TEHRAN – Iranian lawmaker Fada Hossein Maleki delivered cryptic message directly to Washington amid tensions between Tehran and the US. Maleki said any nuclear attack on Iran would trigger a response “whatever the US uses.”
His words immediately raised a bigger question, does Iran have a nuclear weapon, or is Tehran relying on its broader military capabilities to deter another strike? Fada Hossein Maleki, a member of Iran’s parliament and its National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, made the remarks in an interview with Iranian outlet Khabar Online as speculation intensified over the possibility of a US strike involving nuclear weapons.
Maleki said he could not completely dismiss the possibility of what he described as an ill-considered decision by US President Donald Trump. But he argued that Trump would likely hesitate because a nuclear attack on Iran could trigger a far wider and potentially catastrophic war. “If such an action is taken,” Maleki said, Iran would respond, with the nature of Tehran’s retaliation determined by the type of weapon used.
When pressed on whether that meant Iran would answer a US nuclear strike with a nuclear weapon, Maleki gave an uncompromising response: “Whatever the US uses, Iran will respond to it.” The statement immediately raises one of the most sensitive questions surrounding the confrontation: Does Iran actually possess a nuclear weapon?
Maleki did not say that Iran has nuclear warheads, and his comments should not be interpreted as confirmation that Tehran possesses an operational nuclear arsenal.
Instead, his warning comes against the backdrop of Iran’s extensive nuclear capabilities, a large stockpile of highly enriched uranium and a monitoring crisis that has left international inspectors unable to fully establish the current condition and location of Tehran’s nuclear material.
Maleki’s message was broader than a warning about nuclear retaliation. He said Washington should not assume that Iran’s full military capability is publicly known. According to the lawmaker, Tehran has weapons and military systems that have never been publicly revealed.
He also argued that Iran’s strategic posture has changed, moving from a primarily defensive approach toward what he called “active and offensive deterrence.” Maleki warned that any further US military action could trigger a response from Tehran at the same level—or potentially beyond it.
For Tehran, the warning is therefore as much about deterrence as it is about nuclear capability. Despite the alarming language, there is currently no confirmed evidence that Iran possesses an assembled nuclear weapon.
There is no publicly verified evidence showing that Tehran has an operational nuclear warhead, conducted a nuclear weapons test or maintains a fully organized weapons-production program.
US intelligence assessments have historically concluded that Iran halted its structured nuclear weapons effort around 2003. But Iran’s nuclear program has continued to develop in other areas, particularly uranium enrichment. That has left the country in a position often described as nuclear threshold status: it does not have a confirmed nuclear arsenal, but it possesses significant nuclear material, technical expertise and surviving infrastructure that could potentially support a weapons effort if its leadership made such a decision.
Iran having the ability to move toward a weapon is not the same as Iran already possessing one. The biggest concern surrounding Iran’s nuclear program has been its accumulation of uranium enriched to 60%.
Before the major military strikes, IAEA estimated that Iran possessed approximately 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60% U-235, primarily in uranium hexafluoride form. That material is far more highly enriched than uranium normally required for commercial nuclear power.
Most civilian power reactors use uranium enriched to roughly 3–5%, while some research reactors can require enrichment levels approaching 20%. Experts have estimated that, if further enriched and processed appropriately, the material could theoretically provide enough fissile material for roughly nine to ten nuclear weapons.
That figure does not mean Iran possesses nine or ten bombs. It refers to the potential amount of weapons-usable fissile material that could theoretically be derived from the stockpile after additional processing.
Iran also had approximately 184 kilograms enriched to 20%, together with several thousand kilograms at lower enrichment levels, including material enriched to around 5% and 2%. Its total enriched uranium inventory was estimated at more than 9,000 kilograms across different forms and enrichment levels.
That question has become one of the most difficult issues facing international nuclear monitors. The military strikes severely damaged Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, including major sites at Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan. But destroying nuclear facilities does not necessarily mean that all nuclear material inside them was destroyed. Some of Iran’s enriched uranium may have survived in protected or underground locations.
Parts of the Isfahan complex were damaged, with Iranian officials indicating that some nuclear material could be buried beneath the resulting debris.
Possible surviving material at other locations has also become a subject of intense international concern. The problem is that the IAEA currently lacks the access needed to independently verify the full picture. Iran has restricted cooperation with the agency, citing the military attacks against its nuclear infrastructure.
Is Iran planning to strike US Bases in Europe as Trump threatens further Escalation?
