
Iran Says it's Ready for Nuclear Talks with the US but only if Washington Rebuilds Trust
That meeting will be the first since a ceasefire was reached after a 12-day war waged by Israel against Iran in June, which also saw US B-52 bombers strike nuclear-related facilities in the Islamic Republic.
The discussions will bring Iranian officials together with officials from Britain, France and Germany — known as the E3 nations — and will include the European Union's foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas. A similar meeting had been held in the Turkish city in May.
Iran's conditions In a social media post, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said Thursday that for talks with the Unites States, Tehran would seek that 'several key principles' be upheld, The AP news reported.
These include 'rebuilding Iran's trust — as Iran has absolutely no trust in the United States," he said, adding there could be no room 'for hidden agendas such as military action, though Iran remains fully prepared for any scenario.'
Washington would have to respect and recognize Iran's rights under the international agreement known as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the right to enrich uranium 'in line with its legitimate needs' and the lifting of crippling economic sanctions on Iran.
The talks in Istanbul will be held at the deputy ministerial level, with Iran sending Majid Takht-e Ravanchi, the other of Iran's two deputy foreign ministers.
A show of strength Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in a televised interview Thursday that Tehran would not back down from uranium enrichment. Before the war in June, Iran was enriching uranium up to 60% — a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels.
'Our enrichment will continue, and we will not give up this right of the Iranian people,' Araghchi said in a video posted on the state TV's Telegram channel.
Iran's top diplomat said the Istanbul talks with the European parties are necessary, especially after the 12-day war, to make them aware that Iran's positions remain strong.
'The world must know that there has been no change in our stance,' he said. "We will continue to firmly defend the rights of the Iranian people to peaceful nuclear energy, especially regarding enrichment.'
Araghchi also said that Iran has always been ready to advance its peaceful program within a reasonable and logical framework. 'We have never hesitated to build trust with countries that may have concerns,' he said, 'but at the same time, Iran's demand is that its right to peaceful nuclear energy, including enrichment, be respected.'
High stakes European leaders have threatened to trigger a 'snapback' mechanism included in a 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which would reimpose sanctions that were lifted in exchange for Iran accepting restrictions and monitoring of its nuclear program.
The United Kingdom, France and Germany were signatories to the 2015 deal. The US withdrew in 2018 during the first term of President Donald Trump, who insisted the agreement wasn't tough enough.
Iranian officials have warned that a move to reimpose sanctions would have consequences. Gharibabadi said earlier this week that it could force Tehran to withdraw from key non-proliferation agreements.
In a letter to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, Araghchi accused the E3 of hypocrisy, saying they failed to uphold their obligations under the 2015 deal while supporting Israel's recent strikes on Iran.
In last month's conflict, Iran responded to Israeli and US strikes with missile attacks, including a strike on a US base in Qatar, which Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian insisted was not directed at the Qatari state.
In an interview with Al Jazeera that aired on Wednesday, Pezeshkian said Iran is prepared for another war and accused Israel of attempting to assassinate him during a June 15 meeting of Iran's national security council in Tehran.
Pezeshkian reiterated that Iran's nuclear program will continue within the framework of international law and insisted the country has no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons.
'Our nuclear capabilities are in the minds of our scientists,' he said, emphasizing Iran's position that future negotiations must be rooted in mutual respect, not threats.
The aftermath of war According to Iran's official judicial news agency Mizan, at least 13 Iranian nuclear scientists were killed during the June Israel-Iran war.
The extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear sites from the war has not been publicly revealed but a spokesman for Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said Thursday the country's nuclear industry would recover.
'Our nuclear industry is deeply rooted. What has roots cannot be harmed by attack or pressure — it will grow back and thrive again,' state TV quoted Behrouz Kamalvandi as saying.
The UN nuclear watchdog — the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA — reported in May that Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% had grown to over 400 kilograms (882 pounds). That material, just below weapons-grade level, remains a central concern for the West.
After the June war, Iran suspended cooperation with the IAEA, following legislation signed by Pezeshkian.
The road ahead remains uncertain. While European officials say they want to avoid further conflict and are open to a negotiated solution, they have warned that time is running out.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Asharq Al-Awsat
2 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
UK Plans to Recognize Palestinian State in September Unless Israel Takes Action
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Tuesday Britain was prepared to recognize a Palestinian state in September at the United Nations General Assembly unless Israel takes a number of steps to improve life for Palestinians. Britain, if it acts, would become the second Western power on the UN Security Council to do so after France last week, reflecting Israel's deepening isolation over its conduct in its war against Hamas in Gaza, where a humanitarian disaster has set in and the Palestinian death toll has risen above 60,000. Starmer said Britain would make the move unless Israel took substantive steps to allow more aid to enter Gaza, made clear there will be no annexation of the West Bank and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a "two-state solution" - a Palestinian state coexisting in peace alongside Israel. "The Palestinian people have endured terrible suffering," Starmer told reporters. "Now, in Gaza, because of a catastrophic failure of aid, we see starving babies, children too weak to stand, images that will stay with us for a lifetime. The suffering must end." Starmer said his government would make an assessment in September on "how far the parties have met these steps", but that no one would have a veto over the decision. He took the decision after recalling his cabinet during the summer holidays on Tuesday to discuss a new proposed peace plan being worked on with other European leaders and how to deliver more humanitarian aid for Gaza's 2.2 million people. Successive British governments have said they will formally recognize a Palestinian state when the time is right, without ever setting a timetable or specifying the necessary conditions. With warnings from international aid agencies that people in Gaza are facing starvation, a growing number of lawmakers in Starmer's Labor Party have been asking him to recognize a Palestinian state to raise pressure on Israel. The issue came to the fore after President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday France would recognize Palestine as a state in territories Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war. Israel and staunch supporter the United States blasted France's move, branding it a reward for Palestinian Hamas fighters who ran Gaza and whose attack on Israel on October 7, 2023 triggered the current war. At the start of the Gaza war in October 2023, when Starmer was the opposition leader, he fully backed Israel's right to defend itself. But his stance has shifted over the years to a tougher approach to Israel, especially since his election as prime minister just over a year ago. His government dropped the previous government's challenge over arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and has suspended some weapon sales to Israel. Last month, Britain sanctioned two far-right Israeli cabinet ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, accusing them of repeatedly inciting violence against Palestinians.


Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
UK-EU migration progress welcome but more must be done
Two visits to London in consecutive weeks this month, first by French President Emmanuel Macron and then German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, were a clear demonstration that the UK and leading EU countries are absolutely determined to put the debacle of Brexit behind them and embark on a healing journey, one which will enable them to deal constructively with the common challenges and opportunities they encounter — and all in a cordial spirit. The visits and the agreements and understandings reached during the talks announced the return of the informal E3 group of France, Germany and the UK as the backbone and driving force of European security. All three leaders were keen to display unity, regardless of whether the UK is inside or outside the EU, stressing that it is important not to let the past hold back close UK-EU cooperation. One of the issues that dominated both visits, particularly Macron's, was of stopping, or at least substantially reducing, irregular migration, mainly the arrival of immigrants on small boats. According to the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford, about 37,000 people were detected crossing the English Channel in small boats last year. The first half of 2025 has seen an increasing number of people attempt this dangerous and costly journey, proving that the current deterrent measures hardly work. Tragically, the increase in the number of crossings also led to a record number of deaths — at least 82 people, including 14 children, in 2024. Migration is not a simple issue, not in terms of the reasons behind it, the legality of it or how it affects the countries of origin and destination. First, migration is a human trait — it has been part of humanity from the dawn of history and is done for economic, social, political and, increasingly, for environmental reasons. Without exploring and addressing these reasons, people will continue to look for routes to enter countries that promise them a safer and better life. Second, lumping together all the different types of migration muddles the public discourse. There are: economic migrants, which all European countries need; asylum seekers, who these countries have a moral and legal obligation to help; and those who are arriving for family reasons or to study. And, yes, there are those who arrive illegally. These are all different categories of migration that must be addressed according to their individual merits, while removing prejudices and biases against newcomers. Third, there is no escaping the fact that the discourse over migration has become toxic, divisive and fertile ground for right-wing parties and ultranationalist movements, which have no existence without it, and this endangers the stability of many societies and might lead to antimigration movements ascending to power. Lastly, it would be an illusion to believe that migration, especially the kind that most countries consider to be undermining their societies, can be stopped by legislation or by investing in better-equipped and more sophisticated border control forces without courageously investing in resolving the root causes. The 'one in, one out' migrant return deal agreed between the UK and France during Macron's visit is designed to serve as a deterrent to stop people from attempting to cross the Channel in small boats. The plan proposes that for each migrant the UK returns to France, another with a strong case for asylum in Britain will be allowed to come the other way. At this stage, it is unknown how many people will actually be sent away. And although those who are sent back to France will not be allowed to apply for asylum in the UK, one wonders how much of a deterrent this plan is. When more details surface, it will be possible to assess whether the number of migrants sent back justifies the cost and whether it can be scaled up when the pilot scheme comes to an end. But this does not, for instance, effectively deal with the smugglers who exploit the predicaments of those who are desperate enough to pay extortionate sums of money and risk their lives for a better future. Even going after the smugglers would not guarantee an end to small boat crossings, as it is too profitable a venture for more unscrupulous people not to take their place. A quick glance at the nationalities of those who attempted to reach the UK by boat between 2018 and 2024 reveals that 70 percent of them come from countries such as Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Albania, Syria and Eritrea. Fighting criminal gangs is necessary, but can provide only limited answers, as there is a demand for their services, and even securing borders and international cooperation cannot seal them hermetically. The discourse over migration has become toxic, divisive and fertile ground for right-wing parties and ultranationalist movements. Yossi Mekelberg Instead, there is a need to go beyond international cooperation and stopping irregular migration when the migrants are already en route or sending them back when they arrive. First, there must be an integral migration policy that promotes safe and orderly pathways and that establishes legal migration channels that meet the need for migration and the demand for it. But above all, the challenge — and the current record of the international community is not encouraging — is to solve the underlying political, economic, social and environmental problems that lead people to try and escape their countries of origin, whether temporarily or permanently. As long as domestic political instability, including wars, violence, oppression and corruption, is rife and there are no employment opportunities or access to basic needs, people will look for an escape route. A growing issue linked to migration is the worsening impacts of climate change. And the collective global neglect of this existential threat to humanity is bound to lead to more people attempting to escape hostile climate conditions. Programs like 'one in, one out,' as much as they are a welcome, proactive and cooperative move to stop irregular migration by small boats, do not go far enough. Only a holistic approach that recognizes the need for migration in the EU, that meets the drive for migration of those who embark on such journeys, legally and illegally, and, most importantly and drastically, that results in a substantial improvement of conditions in migrants' countries of origin can provide a chance to regulate migration to the benefit of all.


Saudi Gazette
3 hours ago
- Saudi Gazette
UK to recognize Palestinian state in September: Starmer
LONDON — The United Kingdom will formally recognize the State of Palestine in September unless Israel takes "substantive" steps to end the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced on Tuesday. At a news conference in London, Starmer said the UK's longstanding policy aims to realize the vision of a 'safe and secure' Israel alongside a 'viable and sovereign' Palestinian state. He stressed that the current situation in Gaza was "intolerable" and that the two-state solution is "receding." 'This decision has been under consideration for some time as part of a broader peace plan,' Starmer said, reaffirming Labour's enduring commitment to Palestinian statehood. Asked about the conditional nature of the move, Starmer emphasized that the UK's immediate priority is to change the situation on the ground — including the release of hostages and the unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza. "This step is intended to support that goal and create momentum toward a credible peace process," he UK joins a growing list of European countries signaling support for Palestinian recognition, amid mounting international pressure for a ceasefire and diplomatic resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.