Iran MPs' vote to suspend IAEA cooperation is 'wrong signal': Berlin
Germany on Thursday urged Iran to keep working with the UN's nuclear watchdog, labelling a vote by Iranian lawmakers to halt cooperation with the IAEA "a totally wrong signal".
Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul told journalists that Germany "urges the Iranian government not to go down this path".
Wadephul's comments came a day after the vote in Iran's parliament, and following a 12-day war that saw Israeli and US strikes on nuclear facilities.
According to Iranian state TV, parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said the International Atomic Energy Agency "refused to even marginally condemn the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities" and had "put its international credibility up for auction".
The decision of the Iranian parliament still requires the approval of Iran's Guardian Council, a body empowered to vet legislation.
Wadephul also said there were "hopeful signs" of US-Iran talks after President Donald Trump said they would take place next week.
"We are directing all our diplomatic efforts towards finding a binding agreement as soon as possible," Wadephul said, during a joint news conference with his Canadian counterpart Anita Anand.
He added that the so-called E3 grouping of Britain, France and Germany would "play a central role" in any talks and that "Iran expressly wants a European component".
jsk/fz/jj
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Few thought airstrikes could ‘obliterate' Iran's nuclear program. Then Trump said they did.
Experts long argued that airstrikes alone would not be capable of permanently ending Iran's nuclear program absent negotiations. WASHINGTON — A highly politicized debate is unfolding over the impact of June 21 U.S. airstrikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, raising questions over the attack's goal and projected impact. President Donald Trump quickly claimed total victory in the strikes' wake, claiming that Iran's 'key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' Subsequent scrutiny of that claim amid early assessments from intelligence agencies has led Trump and his allies to double down on and even expand on his declarations of success. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed to CNN that the strikes 'obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons.' Iran itself has acknowledged the impact of the U.S. and Israeli attacks. But in the years since Washington's withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, experts and analysts have emphasized that airstrikes alone would merely delay Iran's nuclear ambitions rather than permanently derail them. Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Illinois, reiterated that long-held understanding in a June 26 interview. 'The targets are hard targets, deep targets, mobile targets. So it was never meant to eliminate the program,' Quigley told USA TODAY. 'It was never meant to do anything but slow the program.' The congressman, who is on the House's intelligence committee and has regularly received briefings on Iran, added, 'We've always been told . . . the only way to end this (nuclear) program is with a lot of troops on the ground for a long time. A war.' The former head of the National Nuclear Security Agency's nonproliferation programs, Corey Hinderstein, struck a similar tone. 'The conventional wisdom that you can't destroy the Iranian (nuclear) program through air attack alone has actually held,' said Hinderstein, now a vice president at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'While some are saying that the airstrikes were tactically and strategically successful, I think that the jury is still out on that, and we don't actually have the information that we need to believe that this program is gone.' Third nuclear site, hidden centrifuges, missing uranium Iran may have another nuclear site that, if equipped with enrichment centrifuges and conversion equipment, could continue the process of preparing uranium for use in a nuclear bomb, if the regime wishes to pursue one. Shortly before Israel began its air campaign against Iran, the regime told the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had a third nuclear enrichment site but did not reveal details. Analysts believe an undisclosed underground facility at Pickaxe Mountain near the Natanz nuclear plant may be even deeper under the surface than the Fordow enrichment plant that was severely damaged in the U.S. strikes. The Pickaxe Mountain facility was first publicly revealed in 2023 by experts who spoke with the Associated Press. And it's unclear how much of Tehran's approximately 880 pounds of highly enriched uranium was destroyed or buried during the strikes — satellite images show cargo trucks parked outside the Fordow enrichment plant in the days before the U.S. attack. U.S. lawmakers briefed June 26 and June 27 on intelligence assessments of the strikes acknowledged the missing uranium and called for a full accounting of the material, according to CNN. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told the news agency that the question of the uranium's whereabouts underscores the importance of Iran negotiating 'directly with us, so the (IAEA) can account for every ounce of enriched uranium that's there.' More: Where is Iran's enriched uranium? Questions loom after Trump claims victory. But whether Iran wants to negotiate is another question. Despite the country's obligations as a member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran's Guardian Council approved a law June 25 halting the country's cooperation with the IAEA and its inspections of Tehran's nuclear sites 'until the safety and security of our nuclear activities can be guaranteed,' the country's foreign minister said on social media. Contributing: Tom Vanden Brook and Cybele Mayes-Osterman, USA TODAY Davis Winkie's role covering nuclear threats and national security at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Gen. Wesley Clark: This is the moment for American leadership in Middle East. We can't miss it.
Iran's long-standing quest for nuclear weapons was at least set back for many months, and probably several years. This is the moment for American leadership. After 12 days of Israeli air strikes, Iran's air defenses were largely disabled, above-ground nuclear facilities destroyed, and much of its ballistic missile production and launch capacity wrecked. Nevertheless, Iranian retaliation caused destruction and loss of life in Israel. Then the U.S. entered the fight on the evening of June 21. Iran's three principal, known nuclear enrichment sites, were pounded and penetrated with 14 of the 30,000 Massive Ordnance Penetrators and more than two dozen sea-launched cruise missiles. By the early morning of June 24, Iran and Israel had agreed a ceasefire in the destructive campaign each was waging against the other. It was a triumphant moment for President Donald J. Trump, under whose direction the U.S. armed forces had launched the largest, most complex stealth bomber and TLAM strikes ever undertaken. Iran's long-standing quest for nuclear weapons was at least set back for many months, and probably several years. Many parties had much to gain from the ceasefire: Crown prince of Iran: Israel weakened Iran regime. World must help finish the job | Opinion What happens now for Iran and the rest of the world? But now what? Israel has been highly successful in the use of military force over many decades in the region – from the 1948 war of independence, through the 1956 war in Sinai, the 1967 preemptive war against Egypt, Jordan and Syria, the 1973 war, the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, strikes against the PLO in Tunisia in 1985, and later operations in Lebanon and Gaza. U.S. military action in the Gulf War in 1991 and the invasion of Iraq in 2003 were also highly successful. At this time, Israel, with U.S. help, has stripped Iran of its protective shields of Hezbollah and Hamas, and Iran, without effective air defenses, is laid bare. But outstanding military operations are not sufficient – they must be followed by successful work to end the roots of the conflict. Not once has this happened in the Middle East. Hatred, resentment, anger, terrorism and war have become endemic to the region. This is the moment to end the pattern of continuing conflict. But that requires new appreciation among the leaders in the region of the realities underscored by this latest bout of conflict. Iran, you're not going to have a nuclear bomb, no matter what. And if you continue to seek it, your regime will be defeated along with the destruction of your country. Israel, you cannot continue to use force with impunity – even with the best technology, your own people are vulnerable. To others in the region: Israel and the Palestinians are both permanently in the region; and with all due respect to the different religion, sects, and ethnicities at play, and the pain of history, both must be accommodated, accepted, and, ultimately, embraced as part of a thriving and prosperous Middle East. If there was ever a moment for fundamental change within the region, this is it. The world has come face to face with the potential of a spiraling conflict. Many of the Gulf States have achieved unprecedented wealth and are on the path to world-leading economic, social and technical advances. The region is still and will likely remain the center of global energy production, distribution and investment. There is everything to gain from seizing this moment. Gen. Wesley Clark: Trump needs to push Putin hard to end war in Ukraine – now | Opinion This is the moment for American leadership But how to proceed? Based on the model followed by President Clinton in dealing with the Balkans in the 1990's, it is best to start with a set of principles agreed upon objectively, by those outside the conflict but with the influence and will to deal with the respective parties. The principles must be fair and practicable. It required many weeks of shuttle diplomacy for the much simpler issues in the Balkans, and then, ultimately a 78-day air campaign by NATO in parallel with Presidential-level mediation by outside parties. In all, it entailed more than five years of continuous effort by the United States. In this region, the issues are deeper and more complex, but certainly among the principles, Iran must renounce its efforts, overt and covert, to destroy the state of Israel, and Israel must respect the rights of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to govern and develop their own self-governing state. Terrorism against Israel must be halted. Countries in the region must participate in rebuilding the Palestinian homeland in the West Bank and Gaza. Sanctions against Iran will be lifted, and Iran will be provided the materials it needs for peaceful nuclear energy. Progress must be phased and accompanied by confidence-building measures. Perhaps the Abraham Accords will be fully implemented, and the U.S. will provide a security umbrella for all in the region. International organizations will no doubt remain part of the solution. Perhaps Russia and China, and other interested parties will be invited as observers. Iran today is a wounded tiger. Maybe 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium is still available, maybe some other country will provide nuclear weapons or materials. Revenge will be sought. We cannot permit the next conflict – it could well go 'nuclear.' So neglect or failure are not options. This is the moment for American leadership. It is the moment for President Trump to exercise his broader vision for strategic realignment of the region, and in so doing, to end the Middle East as a cockpit for continuing conflict. Wesley K. Clark is a retired four-star general who served as commander of U.S. Southern Command and then as commander of U.S. European Command/Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
CNN
42 minutes ago
- CNN
Analysis: Final battle damage assessment of US strikes on Iran will be key in US push for Iran nuclear deal
As the Trump administration looks to quickly pivot from military strikes to a diplomatic deal on Iran's nuclear program, the final military and intelligence assessment on the recent US strikes will be critical in informing what the Trump administration needs to accomplish in future Iran negotiations. Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff will need to use that final battle damage assessment – including a detailed summary of the facilities' damage and the locale of the nuclear material – to help formulate the US strategy for diplomatic efforts to completely halt the regime's ability to develop a nuclear weapon in the future, current and former US officials explained. 'You're not going to the negotiation assuming that the other side is going to tell you everything you need to know about the state of their program,' explained Pranay Vaddi, a former senior official for nonproliferation at the National Security Council. 'We need to have a baseline that is established by the US intelligence community before that,' Vaddi added. 'If the Trump administration is committed to some kind of deal still – which it makes statements on – they need to know what they were able to get through military action, compared to what they need to get through the diplomatic process.' President Donald Trump continues to claim that Iran's nuclear program has been 'fully obliterated,' which does not mirror an early assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency, finding that the attack did not destroy the core components of the country's nuclear program. The early assessment has split lawmakers on the effectiveness of the strikes. And Trump's absolutist pronouncements could also complicate Witkoff's job, officials said. Even if the facilities themselves have been badly damaged, it does not mean that the nuclear program itself has been wholly destroyed. Prior to the US strikes, experts and former officials had expressed skepticism about the idea that the nuclear program could be militarily destroyed, noting that there would still be people with the knowledge to support it. 'The basic problem is that the equivalency between the success of the bombing and the success of ending the nuclear program is putting pressure on having this narrative that there isn't a threat,' said Beth Sanner, former deputy director for national intelligence. 'If you think that you've eliminated the nuclear program then you are not dealing with the fact that there is some residual of that program.' And while the final battle damage assessment will be important to take into account, future negotiations with Iran should prioritize getting the UN's nuclear watchdog back on the ground in Iran, said former officials who worked on previous Iran negotiations. 'I don't know that there will be any assessment that I think is fully viable until there are inspectors on the ground,' said a former senior US official who worked on past Iran negotiations. 'We must recreate the kind of intrusive verification and monitoring that was in the 2015 deal.' The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had a presence in Iran before the 2015 nuclear deal signed during the Obama administration – a deal which Trump pulled the US out of during his first term – but the presence of IAEA inspectors in the country drastically increased as a result of that deal. 'The deal meant there were inspectors on the ground 24/7, there was electronic monitoring, there was a process by which – that didn't exist anywhere else in the world – that if there was intelligence about a suspected site, if Iran, over a period of some days, couldn't satisfy the IAEA that there was a reason the IAEA could go and inspect,' the official explained, citing some benefits of the IAEA inspection efforts. But this week the Iranian parliament this week suspended its work with the IAEA, because of the 'regrettable role' played by the agency's chief Rafael Grossi, Iran's foreign minister said. Iran accused Grossi of facilitating the US and Israeli strikes in Iran, citing an IAEA report a day prior to the Israeli strike, which declared Iran was violating its nuclear non-proliferation obligations. This move follows years of Iran making moves to restrict the agency's oversight of it's program. For example, in 2022 Iran responded by removing surveillance cameras from key sites after IAEA censured Iran over uranium particles found at the undeclared sites. The steps that would need to be taken as part of any verifiable deal on Iran's nuclear program would likely include: destroying elements of the program that still exist, monitoring any further activity, blending highly enriched uranium, and declaring parts of the program that are in use. In order to prepare to take those steps, inspectors on the ground would be essential, former officials pressed. 'I think it's been a long time since the US intelligence assessments have been accepted globally as authoritative when it comes to Iran's nuclear program. They would certainly be challenged by Iran. In order to have a successful negotiation everybody needs to at least agree on the source of facts,' said Laura Holgate, the former US Ambassador to the United Nations International Organizations in Vienna. 'The IAEA will be needed to develop a new baseline of what exactly Iran has, where it is, and what its condition is in, and that's going to take time, and it will be based on Iran's cooperation,' Holgate added. With the IAEA access being diminished over the years and virtually nonexistent at this moment, the world now has large gaps in its knowledge of Iran's nuclear inventory. That is particularly true when it comes to the locale of Iran's enriched uranium. Trump administration officials have said in recent days that the stockpile was not moved ahead of the US strikes but the IAEA said Iran may have moved some of the enriched uranium out of the sites before they were attacked. Vice President JD Vance said the day after the strikes that working on what to do about that fuel would be a priority for the US. 'We're going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel. And that's one of the things that we're going to have conversations with the Iranians about,' Vance said. Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, cited the importance of having 'a full accounting' following an all-member classified briefing on Capitol Hill earlier this week. 'There is enriched uranium in the facilities that moves around, but that was not the intent or the mission,' McCaul said. 'We need a full accounting. That's why Iran has to come to the table directly with us, so the IAEA can account for every ounce of enriched uranium that's there, I don't think it's going out of the country, I think it's at the facilities.' The final US military 'battle damage assessment could take days or even weeks to complete,' multiple sources familiar with the Pentagon's process told CNN. CIA Director John Ratcliffe on Wednesday said the agency underscored that a broad intelligence community effort is ongoing to determine the impact of the US strikes on three of the country's nuclear sites on Saturday. The Trump administration was already working on possible terms to offer Iran to bring them back to the able for nuclear deal talks before the US military strikes occurred. But if they are able to pull Iran back to the table, they will have to then enter into much more technical talks to put a legitimate and verifiable deal into place. 'I think that you want to strike while the iron is hot, to try and get them to the table while they're feeling weak,' Sanner said. 'One of the key requirements for the negotiation is setting mechanisms for cataloging Iran's residual capabilities in order to have that conversation and ultimately a deal that is worth the paper it is written on.'
