UAE, Russian Presidents hold phone call discussing ways to contain regional escalation

UAE President His Highness Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and His Excellency Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation, held a phone call today to review the strategic partnership between the two countries, as well as the latest developments in the Middle East and the grave implications for regional and global security.
The two leaders discussed efforts being made to contain the situation and put an end to the escalation, stressing the importance of exercising restraint and pursuing dialogue to avoid further threats to security and stability.
They underscored their support for all efforts aimed at achieving a solution through diplomatic means

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The National

2 hours ago

• The National

'Worst internet shutdown': Iranians abroad fear for loved ones amid blackout back home

It has been a week of dreading and despair for Shirin, a young Iranian woman living in Europe. She has not heard from her family in Iran for five days, after the government disconnected phone and internet services over cybersecurity threats sparked by the war with Israel. The many text messages Shirin sends each day go unanswered. Her calls are cut off after one ring and WhatsApp threads remain marked with a disheartening single tick – meaning recent messages have not been delivered. More than 400 people have been killed and 3,500 injured in Iran since Israel began its attacks on June 13, Iranian state media has reported. In Israel, 24 civilians have been killed by Iranian missile attacks, according to local authorities. The blackout imposed earlier in the week for the more than 90 million people of Iran has left civilians in the dark about when and where the next Israeli strike might occur. Activists describe the move as a form of psychological warfare in a country all too familiar with state-imposed information controls and internet shutdowns during times of unrest. 'It's like waiting outside an operating room, not knowing anything about how the surgery is going,' said Shirin. 'The last thing my dad told me before the shutdown was, 'Don't worry, stay where you are and go on with your life. It's all going to be OK.' But, of course, we're completely panicked.' She said the last time such an internet shutdown occurred was during the Woman, Life, Freedom protests in 2022. Those were among the most significant political uprisings in Iran 's recent history, when millions demanded an end to gender-based discrimination. The protests were met with violent repression by authorities. Shirin is far from alone. Around the world, Iranians are desperately waiting for any news that their loved ones back home are safe, as deadly missile exchanges between Iran and Israel have escalated since June 13, following strikes Israel claimed were aimed at halting Tehran's nuclear programme. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said this week that the change or fall of Iran's leadership was not a goal of Israel's attacks, but could be a result. Cyber attacks have surged since the conflict began, aimed at Iranian banks and state television networks. On Wednesday, hackers briefly took control of the national TV news channel and broadcast a message calling on people to hold protests, which the network quickly dismissed as an 'irrelevant message'. Prominent internet monitoring organisation NetBlocks said the country had faced significant disruptions since the conflict started. On Saturday, it said internet services partially resumed after a 62-hour, government-imposed shutdown. These blackouts severely 'limit the public's ability to express political viewpoints, communicate freely and follow safety alerts amid continuing conflict with Israel", the group said. While Iran blocks access to many foreign websites, social media and messaging apps, a wider range of websites could not be reached this week. The slowdown has also reportedly disrupted tools such as virtual private networks (VPNs), which many rely on to access international content. 'This was the worst internet shutdown we've ever experienced in Iran,' Amir Rashidi, director of cybersecurity and digital rights at Miaan Group. 'Usually, they block access from inside the country to the outside. But in this case, we had no access both ways. We have never had this kind of shutdown before. It meant we had zero visibility into what was happening inside the country.' He said VPNs were restricted and phone calls from outside Iran were completely blocked, although calls within the country still worked. 'There's been some improvement starting today [June 21],' he added. 'But there's still fear it could come back at any time.' There is currently a 'white-listing' system in place, with only a limited number of websites accessible both inside and outside Iran. 'It's unclear what the exact policy is or how these websites are chosen,' he said. 'Concerning' pattern Rights organisations have denounced the move to restrict internet access as part of a concerning trend. 'We are deeply worried about the nature and scale of the shutdown, which only adds to the distress of people already grappling with … uncertainty,' Hussein Baoumi, the Middle East and North Africa deputy regional director at Amnesty International, told The National. 'Restricting access to platforms like WhatsApp and other communication tools prevents people from obtaining potentially life-saving information, including warnings about bombings.' Iranian authorities have cut off internet access at other critical periods in the past. In 2019, Tehran completely shut down access for six days during nationwide protests that reportedly led to the deaths of more than 100 people amid a crackdown by security forces. 'The shutdown also serves to control what can be shared on social media, particularly anything that might challenge the government. We've raised concerns about this pattern in the past,' said Mr Baoumi. Abbas, another Iranian living in Europe, said blackouts occurred every time there was unrest in the country. For him, this reveals the government's true intentions behind the latest restrictions. 'As soon as there are protests, they cut the internet so people can't communicate, film or share information. They cut it to limit communication with the Iranian diaspora, to block access to information from abroad,' he said. 'They cut it because they're afraid of the people."

The National

4 hours ago

• The National

Iran has backed itself into a corner in the conflict with Israel and the US

The continuing standoff between Iran on one side and a US-backed Israel on the other is happening not just in military terms but also in the realm of representation. The warring parties are performing in the battlefield and in the public domain. The latter acts as a window that reveals both political and military strengths and weaknesses, giving a glimpse of the course this war is likely to take. Military developments as well as public messaging strongly indicate that Iran is fighting a losing battle. Israel is framing its attacks on Iran as being about self-defence; presenting the Iranian population with an opportunity for freedom; and saving the world from the threat posed by Tehran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeatedly urged the Iranian people to rise up against the establishment, casting Israel as their external liberator. But his framing of Iran as a threat to the world transforms the war from a bilateral issue into a global matter. This framing was echoed by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz who described Israel's attacks as 'dirty work Israel is doing for all of us', with 'us' here referring to Israel's allies but also the world at large. Such a characterisation of the attacks on Iran is meant to serve as an endorsement of their legitimacy and necessity, standing in stark contrast to the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, which many countries in and outside the West publicly condemned as illegal. Though Israel's attacks are presented as being for the sake of global security, it is the US that has taken ownership of the overall narrative of the war. Even if Washington does not directly intervene in the war militarily, President Donald Trump has presented the US as its agenda setter. He has called on Iran to surrender, insinuated that the life of its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is in the US's hands, and said that 'we have complete and total control of the skies over Iran'. Tehran appeared to regard the chances of US intervention against Iran's nuclear facilities to be unlikely despite Mr Trump's repeated affirmations that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons During the Israel-Hezbollah war, the Israeli army's Arabic-language spokesperson, Avichay Adraee, gained prominence for issuing orders to Lebanese residents to "evacuate" their homes ahead of Israeli strikes, leading many commentators to say that Mr Adraee had become the de facto leader in those areas. Mr Trump is playing a similar role in his call for the residents of Tehran to 'evacuate'. The statements by Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu are not incidental. They are crafted to send a message to Tehran's ruling class that it is the US and Israel that are in charge in Iran. This is an example of psychological warfare amplified by the tools of the digital age, where such statements are not only repeated in the media but also go viral. Mr Trump has also played on the blindness of the Iranian regime regarding the position of the US towards Iran. Tehran appeared to regard the chances of US intervention against Iran's nuclear facilities to be unlikely despite Mr Trump's repeated affirmations that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. Mr Trump's 'I may do it; I may not do it' statement about direct US attacks on Iranian nuclear sites serves as a tool to undermine the Iranian establishment's self-belief. The messages from the US and Israel have also caused a notable shift in Hezbollah's public discourse. Following the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, Hezbollah swiftly declared that it would join Hamas in what the Lebanese group called 'the war of assistance'. For several months, Hezbollah kept issuing messages of defiance through its various communication channels and the speeches of its then-leader Hassan Nasrallah. The present situation is rather different. When Israel began attacking Iran earlier this month, Hezbollah was quick to issue a statement saying the group would not initiate an attack on Israel in the course of the war. The choice of language was for the group to try to save face in justifying its inability to support Iran militarily against Israel. Iran is left alone in trying to save itself and its reputation. While the Islamic Republic's rise is commonly associated with the notion of revolution, Tehran has, from the beginning, also adopted a framework of victimisation as a core part of its identity. As early as 1979, Iran's rulers presented the country as a victim of US imperialism, saying that resistance against this American project was a key mission for the republic. Such framing has not gone away. Iran continues to call the US 'the Great Satan' and justifies much of its foreign interventions in terms of countering what it regards as American evil. Having adopted this rigid framing of the US for almost five decades, Tehran has backed itself into a corner. Being seen to compromise in the face of American pressure means losing the credibility that the Iranian establishment has cultivated in the eyes of its supporters both domestically and regionally. This is why Mr Khamenei's response to Mr Trump's call for Iran to surrender has been to recycle the same tired trope of 'this nation is not one to surrender'. Some observers are making comparisons between the current war Iran is fighting and the Iran-Iraq War, which ended in 1988 when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini reluctantly accepted that Tehran had no choice but to 'drink the poisoned chalice'. There is speculation whether Iran will eventually follow a similar scenario regarding Israel. But for Iran, Israel is the US-backed 'Little Satan'. There can be no compromise as far as Iran's ruling class is concerned because this would mean losing its raison d'etre. If the end game is defeat either way, the regime would rather face it as a victim than as a quitter.

Gulf Today

6 hours ago

• Gulf Today

Russia might try to take Ukraine city Sumy: Putin

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday he did not 'rule out' his forces attempting to seize the northeastern Ukrainian city of Sumy, raising fresh doubts over the prospect of peace talks between Moscow and Kyiv. Diplomatic efforts to end the three-year conflict have stalled in recent weeks and Kyiv has accused Moscow of deliberately sabotaging a peace deal to prolong its full-scale offensive on the country. Russia currently occupies around a fifth of Ukraine and has claimed four Ukrainian regions as its own since launching its assault in 2022, in addition to Crimea, which it captured in 2014. The Sumy region is not one of the regions Moscow has formally annexed, although Russian forces have recently made inroads there for the first time in three years. At Russia's flagship economic forum in Saint Petersburg, Putin suggested Moscow could take Sumy as part of a 'buffer zone' along the border and repeated his denial of Ukrainian statehood. 'We have no objective to take Sumy, but in principle I do not rule it out... They pose a constant threat to us, constantly shelling the border areas,' Putin said. 'I consider Russians and Ukrainians to be one people. In that sense, all of Ukraine is ours,' he told attendees, when asked why his army was entering areas Moscow did not claim as its own. 'There is a saying: where ever a Russian soldier sets foot, that is ours.' Sumy is around 30 kilometres (18 miles) from the Russian border and has been heavily targeted throughout the conflict. Putin's widening territorial ambitions are likely to roil Kyiv, which has accused Moscow of not wanting to end the fighting. The two sides held rounds of direct talks in Istanbul in May and in June, but Kyiv accused Moscow of sending 'dummy' negotiators with no real power to enact a peace deal. Putin has declined to take part in the peace talks in person and on Thursday said he would only meet Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky during a 'final phase' of negotiations on ending the three-year conflict. He has also insisted Ukraine give up territory it already controls for peace. Kyiv says it cannot and will not accept Russian occupation of any part of its land. In his address Friday, Putin denied he was calling for Ukraine to 'capitulate'. 'We are not seeking Ukraine's surrender. We insist on recognition of the realities that have developed on the ground,' the Russian leader said. Putin repeated that Moscow was 'advancing on all fronts' and that his troops had penetrated up to 12 kilometres (seven miles) into the Sumy region. He also accused Kyiv of 'stupidity' by launching an incursion into Russia's Kursk region last August. 'They are creating problems for themselves,' he said. Russia has for months been rejecting calls for an unconditional ceasefire, launching deadly attacks on its neighbour. On the other hand, Russia's Prosecutor General Igor Krasnov, who has led the state's efforts to seize property worth 2.4 trillion roubles ($31 billion), on Friday said foreign companies that return to the country would be watched closely to ensure Russia benefited. Moscow has placed around a dozen foreign-owned assets under state management in the more than three years that Russia has been fighting in Ukraine and prosecutors have stepped up the seizure of domestic assets through the courts this year. Now, as the economy begins to slow after two years of growth fuelled by high military spending, Russian officials are trying to find the balance between insulating the economy from exposure to Western nations it considers unfriendly and the need for growth to keep funding the conflict in Ukraine. 'We will closely follow the government's actions,' Krasnov said. 'That is, who will come... on what terms they will come.' 'We will definitely look at making sure that the conditions under which our (Russian) business operates are better (when Western business returns),' Krasnov said. It must be profitable for Russia's own firms, he said. Russia is prioritising domestic companies, some of whom have taken market share vacated by Western firms, such as McDonald's and Unilever, that have left since Russia launched the conflict in Ukraine. Agencies