US President Donald Trump used his UN General Assembly speech to argue that the war with Iran prevented Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and warn that he could "annihilate the Islamic Republic" if no deal is reached to end the conflict.
While predicting his administration would strike a peace deal with Iran following the 3 November US midterm elections, Mr Trump called on other nations to join America in isolating Iran economically to force it to the negotiating table.
"I have a big decision to make. Will a deal be made with Iran that lets them rebuild and create a far greater country than it ever was before?" Mr Trump said. "Or do I annihilate the Islamic Republic and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again?"
Mr Trump added: "Do I drive them into hell with no chance of survival and no hope of future greatness or generations? But I believe we'll make a deal right after the election."
Trump says he will make Iran deal after US midterms
The speech marked the latest justification Mr Trump has offered for the war with Iran. He has previously cited a range of reasons for the February US-Israeli strikes, including Tehran's nuclear program, its support for regional proxy groups and the prospect of regime change.
Iran has consistently denied seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Outside the UN headquarters, dozens of anti-Iranian government demonstrators gathered, a few of them holding up signs calling for freedom and democracy and decrying dictatorship.
"I believe we'll make a deal right after the election because it doesn't make sense for them not to. They're waiting to see how I do in the midterm election," Mr Trump said during a speech to the United Nations General Assembly.
In addition to defending the decision to attack Iran, Mr Trump used his speech to criticise the UN, and highlighted his administration's efforts to prevent the organisation and other international bodies from encroaching on US sovereignty or advancing what it views as a left-wing agenda.
He also called for all members of the International Criminal Court to resign.
Mr Trump last year caused a stir with a combative speech at the UN, saying that other countries were "going to hell" for, among other things, climate policy and mass migration.
After his speech, Mr Trump is scheduled to meet with no fewer than 11 world leaders, bilaterally or in group settings.
Later on, Mr Trump will meet with British Prime Minister Andy Burnham, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Venezuela's interim leader Delcy Rodriguez, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen, and the representatives of the Gulf states of the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar.
In the evening, he may meet dozens more leaders, albeit briefly, during a leaders' reception.
The long list of foreign leader meetings reflects the US president's focus on foreign affairs during his second term, during which he has started multiple wars, questioned longstanding alliances, threatened allies with invasion and sought to broker well over a dozen conflicts, with mixed success.
The US-Israeli war against Iran has been particularly consequential, driving up fuel prices globally, dragging down Mr Trump's approval ratings and presenting a challenge for Republicans running in the 3 November congressional midterm election.
Yesterday, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed Mr Trump's approval rating falling to an all-time low of 32%, as his fellow Republicans soured on his handling of the cost of living crisis.
Among the closely watched meetings will be the seven-way gathering with the Gulf leaders, many of whom are alarmed by the recent advances of the Houthis, Iran-backed militants who have captured wide swathes of Yemen, attacked US ally Saudi Arabia and threatened shipping through the strategic Bab el-Mandab Strait.
RTÉ's Washington correspondent Jackie Fox reports on President Trump's speech at the UN
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
Read more:
US military Greenland presence set to expand under deal
UN chief calls for AI curbs and end of wars in his last assembly address
Follow live coverage as world leaders attend the UN General Assembly
Political allies and opponents will also be closely watching Mr Trump's first-ever meeting with Venezuela's Rodriguez, who rose to power with the Trump administration's blessing after US forces snatched President Nicolas Maduro in January and took him to New York to face drug trafficking charges.
Mr Trump's allies say the US is working with Ms Rodriguez to open Venezuela's oil sector to US investment, but Democrats and some Republicans say his administration has not done enough to press for new elections in the South American nation.
During the meeting with the leaders of Denmark and Greenland, its overseas territory, Mr Trump will ink an accord designed to increase US military presence on the island while limiting that of geopolitical adversaries.
Danish and Greenland officials hope the accord will put an end to Trump's past comments suggesting he might take Greenland by force.
Facts Only
* US President Donald Trump used a UN General Assembly speech regarding the war with Iran.
* Trump argued that the war prevented Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
* He warned of potential annihilation of the Islamic Republic if no deal was reached.
* Trump called on other nations to isolate Iran economically to force negotiation.
* Trump stated, "I have a big decision to make. Will a deal be made with Iran that lets them rebuild and create a far greater country than it ever was before? Or do I annihilate the Islamic Republic...?"
* Trump indicated he believed a deal would be made after the US midterm elections.
* The speech served as justification for the war, citing factors like Tehran's nuclear program and support for regional proxy groups.
* Demonstrators gathered outside the UN headquarters during the event.
* Trump criticized the UN and called for the resignation of International Criminal Court members.
* Trump is scheduled to meet with numerous world leaders, including British Prime Minister Andy Burnham, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and Gulf state representatives.
* US approval ratings fell to 32% in a recent poll amid handling of the cost of living crisis.
Executive Summary
President Trump used a speech at the UN General Assembly to justify the conflict with Iran, arguing that reaching a deal would allow Tehran to rebuild and create a greater country, contrasting this with the threat of annihilation if no deal is reached. He called on other nations to isolate Iran economically to compel negotiation. The justification for the conflict was presented as preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and warning of the potential destruction of the Islamic Republic. Trump stated his intention to make a deal after the November US midterm elections, suggesting that Iran would do so if it made sense for them to.
The speech also involved criticism of the UN and calls for the resignation of International Criminal Court members. Following the address, Trump is scheduled to meet with numerous world leaders, including those from the Gulf states, Britain, Ukraine, Venezuela, and Greenland. The context suggests that the conflict with Iran has had significant global repercussions, affecting energy prices and impacting US approval ratings amid domestic economic concerns.
Full Take
The narrative skillfully weaves a high-stakes ultimatum—annihilation versus negotiation—with immediate political expediency, framing the conflict less as a geopolitical struggle and more as a personal test for the administration. The juxtaposition of existential threats to the Islamic Republic with the pragmatic appeal of an election outcome attempts to shift the focus from military strategy to domestic political timing. This technique serves to legitimize aggressive policy by externalizing accountability onto future negotiation success rather than present actions.
The layering of international pressure, shifting from UN criticism and calls for ICC resignations to specific bilateral meetings involving critical geopolitical actors (like those concerning Yemen or Greenland) suggests a calculated effort to manage diverse, often contradictory, external expectations simultaneously. The pattern observed is the leveraging of crisis rhetoric to assert sovereignty while engaging in transactional diplomacy with varying levels of trust. It forces observers to weigh abstract moral imperatives against concrete political maneuverings; the implied question is whether future outcomes are determined by stated moral goals or immediate political leverage.
The underlying implication concerns the relationship between sovereign action and international discourse. When leaders employ apocalyptic language regarding regimes, they risk collapsing the distinction between policy and rhetoric. The pattern suggests that existential threats are deployed not merely to persuade allies but to establish a unique moral authority from which future compromises can be extracted without full accountability for the means employed. What costs do other nations bear when they are simultaneously asked to support economic isolation while observing extreme rhetoric? What are the long-term consequences for international norms when perceived moral superiority is tied directly to immediate electoral cycles?
Sentinel — Human
The text reads like standard political commentary synthesizing publicly available information regarding President Trump's statements and subsequent foreign policy actions, exhibiting human journalistic style rather than pure synthetic generation.