Latest news with #JCPOA
Saudi Gazette
17 hours ago
- Politics
- Saudi Gazette
Iran's FM says talks with Washington 'complicated' by US strikes on nuclear sites
TEHRAN — Iran's top diplomat said on Friday that the possibility of new negotiations with the United States on his country's nuclear programme has been "complicated" by US strikes on three of the sites, which he conceded had caused "serious damage." The US was one of the parties to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) which saw Iran agree to limit its uranium enrichment programme in exchange for sanctions relief and other benefits. That deal unravelled in 2018 after President Donald Trump unilaterally pulled the US out during his first term, calling it the "worst deal ever negotiated." Trump had suggested he is interested in new talks with Iran and said the two sides would meet next week. In an interview on Iranian state television broadcast late on Thursday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left open the possibility that his country would again enter talks on its nuclear program, but suggested it would not be anytime soon. "No agreement has been made for resuming the negotiations," he said. "No time has been set, no promise has been made and we haven't even talked about restarting the talks." The American decision to intervene militarily "made it more complicated and more difficult" for talks on Iran's nuclear programme, Araghchi said. In Friday prayers, many imams stressed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's message from the day before that the war had been a victory for Iran. Cleric Hamzeh Khalili, who also is the deputy chief justice of Iran, vowed during a prayer service in Tehran that the courts would prosecute people accused of spying for Israel "in a special way." During the 12-day conflict with Israel, Iran hanged several people who it already had in custody on espionage charges, sparking fears from activists that it could conduct a wave of executions after the fighting ended. Authorities have reportedly detained dozens in various cities on the charge of cooperation with Israel. Israel attacked Iran on 13 June, targeting its nuclear sites, defence systems, high-ranking military officials and atomic scientists in waved of strikes. In almost two weeks of fighting, Israel said it killed some 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. 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. Israeli military spokesperson Brigadier General Effie Defrin said Friday that in some areas it had exceeded its operational goals, but needed to remain vigilant. "We are under no illusion, the enemy has not changed its intentions," he said. The US stepped in on Sunday to hit Iran's three most important nuclear sites with a wave of cruise missiles and bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 bombers, designed to penetrate deep into the ground to damage the heavily-fortified targets. Iran, in retaliation, fired missiles at the US military base, Al Udeida, in Qatar on Monday but caused no known casualties. Trump said the American attacks "completely and fully obliterated" Iran's nuclear programme, though Khamenei on Thursday accused the US president of exaggerating the damage, saying the strikes did not "achieve anything significant." There has been speculation that Iran moved much of its highly-enriched uranium before the strikes, something that it told the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, that it planned to do. Even if that turns out to be true, IAEA Director Rafael Grossi told Radio France International that the damage done to the Fordow site, which is built into a mountain, "is very, very, very considerable." Among other things, he said, centrifuges are "quite precise machines" and it's "not possible" that the concussion from multiple 30,000-pound bombs would not have caused "important physical damage." "These centrifuges are no longer operational," he said. Araghchi himself acknowledged "the level of damage is high and it's serious damage." He added that Iran had not yet decided whether to allow IAEA inspectors to assess the damage, but they would be kept out "for the time being". — Euronews
Euronews
18 hours ago
- Politics
- Euronews
Iran's FM says talks with US 'complicated' by strikes on nuclear sites
Iran's top diplomat said on Friday that the possibility of new negotiations with the United States on his country's nuclear programme has been "complicated" by US strikes on three of the sites, which he conceded had caused "serious damage." The US was one of the parties to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) which saw Iran agree to limit its uranium enrichment programme in exchange for sanctions relief and other benefits. That deal unravelled in 2018 after President Donald Trump unilaterally pulled the US out during his first term, calling it the "worst deal ever negotiated." Trump had suggested he is interested in new talks with Iran and said the two sides would meet next week. In an interview on Iranian state television broadcast late on Thursday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left open the possibility that his country would again enter talks on its nuclear program, but suggested it would not be anytime soon. "No agreement has been made for resuming the negotiations," he said. "No time has been set, no promise has been made and we haven't even talked about restarting the talks." The American decision to intervene militarily "made it more complicated and more difficult" for talks on Iran's nuclear programme, Araghchi said. In Friday prayers, many imams stressed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's message from the day before that the war had been a victory for Iran. Cleric Hamzeh Khalili, who also is the deputy chief justice of Iran, vowed during a prayer service in Tehran that the courts would prosecute people accused of spying for Israel "in a special way." During the 12-day conflict with Israel, Iran hanged several people who it already had in custody on espionage charges, sparking fears from activists that it could conduct a wave of executions after the fighting ended. Authorities have reportedly detained dozens in various cities on the charge of cooperation with Israel. Israel attacked Iran on 13 June, targeting its nuclear sites, defence systems, high-ranking military officials and atomic scientists in waved of strikes. In almost two weeks of fighting, Israel said it killed some 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. 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. Israeli military spokesperson Brigadier General Effie Defrin said Friday that in some areas it had exceeded its operational goals, but needed to remain vigilant. "We are under no illusion, the enemy has not changed its intentions," he said. Operation Midnight Hammer The US stepped in on Sunday to hit Iran's three most important nuclear sites with a wave of cruise missiles and bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 bombers, designed to penetrate deep into the ground to damage the heavily-fortified targets. Iran, in retaliation, fired missiles at the US military base, Al Udeida, in Qatar on Monday but caused no known casualties. Trump said the American attacks "completely and fully obliterated" Iran's nuclear programme, though Khamenei on Thursday accused the US president of exaggerating the damage, saying the strikes did not "achieve anything significant." There has been speculation that Iran moved much of its highly-enriched uranium before the strikes, something that it told the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, that it planned to do. Even if that turns out to be true, IAEA Director Rafael Grossi told Radio France International that the damage done to the Fordow site, which is built into a mountain, "is very, very, very considerable." Among other things, he said, centrifuges are "quite precise machines" and it's "not possible" that the concussion from multiple 30,000-pound bombs would not have caused "important physical damage." "These centrifuges are no longer operational," he said. Araghchi himself acknowledged "the level of damage is high and it's serious damage." He added that Iran had not yet decided whether to allow in IAEA inspectors to assess the damage, but they would be kept out "for the time being."
Observer
a day ago
- Politics
- Observer
Iran n-bomb? More likely
Israel and the United States have dealt punishing blows to Iran's nuclear infrastructure. 'Operation Rising Lion' and 'Operation Midnight Hammer' have been portrayed as precision strikes that will stop the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme in its tracks. But whatever the bombings might have achieved tactically, they risk forfeiting strategically, as Iran is now more convinced than ever that nuclear weapons are the only way to deter future aggression and ensure the regime's survival. Iran was once brought to the negotiating table through a carefully calibrated mix of pressure and incentives. Despite its imperfections, that approach worked. In 2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action was agreed, with Iran agreeing to limit its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief and other concessions. But — at Israel's urging and despite Iran's apparent compliance — Donald Trump abandoned the JCPOA during his first term as president, destroying whatever mutual trust had been built over the course of 20 months of painstaking diplomacy. Now, despite pursuing new nuclear negotiations with Iran, the US has joined Israel in abandoning strategic patience in favor of spasmodic force. Some argue that Iran invited the attacks by deceiving the international community, stoking regional conflicts, and enriching uranium to levels well beyond those needed for any civilian application. These are legitimate complaints. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in a report released just before Israel's campaign began, raised concerns about Iran's compliance with its international obligations. Indeed, an analysis of this report by the Institute for Science and International Security argued that 'Iran can convert its current stock of 60 per cent enriched uranium into 233 kg of [weapon-grade uranium] in three weeks at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP), enough for 9 nuclear weapons.' That conclusion may well have lit a fire under the Trump administration. But the IAEA also concluded that it had 'no credible indications of an ongoing, undeclared structured nuclear programme' in Iran, while underscoring the urgency of reaching a nuclear deal. 'Iran,' the agency warned, 'is the only non-nuclear-weapon state in the world that is producing and accumulating uranium enriched to 60 per cent' — just a short technical step away from the 90 per cent purity needed for weapons-grade material. Even so, US and Israeli decision-makers green-lit attacks on Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan — facilities that are subject to IAEA safeguards and monitored under Iran's Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) commitments. With that, they unravelled the legal and verification framework that exists precisely to prevent weaponisation. Beyond undermining the authority of the IAEA and its inspection regime, the attacks violated the NPT's principle of peaceful nuclear use (Article IV) and breached international law, including the United Nations Charter. The US, a nuclear superpower with a record of catastrophic wars aimed at regime change, and Israel, a clandestine nuclear-armed state that refuses to sign the NPT, have thus sent an unmistakable message: only the weak follow rules, and only the strong are safe. In fact, as long as you have nuclear weapons, you can violate international law at will. This is true not only for major powers, but also for smaller states. Pakistan, for example, nurtures cross-border terrorism and exports proxy war with impunity, threatening nuclear retaliation for anyone who crosses it. This poses a more acute threat to regional peace than Iran's hypothetical bomb, but the US remains silent. This hypocrisy is deeply rooted. It was the US, after all, that aided and abetted Pakistan's covert pursuit of the bomb. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, successive US administrations ignored mounting evidence that Pakistan was secretly enriching uranium and building nuclear weapons – and continued funneling billions of dollars in aid to the country. The result is a fragile state armed with an 'Islamic bomb.' Today, with diplomacy derailed, inspections discredited, coercion normalised, and double standards embraced, what tools remain to convince Iran that remaining non-nuclear is wise and strategically viable? After years of debate over the value of a nuclear deterrent — with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei even issuing religious edicts against nuclear weapons — Iranian decision-makers are almost certain to decide that there is no other way to keep the country safe from attack. Iran now has every incentive to exit — or at least limit — the IAEA framework and race toward nuclear breakout. Just as Saddam Hussein took his nuclear programme underground following Israel's 1981 bombing of Iraq's IAEA-monitored Osirak reactor, Iran is likely to reject transparency and oversight in favor of secrecy and ambiguity. That would not be some dramatic act of defiance, but rather a rational response to a serious — even existential — threat. And it is not just Iran. If powerful states can bomb safeguarded nuclear facilities with impunity, why should any country put its faith in the global nonproliferation regime? Any government that wants to avoid the fate of Saddam's Iraq or Muammar el Qaddafi's Libya (or, for that matter, democratic Ukraine), will seek to acquire the bomb – or at least come close enough to keep adversaries guessing. The only viable path to nonproliferation is and always will be diplomacy, not destruction. Military strikes might slow down a nuclear programme, but they cannot impose long-term restraint — especially when they are carried out by powers that flout the very rules they claim to be enforcing. In the end, Operation Rising Lion and Operation Midnight Hammer may be remembered not as preemptive strikes against Iran's nuclear breakout, but as catalysts for it. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025. By Brahma Chellaney A Professor Emeritus of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and Fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin
Shafaq News
a day ago
- Politics
- Shafaq News
IAEA: Iran holds uranium for 12 nuclear bombs
Shafaq News – Vienna/Tehran Iran possesses enough enriched uranium to produce approximately 12 nuclear warheads but has not assembled any, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Thursday. Rafael Grossi, Director General of the UN nuclear watchdog, told France Inter radio that Iran's atomic facilities suffered 'serious damage' from recent airstrikes but remain functional. 'It's inaccurate to claim the program has been eliminated,' he noted, referring to US-Israeli strikes on sites including Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. He confirmed that centrifuges at the Fordow enrichment facility were knocked out, while declining to provide updates on other locations. Grossi also flagged growing friction with Tehran, citing Iranian accusations that the agency had lost its impartiality. 'There is clear tension with Iran,' he remarked. On June 25, Iran's parliament passed a bill to halt cooperation with the IAEA—pending final approval by the Guardian Council—effectively requiring any inspections to be authorized by the Supreme National Security Council. Under the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA), Iran was restricted to enriching uranium to 3.67%. It now enriches up to 60%, just short of the 90% level required for nuclear weapons. The IAEA has previously reported Tehran as non-compliant.
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Pakistan backs diplomacy on Iran
Pakistan reaffirmed its support for resolving Iran nuclear issue through peaceful means when the UN Security Council on Tuesday discussed the latest developments related to the implementation of its 2015 resolution endorsing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which limits the Iranian atomic programme. "Diplomatic engagement and the resumption of dialogue are the best means to resolve all outstanding issues," Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, permanent representative of Pakistan to the UN, told the 15-member Council on Tuesday. "Diplomacy has delivered previously and with the necessary political will, it can certainly deliver again," he said, referring to JCPOA, which was signed in 2015 after extensive negotiations between Iran and several world powers, including the United States. The US, however, withdrew from the agreement in 2018 under the Trump administration, and the deal is now considered "essentially defunct". Tuesday's Security Council session followed a brokered ceasefire that brought a pause to recent hostilities — air strikes by Israel and the United States on Iranian nuclear sites, and Tehran's subsequent missile attacks on a United States base in Qatar. In his remarks, Ambassador Asim Iftikhar said the IAEA, the UN agency responsible for verifying compliance with respective nuclear safeguards obligations of member states, must be enabled to fulfil this statutory function. "We believe that verification activities by the IAEA should continue unimpeded," he added. The Security Council, the Pakistani envoy said, should allow sufficient time to continuing efforts between the IAEA and Iran as well as other parties to resolve outstanding issues. Recent developments, he said, have yet again manifested the grave dangers that present themselves when there are violations of the UN Charter and international law. "The cost of seeking to resolve issues through military means is more than evident," he said, adding, "The region, and indeed the whole world, cannot be hostage to such adventures, dangerous precedents and spiraling escalations." With regards to recent developments, Ambassador Asim Iftikhar emphasized: Condemnation of violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of member states and, of the threat or use of force to settle disputes; Rejection of attacks on IAEA-safeguarded nuclear facilities; Sustained cessation of hostilities and a permanent ceasefire to allow resumption of dialogue and verification activities by the IAEA, and, Renew diplomatic engagement to seriously and faithfully address the outstanding issues in a cooperative manner. In conclusion, Ambassador Asim Iftikhar informed the Council that together with Russia and China, Pakistan has proposed a draft Council resolution in search of a peaceful solution to the concerns surrounding Iran's nuclear programme.
