Iran has warned that a renewed American military offensive could trigger retaliation far beyond the Middle East, potentially reaching US military installations across Europe and even American territory, as diplomatic efforts to prevent another war struggle to overcome deep disagreements between Washington and Tehran.
The warnings come at a critical moment in negotiations mediated by Qatar, with both countries expected to respond to a new diplomatic proposal within 36 hours.
But while mediators are attempting to secure a breakthrough, Tehran has made clear that Washington’s latest response to its demands remains unacceptable.
Iranian officials insist that any agreement must address the conditions that led to the confrontation, including sanctions, the American military presence in the region and the future of the Strait of Hormuz.
Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump has confirmed a new American military strike against an Iranian air defence facility, even as he publicly expresses optimism about reaching an agreement.
The contradiction between Washington’s diplomatic assurances and its continued military actions has left the negotiations hanging in the balance.
More troublingly, Iranian officials and media outlets have begun openly discussing military scenarios extending into Europe and the United States, raising the possibility that another confrontation could move well beyond its previous geographical limits.
Qatar Pushes for a Breakthrough, but Iran Rejects Washington’s Response
Qatari mediators expect responses from Washington and Tehran within 36 hours to a new proposal designed to advance negotiations, according to an official familiar with the discussions.
Doha has expressed hope that the two sides can reach an agreement as they review proposals exchanged through intermediaries.
Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesperson Majed Al-Ansari told journalists that efforts to narrow the differences between the two countries were continuing.
“What we can confirm at this stage is that efforts to bridge the gap between the parties are ongoing. Both sides remain committed to the negotiating process, and we are exchanging proposals almost in real time,” he said.
Despite the diplomatic activity, Iran has signalled that Washington has yet to offer terms it considers sufficient.
On Tuesday, Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said the American response to Tehran’s demands had failed to convince Iranian officials.
He insisted that Washington must fully and explicitly comply with the seven conditions established by Iran.
“Only then will the Strait of Hormuz be reopened,” Rezaei declared.
The statement reinforced Tehran’s position that reopening one of the world’s most strategically important maritime passages cannot be separated from broader political and military guarantees.
Iran has repeatedly linked the future of the strait to demands for an end to hostilities, the lifting of economic restrictions and changes to America’s military posture in the region.
Trump Confirms New Strike on Iran While Speaking of Peace
The diplomatic negotiations have continued against the backdrop of renewed American military activity.
On Tuesday, Trump confirmed that the United States had carried out a strike against an Iranian air defence installation.
His acknowledgement followed American media reports that US forces had attacked Iran’s Qeshm Island, located in the Strait of Hormuz, overnight.
Speaking to Fox News, Trump described the operation as limited in scope.
“They built an air defence facility … and as soon as they finished it, we hit it last night,” he said.
He insisted that the attack had been a “limited strike”.
American officials, speaking anonymously to The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, CNN and other media organisations, characterised the operation as defensive.
Iran’s official IRNA news agency reported that five explosions had shaken Qeshm Island, although it did not identify their cause.
Tehran did not formally confirm that the reported American strikes had taken place.
However, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi referred to military aggression against the country and reaffirmed Iran’s right to defend itself.
“We are currently in a state of war and have been subjected to military aggression. Therefore, any action we take within this framework will constitute an exercise of our legitimate right to self-defence,” he told ISNA news agency.
The exchange illustrated the uncertainty surrounding the current negotiations, with both governments discussing diplomatic solutions while maintaining the possibility of further military action.
Trump’s Contradictory Messages Leave Tehran Questioning Washington’s Intentions
Trump has alternated between expressing optimism about a diplomatic agreement and threatening further action against Iran.
On Monday evening, ahead of the US midterm elections, the president suggested that an agreement remained possible.
The war has proven unpopular among American voters, adding domestic political pressure to his administration’s handling of the confrontation.
Writing on Truth Social, Trump claimed that Tehran was eager to resolve the dispute.
“Iran wants to reach a settlement as soon as possible. It could happen!” he wrote.
On the same day, Middle East Eye reported that Trump had ruled out launching an American attack against Iran following the midterm elections.
The remarks came in response to a question from an NBC reporter as the president spoke near the Reflecting Pool in front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington.
Yet in an interview with Axios published before that appearance, Trump adopted a considerably more confrontational tone.
“One way or another, we’re going to do something, but there’s no rush,” he said.
He then claimed that American pressure had already inflicted severe economic damage on Iran.
“We have crippled them financially. They have no money and no petrol, and their people are beginning to grow frustrated with that.”
The remarks revealed the administration’s continued reliance on economic pressure alongside the threat of military force, even as diplomatic channels remained active.
Iran Says It Wants Dialogue, but Is Preparing for War
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has warned that renewed fighting would serve neither side’s interests.
“No one will benefit from this war,” he said, emphasising that Tehran was working towards a resolution through dialogue.
Nevertheless, a senior Iranian official told Reuters on Tuesday that Washington and Tehran remained far from reaching an agreement to end the war.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed that indirect negotiations were continuing.
“Given the sensitivity and seriousness of the current situation, consultations and discussions are extremely intensive,” he told Iranian state media.
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who has been involved in the negotiating process, similarly emphasised that Tehran was prepared for either outcome.
He said Iran was on high alert for war but had also delivered a strong and rational response to the American side.
“The ball is now in America’s court to avoid war,” he declared.
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has adopted a more explicit military position.
The organisation announced that its forces were combat-ready and that potential targets had already been identified.
It also described an immediate response without geographical restrictions as a strategic priority.
The warning suggests that Tehran is seeking to deter another American attack by making clear that any retaliation would not necessarily remain confined to the immediate theatre of military confrontation.
Iran Warns American Bases in Europe Could Become Targets
The possibility of expanding the war beyond the Middle East has emerged as one of the most serious elements of Iran’s recent warnings.
Iranian newspapers Kayhan and Hamshahri have raised the possibility that American military installations and NATO bases in Europe could be targeted if the United States resumes its attacks.
On Tuesday, Mohsen Heydari, a member of Iran’s Assembly of Experts, told Rasa News Agency that Iran would not necessarily confine its response to a specific geographical area.
“The Iranian response to the enemy’s military action will not be limited to particular geographical boundaries,” he said.
He suggested that potential targets could include enemy installations in Israel and even American territory.
Heydari further claimed that Iran’s weapons capabilities had reached a level at which Washington itself could fall within the range of potential targets.
He argued that Iranian forces should act proactively if they established that an enemy attack was imminent.
“Whenever a threat is established and it is confirmed that the enemy intends to launch an attack, the armed forces must take the initiative without being constrained by geographical boundaries,” he said.
His remarks reflected a broader message emerging from Iranian political and military circles: Tehran wants Washington to understand that another offensive could carry consequences for American interests well beyond the Gulf.
From Britain to Cyprus: Iranian Media Identify Potential Targets Across Europe
The Iranian newspaper Kayhan, published under the supervision of a representative of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, went further by identifying European countries where American and NATO military facilities could become potential targets.
The newspaper warned that US interests and installations, along with NATO facilities in Italy, Britain, Romania, Cyprus and Greece, could face Iranian missile attacks if hostilities resumed.
In another account, Kayhan referred to an order attributed to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who had not appeared publicly, calling for a military response without geographical restrictions.
The newspaper suggested that the potential target area could extend into the “heart of Europe”, including NATO bases located approximately 4,000 to 5,000 kilometres away.
Hamshahri published a map identifying American military bases and infrastructure across Europe as potential targets.
Another report published by Hamshahri Online, citing the conservative newspaper Javan, specifically mentioned military installations in Cyprus and Greece.
Iranian parliamentarian Manouchehr Mottaki also named Germany, Italy, Britain and Portugal while asserting that Iranian missiles were capable of reaching European territory.
These warnings represent statements and assessments by Iranian officials and media outlets, rather than independently verified evidence that Tehran possesses the operational capability to strike every location mentioned.
Nevertheless, their political significance is considerable.
By publicly discussing potential targets across Europe, Iranian figures are signalling that countries hosting American military infrastructure could face consequences if their facilities become involved in another offensive against Iran.
The threats also introduce a potentially dangerous dimension for European governments attempting to avoid direct involvement in another Middle Eastern war.
Iranian Lawmaker Raises Possibility of Nuclear Weapons Capability
The increasingly confrontational rhetoric has extended to Iran’s nuclear and long-range missile capabilities.
On Tuesday, Kamran Ghazanfari, a member of the Iranian parliament representing Tehran, suggested that Iran might already possess the technical ability to manufacture a nuclear weapon.
He said it could be assumed that Tehran may have acquired such a capability “at the present time”.
The assertion did not establish that Iran possesses a nuclear weapon or has produced one.
Ghazanfari also claimed that Iran had manufactured intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching Europe and the United States.
He warned that Tehran would retaliate on European and American territory if it were attacked by Washington.
These claims have not been independently substantiated in the information available.
In a separate development, Iranian newspaper Ham-Mihan quoted political analyst Hamzeh Rahim Safavi, the son of former IRGC commander Yahya Rahim Safavi, making an even more alarming assertion.
Safavi claimed that Iran possessed the capability to render Israel uninhabitable through the use of dirty bombs or chemical weapons.
The statement was presented as his assessment, with no evidence provided to establish that Iran possesses or intends to use such weapons.
The remarks nevertheless demonstrate how discussions surrounding a possible renewed war have expanded from conventional military operations to scenarios involving unconventional weapons and attacks far beyond Iran’s borders.
China and Russia Enter the Diplomatic Effort
While the military warnings have intensified, international efforts to prevent another confrontation are continuing.
China has been among the countries calling for a return to diplomatic negotiations.
Russia has also become involved in consultations.
On Monday, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei discussed the situation with Russian President Vladimir Putin during a telephone conversation.
Washington, meanwhile, has continued to express cautious optimism about the diplomatic process.
US Vice President JD Vance said on Monday that American officials had held constructive discussions with their Iranian counterparts.
He indicated that both he and Trump remained relatively optimistic about the possibility of reaching a negotiated settlement.
“We have certainly made some progress, and we’ll see whether we can make more,” Vance said.
He confirmed that diplomatic efforts were continuing and denied that Washington had imposed a deadline on Tehran before resuming military strikes.
However, he also emphasised that the United States retained both military and non-military options if the negotiations failed.
Axios reported last week that Vance had sent a message to Rezaei concerning renewed negotiations, marking the first contact at that level between Washington and Tehran in several months.
The diplomatic exchanges suggest that neither government has entirely abandoned the prospect of an agreement, despite their increasingly confrontational public statements.
Iran’s Seven-Day Proposal and the Battle Over the Strait of Hormuz
At the centre of the negotiations is Iran’s proposal for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway whose status has become central to the wider confrontation.
In September, Tehran proposed a seven-day plan to reopen the strait in exchange for several measures.
These included a ceasefire across all regional fronts, the release of Iranian assets frozen overseas, the removal of sanctions targeting Iran’s oil industry and an end to the American naval blockade of Iranian ports.
Tehran subsequently indicated that the proposed implementation period could be reduced from seven days to just two.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei described the shortened timetable as evidence of Tehran’s willingness to reach an agreement.
“The possibility of implementing this plan within two days is further evidence of Iran’s goodwill,” he said on Monday.
However, Iranian officials have maintained that reopening the strait must form part of a broader settlement rather than an isolated concession.
In a televised interview, Foreign Minister Araghchi said Washington must accept a new framework agreed between Iran and Oman governing the passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz.
He also insisted that the United States remove sanctions imposed in recent months and reduce the number of American troops deployed across the region.
The demands reflect Tehran’s insistence that any durable agreement must address both economic restrictions and the American military presence surrounding Iran.
Rezaei’s warning that the strait would remain closed until Washington fully accepted Iran’s seven conditions reinforced that position.
Diplomacy Continues as Tehran Warns of a Wider Retaliation
Iranian officials have repeatedly warned that another American offensive could provoke a large-scale retaliatory response.
Those warnings have been accompanied by increasingly confrontational public messaging inside Iran.
On Tuesday, a large billboard threatening to kill Trump was unveiled in Tehran, while additional posters mocking the American president appeared in various locations across the capital.
The displays emerged as Iranian officials continued to insist that the country remained committed to negotiations while preparing for the possibility of further military attacks.
For Qatar and other intermediaries, the immediate challenge is to determine whether Washington and Tehran can narrow their differences before another round of hostilities begins.
The two sides continue to exchange proposals, and American officials maintain that progress remains possible.
Yet Iran’s rejection of Washington’s latest response, Trump’s acknowledgement of a new military strike and increasingly explicit Iranian warnings about potential targets in Europe and the United States leave the negotiations confronting a fundamental obstacle.
Washington is seeking an agreement while retaining military pressure. Tehran is demanding guarantees while warning that another attack could expand the battlefield far beyond the Middle East.
With responses to Qatar’s latest proposal expected within 36 hours, the question is whether the diplomatic process can produce a settlement before the military confrontation takes another, potentially far more dangerous turn.
