Iran Foreign Minister Condemns US Attacks
00:00
The Islamic Republic of Iran condemns in the strongest terms the United States brutal military aggression against Iran's peaceful nuclear facilities. It is an outrageous, grave and unprecedented violation of the fundamental principles of the charter of the United Nations and international law. The warmongering and lawless administration in Washington. Is solely and fully responsible for the dangerous consequences and far reaching implications of its act of aggression. The U.S. military attack on the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of a U.N. member state carried out with genocidal Israeli regime, carried out in collusion with the genocidal Israeli regime, has once again revealed the extent of the United States hostility towards the peace seeking people of Iran who will never compromise over their independence and sovereignty. The Islamic Republic of Iran continue to defend Iran's territorial sovereignty, security and people. By all means necessary. Against not just U.S. military aggression, but also the reckless and unlawful actions of the Israeli regime.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This overlooked risk to financial markets usually lurks quietly under the surface. But now it's ‘shouting, not whispering'
Much attention has been focused on the U.S. current account deficit, or the imbalance between imports and export, but there's another metric that's poised to amplify market shocks. That's the net international investment position, according to Kevin Ford, FX and macro strategist at Convera, who likens it to America's financial scorecard with the rest of the world. President Donald Trump's trade war has focused much of Wall Street's attention on the U.S. current account deficit, or the imbalance between imports and exports. But there's another metric worth following that could worsen financial risks. According to Kevin Ford, FX and macro strategist at Convera, the country's net international investment position (NIIP) often gets overlooked. It measures how much the U.S. owns abroad versus how much the world owns in the U.S., he said in a note last week, describing it as America's financial scorecard with the rest of the world. And by that score, the U.S. is in the red by about $26 trillion, or nearly 80% of GDP. 'That means foreign investors hold way more American assets than Americans hold abroad,' Ford added. 'It's a setup that works fine when confidence is high, but in shaky times like 2025, it can become a pressure cooker.' Indeed, times have been shaky. The U.S. Dollar Index is down 10% so far this year as the shock of Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs continues to reverberate, creating doubts about U.S. assets once deemed reliable safe havens. In fact, the dollar's year-to-date plunge is the worst since the U.S. transitioned to a free-floating exchange rate in 1973, effectively ending the post-World War II system of fixed rates under the Bretton Woods agreement. Meanwhile, legislation that would add trillions of dollars to fiscal deficits is advancing in Congress, stirring more anxiety among foreign investors, especially those who hold U.S. debt. Put it all together, and this year has been a textbook example of how a negative NIIP profile can magnify currency turmoil, Ford warned. 'And because so much of the capital propping up the U.S. financial system comes from abroad, even small shifts in sentiment can lead to big outflows,' he added. 'That's a lot of dollars being sold, and fewer being bought, and voilà, the greenback stumbles.' Circling back to the financial scorecard analogy, Ford explained that the problem with focusing on the current account deficit is that it only shows the flow of transactions, i.e. imports versus exports. By contrast, the NIIP shows the overall pile of debts—and ignoring that would be like judging a person's spending habits without checking their credit card balance, he said, making trust 'your most important asset.' 'Yes, trade deficits, interest rates, and Fed signals all play a role, but the NIIP tells you just how exposed the U.S. is when things go sideways,' Ford concluded. 'It's the quiet structural risk lurking under the surface, ready to amplify shocks. And in a year like this, it's been shouting, not whispering.' Waning confidence in the dollar has spurred investors and central banks around the world to load up on gold, which has soared in price in recent years and particularly this year, surging 21% in 2025. Trump's unrelenting pressure on Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to cut interest rates has also weakened the dollar lately. While many on Wall Street see even more downside potential ahead for the dollar, the AI boom that's still drawing billions in global investment flows to the U.S. offers some hope for relief. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CNN
36 minutes ago
- CNN
Tens of thousands of protesters at Hostages Square call for an end to the Gaza war
CNN's Nic Robertson reports from Tel Aviv where tens of thousands of anti-war protesters packed Hostages Square to call for an end to the Gaza war and the return of the remaining hostages.
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Transcript: Rafael Mariano Grossi, IAEA director general, on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," June 28, 2025
The following is the transcript of an interview with Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, that will air on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on June 28, 2025 MARGARET BRENNAN: And we go now to the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or the IAEA. Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, welcome to the program. DIRECTOR GENERAL RAFAEL MARIANO GROSSI: Thank you very much, Margaret. Good to talk to you again. MARGARET BRENNAN: Director General, there is so much happening. I'm hoping you can walk us through what you know. Iran's foreign minister has said that the damage to their nuclear facilities from the U.S. bombing is significant and serious. We know Israel has also killed a number of top Iranian nuclear scientists. What exactly is Iran's capability at this moment? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Well, yes, and I think you can pick and choose any adjective to characterize this, but you will see that there is an agreement in describing this as a very serious level of damage. It can be, you know, described in different ways, but it's clear that what happened in particular in Fordo, Natanz, Isfahan, where Iran used to have and still has, to some degree, capabilities in terms of treatment, conversion and enrichment of uranium have been destroyed to an important degree. Some is still standing. So there is, of course, an important setback in terms of those- of those capabilities. This is- this is clear. And now the important issue- the important thing is, what are the next steps? Now the characterization of the damage, I think we can, you know, speculate, and still, until, of course, the Iranians themselves will have to go there and sift through the, you know, rubble and look at what is the exact degree of the damage. At some point, the IAEA will have to return. Although our job is not to assess damage, but to re-establish the knowledge of the activities that take place there, and the access to the material, which is very, very important, the material that they will be producing if they continue with this activity. This is contingent on other, you see, everything is connected. This is- this is contingent on negotiations which may or may not restart, so- so what we see this here, I think we have a snapshot of- of- of a program which has been very seriously damaged, to quote Dr. Araghchi. And now what we need to focus on is on the next steps. MARGARET BRENNAN: You mentioned there diplomacy. President Trump has been calling for diplomatic talks with Iran to settle all the issues around the nuclear program. I know you were in regular contact with envoy Steve Witkoff. Are you talking to him now? Will the IAEA be involved in any agreement? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Well, at some point we will have to be, because if his efforts, which I support wholeheartedly, succeed, this will come to a point where there is some agreement, some understanding on things that Iran will continue doing, and some things where there could be an agreement on certain restrictions. And of course, who is going to verify that is the IAEA so this is why we're in constant contact. Now they need to reconnect. And it's not going to be easy, one can imagine, after the traumatic events that took place. Even for us, you may have seen that I wrote to Foreign Minister Araghchi a few days ago, immediately, I would say, after the cease-fire was considered to be holding, and I said to him that we should perhaps sit down and analyze in a gradual way the reconnection, the modalities for the inspectors to go- to go back. So there is a level where the IAEA is not involved, and this is the direct conversation. What is the deal? And then, of course, we will be connecting to make sure that that deal stands and it's verifiable. MARGARET BRENNAN: But to that point, Tehran just passed a law saying they want to suspend cooperation with the IAEA inspectors. The foreign minister said he had no plans to let you personally, Mr. Director General, into the country. Does that mean Iran will completely block all inspectors? Do those you already have in the country have any access? GROSSI: Well, certainly I hope this is not the case. I think that what the foreign minister said is that they were looking into this law and how this law would impact our activities. I think it's time- this is why it's so important that we sit down around the table and we look into this. Iran- and I think nobody has put that in question, and I hope nobody will, is a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, like more than 190 countries in the world. So- so, that implies that they have to work with the- with the agency. So we have to go- we have been going through this law that they have, that the Majles approved, and we see that they are talking about cooperation on the basis of- of the security and the safety of their sites. I think that is not incompatible with the inspection work that needs to take place. But of course, it's not Rafael Grossi and Margaret Brennan discussing this that we are going to solve it. I think we- I have to sit down with- with- with Iran and look into this, because at the end of the day, this whole thing, after the military strikes, will have to have a long lasting solution, which cannot be but a diplomatic one. MARGARET BRENNAN: So they're not kicking- they're not kicking out your inspectors at this point? 6:23 DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Not in this sense. I would not say that I am looking with interest and with some concern what they have approved. But of course, it's their law. It is their parliament. But you know, here there are legal implications. An international treaty, of course, takes precedence. You cannot invoke an internal law not to abide with an international treaty. But Iran is not saying that at the moment, and I think this is constructive. So this is why I think we have to go down into the details, because the work will have to continue, otherwise nobody will have an idea of what is happening in Iran. Iran will continue with a nuclear program, the contours of which are still to be seen and will be I am sure, part of these negotiations, which I hope, will be resuming soon. MARGARET BRENNAN: Iran officially reported weeks ago that they were going to take measures in advance of these strikes to try to protect their nuclear assets. Did they share with the IAEA what those plans were? Where they were going to stash things like centrifuges, the machines that help enrich fuel? Where they were going to put the gas canisters that have enriched uranium? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: No, no, they did not inform that- that to us, but at the same time, there was no physical time, perhaps, to do it. Iran, for example, had announced to us that they had a new enrichment facility in Isfahan, and we were going to go on the 13th of June to- to check on that facility so that- and the site has been severely damaged and hit. So this is why I say it is indispensable. We will have to, aggravation or not, feelings and emotions or not, there has to come a point with- with cool heads. We sit around the table and- and see what- I mean, these protective measures, of course, it's their right to protect their assets, like any other sovereign nation. They can, of course, protect- but they know and there are, I don't want to get too technical or legalese here in this conversation, but there are provisions in the agreements we have, not only with Iran, with any- with any country. If a country at a- at a moment, feels that some of the things we inspect must be protected or whatever, they have to tell us, and we have to go, etc., etc., as you can imagine. So, this could not happen because of the unfolding of the circumstances, of a military conflict where, of course, you know, decisions are taken and this is not planned or announced, obviously. So now- now it's the time to reconnect and to talk and to talk to each other. MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah, but there was roughly 400 kilograms, which is just under 900 pounds, of highly enriched uranium, before the attacks. I know these are in small canisters and relatively easy to move. Do you have any idea where that was moved, and if it was moved before the attack? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: We presume, and I think it's- it's logical to presume that when they announce that they are going to be taking protective measures, this could be part of it. But, as I said, we don't know where this material could be, or if part of it could have been, you know, under the attack during those 12 days. So some could have been destroyed as part of the attack, but some could have been moved. So there has to be at some point a clarification. If we don't get that clarification, this will continue to be hanging, you know, over our heads as- as a potential problem. So this is why I say it's so important, first of all, for Iran to allow our inspectors to continue their indispensable work as soon as possible. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I ask you about what things might still remain, because there's that open question of could Iran sprint towards a bomb even now, if they wanted to. If we don't know where the highly enriched uranium is and cannot account for all the centrifuges, is that still a risk that they could be rushing towards a bomb? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Well, you know, I- we don't want to be alarmists here, and I don't want to be part of, you know, a messaging that would be spreading, as I say, alarm. But we need to be in a position to ascertain, to confirm what is there, and where is it and what happened. Iran had a very vast ambitious program, and part of it may still be there, and if not, there is also the self-evident truth that the knowledge is there. The industrial capacity is there. Iran is a very sophisticated country in terms of nuclear technology, as is obvious. So you cannot disinvent this. You cannot undo the knowledge that you have or the capacities that you have. It's a huge country, isn't it? So I think this should be the incentive that we all must have to understand that military operations or not, you are not going to solve this in a definitive way militarily. You are going to have an agreement. You are going to have an inspection system that will give everybody, everybody in the region and- and- and elsewhere, the assurances that we can- we can definitely turn the page. MARGARET BRENNAN: So up until right before the strikes, the IAEA still had inspectors, as I understand it, going to some of these sites. There's been a lot of focus here in America on the trucks and satellite images of them outside of Fordo. What was happening in those days before the strike? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Well, as- as you were pointing out there were- there was an announcement of protective measures that could have included moving equipment and material. We don't know. We saw the same images that the whole world has seen of these trucks, and we don't want to get into any rush conclusion about it, but it is, it is clear that we need the things that we ignore, okay. And after a reasonable period, after the war, there has to be a process that needs to continue. Otherwise the uncertainties will continue, will continue to linger on. And this is, you know, in a final analysis, not good, and perhaps even preventing a good agreement, because who is going to have an agreement where you don't know what the counterpart really has? What are the assets that they really have after the- after this- this- this military campaign that took place. MARGARET BRENNAN: So up until these strikes Iran- Iran was still disclosing information to the IAEA-- DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: --Well yes, yes, yes, yes-- MARGARET BRENNAN: –-In certain amounts-- DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: There were deficits. There were deficits, and we were referring to those in the- in the sense that there were some things that they were not clarifying to us. But our inspection work was- was constant. In particular, in this sensitive area of the number of centrifuges and the amount of material, we had perfect view. We didn't have view on other things that we wanted to have. But on this one, it was- it was complete. It was comprehensive. And, of course, at the moment, there is- there is nothing. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, Iran wasn't keeping its stockpile of enriched uranium secret. The world was concerned-- DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: --No-- MARGARET BRENNAN: --You said you were concerned about it. What do you think it was intended for? And did you see anything that suggested they were looking to weaponize? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: They- let me be clear here, because we said, first of all, something very, very important. They have all these capabilities, but for the agency, they- first of all, they didn't have nuclear weapons. Okay? This needs to be said. One can have an assessment nationally that they were close, okay? And I don't get into that, because we, the IAEA, does not judge intentions. The IAEA looks at the activities of a country and reports it to the world. So it is countries that- that say, well, this is of concern or not. What we were concerning- what- what I was concerned about is that there were other things that were not clear. For example, we had found traces of uranium in some places in Iran, which were not the normal declared facilities. And we were asking for years, why did we find these traces of enriched uranium in place x, y or z? And we were simply not getting credible answers. If there was material- where is this material? So there could be even more. We don't know. This is why it is, I'm sorry I'm repeating it for the third time, I think we need to go back. MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood, understood. But your statement and that report that you gave about some of these open questions or unanswered questions, the Iranians are pointing to it now, and the foreign minister seems to be sort of blaming you for the military strikes. He said it wasn't honest and fair, your report. He said, after the facilities, you didn't even condemn the strikes- after the strikes, I should say. What do you make of those criticisms? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Well- I, to an extent, I understand. They have been under attack. But, really, who can believe that this conflict happened because of a report of the IAEA? And, by the way, what was- what was in that report was not new, Margaret. We have been saying that for a long time, and in previous reports as well. So, this- maybe it's because it's easier, maybe, to criticize an international organization or a director general, I don't know, but it's not reasonable to say that. And, if anything, the IAEA, as always, has had a very honest assessment of the situation. And there were many, I can assure you, there were many that- that were saying in your report, you must say that they have nuclear weapons, or they are very close to have nuclear weapons. And we didn't. We simply didn't, because this was not what we were seeing. MARGARET BRENNAN: But you also said you couldn't verify that it was a peaceful program. DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Absolutely, because we have to see everything. MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah. DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: They did- we didn't see them. We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction, but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending. So this is- this is the truth. MARGARET BRENNAN: And I appreciate the nuance here, because there's so much gray. People here are looking for clarity, and there's confusion in the United States. CBS is reporting that the Defense Intelligence Agency assesses Iran's program was set back a few months, but once they dig out, they could resume in a number of months. They have to rebuild electrical and water supplies. The CIA and the National Intelligence directors say the facilities were destroyed, and it would take years to rebuild. Israel says the military program is set back many years. What's the truth here? What do you make of these assessments? DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: You know- you know what, this hourglass approach in weapons of mass destruction is- is not a good idea. Remember, we had cases 45 minutes and so on, which were quite- quite off spot. All of that depends on your metrics, Margaret. If you tell me it will take them two months or three months, for what? MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: The capacities they have are there. They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that. But as I said, frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there. Because, first of all, as I- and I think the intelligence- we are not there making any military evaluations, first of all, but, out of the logic of our conversation, it is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage, first of all. And secondly, Iran has the capacities there; industrial and technological capacities. So if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again. This is again- and I'm sorry, fourth time, we have to go back to the table and have a technically sound solution to this. Otherwise, this will come hit us again, in terms of a situation which is not well clarified. And this is an opportunity. We do have an opportunity now. MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood, and we will see if that opportunity is picked up by either side. Director General, thank you for your time today. DIRECTOR GENERAL GROSSI: Thank you, as always, a pleasure. Thank you very much.
