UAE warns of 'uncalculated, reckless steps' amid Israel-Iran air war
(Reuters) -The foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, has warned of "uncalculated and reckless steps" that could spill out beyond the borders of Iran and Israel, according to a statement by the foreign ministry on Tuesday.
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian discussed in a phone call the Israeli strikes on Iran, the Emirati state news agency WAM reported later in the day.
The Emirati president said the Gulf country is conducting intensive talks with concerned parties to calm the situation, WAM said.
He also expressed solidarity with Iran and its people during the current circumstances, it added.
Abu Dhabi in recent years mended ties with Tehran after years of tension. The Gulf country, along with Bahrain, also normalised ties with Israel in 2020.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
28 minutes ago
- Atlantic
How to Assess the Damage of the Iran Strikes
In August 1941, the British government received a very unwelcome piece of analysis from an economist named David Miles Bensusan-Butt. A careful analysis of photographs suggested that the Royal Air Force's Bomber Command was having trouble hitting targets in Germany and France; in fact, only one in three pilots that claimed to have attacked the targets seemed to have dropped its bombs within five miles of them. The Butt report is a landmark in the history of 'bomb damage assessment,' or, as we now call it, 'battle damage assessment.' This recondite term has come back into public usage because of the dispute over the effectiveness of the June 22 American bombing of three Iranian nuclear facilities. President Donald Trump said that American bombs had 'obliterated' the Iranian nuclear program. A leaked preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency on June 24 said that the damage was minimal. Whom to believe? Have the advocates of bombing again overpromised and underdelivered? Some history is in order here, informed by a bit of personal experience. From 1991 to 1993 I ran the U.S. Air Force's study of the first Gulf War. In doing so I learned that BDA rests on three considerations: the munition used, including its accuracy; the aircraft delivering it; and the type of damage or effect created. Of these, precision is the most important. World War II saw the first use of guided bombs in combat. In September 1943, the Germans used radio-controlled glide bombs to sink the Italian battleship Roma as it sailed off to surrender to the Allies. Americans developed similar systems with some successes, though none so dramatic. In the years after the war, precision-guided weapons slowly came to predominate in modern arsenals. The United States used no fewer than 24,000 laser-guided bombs during the Vietnam War, and some 17,000 of them during the 1991 Gulf War. These weapons have improved considerably, and in the 35 years since, 'routine precision,' as some have called it, has enormously improved the ability of airplanes to hit hard, buried targets. Specially designed ordnance has also seen tremendous advances. In World War II, the British developed the six-ton Tallboy bomb to use against special targets, including the concrete submarine pens of occupied France in which German U-boats hid. The Tallboys cracked some of the concrete but did not destroy any, in part because these were 'dumb bombs' lacking precision guidance, and in part because the art of hardening warheads was in its infancy. In the first Gulf War, the United States hastily developed a deep-penetrating, bunker-busting bomb, the GBU-28, which weighed 5,000 pounds, but only two were used, to uncertain effect. In the years since, however, the U.S. and Israeli air forces, among others, have acquired hardened warheads for 2,000-pound bombs such as the BLU-109 that can hit deeply buried targets—which is why, for example, the Israelis were able to kill a lot of Hezbollah's leadership in its supposedly secure bunkers. The aircraft that deliver bombs can affect the explosives' accuracy. Bombs that home in on the reflection of a laser, for example, could become 'stupid' if a cloud passes between plane and the target, or if the laser otherwise loses its lock on the target. Bombs relying on GPS coordinates can in theory be jammed. Airplanes being shot at are usually less effective bomb droppers than those that are not, because evasive maneuvers can prevent accurate delivery. The really complicated question is that of effects. Vietnam-era guided bombs, for example, could and did drop bridges in North Vietnam. In many cases, however, Vietnamese engineers countered by building 'underwater bridges' that allowed trucks to drive across a river while axle-deep in water. The effect was inconvenience, not interdiction. Conversely, in the first Gulf War, the U.S. and its allies spent a month pounding Iraqi forces dug in along the Kuwait border, chiefly with dumb bombs delivered by 'smart aircraft' such as the F-16. In theory, the accuracy of the bombing computer on the airplane would allow it to deliver unguided ordnance with accuracy comparable to that of a laser-guided bomb. In practice, ground fire and delivery from high altitudes often caused pilots to miss. When teams began looking at Iraqi tanks in the area overrun by U.S. forces, they found that many of the tanks were, in fact, undamaged. But that was only half of the story. Iraqi tank crews were so sufficiently terrified of American air power that they stayed some distance away from their tanks, and tanks immobilized and unmaintained for a month, or bounced around by near-misses, do not work terribly well. The functional and indirect effects of the bombing, in other words, were much greater than the disappointing physical effects. Many of the critiques of bombing neglect the importance of this phenomenon. The pounding of German cities and industry during World War II, for example, did not bring war production to a halt until the last months, but the indirect and functional effects were enormous. The diversion of German resources into air-defense and revenge weapons, and the destruction of the Luftwaffe's fighter force over the Third Reich, played a very great role in paving the way to Allied victory. At a microlevel, BDA can be perplexing. In 1991, for example, a bomb hole in an Iraqi hardened-aircraft shelter told analysts only so much. Did the bomb go through the multiple layers of concrete and rock fill, or did it 'J-hook'back upward and possibly fail to explode? Was there something in the shelter when it hit, and what damage did it do? Did the Iraqis perhaps move airplanes into penetrated shelters on the theory that lightning would not strike twice? All hard (though not entirely impossible) to judge without being on the ground. To the present moment: BDA takes a long time, so the leaked DIA memo of June 24 was based on preliminary and incomplete data. The study I headed was still working on BDA a year after the war ended. Results may be quicker now, but all kinds of information need to be integrated—imagery analysis, intercepted communications, measurement and signature intelligence (e.g., subsidence of earth above a collapsed structure), and of course human intelligence, among others. Any expert (and any journalist who bothered to consult one) would know that two days was a radically inadequate time frame in which to form a considered judgment. The DIA report was, from a practical point of view, worthless. An educated guess, however, would suggest that in fact the U.S. military's judgment that the Iranian nuclear problem had suffered severe damage was correct. The American bombing was the culmination of a 12-day campaign launched by the Israelis, which hit many nuclear facilities and assassinated at least 14 nuclear scientists. The real issue is not the single American strike so much as the cumulative effect against the entire nuclear ecosystem, including machining, testing, and design facilities. The platforms delivering the munitions in the American attack had ideal conditions in which to operate—there was no Iranian air force to come up and attack the B-2s that they may not even have detected, nor was there ground fire to speak of. The planes were the most sophisticated platforms of the most sophisticated air force in the world. The bombs themselves, particularly the 14 GBU-57s, were gigantic—at 15 tons more than double the size of Tallboys—with exquisite guidance and hardened penetrating warheads. The targets were all fully understood from more than a decade of close scrutiny by Israeli and American intelligence, and probably that of other Western countries as well. In the absence of full information, cumulative expert judgment also deserves some consideration—and external experts such as David Albright, the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, have concluded that the damage was indeed massive and lasting. Israeli analysts, in and out of government, appear to agree. They are more likely to know, and more likely to be cautious in declaring success about what is, after all, an existential threat to their country. For that matter, the Iranian foreign minister concedes that 'serious damage' was done. One has to set aside the sycophantic braggadocio of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who seems to believe that one unopposed bombing raid is a military achievement on par with D-Day, or the exuberant use of the word obliteration by the president. A cooler, admittedly provisional judgment is that with all their faults, however, the president and his secretary of defense are likely a lot closer to the mark about what happened when the bombs fell than many of their hasty, and not always well-informed, critics. *Photo-illustration by Jonelle Afurong / The Atlantic. Source: Alberto Pizzoli / Sygma / Getty; MIKE NELSON / AFP / Getty; Greg Mathieson / Mai / Getty; Space Frontiers / Archive Photos / Hulton Archive / Getty; U.S. Department of Defense
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump says he's not planning to extend a pause on global tariffs beyond July 9
WASHINGTON — President Trump says he is not planning to extend a 90-day pause on tariffs on most nations beyond July 9, when the negotiating period he set would expire, and his administration will notify countries that the trade penalties will take effect unless there are deals with the United States. Letters will start going out 'pretty soon' before the approaching deadline, he said. 'We'll look at how a country treats us — are they good, are they not so good — some countries we don't care, we'll just send a high number out,' Trump told Fox News Channel's 'Sunday Morning Futures' during a wide-ranging interview taped Friday and broadcast Sunday. Those letters, he said, would say, 'Congratulations, we're allowing you to shop in the United States of America, you're going to pay a 25% tariff, or a 35% or a 50% or 10%.' Trump had played down the deadline at a White House news conference Friday by noting how difficult it would be to work out separate deals with each nation. The administration had set a goal of reaching 90 trade deals in 90 days. Negotiations continue, but 'there's 200 countries, you can't talk to all of them,' he said in the interview. Trump also discussed a potential TikTok deal, relations with China, the U.S. strikes on Iran and his immigration crackdown. Here are the key takeaways: A group of wealthy investors will make an offer to buy TikTok, Trump said, hinting at a deal that could safeguard the future of the popular social media platform, which is owned by China's ByteDance. 'We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I'll need, probably, China approval, and I think President Xi [Jinping] will probably do it,' Trump said. Trump did not offer any details about the investors, calling them 'a group of very wealthy people.' 'I'll tell you in about two weeks,' he said when asked for specifics. It's a time frame Trump often cites, most recently about a decision on whether the U.S. military would get directly involved in the war between Israel and Iran. The U.S. struck Iranian nuclear sites just days later. Earlier this month, Trump signed an executive order to keep TikTok running in the U.S. for 90 more days to give his administration more time to broker a deal to bring the social media platform under American ownership. It is the third time Trump has extended the deadline. The first one was through an executive order on Jan. 20, his first day in office, after the platform went dark briefly when a national ban — approved by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court — took effect. Trump reiterated his assertion that the U.S. strikes on Iran had 'obliterated' its nuclear facilities, and he said whoever leaked a preliminary intelligence assessment suggesting Tehran's nuclear program had been set back only a few months should be prosecuted. Trump claimed Iran was 'weeks away' from achieving a nuclear weapon before he ordered the strikes, contradicting his own intelligence officials. 'It was obliterated like nobody's ever seen before,' he said. 'And that meant the end to their nuclear ambitions, at least for a period of time.' Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Sunday on X that Trump 'exaggerated to cover up and conceal the truth.' Iran's ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, told CBS' 'Face the Nation' that his country's nuclear program is peaceful and that uranium 'enrichment is our right, and an inalienable right and we want to implement this right' under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 'I think that enrichment will not — never stop.' Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, said on CBS that 'it is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage.' Grossi also said his agency has faced pressure to report that Iran had a nuclear weapon or was close to one, but 'we simply didn't because this was not what we were seeing.' Of the leak of the intelligence assessment, Trump said anyone found to be responsible should be prosecuted. Journalists who received it should be asked who their source was, he said: 'You have to do that and I suspect we'll be doing things like that.' His press secretary said Thursday that the administration is investigating the matter. As he played up his immigration crackdown, Trump offered a more nuanced view when it comes to farm and hotel workers. 'I'm the strongest immigration guy that there's ever been, but I'm also the strongest farmer guy that there's ever been,' he said. He said he wants to deport criminals, but it's a problem when farmers lose their laborers and it destroys their businesses. Trump said his administration is working on 'some kind of a temporary pass' that could give farmers and hotel owners control over immigration raids at their facilities. Earlier this month, Trump had called for a pause on immigration raids disrupting the farming, hotel and restaurant industries, but a top Homeland Security official followed up with a contradictory statement. Tricia McLaughlin said there would be 'no safe spaces for industries who harbor violent criminals or purposely try to undermine' immigration enforcement efforts. Trump praised a recent trade deal with Beijing over rare-earth exports from China and said establishing a fairer relationship would require significant tariffs. 'I think getting along well with China is a very good thing,' Trump said. 'China's going to be paying a lot of tariffs, but we have a big [trade] deficit, they understand that.' Trump said he would be open to removing sanctions on Iranian oil shipments to China if Tehran could show 'they can be peaceful and if they can show us they're not going to do any more harm.' But the president also indicated the U.S. might retaliate against Beijing. When Fox News Channel host Maria Bartiromo noted that China has tried to hack U.S. systems and steal intellectual property, Trump replied, 'You don't think we do that to them?' Klepper and Swenson write for the Associated Press.
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
At least 71 killed in Israel's attack on Tehran's notorious Evin Prison, Iranian judiciary says
DUBAI — At least 71 people were killed in Israel's attack on Tehran's Evin Prison, Iran's judiciary said Sunday about the notorious lockup where many political prisoners and dissidents have been held. Judiciary spokesperson Asghar Jahangir posted on the office's official Mizan News agency website that those killed on Monday included staff, soldiers, prisoners and members of visiting families. It was not possible to independently verify the claim. The Israeli bombardment, which came the day before the ceasefire with Iran took hold, hit several prison buildings and prompted concerns from rights groups about the safety of the inmates. It remains unclear why Israel targeted the prison, but it came on a day when the Defense Ministry said it was attacking 'regime targets and government repression bodies in the heart of Tehran.' The news of the prison attack was quickly overshadowed by an Iranian attack on a U.S. base in Qatar later that day, which caused no casualties, and the announcement of the ceasefire. Jahangir did not break down the casualty figures but said the attack had hit the prison's infirmary, engineering building, judicial affairs and visitation hall, where visiting family members were killed and injured. On the day of the attack, the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran criticized Israel for striking the prison, seen as a symbol of the Iranian regime's repression of any opposition, saying it violated the principle of distinction between civilian and military targets. Over the 12 days before a ceasefire was declared, Israel claimed it killed about 30 Iranian commanders and 11 nuclear scientists, while hitting eight nuclear-related facilities and more than 720 military infrastructure sites. More than 1,000 people were killed, including at least 417 civilians, according to the Washington-based Human Rights Activists group. In retaliation, Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted, but those that got through caused damage in many areas and killed 28 people. Abbas Araghchi, Iran's foreign minister, said in a Saturday letter to United Nations officials that the international body should recognize Israel and the U.S. 'as the initiators of the act of aggression' against Iran and that their targeting of a sovereign country and its people should require 'compensation and reparation.' 'The Security Council should also hold the aggressors accountable and prevent the recurrence of such heinous and serious crimes to enable it to maintain international peace and security,' Araghchi said in the letter obtained by the Associated Press. At the same time, advocates have said that Iran was legally obligated to protect the prisoners held in Evin, and criticized authorities in Tehran for their 'failure to evacuate, provide medical assistance or inform families' following the attack. Jahangir said some of the injured were treated on site, while others were taken to hospitals. Iran had not previously announced any death figures, though on Saturday it confirmed that top prosecutor Ali Ghanaatkar — whose prosecution of dissidents, including Nobel Peace Prize winner Narges Mohammadi, led to widespread criticism by human rights groups — had been killed in the attack. He was one of about 60 people for whom a massive public funeral procession was held Saturday in Tehran, and he was to be buried at a shrine in Qom on Sunday. While both Israel and Iran have been adhering to the truce, Iranian officials raised suspicions Sunday about whether the other side would continue to keep its word. Abdolrahim Mousavi, the chief of staff for the Iranian armed forces, said in a conversation with Saudi Arabia's defense minister that Iran is prepared if there were to be another surprise Israeli attack. 'We did not initiate the war, but we responded to the aggressor with all our might, and since we have complete doubts about the enemy's adherence to its commitments, including the ceasefire, we are prepared to give them a strong response if they repeat the aggression,' Mousavi said, according to Iranian state TV agency IRNA. Meanwhile, a lot remained unclear about the status of Iran's nuclear program, which incited the initial Israeli attack. President Trump claimed that the U.S. strikes 'obliterated' the program, though preliminary American intelligence reports are inconclusive. Iranians say Trump is exaggerating. Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. atomic watchdog, told CBS' 'Face the Nation' in an interview that aired Sunday that Iran's capacities remain but it is impossible to know the timeline or access the full damage to the program unless inspectors are allowed in, which Iranian officials have suspended since the U.S. bombardment. '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.' Rising and Amiri write for the Associated Press.
