Watch: Winston Peters, Judith Collins speak on Israel-Iran conflict from RNZAF base

Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Defence Minister Judith Collins are about to make an announcement regarding the Israel-Iran conflict from the Royal New Zealand Airforce Base in the Auckland suburb of Whenuapai at 3pm.
The announcement that the ministers would speak on the conflict came before it was revealed the US performed military strikes against three Iranian nuclear sites, including uranium enrichment facility Fordow.
Trump said on Truth Social: "We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter."
Peters has
previously said
the provocative behaviour by both Israel and Iran was to be criticised, and New Zealand did not take sides in a conflict of this nature.
"There are no innocent parties in this conflict," he said.
It was a tragedy that civilians were being killed, Peters said.
"The people who are innocent ... that tragedy is just awful and I think New Zealanders understand that with clarity," Peters said. "That's why we try to help where we can, but we are a long way from this conflict."
While Peters said we should avoid making judgement without all the information, he noted the conflict in the Middle East has been going on for years.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

RNZ News

4 hours ago

• RNZ News

Iwi must deal with us 'whether they want us or not'

A seabed mining protest held earlier in June. Photo: RNZ / Emma Andrews The head of a company that wants to mine millions of tonnes of ironsands from the seabed off the Taranaki coast says local iwi - which unanimously oppose the project - must engage with Trans-Tasman Resources "whether they want us or not", when it gets its consents. TTR has approval to vacuum up 50 million tonnes of sand annually from the South Taranaki seabed for 35 years to extract iron, vanadium and titanium, but the company still needs consent to discharge 45 million tonnes of unwanted sediment a year back into the shallow waters. The company has previously been thwarted through legal challenges right up to the Supreme Court and is currently going through the fast-track consenting process. TTR said it can mine the seabed environmentally safely, and its project would significantly boost the national and regional economies. Managing director Alan Eggers outlined the virtues of the project to councillors and members of the public - many of whom opposed it - for about an hour at a workshop last week. At the conclusion of his presentation, councillor Bryan Vickery asked Eggers why - despite his compelling case - did all eight Taranaki iwi oppose the project, and why was there a disconnect between TTR and iwi. In May, Ngā Iwi o Taranaki released a statement on behalf of the eight Post Settlement Governance Entity iwi of Taranaki, voicing their support for South Taranaki iwi in their opposition to seabed mining off the coast of Pātea. "Our iwi stand alongside our southern iwi to support them and amplify their concerns about seabed mining in their takiwā," said Ngā Iwi o Taranaki pouwhakahaere Wharehoka Wano. "We encourage all iwi to support our South Taranaki whānau in their deep opposition to TTR and seabed mining." Eggers told the workshop TTR had documented its interactions with iwi and they were extensive. "We're very disappointed at the lack of engagement that they have given us. They haven't engaged, they've refused to engage with us. "We would love to engage with them and, let me say this, we are going to be working with South Taranaki iwi when we get our consent, whether they like want us or not. "We're going to want them on board, and were going to want them to actually do a lot of this marine monitoring and research." After the meeting, Eggers told RNZ that iwi previously wanted to invest in the project. "We had a quite good relationship with South Taranaki iwi to start with and they were quite keen, in fact, to join us as perhaps an equity partner in the project, invest in the project. We'd welcomed that." Protect Our Moana group member and Parihaka uri Tihikura Hohaia said he didn't know who Eggers was talking about, when he said TTR had consulted with iwi. "He certainly hasn't come to consult with any of us grassroots whanau, hapū that are keeping our home fires burning on our marae... not at all, I can tell you that right now." Hohaia didn't hear anything in Eggers' presentation that made him think the project could go ahead in an environmentally safe way. "I don't believe it," he said. "It mustn't go ahead. "If it goes ahead, it's going to condemn our already impoverished, trampled uri to generations of protest." During his presentation, Eggers spoke to economic benefits and environmental credentials of TTR's project, while councillors and the public gallery maintained a steely silence. He pointed to the 3.2 billion tonne resource TTR had discovered in the South Taranaki Bight, saying it could generate export revenues of $1 billion a year, making it New Zealand's 11th or 12th largest exporter. The project would create about 1320 jobs nationally, and generate $190 million in government royalties and taxes per annum, Eggers said. Taranaki would benefit significantly. New Plymouth would be the operational headquarters, and Hāwera a training and logistics base. TTR would directly employ 305 people in Taranaki - 270 operational staff and 35 in administrative support. Eggers said 1125 jobs would be generated in the region in logistics, supplies, services and maritime operations. Port Taranaki and Whanganui Port would be upgraded, and TRR would spend $250 million annually in Taranaki. He brushed off concerns about the project disturbing marine mammals and rocky reefs, arguing - with supporting evidence - that there were no reefs in the project area and visits by blue whales anywhere near the mining site were extremely rare. Concerns about the plume created by dredging the seafloor were also dismissed, Eggers arguing that waters near the site would be no more turbid than during a stormy day and reefs would not be smothered. At the conclusion of his presentation, Eggers took about half a dozen questions from councillors, before Mayor Neil Holdom drew the meeting to a close. Eggers thought the meeting went well. "Well, I was pleased to have been given the opportunity, and hopefully I did give them some facts and figures around the project, and its benefits and effects." Hohaia remained unconvinced. "It felt very violent against a backdrop of a cultural upbringing in an area of land loss and so the pure focus on economics for us, the people in the room, sitting in the gallery, it seemed totally bereft of any wairua, of any spirit at all." He said proud opponents of the project sat through the address "with dignity". "These kinds of presentation, as you'd expect, are all about money, all about the supposed benefits through that perspective alone. We've seen enough environmental degradation, we've seen enough cultural degradation here in Taranaki to know better than to be lured by any more sliver coins." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

NZ Herald

5 hours ago

• NZ Herald

Donald Trump targets Iran's nuclear programme with B-2 bomber strikes

He is betting that the United States can repel whatever retaliation Iran's leadership orders against more than 40,000 US troops spread over bases throughout the region. All are within range of Tehran's missile fleet, even after eight days of relentless attacks by Israel. And he is betting that he can deter a vastly debilitated Iran from using its familiar techniques – terrorism, hostage-taking and cyber attacks – as a more indirect line of attack to wreak revenge. Most importantly, he is betting that he has destroyed Iran's chances of ever reconstituting its nuclear programme. That is an ambitious goal: Iran has made clear that, if attacked, it would exit the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and take its vast programme underground. That is why Trump focused so much attention on destroying Fordo, the facility Iran built in secret in the mid-2000s that was publicly exposed by President Barack Obama in 2009. That is where Iran was producing almost all of the near bomb-grade fuel that most alarmed the United States and its allies. Trump's aides were telling those allies on Saturday night (UST) that Washington's sole mission was to destroy the nuclear programme. They described the complex strike as a limited, contained operation akin to the special operation that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011. 'They explicitly said this was not a declaration of war,' one senior European diplomat said, describing his conversation with a high-ranking administration official. But, the diplomat added, bin Laden had killed 3000 Americans. Iran had yet to build a bomb. In short, the administration is arguing that it was engaged in an act of pre-emption, seeking to terminate a threat, not the Iranian regime. But it is far from clear that the Iranians will perceive it that way. In a brief address from the White House on Saturday night (UST), flanked by Vice-President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defenve Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump threatened Iran with more destruction if it does not bend to his demands. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,' the President said. 'If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' 'There will be either peace,' he added, 'or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember, there are many targets left.' He promised that if Iran did not relent, he would go after them 'with precision, speed and skill'. In essence, Trump was threatening to broaden his military partnership with Israel, which has spent the last eight days systematically targeting Iran's top military and nuclear leadership, killing them in their beds, their laboratories and their bunkers. The United States initially separated itself from that operation. In the Trump administration's first public statement about those strikes, Rubio emphasised that Israel took 'unilateral action against Iran', adding that the United States was 'not involved'. But then, a few days ago, Trump mused on his social media platform about the ability of the US to kill Iran's 86-year-old supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, any time he wanted. And Saturday night, he made clear that the US was all-in and that, contrary to Rubio's statement, the country was now deeply involved. Now, having set back Iran's enrichment capability, Trump is clearly hoping that he can seize on a remarkable moment of weakness – the weakness that allowed the American B-2 bombers to fly in and out of Iranian territory with little resistance. After Israel's fierce retaliation for the October 7, 2023, terror attacks that killed over 1000 Israeli civilians, Iran is suddenly bereft of its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah. Its closest ally, Syria's Bashar Assad, had to flee the country. And Russia and China, which formed a partnership of convenience with Iran, were nowhere to be seen after Israel attacked the country. That left only the nuclear programme as Iran's ultimate defence. It was always more than just a scientific project – it was the symbol of Iranian resistance to the West, and the core of the leadership's plan to hold on to power. Along with the repression of dissent, the programme had become the ultimate means of defence for the inheritors of the Iranian revolution that began in 1979. If the taking of 52 American hostages was Iran's way of standing up to a far larger, far more powerful adversary in 1979, the nuclear programme has been the symbol of resistance for the last two decades. One day, historians may well draw a line from those images of blindfolded Americans, who were held for 444 days, to the dropping of GBU-57 bunker-busting bombs on the mountainous redoubt called Fordo. They will likely ask whether the United States, its allies or the Iranians themselves could have played this differently. And they will almost certainly ask whether Trump's gamble paid off. His critics in Congress were already questioning his approach. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said Trump had acted 'without consulting Congress, without a clear strategy, without regard to the consistent conclusions of the intelligence community' that Iran had made no decision to take the final steps to a bomb. If Iran finds itself unable to respond effectively, if the Ayatollah's hold on power is now loosened, or if the country gives up its long-running nuclear ambitions, Trump will doubtless claim that only he was willing to use America's military reach to achieve a goal his last four predecessors deemed too risky. But there is another possibility. Iran could slowly recover, its surviving nuclear scientists could take their skills underground and the country could follow the pathway lit by North Korea, with a race to build a bomb. Today, North Korea has 60 or more nuclear weapons by some intelligence estimates, an arsenal that likely makes it too powerful to attack. That, Iran may conclude, is the only pathway to keep larger, hostile powers at bay, and to prevent the United States and Israel from carrying out an operation like the one that lit up the Iranian skies Sunday morning. This article originally appeared in the New York Times. Written by: David E. Sanger Photographs by: Carlos Barria / Getty Images ©2025 NEW YORK TIMES

1News

6 hours ago

• 1News

What to know about the Iranian nuclear sites that were hit by US strikes

US forces have attacked three Iranian nuclear and military sites, further upping the stakes in the Israel-Iran war. US President Donald Trump said the strikes, which he described as 'very successful', had hit the Natanz, Fordo and Isfahan sites, with Fordo being the primary target. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran confirmed there were attacks early today at all three nuclear sites. Israel launched a surprise barrage of attacks on sites in Iran on June 13, which Israeli officials said was necessary to head off what they claimed was an imminent threat that Iran would build nuclear bombs. Iran, which has long insisted its nuclear programme is peaceful, has retaliated with a series of missile and drone strikes in Israel, while Israel has continued to strike sites in Iran. The US and Iran had been in talks that could have resulted in the US lifting some of its crushing economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for Tehran drastically limiting or ending its enrichment of uranium. Until today, Washington had helped shoot down Iranian strikes on Israel but had not launched direct attacks on Iran. ADVERTISEMENT Here's a look at the sites Trump said the US struck and their importance to Iran's nuclear programme. Natanz enrichment facility Iran's nuclear facility at Natanz, located some 220 kilometres southeast of Tehran, is the country's main enrichment site and had already been targeted by Israeli airstrikes. Uranium had been enriched to up to 60% purity at the site — a mildly radioactive level but a short step away from weapons grade — before Israel destroyed the aboveground part of the facility, according to the UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. Another part of the facility on Iran's Central Plateau is underground to defend against potential airstrikes. It operates multiple cascades, or groups of centrifuges working together to more quickly enrich uranium. The IAEA has said it believes that most if not all of these centrifuges were destroyed by an Israeli strike that cut off power to the site. The IAEA said those strikes caused contamination only at the site itself, not the surrounding area. Iran also is burrowing into the Kūh-e Kolang Gaz Lā, or Pickax Mountain, which is just beyond Natanz's southern fencing. Natanz has been targeted by the Stuxnet virus, believed to be an Israeli and American creation, which destroyed Iranian centrifuges. Two separate attacks, attributed to Israel, also have struck the facility. Fordo enrichment facility ADVERTISEMENT The Fordo enrichment facility in Iran. (Source: Maxar Technologies via AP) Iran's nuclear facility at Fordo is located some 100 kilometres southwest of Tehran. It also hosts centrifuge cascades, but isn't as big as Natanz. Its construction began at least in 2007, according to the IAEA, although Iran only informed the UN nuclear watchdog about the facility in 2009 after the US and allied Western intelligence agencies became aware of its existence. Buried under a mountain and protected by anti-aircraft batteries, Fordo appears designed to withstand airstrikes. Military experts have said it could likely only be targeted by 'bunker buster' bombs — a term for bombs that are designed to penetrate deep below the surface before exploding — such as the latest GBU-57 A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb in the American arsenal. The roughly 13,600 kilogram precision-guided bomb is designed to attack deeply buried and hardened bunkers and tunnels. The US has only configured and programmed its B-2 Spirit stealth bomber to deliver that bomb, according to the Air Force. The B-2 is only flown by the Air Force, and is produced by Northrop Grumman, meaning that Washington would have to be involved in such an operation. Isfahan Nuclear Technology Centre The facility in Isfahan, some 350 kilometres southeast of Tehran, employs thousands of nuclear scientists. It also is home to three Chinese research reactors and laboratories associated with the country's atomic programme. Israel has struck buildings at the Isfahan nuclear site, among them a uranium conversion facility. The IAEA said there has been no sign of increased radiation at the site. ADVERTISEMENT Other nuclear sites The Fordo enrichment facility in Iran. (Source: Planet Labs PBC via AP) Iran has several other sites in its nuclear program that were not announced as targets in the US strikes. Iran's only commercial nuclear power plant is in Bushehr on the Persian Gulf, some 750 kilometres south of Tehran. Iran is building two other reactors like it at the site. Bushehr is fuelled by uranium produced in Russia, not Iran, and is monitored by the IAEA. The Arak heavy water reactor is 250 kilometres southwest of Tehran. Heavy water helps cool nuclear reactors, but it produces plutonium as a byproduct that can potentially be used in nuclear weapons. Iran had agreed under its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers to redesign the facility to relieve proliferation concerns. The Tehran Research Reactor is at the headquarters of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, the civilian body overseeing the country's atomic programme. It initially required highly enriched uranium but was later retrofitted to use low-enriched uranium over proliferation concerns.