&w=3840&q=100)
Russia warns US strikes risk nuclear disaster, endanger global security
Russia said it offered to mediate a peaceful solution on Iran's nuclear issue, but accused US leaders of showing no interest in diplomacy and escalating tensions instead
AP United Nations
Russia's UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia told an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on the US airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities that the US has opened a Pandora's box and no one knows what new catastrophes and suffering it will bring.
He said Russia offered its mediation to the US to find a peaceful and mutually agreeable solution to Iran's nuclear programme, but the United States, especially its leaders, are clearly not interested in diplomacy today.
Unless we stop the escalation, Nebenzia warned, the Middle East will find itself on the verge of a large scale conflict with unpredictable consequences for the entire international security system, plus the entire world might end up on the verge of a nuclear disaster.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Israel Iran News Live Updates: Khamanei absent as Iran mourns top military leaders
Israel Iran Ceasefire Live: The surprise ceasefire between Iran and Israel, brokered by the Trump administration, has raised fresh questions about the future of US policy in the Middle East. Despite the truce, uncertainty remains over whether it will hold and how Washington will proceed, particularly with President Trump sidelining traditional diplomatic channels and relying on a small circle of White House advisers. US special envoy Steve Witkoff has called for comprehensive peace talks with Tehran. However, observers note confusion within Iran's leadership and question whether a negotiating team with real authority exists. Despite this, back-channel discussions are reportedly underway. The ceasefire followed US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, which Trump claimed had obliterated the programme. But a preliminary US intelligence assessment suggests only limited disruption, with key facilities damaged but not destroyed. Iran retains significant military capability, including the ability to threaten US forces. 01:23 (IST) Jun 29 Israel Iran News Live: Rights groups alarmed as Iran's spy crackdown targets alleged traitors and dissenters Iran's wave of arrests and fast-tracked executions has drawn international concern. Amnesty International condemned the 'grossly unfair trials,' warning the campaign risks becoming a wider crackdown on political opposition. With no access to lawyers and ethnic minorities also detained, observers fear the regime is using the security threat to silence critics under the guise of national defence. 01:22 (IST) Jun 29 Israel Iran News Live: Iran launches spy hunt after Israeli attacks Following Israel's deadly strikes on June 13, Iran has intensified efforts to root out suspected spies. Authorities have urged citizens to report suspicious behaviour like wearing hats or sunglasses at night. More than 10,000 microdrones were reportedly found in Tehran. Officials claim these drones were used in assassinations of nuclear scientists and other top figures. 01:21 (IST) Jun 29 Israel Iran News Live: Iran slams US rhetoric as mourners chant 'boom, boom, Tel Aviv' As black-clad crowds filled Tehran's streets, Iranian state TV showed banners declaring 'Boom, boom, Tel Aviv.' The chants followed sharp US criticism of Khamanei, condemned by Iran's foreign ministry. President Masoud Pezeshkian and Rear Admiral Ali Shamkhani were present, but tensions remain high as back-and-forth strikes with Israel leave the region on edge despite the declared ceasefire. 01:20 (IST) Jun 29 Bagheri, Salami, Tehranchi among Iran's fallen honoured Major General Mohammad Bagheri, killed with his wife and daughter, was among those honoured. Nuclear scientist Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi and his wife were also laid to rest. Revolutionary Guards commander Hossein Salami, killed on day one of the conflict, will be buried Sunday. Of the 60 dead, four were women and four were children, state media reported. 01:20 (IST) Jun 29 Israel Iran News Live: Khamanei absent as Iran mourns top military leaders Iran held a massive state funeral on Saturday for 60 figures killed in its war with Israel, including top generals and scientists. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamanei did not attend the ceremony, though he had earlier declared 'victory' in a video message. Thousands of mourners chanted anti-Israel and anti-US slogans, waving photos of the dead. A sudden ceasefire between Israel and Iran, facilitated by the Trump administration, has sparked fresh debate over the future direction of US involvement in the Middle East. While the truce has brought a pause to escalating tensions, analysts remain uncertain about how long it will last — or what comes next. US President Donald Trump, operating largely through a small group of White House advisers and bypassing traditional diplomatic institutions, played a central role in securing the agreement. This unconventional approach has left many questioning the durability of the deal and the strategic goals behind it. US special envoy Steve Witkoff has since urged a broader peace framework involving Tehran. However, confusion within the Iranian leadership has cast doubt on whether any team on the Iranian side has the authority or unity to negotiate meaningful terms. Despite the uncertainty, unofficial communication channels between the two sides are reportedly active. The ceasefire followed recent US military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. President Trump had earlier claimed that the attacks crippled Iran's nuclear programme. But a preliminary assessment by American intelligence suggests the strikes caused only limited damage, with several key sites hit but not destroyed. Iran's military remains largely intact and still poses a potential threat to US assets in the region, even as both sides publicly commit to the ceasefire for now. The evolving situation has left many observers cautious, with some warning that the truce could be temporary unless backed by structured negotiations and clearer commitments from both sides.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
What is the legality of U.S. strikes on Iran?
The story so far: On June 22, U.S. President Donald Trump launched military strikes on Iran, joining its ally Israel in efforts to derail Iran's nuclear programme, which both countries claim is approaching weapons production. Iran retaliated the following day with missile attacks on Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the forward headquarters of U.S. Central Command. After nearly two weeks of escalating hostilities, Iran and Israel agreed to a ceasefire on June 24. What is a lawful exercise of self-defence? The UN Charter, under Article 2(4), prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, except in narrowly defined circumstances — a claim of self-defence under Article 51 or with the UN Security Council's (UNSC) authorisation. The restrictive interpretation, grounded in the text of Article 51, permits self-defence only in response to an armed attack that is already under way. A more permissive interpretation allows for self-defence in response to an armed attack that is imminent. This broader interpretation, often referred to as anticipatory self-defence, has been endorsed in several UN-affiliated reports. Notably, the 2004 report of the Secretary-General's High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change affirmed that 'a threatened State, according to long-established international law, can take military action as long as the threatened attack is imminent, no other means would deflect it, and the action is proportionate'. These criteria are derived from the famous Caroline case, which established that the use of force is lawful only when the need for self-defence is 'instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation'. Over time, many states have argued that the Caroline standard is too rigid to address contemporary security threats. This has led to attempts to reinterpret and expand the notion of imminence, giving rise to the controversial doctrine of pre-emptive self-defence. Under this doctrine, a state may use force not only in response to an attack that is imminent but also during what is perceived as the 'last window of opportunity' to neutralise a threat posed by an adversary with both the intent and capability to strike. The U.S. has been a leading proponent of this doctrine, invoking it to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq. 'Pre-emptive self-defence lacks the requisite state practice and opinio juris to qualify as customary international law. States are generally reluctant to endorse its legality, as the absence of an imminent threat renders the doctrine highly susceptible to misuse,' Prabhash Ranjan, Professor at Jindal Global Law School, told The Hindu. Did Iran pose an 'imminent' threat? The U.S. has not submitted an Article 51 notification to the UNSC declaring its strikes on Iran as self-defence. However, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described them as a precision operation to neutralise 'threats to national interest' and an act of 'collective self-defence' of U.S. forces and its ally, Israel. Tehran has maintained that its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes and remains under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. However, on June 12, the UN nuclear watchdog passed a resolution accusing Iran of violating its non-proliferation obligations, while noting that inspectors have been unable to confirm whether the programme is 'exclusively peaceful'. In March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard initially told Congress that while Iran had stockpiled materials, it was not actively building a nuclear weapon. However, she later warned that Iran could do so 'within weeks,' after President Trump claimed Iran could develop one 'within months.' Dr. Ranjan noted that the criteria for determining an 'imminent threat' remain highly contested, as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has never ruled on the legality of anticipatory self-defence or pre-emptive strikes. 'For the U.S. to credibly invoke pre-emptive self-defence, it must present clear evidence of both Iran's intent and capability to strike in the near future. This is a difficult threshold to meet, given that Iran does not yet possess a nuclear weapon,' he said. He added that ongoing U.S.-Iran negotiations indicate that diplomatic means were still available. What about collective self-defence? Under Article 51 of the Charter, Israel can call on the assistance of its allies to exercise collective self-defence against an attack. 'Israel's strikes on Iran, framed as pre-emptive action against perceived nuclear threats, are legally suspect. This, in turn, casts doubt on the legitimacy of any claim to collective self-defence,' Dr. Ranjan said. Israel has also sought to justify its military offensive as part of an 'ongoing armed conflict,' citing a history of attacks by groups like Hamas and the Houthis, which it claims act as Iranian proxies. However, to legally sustain this argument, Israel must meet the 'effective control' test set by the ICJ in Nicaragua versus U.S. (1986). This is a high threshold to meet since it requires proof that Iran exercises 'overall control' over these groups beyond merely funding or arming them. What are the implications? Allowing states to invoke pre-emptive self-defence would effectively grant powerful nations the licence to unilaterally use force based on mere conjecture. This would further weaken the already fragile rules-based international order. It is, therefore, crucial to resist expanding legal definitions of what constitutes an imminent threat, particularly when punitive action by the UNSC against permanent members like the U.S. remains unlikely due to their veto power.
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
UN says over 1.2 million Afghans forced to return from Iran, Pakistan in 2025
More than 1.2 million Afghans have been forced to return from both Iran and Pakistan so far this year, the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) reported on Saturday, cautioning that all these repatriations could destabilize Afghanistan's already fragile humanitarian mass returns stem from crackdowns in both Iran and Pakistan that target illegal migrants, and Afghan nationals bear the brunt of the campaigns. Both nations' officers claim removals involve any illegally living foreigners. Since the count of Afghans who are being deported is disproportionate, it has raised alarm within rights organizations as well as within the to UNHCR data, more than half of the returnees came out of Iran, which had imposed a March 20 deadline for undocumented Afghans to leave voluntarily or face forcible expulsion. Since then, Iran has deported over 366,000 Afghans, including registered refugees and those in vulnerable, refugee-like conditions. Tensions related to Iran's brief conflict with Israel have also fueled the rise in deportations. The highest number of returns in a single day was recorded on June 26, when more than 36,000 Afghans crossed back into more than half the Afghan population dependent on humanitarian aid, the influx of returnees is straining resources. Aid agencies have been scaling back operations due to international funding cuts and objections to Taliban governance, undermining access to critical services like healthcare and Attorney General, Mohammad Movahedi Azad, reiterated on Saturday that undocumented foreigners must leave the country promptly or face legal consequences. 'Foreign nationals, especially our Afghan brothers and sisters, should help ensure that those staying illegally exit Iran as soon as possible,' he told state media. Iranian officials estimate that around 2.5 million of the six million Afghans in the country are Reza Bikdeli, Iran's top diplomat in Kabul, visited the Dogharoun border crossing to oversee the repatriation process and pledged support in facilitating returns. Meanwhile, growing domestic resentment in Iran has led to increased scrutiny of Afghan migrants, with some citizens accusing them of espionage linked to recent Pakistan, authorities have announced plans to expel up to 3 million Afghans in 2025, setting a June 30 deadline for 1.3 million to leave voluntarily. Islamabad, like Tehran, insists the removals are based on legal status rather than the Afghan side, the Taliban have issued reassurances to returning citizens. During the recent Eid Al-Adha holiday, Prime Minister Mohammad Hassan Akhund called on Afghans who fled after the fall of the Western-backed government to return, promising their safety. 'Come back to your ancestral land and live in peace,' he posted on social Taliban ministerial delegation recently visited Herat province to meet some of the returnees, vowing swift action to address their immediate needs and facilitate reintegration. Deputy spokesman Hamdullah Fitrat said efforts are underway to ensure returnees receive essential services and is already grappling with deepening poverty, political isolation, and a worsening humanitarian crisis, and the return of over a million people threatens to push the country's limited resources to the brink of collapse.- EndsWith inputs from agenciesMust Watch
