Putin meets Iran Supreme Leader's aide in Moscow, discusses nuclear programme
On June 23, President Putin, during his meeting with Araghchi, had assured Tehran of Moscow's support in de-escalating the Israel-Iran conflict hours after the US strikes at Iranian nuclear sites at dawn on June 22.Moscow and Tehran have signed a strategic partnership treaty, but it does not provide for military assistance in case any side is attacked.However, Tehran and Moscow under the treaty have an obligation not to take the side of the aggressor and enter into urgent political consultations to mitigate the situation.Russia supports Tehran's right to pursue its civil nuclear research under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) oversight.Earlier reports said Larijani had played a key role as the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament in the negotiation and eventual approval of the now defunct Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal.He was instrumental in navigating domestic political complexities and securing parliamentary support for the agreement, which involved significant concessions from Iran in exchange for sanctions relief.However, US President Donald Trump had walked out of the deal in his first term under pressure from Israel.In his second term, Trump ordered the bombardment of Iranian nuclear sites and demanded the complete end to Tehran's enrichment activities under the civilian nuclear programme, allowed under the NPT to which Iran is a signatory.- Ends
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
25 minutes ago
- First Post
Iran to meet European leaders for renewed nuclear talks amid threats of UN sanctions
The meeting, set to take place in Istanbul, will be the first since Israel's mid-June attack on Iran, which sparked a 12-day war and targeted key nuclear and military sites. read more People walk past a mural drawn by the "Grafitiyul" graffiti art group depicting Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on a street in the Israeli coastal city of Tel Aviv on July 22, 2025. AFP Iranian diplomats will meet counterparts from Germany, Britain and France on Friday for renewed nuclear talks, amid warnings that the three European powers could trigger 'snapback' sanctions outlined under the 2015 deal. The meeting, set to take place in Istanbul, will be the first since Israel's mid-June attack on Iran, which sparked a 12-day war and targeted key nuclear and military sites. Israel's offensive – which killed top commanders, nuclear scientists and hundreds of others as residential areas were struck as well – also derailed US-Iran nuclear talks that began in April. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Since then, the European powers, known as the E3, have threatened to trigger the 'snapback mechanism', which would reinstate United Nations sanctions on Iran by the end of August, under the effectively moribund 2015 nuclear deal. The option to trigger the snapback expires in October, and Tehran has warned of consequences should the E3 opt to activate it. 'Inaction by the E3 is not an option,' a European source said, noting that Tehran would be reminded during the meeting that the snapback window closes this autumn. The source said Europeans are preparing to trigger the mechanism 'in the absence of a negotiated solution' and called on Iran to make 'clear gestures' regarding uranium enrichment and the resumption of cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog. Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who will attend the talks Friday, alongside senior Iranian diplomat Majid Takht-Ravanchi, warned this week that triggering sanctions 'is completely illegal'. He also accused European powers of 'halting their commitments' to the deal after the United States unilaterally withdrew in 2018 during President Donald Trump's first term. 'We have warned them of the risks, but we are still seeking common ground to manage the situation,' said Gharibabadi. Sanctions Iranian diplomats have previously warned that Tehran could withdraw from the global nuclear non-proliferation treaty if UN sanctions are reimposed. Restoring sanctions would deepen Iran's international isolation and place further pressure on its already strained economy. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has urged European powers to trigger the mechanism. Israel's June 13 attack on Iran came two days before Tehran and Washington were scheduled to meet for a sixth round of nuclear negotiations. On June 22, the United States itself struck Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordo, Isfahan, and Natanz. Before the war, Washington and Tehran were divided over uranium enrichment, which Iran has described as a 'non-negotiable' right, while the United States called it a 'red line'. The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran is enriching uranium to 60 percent purity – far above the 3.67 percent cap under the 2015 deal and close to weapons-grade levels. Tehran has said it is open to discussing the rate and level of enrichment, but not the right to enrich uranium. A year after the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal, Iran began rolling back its commitments, which had placed restrictions on its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Israel and Western powers accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons – a charge Tehran has consistently denied. 'National pride' Iran insists it will not abandon its nuclear programme, which Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called a source of 'national pride'. 'Especially after the recent war, it is important for them to understand that the Islamic Republic of Iran's position remains unshakable, and that our uranium enrichment will continue. We will not give up this right of the Iranian people,' Araghchi said on the eve of the Istanbul talks. The full extent of the damage sustained in the US bombing remains unclear. Trump has claimed the sites were 'completely destroyed', but US media reports have cast doubt over the scale of destruction. Araghchi has noted that enrichment is currently 'stopped' due to 'serious and severe' damage to nuclear sites caused by US and Israeli strikes. Since the 12-day war, Iran has suspended cooperation with the IAEA, accusing it of bias and failing to condemn the attacks. Inspectors have since left the country, but a technical team is expected to return in the coming weeks after Iran said future cooperation would take a 'new form'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Israel has warned it may resume strikes if Iran rebuilds facilities or moves toward weapons capability. Iran has pledged a 'harsh response' to any future attacks.
Scroll.in
25 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Over 2.06 lakh Indians gave up their citizenship in 2024, says Centre
More than 2.06 lakh persons relinquished their Indian citizenship in 2024, the Union government told Parliament on Thursday. Kirti Vardhan Singh, the minister of state for external affairs, told Rajya Sabha that 2.16 lakh Indians had given up their citizenship in 2023. In 2022, more than 2.25 lakh Indians had given up their citizenship. The number was 1.6 lakh in 2021, 85,256 in 2020 and 1.4 lakh in 2019. The minister provided the data in response to a question by Congress MP Anil Kumar Yadav Mandadi, who had sought to know if the Union government undertakes a 'thorough checkup/survey/inspection before acceding to the request of relinquishment of Indian Citizenship'. Singh said that a person looking to renounce their Indian citizenship is required to apply online, following which, either a district collector or a consular officer verifies the original passport. Documents are uploaded and made available to all government departments for their inputs that are to be provided within 30 days, said the minister, adding that a renunciation certificate is issued after this period. In March, the Union government told Parliament that the number of Indians who gave up their citizenship stood at 1.34 lakh in 2018 and 1.33 lakh in 2017. 'The reasons for renouncing Indian citizenship or taking foreign citizenship are personal and known only to the individual,' the Union government had said. It added that it recognised the 'potential of the global workplace in an era of knowledge economy', which had brought about a 'transformational change in its engagement with Indian diaspora'. 'A successful, prosperous, and influential diaspora is an asset for India,' said the government. 'India stands to gain a lot from tapping its diaspora networks and productive utilisation of the soft power that comes from having such a flourishing diaspora.'
Hindustan Times
27 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC to hear plea by HC judge Varma next week
New Delhi: SC to hear plea by HC judge Varma next week A Supreme Court bench led by justice Dipankar Datta is set to hear next week justice Yashwant Varma's petition challenging the findings of an in-house inquiry panel that concluded there was 'strong inferential evidence' of his 'covert or active control' over a stash of charred currency recovered from his official residence in Delhi earlier this year. According to people familiar with the matter, Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai assigned the case to the justice Datta-led bench on Wednesday evening, hours after Varma's legal team sought an urgent listing. The people cited above added that the CJI ordered the matter to be listed 'immediately' and that the petition is expected to come up for a hearing on July 28 or 29. Earlier on Wednesday morning, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for justice Varma, mentioned the matter before the CJI and requested an expedited hearing. While agreeing to list the plea, CJI Gavai noted that it would be inappropriate for him to be on the hearing bench given his prior involvement in internal deliberations related to the case. The development comes even as the central government plans to bring an impeachment motion in Parliament to remove justice Varma from office. As the monsoon session of Parliament is underway and political momentum builds for his removal, 149 Lok Sabha MPs and 63 Rajya Sabha lawmakers submitted separate notices in their respective Houses for impeachment of justice Verma on July 21 – the first day of the current session. Since then, the resignation of former vice-president Jagdeep Dhankhar has overshadowed the impeachment notices but Parliament is expected to take it up soon. If the impeachment notices are admitted in a House, the chair or speaker will constitute a three-member panel of jurists to probe the charges. The entire process of impeachment must be completed in the monsoon session that ends on August 21. Justice Varma will get up to three opportunities to defend himself before Parliament. As reported first by HT, justice Varma moved the apex court on July 17, filing a writ petition challenging the May 3 report by a three-member judicial inquiry panel and the subsequent May 8 recommendation by then CJI Sanjiv Khanna urging Parliament to initiate impeachment proceedings against him. As an interim measure, the petition has also urged the top court to stay the operation of the May 3 report of the in-house inquiry panel as well as the May 8 recommendation of the then CJI to the President and the Prime Minister to initiate proceedings to remove justice Varma from office. Terming the panel's report 'unsustainable' and the process 'perverse,' the petition alleged grave violations of natural justice and accused the committee of functioning with an 'outcome-driven approach' based on a 'preconceived narrative.' The panel, justice Varma said, failed to investigate foundational facts such as ownership, authenticity, and actual recovery circumstances of the charred cash allegedly found on March 14 at his Delhi residence following a fire. While acknowledging that some currency may have been recovered from the outhouse, the judge maintained that further inquiry was essential to establish culpability. Instead, the panel concluded its proceedings hastily, the petition claimed, reversing the burden of proof and placing the onus on the judge to disprove misconduct. The inquiry committee, comprising then high court chief justices Sheel Nagu (Punjab & Haryana), GS Sandhawalia (Himachal Pradesh), and justice Anu Sivaraman (Karnataka high court), was formed on March 22 and submitted its findings to CJI Khanna on May 3. Justice Varma's petition also challenged the then CJI's May 8 recommendation, arguing that it was based solely on an inquiry report that violated constitutional protections afforded to sitting judges. The Supreme Court's May 8 press note confirmed that justice Varma had submitted a written response to the inquiry report, reiterating his denial of any wrongdoing and terming the allegations a 'conspiracy.' However, the top court noted that the judge had essentially restated his earlier stand. During the in-house inquiry, justice Varma was divested of all judicial work and transferred back to his parent high court in Allahabad. He was serving on the bench of the Delhi high court when the March 14 incident took place. The 64-page inquiry report cited 'strong inferential evidence' to conclude that justice Varma had 'covert or active control' over the charred cash. While admitting that no direct evidence linked him to the currency, the panel held that his conduct 'belied the trust' reposed in a constitutional judge and warranted impeachment proceedings. 'The burden shifted upon justice Varma to account for the money by giving a plausible explanation, which he failed to do, except projecting a flat denial and raising a bald plea of conspiracy,' the report said. The committee concluded that even if the money had been stored without his explicit knowledge, its presence in his official residence 'eroded public trust' and constituted judicial misconduct of a grave nature. As first reported by HT on June 18, justice Varma had earlier rejected CJI Khanna's suggestion to resign or opt for voluntary retirement. In a detailed letter dated May 6, the judge accused the panel of procedural violations and asked the then CJI to reconsider both the process and the outcome.
