Tulsi Gabbard now claims Iran could produce nuclear weapons in a matter of weeks

In a surprising shift, Tulsi Gabbard has revised her stance on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, now suggesting that they could produce weapons in a matter of weeks.

The BBC reported that this marks a notable departure from her March testimony before Congress, where she testified that Iran was not actively pursuing the development of nuclear arms.

In March, Gabbard’s testimony before Congress drew attention when she stated that Iran had not been engaged in the production of nuclear weapons, a claim that caused an uproar, including criticism from President Donald Trump.

U.S. Director of National Intelligence, at the time, clarified that Gabbard’s statements were misconstrued by what he described as “dishonest media.” However, now the political landscape has shifted.

Gabbard Aligns with Trump’s Stance

Gabbard’s newfound position aligns her with Trump’s more assertive view on Iran’s nuclear threat. Trump has been vocal about his concerns, claiming Iran possesses considerable nuclear material and could achieve weapons capability within “months.”

Gabbard, in a recent social media declaration, underscored that U.S. intelligence points to potential nuclear capability from Iran “within weeks to months,” casting her lot with Trump’s narrative.

The escalation in rhetoric comes amid heightened tensions involving the United States, Iran, and Israel. Both geopolitical posturing and military actions have intensified fears over Iran’s nuclear agenda. Despite Iran’s persistent denial of any intentions to develop nuclear arms, insisting its nuclear program is solely peaceful, skepticism from global leaders remains difficult to assuage.

Trump’s ultimatum of a two-week deadline for Iran to engage in nuclear negotiations with Washington adds another layer of tension. His statements alluded to potential American involvement in Israeli strikes against Iranian targets, igniting further debate. Critics within Trump’s “America First” movement express apprehension over possible U.S. entanglement in an escalating conflict.

The IAEA has voiced its concerns, reporting Iran’s enrichment of uranium to worrying levels. In this context, Israel demonstrated its military readiness by conducting targeted airstrikes on June 13, striking Iranian nuclear facilities and causing notable casualties.

Subsequently, Iran retaliated with missile and UAV attacks, resulting in fatalities in Israel, triggering further concerns regarding regional stability.

In the wake of these developments, Gabbard shared records of her March testimony, reminding audiences of her earlier assertion, which reflected U.S. intelligence sentiment at the time, that Iran was not actively developing nuclear weapons. This seeming reversal in Gabbard’s pronouncements highlights the complexity and fluidity of geopolitical assessments.

Iran’s Call for Negotiation Amid Conflict

Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, expressed a willingness to negotiate, albeit under certain conditions. Araghchi firmly stated that Iran cannot engage in talks with the United States while under the duress of active bombardment.

Gabbard, in her communications, emphasized the urgency of preventing Iran from advancing its nuclear ambitions, reinforcing her agreement with Trump that such an outcome is unacceptable.

Her alignment with Trump’s rhetoric represents a broader political maneuver, signaling unity in combating what is perceived as a critical threat.

Historically, Iran’s nuclear aspirations have long been a point of contention. In 2015, a landmark nuclear agreement was brokered between Iran and global powers to mitigate the threat of nuclear weapons development. Yet, ongoing disputes suggest that achieving lasting peace and resolution remains elusive.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently underscored the risk posed by Iran’s nuclear activities, maintaining a firm stance that these programs could lead to weapons capability in the near future. Israel’s military actions underscore the precariousness of the situation and convey a stern warning against complacency.