On October 20, 2025, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei emerged from a period of relative silence to deliver a fiery rebuke to U.S. President Donald Trump and the broader American approach to Iran’s nuclear program. In a series of statements and public appearances reported by Reuters, Iran International, and other outlets, Khamenei dismissed recent U.S. claims of having destroyed Iran’s nuclear capabilities, rejected renewed offers for nuclear negotiations, and ridiculed what he called the coercive tactics of the Trump administration.
Khamenei’s remarks came just months after a dramatic escalation in the region. In June 2025, the United States and Israel carried out joint airstrikes targeting three of Iran’s major nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—over a tense twelve-day period. President Trump boasted that these strikes had “completely destroyed” Iran’s nuclear industry, warning that future attacks could be even larger if Tehran did not acquiesce to American demands. Yet, as Reuters and NY Post reported, intelligence assessments soon cast doubt on these claims, indicating that while the facilities suffered massive damage, the complete destruction of Iran’s nuclear program had not occurred.
In his address, Khamenei did not mince words. “Trump says that he is a master of deals, but if a deal is backed by coercion and its outcome is predetermined, then it is not a deal, but imposition and intimidation,” he declared, according to Reuters. He went further, mocking Trump’s repeated assertions: “The President of the United States proudly states that they bombed and destroyed Iran’s nuclear industry. Very good, keep dreaming!”
These sentiments were echoed in a flurry of posts on social media and in speeches to various domestic audiences. Speaking to a group of young athletes, the Supreme Leader called Trump a “loudmouth” and a “windbag,” as quoted by Iran International. “This man tried through vulgar behavior and numerous lies about the region, Iran, and the Iranian people to boost the morale of the Zionists and present himself as powerful. But if he truly has such power, let him go and calm the millions across U.S. states who are chanting slogans against him.” Khamenei cited anti-Trump protests in America as evidence of U.S. weakness, a rhetorical jab that played well to his domestic audience.
Behind the bravado, however, Iran’s leadership faces mounting challenges. The June airstrikes did inflict significant damage on the country’s nuclear infrastructure, setting back the program by years according to nuclear experts cited by the NY Post. Rafael Grossi, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told Neue Zürcher Zeitung that while the targeted sites were “massively damaged,” Iran still possesses 400 kilograms of 60 percent enriched uranium—a worrying stockpile that, if further enriched, could be used for weapons. “According to our information, the majority of this uranium remains in the nuclear facilities in Isfahan and Fordow, and some in Natanz. However, the facilities there were bombed, they are massively damaged, and some are underground,” Grossi explained.
Despite these setbacks, Iran’s leadership has doubled down on its defiant posture. On the same day as Khamenei’s speech, Iran officially ended its cooperation agreement with the IAEA, as reported by the NY Post. Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani announced that the so-called Cairo Agreement, signed only a month prior to ease tensions, was now considered invalid following the reimposition of UN “snapback” sanctions. These sanctions, triggered in September, froze Iranian assets abroad, halted arms deals, and penalized any development of Iran’s ballistic missile program. Larijani accused the IAEA of collaborating with the U.S. and Israel to target Iran’s nuclear program—an allegation the independent watchdog has firmly denied.
Still, Larijani left the door open for future engagement, stating, “If the IAEA presents a new proposal for cooperation, it will be studied by the SNSC.” Yet, for now, with the snapback sanctions in full effect and international pressure mounting, the prospects for meaningful dialogue appear dim.
The White House, for its part, has maintained a tough line. A senior official told Iran International, “President Trump has always been clear: the world’s number one state sponsor of terror can never be allowed to possess a nuclear weapon.” The official added, quoting Trump’s recent speech to the Israeli parliament, “There’s nothing that would do more good for this part of the world than for Iran’s leaders to renounce terrorists...and finally recognize Israel’s right to existence.” At the same time, the White House insisted that “the hand of friendship and cooperation is always open” to Iran—if it changes course.
Inside Iran, the political climate is fraught. Khamenei’s return to the public stage ended a stretch of unusual caution by the regime’s leadership, who had been visibly shaken after the summer’s military blows. The regime is now grappling with not just external threats but also internal instability. High-level figures, including former president Hassan Rouhani and ex-Supreme National Security Council chairman Ali Shamkhani, have turned on each other in public disputes, with accusations flying over past crises like the downing of a Ukrainian passenger jet in 2020. Observers see these feuds as part of a broader struggle for influence in a post-Khamenei era, with his son Mojtaba and various reformist and hardline factions vying for position.
Yet, for all the internal and external turbulence, Khamenei continues to project confidence in confronting the United States. In his speeches, he has repeatedly asserted Iran’s right to a nuclear industry and dismissed American efforts to dictate Iran’s future. “What does it have to do with America whether Iran has nuclear facilities or not? These interventions are inappropriate, wrong and coercive,” he insisted, as reported by Reuters and Iran International. He also flatly rejected any notion of negotiations under current conditions: “He says he is a man of deals, but if a deal comes with bullying and a predetermined outcome, it is not a deal at all—it is coercion and imposition. The Iranian people will not submit to coercion.”
Meanwhile, the international community waits for clarity on the true extent of the damage to Iran’s nuclear program. Without full access for IAEA inspectors, the world is left to speculate based on incomplete intelligence and conflicting political narratives. What is clear is that the crisis has entered a new, dangerous phase—one marked by hardening positions, deepening distrust, and the ever-present risk of further escalation.
As the dust settles from the summer’s strikes and rhetoric intensifies on all sides, the future of Iran’s nuclear ambitions—and the fragile stability of the region—hangs in the balance.