"Good news but fragile": EU Foreign Policy Chief Kallas on Israel-Iran ceasefire
In a series of posts on X on Tuesday, the EU Foreign Policy Chief urged all sides who were involved in the conflict in the region to refrain from further violence and avoid escalation.
"The announced reprieve in fighting between Israel and Iran is good news but remains fragile. All sides should stand by this and refrain from further violence. All further escalation must be avoided," Kallas stated, highlighting the precarious nature of the ceasefire.
"The EU stands in solidarity with all those affected, including Qatar last night. This is the moment to return to the negotiating table. Let this be a turning point for the whole region. I will continue to work towards this end with all sides," she added.
This came after US President Trump, on early Tuesday, announced a ceasefire agreement between the two conflict-gripped nations following Iran's attack on US military bases in Qatar and Iraq in response to the US strikes on its nuclear facilities.
However, moments after the announcement, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) carried out a limited strike on an Iranian radar installation north of Tehran, following which Iran launched two ballistic missiles at Israel, as reported by The Times of Israel.
Trump expressed his strong disapproval of Israel and Iran "violating the ceasefire", he announced, and said that the two countries have been fighting "so long and so hard that they don't know what the f*** they're doing."
Shortly after, the Israeli Prime Minister's Office in a statement noted that after a conversation between Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel has "refrained" from further attacks on Iran.
This came following a series of escalating military actions in the region when Israel initially conducted coordinated strikes against Iranian nuclear and military sites on June 13.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
7 hours ago
- Observer
Competing security visions of the US, China
It is indisputable at this point that the US is disengaging from global leadership. While America's retreat has so far been largely a choice – spearheaded by President Donald Trump's 'America First' administration – it may well become irreversible. And if the Communist Party of China (CPC) has its way, the People's Republic will emerge as the new global hegemon. China's recently published white paper on national security, its first ever, offers a glimpse into the CPC's plans. Reflecting President Xi Jinping's 'holistic national security concept,' the document articulates an expansive, integrated approach, encompassing political, economic, military, technological, cultural, and societal domains. Unlike previous defence-focused white papers, it establishes political security – specifically, the CPC's leadership – as the foundation of national stability, essential to enable China to act as a stabilising force in a turbulent world. That turbulence, China asserts, can be blamed largely on Western powers – especially the US – which have fostered disorder through containment and interference. China has a point here: even America's current withdrawal from global leadership has been conflicted and chaotic. That chaos begins with the Trump administration's embrace of economic nationalism and continues through Trump's rejection of decades of US foreign-policy principles. Trump's willingness to leverage American power to shape global affairs according to his whims is another incitement to instability, with his unilateral decision to bomb Iranian nuclear sites being the most obvious example. To be sure, in the Trump administration's view, the US operation in Iran was a bold, one-off manoeuvre aimed squarely at ending the Iranian nuclear threat and advancing peace in the Middle East. It was thus perfectly aligned with the administration's commitment not to become embroiled in new 'forever wars.' But not only is the operation unlikely to have achieved its objectives; it undermines US soft power by inviting accusations of arrogance and hypocrisy. This appears to matter little to the Trump administration, which seems convinced that national security depends not on global outreach but on military deterrence, advances in cybersecurity, and economic protectionism, exemplified by high tariffs, efforts to secure critical-mineral supply chains, and limits on the export of advanced technology to China. In fact, the Trump administration has scaled back cultural diplomacy and slashed development aid – hallmarks of America's post-Cold War influence. This has provided a critical opening for China to position itself as a stable and certain actor in regional and global affairs, a champion of multilateralism, an investor in and defender of the Global South, and a just peacemaker. Within Asia, this vision has materialised in 'treaties of neighbourliness and friendly cooperation' between China and nine countries, and in China's promotion of greater regional security cooperation, including with the ASEAN countries. More broadly, China is touting Xi's Global Security Initiative (GSI), which was launched in 2022 as an alternative to Western-led security frameworks that can support broad-based, 'win-win' cooperation on 'complex and intertwined security challenges.' The message has resonated widely: according to China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, more than 120 countries have endorsed the GSI. China is further nurturing its soft power through cultural outreach – from its network of Confucius Institutes to its recent dialogues with the African Union – and economic engagement, including trade, lending, and investment. In May, the country introduced a $9 billion credit line for Latin America and the Caribbean. More broadly, China has been allocating huge amounts of funding for infrastructure and energy projects across the Global South, including through its ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The GSI, the BRI, and other projects form the pillars of what China calls a 'global community of shared future.' But, like the US, China's claim to the moral high ground is not always aligned with reality. Its message is clear: China, with the CPC at its helm, is the just, stable, non-hegemonic power the world – especially the Global South – needs. But its rhetoric of justice and multilateralism is belied by its coercive domestic policies and aggressive regional manoeuvres, such as the militarisation of the South China Sea. In fact, while China presents its security posture as entirely defensive – aimed only at ensuring its own sovereignty – it has been pursuing various territorial claims with increasing assertiveness. Regarding Taiwan, the CPC makes 'no promise to renounce the use of force' and 'reserves the option of taking all necessary measures' to 'reunite' China. Following through on these threats would be far less justifiable than the US operation in Iran, which was at least aimed at neutralising a perceived threat. Taiwan poses no threat whatsoever to China or its neighbours. But for many countries in the Global South, America's history of double standards, including its inconsistent human-rights advocacy, has so decimated its moral authority that its interventions stand out as uniquely problematic, especially as it turns its back on soft power. The US and China have very different ideas of what it means to underwrite global stability. For the US, the objective – at least before Trump's presidency – had been to quash or deter threats to a rules-based order, including through selective interventions. But as Trump's America abandons that approach and alienates more of the world, China's vision, focused on fortifying CPC control and building alternative frameworks for global engagement, has gained greater appeal. If the US wants to remain a decisive player in the emerging multipolar world order, it will need to reaffirm the postwar foreign-policy principles that underpinned the rules-based order that it helped build but now threatens. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025. Ana Palacio A former minister of foreign affairs of Spain, is a visiting lecturer at Georgetown University
Observer
7 hours ago
- Observer
Israeli forces kill at least 12 in Gaza amid renewed truce talks
GAZA: Gaza's civil defence agency said Israeli forces killed at least 12 people on Monday, including six in a clinic housing Palestinians displaced after 21 months of war. Israel has recently expanded its military operations in the Gaza Strip, where the war has created dire humanitarian conditions for the Palestinian territory's population of more than two million. Civil defence spokesman Mahmud Bassal said that six people were killed and 15 injured in an Israeli air strike that hit the Al-Rimal clinic, "which houses hundreds of displaced people, in the Al-Rimal neighbourhood west of Gaza City." Footage showed Palestinians, including groups of young children, combing through the bombed-out interior of the clinic, where mattresses lay alongside wood, metal and concrete broken apart in the blast. "We were surprised by missiles and explosions inside the building," eyewitness Salman Qudum said. "We did not know where to go because of the dust and destruction." In the south of the territory, Bassal said two people were killed and 20 others injured by Israeli forces' gunfire while waiting for aid near a distribution site run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). A US- and Israel-backed group, the GHF took the lead in food distribution in the territory in late May, but its operations have had a chaotic rollout with repeated reports of aid seekers killed near its facilities. In Khan Yunis in the south, Bassal reported two people killed in an air strike on a house and another killed by Israeli gunfire. An air strike on a house in Gaza City killed one and injured several others, he added. Meanwhile, Hamas and Israel were resuming talks in Qatar on Monday, a Palestinian official said, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu travelled to Washington to meet President Donald Trump, who has pushed for a "deal this week" between the foes. The latest round of negotiations on the war in Gaza began on Sunday in Doha, aiming to broker a ceasefire and reach an agreement on the release of hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners. "Indirect negotiations are scheduled to take place before noon today in Doha between the Hamas and Israeli delegations to continue discussions" on the proposal, a Palestinian official familiar with the negotiations said. Ahead of Netanyahu's third visit since Trump's return to office this year, the US president said there was a "good chance" of reaching an agreement. "We've gotten a lot of the hostages out, but pertaining to the remaining hostages, quite a few of them will be coming out," he told journalists. Netanyahu, speaking before heading to Washington, said his meeting with Trump could "definitely help advance this" deal. The US president is pushing for a truce in the Gaza Strip, plunged into a humanitarian crisis after nearly two years of war. Netanyahu said he dispatched the team to Doha with "clear instructions" to reach an agreement "under the conditions that we have agreed to". He previously said Hamas's response to a draft US-backed ceasefire proposal, conveyed through Qatari and Egyptian mediators, contained "unacceptable" demands. The war has created dire humanitarian conditions for the more than two million people in the Gaza Strip. A US- and Israel-backed group, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), took the lead in food distribution in the territory in late May, when Israel partially lifted a more than two-month blockade on aid deliveries. But its operations have had a chaotic rollout, with repeated reports of aid seekers killed near its facilities while awaiting rations. UN agencies and major aid groups have refused to cooperate with the GHF over concerns it was designed to cater to Israeli military objectives. The UN human rights office said last week that more than 500 people have been killed waiting to access food from GHF distribution points. The health ministry in Gaza on Sunday placed that toll even higher, at 751 killed. Israel's retaliatory campaign has killed at least 57,418 people in Gaza, mostly civilians. — AFP
Muscat Daily
10 hours ago
- Muscat Daily
Donald Trump slams Elon Musk's ‘America Party' plan
Washington, D.C., US – President Donald Trump on Sunday blasted multibillionaire CEO Elon Musk's launch of a new US political party called the America Party. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO, and until recently a close adviser to Trump, announced the creation of the America Party in a series of posts late on Saturday. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy. Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom,' he posted on X, the social media platform he owns. On Sunday, Trump said it was 'ridiculous' to start a third party. 'The Democrats have lost their way, but it's always been a two-party system,' Trump said, adding, 'and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion. It really seems to have been developed, but three parties have never worked'. Musk first floated the idea of forming a new political party after a public and bitter falling-out with Trump. Musk spent hundreds of millions of dollars to support Trump's re-election and led the so-called Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE in the Trump administration, which aimed to cut government spending, before their disagreements spilled into the open. He revived the idea of a new political party this week as US lawmakers approved Trump's sweeping tax and spending bill. Musk was among the legislation's most vocal critics and has pledged to establish a new party to oppose Republicans who supported the bill. On Friday, he posted a poll asking whether users 'want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system', drawing over 1.2mn responses, with more than 60% in favour of a new party. Third-party challenges A truly competitive third party could disrupt over a century of Democratic and Republican dominance at all levels of government. But Musk would not be the first person trying to establish a party to challenge their dominance. Former President Theodore Roosevelt came the closest in 1912, after splitting from the Republican party. He ran as Progressive Party candidate and won 27% of the popular vote and 88 electoral votes. More recently, Ross Perot, another billionaire, won 19% of the popular vote but no electoral votes in the 1992 presidential campaign as an independent and later formed the Reform Party. Musk's billions meet ballot reality Musk has already indicated that he is not aiming for an all-out win. Instead, his America Party would focus on flipping a couple of House and Senate seats by applying, 'extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield'. He believes that by targeting key races, the America Party could hold decisive votes on contentious legislation. A massive campaign war chest could give Musk an edge. Parties spend billions of dollars to get their candidates elected. According to donations watchdog OpenSecrets, nearly US$16bn was spent across the 2024 presidential and congressional races. Musk himself was the biggest donor in the 2023-24 election cycle. He gave more than US$291mn to Republicans across all races. However, money is not the only factor that matters. In April, Musk provided million-dollar checks to some voters in Wisconsin ahead of an election for the state's Supreme Court. Voters chose Democratic-backed Susan Crawford, who defeated conservative Brad Schimel for a State Supreme Court seat, despite US$25mn in spending from Musk. DW
