One country has nuclear weapons. Another is told it must never have them. One leader faces pressure and military confrontation. The other is called a “friend.”Donald Trump has once again put the contradictions of American nuclear diplomacy under the spotlight.Asked why North Korea can possess nuclear weapons while Iran cannot, the US president offered an extraordinary response.Trump blamed previous American presidents for failing to stop Pyongyang's nuclear programme before turning to his personal relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.“He happens to be a friend of mine,” Trump said, adding that Kim likes and respects him. Trump acknowledged that North Korea possesses a “pretty large” nuclear capability, although one smaller than that of the United States.The contrast is difficult to ignore.Trump has maintained an uncompromising position that Iran must not acquire a nuclear weapon. Tehran, meanwhile, has consistently denied that it seeks one.North Korea presents the opposite reality: it already possesses nuclear weapons.South Korean Defence Minister Ahn Gyu-back recently estimated Pyongyang's arsenal at between 80 and 120 nuclear warheads. Trump himself previously put the figure at 57. Whatever the precise number, North Korea is no longer merely suspected of pursuing a bomb; it is an established nuclear-armed state.And therein lies Washington's uncomfortable dilemma.Is American nuclear policy based on principle — or on the realities created once a country successfully crosses the nuclear threshold?<h2>Friendship is not a nuclear doctrine</h2>There is an important distinction that cannot be ignored. Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, under which it has committed not to acquire nuclear weapons. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and subsequently conducted nuclear tests.Washington therefore confronts two very different nuclear realities.But Trump's explanation was striking because instead of focusing primarily on treaties, proliferation law or regional security, he repeatedly invoked his relationship with Kim.The president has argued that getting along with the North Korean leader is an asset rather than a weakness. He has also said North Korea should never have been allowed to obtain nuclear weapons in the first place.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><a href="https://x.com/hashtag/WIONRaceToPower?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WIONRaceToPower</a> | Trump&#39;s doublespeak on nuclear debate US nuke hypocrisy exposed as Trump slams Iran, praises North Korea Trump: Kim Jong Un is a friend of mine <a href="https://x.com/ShreyaOpines?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ShreyaOpines</a> and <a href="https://x.com/eriknjoka?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@eriknjoka</a> speak to John Erath, Policy Director at Center for Arms Control for more <a href="https://t.co/RqXGxMBksL">pic.twitter.com/RqXGxMBksL</a>&mdash; WION (@WIONews) <a href="https://x.com/WIONews/status/2105326156014821620?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

That may explain Trump's diplomacy.It does not eliminate the larger question.If possessing nuclear weapons eventually forces Washington to accept a country as a nuclear reality, while countries that have not crossed that threshold remain vulnerable to overwhelming pressure, what message does that send to other governments contemplating their own security?The danger is obvious.A non-proliferation strategy must convince countries that not building nuclear weapons makes them safer, not that possessing them eventually earns greater strategic caution from Washington.<h2>From ‘fire and fury’ to friendship</h2>Trump's relationship with Kim has itself undergone an extraordinary transformation.During his first presidency, Trump threatened North Korea with “fire and fury” before embarking on unprecedented personal diplomacy with Kim.The two men subsequently met three times — Singapore in 2018, Hanoi in 2019 and the Korean Demilitarised Zone later that year.Yet those meetings failed to produce an agreement eliminating North Korea's nuclear arsenal. Pyongyang's capabilities have instead expanded substantially since their first summit.Trump nevertheless continues to argue that his personal relationship with Kim reduces the danger.That creates another uncomfortable contrast with Iran.The same American president who presents personal diplomacy as a mechanism for managing an already nuclear-armed North Korea has pursued a dramatically harder approach towards preventing Iran from ever reaching that position.Strategically, Washington can argue that prevention is easier than disarmament.Politically, however, the optics are considerably harder.<h2>The nuclear club’s uncomfortable truth</h2>This debate extends beyond Trump.The global nuclear order has always contained contradictions.The United States, Russia, China, France and Britain are recognised nuclear-weapon states under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons outside that framework. Israel maintains a policy of nuclear ambiguity. North Korea withdrew from the NPT and built its arsenal.Iran remains inside the treaty framework while facing intense international scrutiny over its nuclear activities.That does not make every nuclear programme equivalent. Their histories, treaty obligations, security environments and relationships with the international community differ significantly.But Trump's latest remarks expose the fundamental challenge confronting global non-proliferation:What happens after deterrence succeeds?Once a state possesses a credible nuclear arsenal, the cost of forcing it to surrender those weapons becomes dramatically higher.North Korea may be the clearest example.Washington spent decades demanding denuclearisation. Today, Trump is publicly acknowledging Kim's nuclear capacity while arguing that his personal relationship can keep the situation under control.For Iran — and indeed every country watching — that distinction matters.Because the lesson emerging from the world's nuclear confrontations cannot be allowed to become this:Build the bomb and eventually the world learns to live with you. Don't build it, and the world retains the option of stopping you.That would not strengthen nuclear non-proliferation.It could become one of its greatest weaknesses.

Trump’s contrasting approaches to nuclear-armed North Korea and non-nuclear Iran have raised questions over consistency in US non-proliferation policy and the role of personal diplomacy in managing nuclear threats.

One country has nuclear weapons. Another is told it must never have them. One leader faces pressure and military confrontation. The other is called a “friend.” Donald Trump has once again put the contradictions of American nuclear diplomacy under the spotlight. Asked why North Korea can possess nuclear weapons while Iran cannot, the US president offered an extraordinary response. Trump blamed previous American presidents for failing to stop Pyongyang's nuclear programme before turning to his personal relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. “He happens to be a friend of mine,” Trump said, adding that Kim likes and respects him. Trump acknowledged that North Korea possesses a “pretty large” nuclear capability, although one smaller than that of the United States. The contrast is difficult to ignore. Trump has maintained an uncompromising position that Iran must not acquire a nuclear weapon. Tehran, meanwhile, has consistently denied that it seeks one. North Korea presents the opposite reality: it already possesses nuclear weapons. South Korean Defence Minister Ahn Gyu-back recently estimated Pyongyang's arsenal at between 80 and 120 nuclear warheads. Trump himself previously put the figure at 57. Whatever the precise number, North Korea is no longer merely suspected of pursuing a bomb; it is an established nuclear-armed state. And therein lies Washington's uncomfortable dilemma. Is American nuclear policy based on principle — or on the realities created once a country successfully crosses the nuclear threshold? Friendship is not a nuclear doctrine There is an important distinction that cannot be ignored. Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, under which it has committed not to acquire nuclear weapons. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and subsequently conducted nuclear tests. Washington therefore confronts two very different nuclear realities. But Trump's explanation was striking because instead of focusing primarily on treaties, proliferation law or regional security, he repeatedly invoked his relationship with Kim. The president has argued that getting along with the North Korean leader is an asset rather than a weakness. He has also said North Korea should never have been allowed to obtain nuclear weapons in the first place.

Trump’s contrasting approaches to nuclear-armed North Korea and non-nuclear Iran have raised questions over consistency in US non-proliferation policy and the role of personal diplomacy in managing nuclear threats.

US nuclear double standard? Trump’s ‘friend’ Kim exposes the Iran contradiction

Iran&nbsp;criticised new US sanctions on its missile programme on Thursday, saying they&nbsp;would undermine a 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.&nbsp;

&quot;Iran&nbsp;condemns the US administration&#39;s ill will in its effort to reduce the positive results of the country&#39;s implementation of JCPOA (nuclear deal) commitments by adding individuals to the list of unilateral and illegal extraterritorial sanctions,&quot; foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi said on his Telegram channel.&nbsp;

The administration of US President Donald Trump chose to stick by the nuclear deal with&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;on Wednesday, renewing a waiver of nuclear-related sanctions despite his past criticism of the agreement.

But it imposed new measures to punish Iranian defence officials and a Chinese business tied to Tehran&#39;s ballistic missile programme, which it says is in breach of international law because they could carry nuclear warheads in the future.

The decision came just before a Friday presidential election&nbsp;in&nbsp;Iran, in which moderate President Hassan Rouhani is fighting for a second term against hardline cleric Ebrahim Raisi, who has called for a much tougher stance against the West.&nbsp;

Iran&nbsp;denies ever seeking nuclear weapons and Ghasemi said its missile programme is part of its &quot;absolute and legal right to build up the country&#39;s defensive capabilities&quot;.

&quot;The Islamic Republic of&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;will continue its missile programme with power and authority based on its plans,&quot; he said.

Ghasemi said&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;would retaliate by adding nine US individuals and companies to its own sanctions list, accusing them of &quot;clear violations of human rights&quot; in relation to their support for Israel or &quot;terrorist groups&quot; in the Middle East.&nbsp;

Under review&nbsp;

Trump threatened to tear up the nuclear deal during his campaign and has launched a review of its terms, but until then he is required to decide on renewing sanctions relief at regular intervals.

His first deadline fell this week, related to sanctions on oil purchases through the Iranian central bank -- part of a 2012 law called the National Defence Authorisation Act -- that must be waived every 120 days.

The Trump administration will have to waive more sanctions next month if it wants to stick by the nuclear deal.&nbsp;

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in April that&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;was complying with its side of the bargain, but has described the country as the world&#39;s leading state sponsor of terrorism.&nbsp;

Washington has maintained a raft of other sanctions related to human rights and the missile programme that continue to stifle&nbsp;Iran&#39;s efforts to rebuild its foreign trade.

This has been a major issue in the Iranian election, with hardliner Raisi accusing Rouhani of making too many concessions without gaining any economic benefits.&nbsp;

Although oil sales have rebounded since the deal came into effect in January 2016,&nbsp;Iran&#39;s continued exclusion from the international banking system has prevented it from signing much needed trade and investment deals with Europe and Asia.&nbsp;

Rouhani, who is still seen as the frontrunner in unofficial polls, has vowed to work towards the removal of remaining sanctions and called for more time to allow the benefits of the deal to reach ordinary Iranians.&nbsp;

(AFP)

But the Donald Trump administration committed itself to the nuclear deal with?Iran?by waiving nuclear-related sanctions

Iran criticised new US sanctions on its missile programme on Thursday, saying they would undermine a 2015 nuclear deal with world powers. "Iran condemns the US administration's ill will in its effort to reduce the positive results of the country's implementation of JCPOA (nuclear deal) commitments by adding individuals to the list of unilateral and illegal extraterritorial sanctions," foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi said on his Telegram channel. The administration of US President Donald Trump chose to stick by the nuclear deal with Iran on Wednesday, renewing a waiver of nuclear-related sanctions despite his past criticism of the agreement. But it imposed new measures to punish Iranian defence officials and a Chinese business tied to Tehran's ballistic missile programme, which it says is in breach of international law because they could carry nuclear warheads in the future. The decision came just before a Friday presidential election in Iran, in which moderate President Hassan Rouhani is fighting for a second term against hardline cleric Ebrahim Raisi, who has called for a much tougher stance against the West. Iran denies ever seeking nuclear weapons and Ghasemi said its missile programme is part of its "absolute and legal right to build up the country's defensive capabilities". "The Islamic Republic of Iran will continue its missile programme with power and authority based on its plans," he said. Ghasemi said Iran would retaliate by adding nine US individuals and companies to its own sanctions list, accusing them of "clear violations of human rights" in relation to their support for Israel or "terrorist groups" in the Middle East. Under review Trump threatened to tear up the nuclear deal during his campaign and has launched a review of its terms, but until then he is required to decide on renewing sanctions relief at regular intervals. His first deadline fell this week, related to sanctions on oil purchases through the Iranian central bank -- part of a 2012 law called the National Defence Authorisation Act -- that must be waived every 120 days. The Trump administration will have to waive more sanctions next month if it wants to stick by the nuclear deal. US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in April that Iran was complying with its side of the bargain, but has described the country as the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. Washington has maintained a raft of other sanctions related to human rights and the missile programme that continue to stifle Iran's efforts to rebuild its foreign trade. This has been a major issue in the Iranian election, with hardliner Raisi accusing Rouhani of making too many concessions without gaining any economic benefits. Although oil sales have rebounded since the deal came into effect in January 2016, Iran's continued exclusion from the international banking system has prevented it from signing much needed trade and investment deals with Europe and Asia. Rouhani, who is still seen as the frontrunner in unofficial polls, has vowed to work towards the removal of remaining sanctions and called for more time to allow the benefits of the deal to reach ordinary Iranians. (AFP)

Iran irate as US slaps fresh nuclear missile sanctions

trump-nuclear

Trump Nuclear, News on Trump Nuclear, stories on Trump Nuclear, articles on Trump Nuclear, Trump Nuclear stories at Wion, Trump Nuclear news, Trump Nuclear latest news

trump nuclear

US nuclear double standard? Trump’s ‘friend’ Kim exposes the Iran contradiction

Iran irate as US slaps fresh nuclear missile sanctions