Türkiye Says Israel Doesn't Want Diplomacy, Warns of Regional Disaster Amid Escalating Tensions
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Saturday that Israel's attacks on Iran right before a new round of nuclear talks with the United States aimed to sabotage the negotiations, and it showed Israel did not want to resolve issues through diplomacy.
Speaking at a foreign ministers' meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Istanbul, Erdogan urged countries with influence over Israel not to listen to its "poison" and to seek a solution to the fighting via dialogue without allowing a wider conflict.
He also called on Muslim countries to increase their efforts to impose punitive measures against Israel on the basis of international law and United Nations' resolutions.
Additionally, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan told his counterparts from Muslim countries that Israel was dragging the region into "total disaster" with its attacks on Iran. He said that world powers must prevent the war from spiraling into a wider conflict.
Speaking at a foreign ministers' meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Istanbul, Fidan called on Muslim countries to stand with Iran against Israel, and said the region had an "Israel problem" after its assault on Gaza and attacks on Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iran.
The Israel-Iran war began on June 13, 2025, when Israel launched massive airstrikes targeting Iran's nuclear and military infrastructure. Iran responded with missile and drone attacks, escalating years of covert conflict into open warfare. This marks the first direct war between the two nations, raising fears of broader regional instability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
At least 1.2 million Afghans forced to return from Iran and Pakistan this year — UN
ISLAMABAD: At least 1.2 million Afghans have been forced to return from Iran and Pakistan this year, the UN refugee agency said Saturday, warning that repatriations on a massive scale have the potential to destabilize the fragile situation in Afghanistan. Iran and Pakistan in 2023 launched separate campaigns to expel foreigners they said were living in the country illegally. They set deadlines and threatened them with deportation if they didn't leave. The two governments deny targeting Afghans, who have fled their homeland to escape war, poverty or Taliban rule. The UN high commissioner for refugees said that of the 1.2 million returning Afghans, more than half had come from Iran following a March 20 government deadline for them to leave voluntarily or face expulsion. Iran has deported more than 366,000 Afghans this year, including refugees and people in refugee-like situations, according to the agency. Iran's 12-day war with Israel also has driven departures. The highest number of returns was on June 26, when 36,100 Afghans crossed the border in one day. 'Afghan families are being uprooted once again, arriving with scant belongings, exhausted, hungry, scared about what awaits them in a country many of them have never even set foot in,' said Arafat Jamal, the UNHCR representative in the Afghan capital, Kabul. He said women and girls are particularly worried, as they fear the restrictions on freedom of movement and basic rights such as education and employment. More than half Afghanistan relies on humanitarian assistance. But opposition to Taliban policies and widespread funding cuts are worsening the situation, with aid agencies and nongovernmental organizations cutting back on basic services like education and health care. IRAN URGES FOREIGNERS TO LEAVE QUICKLY Iran's attorney general, Mohammad Movahedi Azad, said Saturday that foreigners in the country illegally should leave as soon as possible or face prosecution, state media reported. 'Foreign nationals, especially brothers and sisters from Afghanistan whom we have hosted for years, help us [so] that illegal individuals leave Iran in the shortest period,' the official IRNA news agency quoted Azad as saying. Iranian authorities said in April that out of more than 6 million Afghans, up to 2.5 million were in the country illegally. Iran's top diplomat in Kabul, Ali Reza Bikdeli, visited the Dogharoun border crossing with Afghanistan and promised to facilitate the repatriation of Afghans, state TV reported. Iranians have complained about the increasing presence of Afghans in recent months, with some accusing them of spying for Israel since the outbreak of the war. TALIBAN PLEDGE AMNESTY Earlier this month, on the religious festival of Eid Al-Adha, the Taliban prime minister said all Afghans who fled the country after the collapse of the former Western-backed government were free to return, promising they would be safe. 'Afghans who have left the country should return to their homeland,' Mohammad Hassan Akhund said in a message on X. 'Nobody will harm them. Come back to your ancestral land and live in an atmosphere of peace.' On Saturday, a high-ranking ministerial delegation traveled to western Herat province to meet some of the Afghans returning from Iran. The officials pledged 'swift action to address the urgent needs of the returnees and ensure that essential services and support are provided to ease their reintegration,' according to a statement from the Taliban deputy spokesman Hamdullah Fitrat on X. People get food, temporary accommodation and access to health care upon their return, said Ahmadullah Muttaqi, the director of information and culture in Herat. Everyone receives 2,000 Afghanis, or $28.50, in cash and is taken free of charge to their home provinces. 'Upon arrival, they are housed in designated camps until permanent housing is arranged, as residential townships are currently under construction in every province for them,' he told The Associated Press. Meanwhile, Pakistani authorities have set a June 30 deadline for some 1.3 million Afghans to leave. Pakistan aims to expel a total of 3 million Afghans this year.
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
Missile exchanges may have ended — but questions remain
As befits 21st century diplomacy, US President Donald Trump announced a complete and total ceasefire between Iran and Israel on social media, congratulating 'everyone' for this, especially himself. After regrettable violations within the first few hours of the truce, which needlessly caused more loss of life, the deal to end this 12-day war seems to be holding. It is probably the first good news for the region in months, as both sworn enemies have given way to pressure exerted by Washington and are holding fire, at least for now. Until the ceasefire was agreed there was a danger the region might become embroiled in a long war of attrition. Now that the missile and drone exchanges have ended, one inevitable question is whether this costly affair could have been prevented — not just as a hypothetical exercise, but as a lesson in how to avoid another military confrontation between two of the most powerful militaries in the region. Could diplomacy have achieved the same, or even better, results, without inflicting death, destruction, and psychological scars on both combatants? The build-up to these 12 days of hostilities began more than a quarter of the century ago, and some might argue as far back as 1979 when the Iranian revolution rather artificially marked Israel, for its close relations with both the toppled shah and the US, as an enemy. History will look back at this deep enmity and might struggle to find objective reasons for it. Initially this hostility served the revolution as a tool for consolidating its hold on power at home and suppressing opposition. In turn, it also helped to propel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to power as Israel's defender against the Iranian threat, both conventional and potentially nuclear. Time will possibly reveal how close Iran was to assembling a nuclear bomb, and most analysts agree that the US decision to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal in 2018, during Trump's first term, removed the shackles from Iran's uranium enrichment program, bringing it closer to weapons grade. It is hardly believable that the Tehran regime should have invested such huge resources only for civilian use. It is also the case that in forming and leading the so-called axis of resistance, Iran, through its proxies in the region, posed a threat to stability sufficient to eventually merit a response. Ultimately, despite being a source of major disruption, even a lethal one in the case of Hamas, and to a lesser extent Hezbollah, it could not match Israel's military capabilities, especially when the latter was backed by the US and other allies. On this occasion, Netanyahu managed also to lure Trump to act against his instincts and use military force. For the US leader the dilemma was between maintaining his posture as a president who brings an end to wars, and the temptation to deliver an almost risk-free strike against Iran's main nuclear sites after Israel's air force had eliminated the country's air defense capabilities. Could diplomacy have achieved the same, or even better, results? Yossi Mekelberg The latter then gained the upper hand, enabling Trump, in a matter of days, to potentially inflict a decisive blow against Iran's nuclear program, especially in Fordow, where it is believed more than 400 kg of uranium enriched to 60 percent was stored, and then lean on both sides to stop the hostilities. When both violated the ceasefire, Trump was furious, telling the media in no uncertain terms that 'we basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what ... they're doing.' Yet, his criticism of Israel was far more robust, including a demand that Netanyahu order its pilots to return from another mission immediately. Allowing Iran a symbolic attack on US military bases in Qatar without any loss of life permitted an act of theater that allowed Tehran to save face after weeks of humiliation during which it lost many of its military chiefs and top scientists, exposing the level of Israel's penetration to nearly every government department, scientific institution, and military command. Nevertheless, Israel's vulnerability was also exposed by its failure to sufficiently protect its civilian population, revealing a severe shortage of adequate shelters as their enemy hit hospitals, the main international airport, and even oil refineries in Haifa. What emerged quickly was the difference between the open-ended conflict that Israel embarked on and Washington's priorities. Israel had many far-reaching objectives beyond Iran's nuclear program, including degrading its conventional military power, and instigating regime change. For Trump, however, it was simply about setting back the nuclear program and returning to the negotiating table. The war with Iran gave Netanyahu a new lease of life. A man who had barely talked to the Israeli media or mixed with people in public, especially since Oct. 7, suddenly could not stop himself from doing both, including visiting sites that were hit by Iranian missiles. But 21 months after the massacre, incapable and unwilling to take responsibility, he still has not visited the communities that were destroyed there. Yet the destruction caused by Iran gave him much-needed justification to continue the war before Trump put a stop to the conflict, and the photo-ops were exactly what he needed considering his high level of disapproval among voters. After this brief bout of fighting, Netanyahu's Likud party is doing slightly better in the polls, which might tempt him to call a snap election, but in the meantime, he will have to convince Israel's voters that the outcome of this war justified the unprecedented terrifying 12 days that they endured. Can he, together with Trump, also translate military achievements into a diplomatic success, one that ensures both that future uranium enrichment is limited to what is needed for civil use, and that Tehran ceases its meddling in the affairs of other countries? This remains an open question, but the next task for Israel's prime minister is to explain to the electorate why the war in Gaza is still raging and 50 hostages are still in captivity.
Asharq Al-Awsat
3 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Iran Extends Access to Airspace for Overflights after Ceasefire
Iran has expanded access to its airspace for international overflights following a ceasefire with Israel, though flight restrictions remain in place across much of the country, an official said Saturday. "In addition to the eastern half of the country's airspace being available for domestic, international and overflight operations, the airspace over the central and western parts of the country has now also been opened only for international overflights," Majid Akhavan, spokesman for the Ministry of Roads and Urban Development, said in a statement carried by the IRNA state news agency. Flights to and from airports in the north, south and west of the country, including Tehran's Mehrabad and Imam Khomeini international airports, remained suspended, according to Akhavan. "All fellow citizens are requested not to go to airports located in the northern, southern and western regions of the country," he said, urging travelers to follow updates through official sources only. The move comes after Iran reopened its eastern airspace on Wednesday, following a ceasefire that ended 12 days of fighting with Israel. Iran had closed its skies entirely on June 13 after Israel launched a wave of airstrikes, prompting Iranian missile retaliation. Airports now operating include Mashhad in eastern Iran -- which Israel claimed to have targeted during the conflict -- as well as Chabahar in the southeast. Flights in other regions remain suspended until further notice.
