period of covert confrontation, regional volatility, and the ever-present risk of open warfare returning with little warning. Diplomats must act urgently, not naively. Military leaders must remain on alert. And political leaders—especially in Washington—must resist the temptation to declare victory before the conflict is truly resolved.

Trump’s visible exasperation and his blunt warnings serve as a reminder: this ceasefire is no more secure than the tempers and tactics of the adversaries it binds. The Israeli-Iranian war is not over. It has simply entered its next, and perhaps most perilous, phase.

The U.S. would strike Iran again if the country attempts to rebuild its nuclear program, President Donald Trump said Wednesday.

Trump made the statement during an exchange with reporters while attending a NATO summit in the Netherlands on Wednesday. The U.S. has touted a report from Israel stating that the strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities set back the country’s program ‘many years.’

A reporter asked Trump whether he would strike Iran again if it were to rebuild its nuclear facilities.

‘Sure,’ came Trump’s blunt response.

The exchange came after NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte praised Trump as a ‘man of strength’ and a ‘man of peace’ during Wednesday’s summit.

‘I just want to recognize your decisive action on Iran,’ Rutte said at the start of his joint remarks with the president. ‘You are a man of strength, but you are also a man of peace. And the fact that you are now also successful in getting this ceasefire done between Israel and Iran — I really want to commend you for that. I think this is important for the whole world.’

Rutte also praised Trump’s effort to get NATO members to pay more and said the president was ‘flying into another big success’ after all countries—except Spain—agreed to spend 5% of their GDP on defense. He added that Trump achieved something ‘NO American president in decades could get done.’

Leaders of NATO member states had mixed reactions to the strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, with several calling for de-escalation while acknowledging the threat a nuclear Iran would pose to global security.

Trump cajoled Iran and Israel into a ceasefire on Tuesday that has so far held after an uncertain start that saw Trump unleash his frustration with both countries.

Fox News’ Rachel Wolf contributed to this report.

Toni McAllister is a prominent voice in Louisiana’s logging industry, but as she told Fox News Digital on Tuesday, she is also ‘a mom and a wife’ from a middle-class family.

She is one of four Americans from across the country invited by House GOP leaders to Capitol Hill to promote President Donald Trump’s ‘one big, beautiful bill.’

It is a vast piece of legislation aimed at advancing Trump’s priorities on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the national debt – which is taking Herculean political maneuvering to pass.

On Tuesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and other leaders pivoted from promoting it themselves, instead inviting their four guests to talk about their support for the bill, and what is at stake if it does not pass by the end of this year.

‘I believe that our tax rates in Louisiana for small businesses will jump up to around 43.4%. I mean, that’s literally half of what we’re working for. So what will we be working for to pay taxes?’ McAllister told Fox News Digital.

She is the executive director of the Louisiana Logger’s Association, a trade group representing loggers in the Bayou State. In addition to that, however, McAllister said she was concerned about a tax hike for her family if the bill is not passed.

‘I’m just a regular middle-class family. And in Louisiana, the average tax hike would be around $1,300. That’s a month of groceries. That’s anything extra that we can do with our kids. $1,300 is a lot of money,’ she said.

Projections released by the House GOP show that under the lower chamber’s version of the bill, an average family could see an additional $1,300 in tax relief, while a failure to pass it could lead to a $1,700 tax hike.

Republicans are aiming to use the bill to extend Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, as well as implement a host of new policies like eliminating taxes on tipped and overtime wages.

Retired Sheriff James Stuart said those latter measures, which Trump campaigned on in 2024, will be critical to law enforcement recruitment in Minnesota.

‘One of the most persistent struggles of agencies across the country is retention and recruitment. No tax on overtime will increase take-home pay for our peace offices, which will boost morale and ease burdens for them and their families,’ Stuart, who is also executive director of the Minnesota Sheriff’s Association, told Fox News Digital.

However, Paul Danos, the head of a family-owned offshore energy service company in Gray, Louisiana, told Fox News Digital that Republicans’ energy policies are also critical for his business.

‘If this bill doesn’t pass, then we find ourselves where we were in the last administration, with that lack of predictability around lease sales,’ Danos said.

‘Those multibillion-dollar investments that are creating jobs, that are providing safe and affordable energy here in the US, are jeopardized. We start having to depend on other nations for our oil and gas.’

That, he argued, would lead to higher prices for everyone.

Sam Palmeter, who leads engineering at Laser Marking Technologies, one of the last two laser technology companies owned and operated in America, said he and others in Michigan were ‘tired of brain drain,’ hoping Trump’s bill could reverse that and revitalize manufacturing in the region.

‘We won’t grow, and we won’t provide as many jobs in the industrial manufacturing and engineering space,’ Palmeter said.

‘And that’s sad, because there’s nothing that makes me more proud than hiring a local kid…So he’s working 13 miles from home. He doesn’t have to leave his family and everything to exercise that degree.’

It is not yet clear if their arguments or others in favor of Trump’s bill will have any effect, however. 

The legislation has been met with Republican critics in the House and Senate, while GOP leaders have styled it as the best possible path forward for a conservative policy overhaul while they control Congress and the White House.

While the dissent is coming from a relatively small number of Republicans, it could be enough to derail the legislation – both House and Senate GOP leaders are grappling with razor-thin margins of just a few votes.

Trump recently ordered lawmakers to remain in Washington, D.C., until the bill is passed – despite a planned recess next week for the Fourth of July holiday.

The bill passed the House by one vote last month, and a modified version is expected to get a Senate vote sometime this week. Both the House and Senate must pass identical products before they can be sent to Trump’s desk.

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that Moscow is not planning to supply Iran with nuclear warheads, after President Donald Trump mocked him for suggesting that other countries would step in and provide Iran with nuclear weapons after the U.S. strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. 

Medvedev, now the deputy chairman of the Security Council of Russia, originally said Sunday that Iran would continue to advance its nuclear program and would receive assistance from other nations to do so.

Although Medvedev did not specify any countries, he clarified later Monday that he was not talking about Russia. 

‘I condemn the U.S. strike on Iran — it failed to achieve its objectives,’ Medvedev said in a Monday post on X. ‘However, Russia has no intention of supplying nuclear weapons to Iran because, unlike Israel, we are parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.’

‘I know quite well what this would entail, having overseen our nuclear forces as president,’ Medvedev said. ‘But other countries might — and that’s what was said.’ 

Medvedev’s statement came after Trump called him out by name in a post on Truth Social following the Russian leader’s original Sunday remarks. 

‘Did I hear Former President Medvedev, from Russia, casually throwing around the ‘N word’ (Nuclear!), and saying that he and other Countries would supply Nuclear Warheads to Iran? Did he really say that or, is it just a figment of my imagination? If he did say that, and, if confirmed, please let me know, IMMEDIATELY. The ‘N word’ should not be treated so casually. I guess that’s why Putin’s ‘THE BOSS,’’ Trump said in a Monday Truth Social Post. 

Andrea Sticker, the deputy director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ nonproliferation and biodefense program, chalked up Medvedev’s initial statement as an attempt to brag and said it was unrealistic for any country to provide such assistance to Iran. 

‘Medvedev’s original claim was likely bluster about Russia or another country supplying Iran with nuclear weapons,’ Stricker said in a Monday email to Fox News Digital. ‘No country, including Pakistan or North Korea, would supply atomic devices to Tehran because they would be held accountable by the United States if Iran used the weapons. Moscow and Pyongyang, at least from available open-source information, appear to be standing mostly idle as their ally Iran takes a major beating.’

The U.S. launched strikes late Saturday targeting key Iranian nuclear facilities, which involved more than 125 U.S. aircraft, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine told reporters Sunday. 

Trump announced early Tuesday that a ceasefire had gone into effect between Israel and Iran but scolded both countries hours later following accusations from both sides that the other had violated the agreement. 

Trump told reporters both Israel and Iran failed to follow the terms of the agreement, which he said is still in effect. 

‘I’m not happy with them. I’m not happy with Iran either but I’m really unhappy with Israel going out this morning,’ Trump said at the White House Tuesday morning. 

‘We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f— they’re doing,’ he said.