“No, I wouldn’t use it,” Trump told reporters at the White House, referring to nuclear weapons. “Why would I use a nuclear weapon when we’ve, in a very conventional way, decimated them without it?” he added, while also stating that such weapons “should never be allowed to be used by anybody.”

The remarks come after Trump earlier this month warned that Iran faced destruction, comments that drew scrutiny before a ceasefire was agreed and subsequently extended.

During the conflict, Vice President JD Vance said Washington was prepared to intensify its military response using capabilities not previously deployed, though the White House denied that nuclear weapons were under consideration.

Trump reiterated that his objective was to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, saying he sought an Iran “without a nuclear weapon” that could threaten U.S. cities or regional stability. Tehran has consistently denied pursuing nuclear arms, and the International Atomic Energy Agency has said an atomic weapon was not imminent prior to the outbreak of hostilities.

The United States remains the only country to have used nuclear weapons in combat, during the final stages of World War II, when atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons but has not publicly confirmed their existence.

Trump’s statement appears to contrast with longstanding U.S. nuclear doctrine, which has not ruled out the potential use of nuclear weapons under certain conditions.

Previous administrations, including that of Barack Obama, have advocated for reducing nuclear risks while maintaining deterrence capabilities.

The gunman, described as having been born in Moscow and previously residing in eastern Ukraine, opened fire with a registered weapon near a supermarket in the capital on Saturday.

Authorities have not disclosed a motive.Public anger has intensified in the aftermath, particularly following reports that two law enforcement officers since suspended fled the scene. The incident has prompted renewed calls from some politicians and citizens for broader access to firearms for self-defense.

Oleksandra Ustinova, a member of parliament’s domestic security committee, said the attack underscored vulnerabilities in public protection, writing on social media that more needed to be done to address security realities.Ukraine maintains tight controls on civilian firearms.

Handguns are effectively prohibited, while licenses for other weapons, such as hunting rifles, are granted under strict conditions. Fewer than 10 percent of households possess a firearm, according to estimates by the Switzerland-based Small Arms Survey, which has also reported that Russia’s 2022 invasion did not significantly increase civilian gun ownership.

At the outset of the invasion, authorities distributed thousands of small arms to civilians but later reimposed tighter controls and increased seizures, according to the group.

Debate over reform has persisted since parliament approved draft legislation regulating civilian firearm possession and use for self-defense on the eve of the February 2022 invasion, though the bills remain unpassed.

Igor Fris, a lawmaker involved in drafting the legislation, said the recent shooting might have been deterred if civilians were permitted to carry weapons, arguing that potential attackers could be discouraged by the prospect of armed bystanders.

However, he acknowledged that Ukraine’s wartime conditions and heightened public stress would necessitate a phased approach to any policy change.Interior Minister Igor Klymenko said discussions on firearm regulation would be revisited following the incident.

Opposition to loosening restrictions remains firm among some lawmakers. Inna Sovsun, a member of parliament, questioned the rationale for expanding access to weapons when the firearm used in the attack had been legally registered, emphasizing concerns about increased risks to public safety.

Public opinion appears mixed. Surveys cited by the Small Arms Survey indicate that while a significant portion of Ukrainian men without firearms express interest in owning one, concerns over safety, regulation and enforcement persist, particularly as the country continues to navigate the pressures of ongoing conflict.

The Kremlin emphasized that its defense strategies and technological advancements are guided by a commitment to safeguarding national sovereignty, maintaining global stability, and ensuring security through preparedness and innovation.

During a media briefing in Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov underlined that Russia’s military and scientific initiatives are not intended to provoke or escalate tensions with any nation.

Instead, they reflect the country’s ongoing efforts to maintain a secure and balanced defense posture in a rapidly changing world.

Peskov reiterated that the testing of the Burevestnik missile was part of Russia’s broader strategy to strengthen deterrence capabilities and ensure the safety of its citizens in an evolving global security landscape.

He noted that such advancements are conducted transparently and within the framework of international norms. Russia’s approach, he explained, is based on a principle of responsible defense development—where the focus lies on stability, peace, and readiness rather than confrontation.

The Kremlin spokesperson emphasized that Russia remains open to dialogue with all nations, including the United States, on matters of arms control, nuclear safety, and strategic cooperation.

Observers see Moscow’s statement as a sign of balance between firmness and diplomacy. While Russia continues to protect its strategic interests, it also expresses willingness to engage constructively with global partners to reduce misunderstanding and promote peace.

The ongoing discussions about global security, arms limitations, and disarmament remain areas where Russia believes transparent communication and mutual respect are vital.

Peskov highlighted that Russia does not seek to undermine international trust but to strengthen it through technological advancement and responsible governance.

The Burevestnik missile test, according to defense analysts, represents a continued pursuit of innovation and scientific excellence within Russia’s defense sector, reflecting the nation’s emphasis on technological self-reliance and modernization.

The test also underscores the government’s ongoing investment in research, safety mechanisms, and oversight to ensure that advancements serve peaceful deterrence purposes.

He further mentioned that Russia’s defense priorities have always been shaped by its historical experiences and the necessity to remain self-sufficient in a world of shifting alliances and evolving security challenges.

The aim, he said, is to achieve long-term stability, peace, and global balance through strong but responsible defense measures.

At the same time, the Kremlin acknowledged the importance of maintaining open channels with Washington and other key partners.

Diplomatic experts in Moscow believe that constructive dialogue, rather than criticism or confrontation, will pave the way toward a more cooperative global environment.

They stress that issues like arms control and conflict resolution require a spirit of partnership and shared responsibility among leading powers.

Russia’s reaffirmation of its sovereign course comes at a time when global security discussions are intensifying. Moscow’s message conveys both confidence in its scientific and military capabilities and a broader call for diplomatic engagement.

The Kremlin’s position reinforces that technological progress in defense should coexist with dialogue, transparency, and peacekeeping efforts.

As nations navigate complex geopolitical realities, Russia continues to emphasize that every sovereign state has the right to protect its national interests, develop its defense systems, and contribute responsibly to international peace and security.

In reaffirming this stance, the Kremlin sends a message not of defiance, but of determination—to act independently while remaining open to collaboration and understanding in the pursuit of a safer and more stable world.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Moscow prefers to wait for an official and detailed statement from Washington before drawing conclusions. “We understand that we need to wait for clearer statements, if any come,” Peskov told reporters, underlining that open communication remains key to maintaining balance during complex global developments.

The remarks came after U.S. President Donald Trump indicated he would seek a clear understanding of Ukraine’s intentions before making a final decision on the possible transfer of Tomahawk missiles. The U.S. president also emphasized his commitment to preventing escalation and pursuing a thoughtful approach to defense cooperation.

Analysts say the exchange reflects a cautious yet constructive phase in U.S.-Russia communication, as both nations navigate evolving security concerns while expressing their intent to avoid unnecessary confrontation.

Under previous administrations, the U.S. had generally announced new arms supplies to Ukraine only after deliveries were completed. Peskov’s comments suggest that Moscow is monitoring the current dialogue closely while maintaining diplomatic channels open for discussion and clarification.

Russian officials have consistently reiterated their stance on ensuring that any international arms movement does not contribute to heightened tensions. President Vladimir Putin, in a recent statement, emphasized that global security should remain the shared responsibility of all nations, highlighting that open dialogue and trust-building remain crucial pillars of peace.

Tomahawk missiles, known for their long range and precision, are typically used for strategic defense purposes. Russia’s call for clarity highlights the importance of transparency and information-sharing between major powers, which experts believe could help reduce uncertainty and strengthen confidence across the region.

While some observers describe the situation as delicate, diplomatic voices on both sides are calling for patience and mutual understanding. By choosing dialogue over speculation, Russia and the United States appear to be signaling a preference for diplomacy and structured communication, rather than confrontation.

The Kremlin’s message comes amid broader international conversations about maintaining balance and preventing the escalation of military tensions in Eastern Europe. Both Moscow and Washington have long acknowledged that constructive communication remains essential for ensuring regional and global peace.

Russia’s approach, focused on waiting for official clarification, underscores its commitment to responsible statecraft and measured response. This approach aligns with the global call for transparency, prudence, and continued cooperation in addressing international security challenges.

Observers believe that ongoing discussions about defense policies should serve as a foundation for deeper dialogue, mutual respect, and understanding between the two powers. As the situation develops, the emphasis remains on diplomacy, communication, and collective stability — values that continue to guide responsible nations in navigating a complex global landscape.

The $24 million deal for Colt Carbine 5.56mm fully automatic rifles was officially notified to Congress by the State Department on March 6. The stated end user is the Israeli National Police.

A Controversial Deal

While the sale is relatively small compared to the billions of dollars in U.S. arms supplied to Israel, it has drawn significant attention due to previous concerns that the rifles could be used by extremist Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank. The Biden administration had initially delayed the deal, citing fears that some of the weapons might end up in the hands of settlers involved in attacks on Palestinians.

Under Biden, the U.S. had imposed sanctions on individuals and entities linked to settler violence in the West Bank. However, on his first day in office on January 20, Trump rescinded those sanctions through an executive order, reversing U.S. policy. Since then, his administration has approved multiple arms sales to Israel worth billions of dollars.

The March 6 notification to Congress stated that the U.S. had considered “political, military, economic, human rights, and arms control” factors in approving the sale. However, the State Department did not confirm whether any assurances had been sought from Israel regarding how the rifles would be used.

Deepening U.S.-Israel Ties

Israel has occupied the West Bank since the 1967 Middle East war, and the settlements it has built there are widely considered illegal under international law—though Israel disputes this, citing historical and biblical connections to the land.

Violence by settlers against Palestinians had already been rising before the Gaza war erupted, and it has intensified since the conflict began over a year ago.

Trump has maintained close ties with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, promising unwavering support for Israel in its war against Hamas in Gaza. His administration has proceeded with multiple arms sales to Israel, even as some Democratic lawmakers have urged for pauses to review their potential impact.

On Thursday, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly rejected an attempt to block $8.8 billion in arms sales to Israel due to human rights concerns. Senators voted 82-15 and 83-15 against two resolutions, introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders, which aimed to halt the sale of massive bombs and other offensive weapons.

Context of the Conflict

The rifle sale was initially put on hold after Democratic lawmakers demanded clarity on how Israel intended to use them. While congressional committees eventually cleared the deal, the Biden administration had kept it frozen.

The current phase of the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched an attack on Israeli communities, killing 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli sources. In response, Israel has carried out a military campaign that, according to Gaza health authorities, has killed more than 50,000 Palestinians.

Israel’s National Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir—a far-right member of Netanyahu’s government—oversees the country’s police force. In November 2023, The Times of Israel reported that his ministry had placed “a heavy emphasis on arming civilian security squads” in the wake of the October 7 attacks.

This latest arms deal reflects the Trump administration’s continued push to support Israel militarily, despite concerns from human rights advocates and opposition from some U.S. lawmakers.