Iran may hold nuclear talks with EU trio next week as sanctions loom: Report
The three European countries, along with China and Russia, are the remaining parties to a 2015 nuclear deal reached with Iran - from which the United States withdrew in 2018 - that lifted sanctions on the Middle Eastern country in return for restrictions on its nuclear programme.The E3 have said they would restore UN sanctions on Tehran via the so-called "snapback mechanism" by the end of August if nuclear talks that were ongoing between Iran and the US before the Israel-Iran air war do not resume or fail to produce concrete results."If the EU/E3 want to have a role, they should act responsibly, and put aside the worn-out policies of threat and pressure, including the 'snap-back' for which they lack absolutely [any] moral and legal ground," Araqchi said earlier this week.The snapback mechanism can be used to restore UN sanctions before the UN Security Council resolution enshrining the deal expires on October 18.Prior to the Israel-Iran war, Tehran and Washington held five rounds of nuclear talks mediated by Oman but faced major stumbling blocks such as uranium enrichment in Iran, which Western powers want to bring down to zero to minimise any risk of weaponisation.Tehran maintains its nuclear programme is solely meant for civilian purposes.- EndsTune InMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
28 minutes ago
- Hans India
AAIB conducting unbiased probe, will have to wait for final report: Aviation Minister in LS
New Delhi: Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu Kinjarapu on Monday said that the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) was conducting 'unbiased and transparent' probe into the Air India 171 plane crash in Ahmedabad. The plane crashed minutes after take-off on June 12, killing all those on board except one passenger. Making his first statement in the House on the AI plane crash, the Union Minister for Civil Aviation said that a thorough investigation is underway by the International Civil Aviation Organisation and AAIB, along with subject experts, and the final probe report is still awaited. Naidu's remarks come in the wake of preliminary findings by the AIBB, which hinted at 'suicide theory' by the pilots, sparking widespread anger and protests. The Aviation Minister said that these are the first set of investigations, and one should wait for the final probe report. He also urged the members to respect the 'process of investigation'. 'AAIB has a definitive, rule-based, rigorous process of investigation. They are totally unbiased and looking through every detail. We will have to stand by the truth and also respect the process of investigation,' he added. The AI 171 plane crash in Ahmedabad resulted in the death of all 241 persons onboard, sending shockwaves through the country and the world, as many foreign nationals were also on board the ill-fated flight. He also told the House that the black box was decoded here in India, and this marks a first for the country because on earlier occasions, it was sent to the Boeing manufacturing nation for decoding the conversations inside the cockpit. A day ago, the Aviation Minister slammed the Western media for speculative reporting on the Air India Boeing crash probe and also lauded the AIBB for successfully decoding the black box data. 'I believe in AAIB. They have done a wonderful job in decoding the whole black box and getting the data out in India itself,' the Minister stated.
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu Rebukes Bias Claims, Defends Air India Crash Probe
Union Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu has firmly rejected allegations suggesting bias in the preliminary report on the tragic Air India crash. Addressing the Rajya Sabha on Monday, Naidu criticized sections of the Western media for allegedly promoting a skewed narrative around the investigation. He emphasized that drawing early conclusions without complete information does a disservice to both the victims and the investigation process. Naidu stated that the government remains committed to a thorough, transparent, and unbiased inquiry into what has been one of India's most devastating aviation tragedies. The minister assured the public that all findings and evidence will be made fully available once the final report is complete, and that nothing will be hidden from scrutiny. In his remarks, Naidu appealed to citizens, media outlets, and global observers to withhold judgment until the investigation reaches its conclusion. 'Speculation undermines the integrity of the process and spreads unnecessary fear,' he noted. His comments came amid growing international attention and commentary, some of which, he argued, appears to reflect an agenda rather than facts. Naidu reaffirmed India's commitment to global safety standards and said the probe was being conducted with utmost professionalism. The minister concluded by reminding the House that while emotions are high following the disaster, only patience and evidence-based conclusions will honor the victims and improve aviation safety in the future.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
World's major courts take growing role in climate fight
PARIS: The world's top court is poised to tell governments what their legal obligations are to tackle global warming, and possibly outline consequences for polluters that cause climate harm to vulnerable countries. Wednesday's highly anticipated advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice comes in the wake of landmark international decisions that experts say together have the potential to significantly shape climate action. How has climate litigation evolved? Andrew Raine, deputy director of the UN Environment Programme 's law division, said frustration over the pace of climate action had spurred people, organisations and countries to turn to the courts. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo "When political systems fall short, the law is increasingly seen as a tool for driving ambition and enforcing commitments that have been made," he told AFP. These have been bolstered by increasingly precise and detailed climate science, including from the UN's IPCC climate expert panel. Almost 3,000 climate cases have been filed up to the end of 2024, in nearly 60 countries, according to the Grantham Research Institute, using data compiled by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. While not all have been successful -- and some have tried to slow climate progress -- there have been notable cases in recent years that have pushed states to do more. Urgenda, an environmental organisation in the Netherlands, notched a win at the Dutch Supreme Court in 2019, with justices ordering the government to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by the end of the following year. And in 2021, the German Constitutional Court found that the government's failure to sufficiently cut planet-heating pollution placed an unacceptable burden on future generations. Raine said that litigation was increasingly crossing borders, with 24 cases brought before international or regional courts, tribunals or other bodies. "This marks a turning point and it reflects the transboundary and shared nature of the climate crisis," he said. Why have recent cases been deemed historic? Two in particular have been hailed as watershed moments that will help shape how courts, governments and businesses understand and act on their climate responsibilities. Last year, an advisory opinion by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea said carbon emissions can be considered a marine pollutant and that countries have a legal duty to take measures to reduce their effects on oceans. The tribunal made clear that the work of defining countries' obligations is not limited to the Paris climate agreement or the UN body that runs climate change negotiations. Major polluters have argued that the UN framework is sufficient and against courts taking climate decisions. Another major advisory opinion was issued this month, with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights reaffirming the right to a healthy climate system and acknowledging the rights of nature. But perhaps the court's most profound statement was to place protection against irreversible climate harms on the same level as international prohibitions on genocide and torture, said Cesar Rodriguez-Garavito, Professor of Law and Director of the Climate Law Accelerator at New York University. The court said "massive and serious harm to the climate system through emissions, through deforestation and so on, is absolutely forbidden by international law," he said. In his view this made it the strongest statement yet by any international court on states' duty to avoid causing severe ecological destruction. All eyes are now on the ICJ. What could be the impact? Vanuatu, one of many low-lying islands threatened by sea level rise, has asked the ICJ to give its opinion on states' obligations to reduce emissions. But the potentially more controversial request is what -- if any -- legal consequences there might be for major polluters who cause severe climate damages. "These are questions of global justice," said Rodriguez-Garavito, potentially touching on contentious issues of "reparations for climate harms" to those least responsible for emissions. While advisory opinions like the ICJ are not legally enforceable, Raine said they carry significant weight. "They clarify how international law applies to the climate crisis, and that has ripple effects across national courts, legislative processes and public debates," he said. "It doesn't force states to act, but it shows them where the law stands and where they should be headed."
