Israeli official says 'it was a mistake' to say Bushehr was hit

By Jana Choukeir, Pesha Magid and Steven Scheer
DUBAI/JERUSALEM (Reuters) -An Israeli military official said on Thursday that "it was a mistake" for a military spokesperson to have said earlier in the day that Israel had struck the Bushehr nuclear site in Iran.
The official would only confirm that Israel had hit the Natanz, Isfahan and Arak nuclear sites in Iran.
Pressed further on Bushehr, the official said he could neither confirm or deny that Israel had struck the location, where Iran has a reactor.
The potential consequences of an attack on the plant -- contaminating the air and water -- have long been a concern in the Gulf states.
Qatar's prime minister, in March, warned that an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would "entirely contaminate" the waters of the Gulf and threaten life in Qatar, the UAE and Kuwait.
Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani warned that an attack on Iran's nuclear sites would leave the Gulf with "no water, no fish, nothing ... no life".
Qatar, the UAE and Kuwait, facing Iran on the opposite side of the Gulf, have minimal natural water reserves and are home to more than 18 million people whose only supply of potable water is desalinated water drawn from the Gulf.
Bushehr is Iran's only operating nuclear power plant, which sits on the Gulf coast, and uses Russian fuel that Russia then takes back when it is spent to reduce proliferation risk.
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday said that Moscow had agreed with Israeli leaders that the safety of Russian workers at the site would be guaranteed.
"Our specialists are on site. This is more than two hundred people. And we agreed with the leadership of Israel that their safety will be ensured," Putin told journalists.
The Russian embassy in Iran said in a statement earlier on Thursday that Bushehr was operating normally and that it did not see any security threats.
A source familiar with the matter told Reuters that contamination from any attack on Bushehr was the worst case Gulf countries were preparing for. The source stated that Gulf countries, in cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog, had prepared a contingency plan for any attack on any nuclear plant in the region.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

39 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Europe to give Iran message that US open to direct talks

By Francois Murphy, John Irish and Parisa Hafezi GENEVA (Reuters) -European foreign ministers will tell their Iranian counterpart on Friday that the U.S. is open to direct talks even as it considers joining Israeli strikes intended to smash Tehran's nuclear capacity, diplomats said before a meeting in Geneva. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi will be told that Iran must send a "clear signal," two diplomats told Reuters, with pressure mounting on Tehran to agree tough curbs on its nuclear programme to prevent the potential development of an atomic weapon. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke to several Western counterparts prior to the Geneva meeting, the diplomats said, indicating readiness to engage directly with Tehran. Washington did not confirm that, though broadcaster CNN quoted a U.S. official saying President Donald Trump supported diplomacy from allies that could bring Iran closer to a deal. Tehran, however, has repeatedly said it will not talk to the Trump government until Israeli attacks end. The ministers from Britain, France and Germany, known as the E3, plus the European Union's foreign policy chief, were meeting separately prior to planned face-to-face talks with Araqchi. "The Iranians can't sit down with the Americans whereas we can," said a European diplomat. "We will tell them to come back to the table to discuss the nuclear issue before the worst-case scenario, while raising our concerns over its ballistic missiles, support to Russia and detention of our citizens." The Trump administration is demanding Iran stop uranium enrichment altogether, whereas the E3 have in past talks left it some scope to enrich for civil ends in exchange for extremely strict international inspections of its nuclear activities. On Friday, French President Emmanuel Macron shifted closer to Trump's position, saying that any new deal with Tehran needed to go towards zero enrichment. A senior Iranian official told Reuters Iran is ready to discuss limitations on its uranium enrichment but said the prospect of zero enrichment would undoubtedly be rejected, especially while Israel was attacking Iran. IRAN DEMANDS END TO WAR The talks were due for mid-afternoon in Geneva, where an initial accord between Iran and world powers to curb its nuclear programme in return for sanctions lifting was struck in 2013 before a comprehensive deal in 2015. Separate talks between Iran and the U.S. collapsed when Israel launched what it called Operation Rising Lion against Iran's nuclear facilities and ballistic capabilities on June 12. "There is no room for negotiations with the U.S. until Israeli aggression stops," Araqchi was quoted as saying on Iranian state TV on Friday. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot spoke to Rubio on Thursday night, during which Rubio said Washington was ready for direct contact with the Iranians any time, according to a French diplomatic source. The main message Europeans will pass to Araqchi is that the U.S. has signalled readiness for direct talks, but that Iran must give a serious signal, the two European diplomats said, without defining what the signal should be. Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, has spoken to Araqchi several times since last week, sources say. While diplomats did not expect a breakthrough in Geneva, they said it was vital to engage with Iran because once the war stopped the nuclear issue would remain unresolved given that Tehran would still retain the scientific know-how. "Even now, if they have something to say, we will listen," Araqchi said of the Europeans. "We are not ashamed of defending our nation's rights and we are not avoiding anyone." German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said European powers had always been ready to talk provided Iran committed to not developing nuclear weapons. "Now it's Iran's move," he said. Trump has said he will decide within two weeks whether to join Israeli strikes.

Washington Post

an hour ago

• Washington Post

NATO's call to arms: Time to muscle up ‘at the speed of fear'

LONDON — NATO chief Mark Rutte visited Britain this month and had a bracing message for his hosts, along with other nations in the alliance: Start bulking up militarily, he said, or 'you had better learn to speak Russian.' Vladimir Putin isn't about to invade England. But don't forget that, shortly before invading Ukraine in 2022, he did casually threaten then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson with a missile strike that 'would only take a minute.' Europe, a top British defense strategist told me, needs to re-arm 'at the speed of fear.' With a handful of exceptions, most of NATO's European leaders have gotten the memo that Russia, far from being depleted by the bloodbath in Ukraine, is now a country remade, reoriented and revved up for a state of permanent warfare. A much greater share of overall Russian economic activity, more than 7 percent of gross domestic product, is now earmarked for defense than in any of the alliance's 32 member states. That is likely to continue even if the guns fall silent in Ukraine, which they probably won't any time soon. 'As the army eats through Soviet legacy equipment, Putin is determined to replenish stockpiles — and equip his military with the most modern [equipment] informed by wartime innovation,' Alexandra Prokopenko of Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin wrote recently in the Financial Times. 'This will take several years, keeping the performance-enhancing drug of high military expenditure in the Russian economic system.' The growing dread in Europe arising from Moscow's threat has been compounded by the parallel fear inspired by President Donald Trump's contempt for Washington's NATO allies, and his apparent indifference to their security. That is the backdrop as NATO prepares for its annual summit next week at The Hague, where it is expected to adopt an annual spending goal of 5 percent of GDP on defense and related infrastructure — a target most of member states will struggle over years to meet. About one-third of the alliance's members don't even hit the current minimum of 2 percent; some that do, including France and Britain, are grappling with severely squeezed public finances. Rutte's prescription is that the alliance should be prepared to defend its own territory from Russian aggression within five years, including by boosting its air and missile defense by 400 percent. Others across the continent think the timeline is even shorter. Don't imagine that Putin would launch a massive invasion of a European NATO state like the unsuccessful one of Ukraine three years ago. To achieve his aim — unmasking the alliance as a paper tiger — he wouldn't need to. It would be enough to take a bite out of one of the three tiny Balts — Lithuania, Latvia or Estonia — and bet that Washington wouldn't respond with boots on the ground or a sustained missile air assault. With Trump in the White House, that's a bet Putin might be willing to make. For the Russian leader, the West is an implacable forever-foe obstructing his neoimperial dream. He's not giving up or backing down; to the contrary, he sees opportunity in Trump's disregard for Europe. The intensifying peril for Europe is not only to fortify its own defenses but simultaneously to bear the burden of keeping Ukraine in the fight for its sovereignty and survival as Washington disengages. In Ukraine, my British strategist source told me, Europe must seek 'escalation dominance,' meaning arming Kyiv at a pace that might double Russian casualties, forcing Putin to reassess the war's cost-benefit calculus. That's an ambitious goal given Russia's resilience. One measure of Putin's callousness is that he is untroubled by his forces' average daily toll of at least 1,200 deaths and injuries in Ukraine over the past year, for territorial gains the size of Rhode Island. The question is whether the continent's major powers — their economies anemic, their leaders facing ascendant right-wing parties, their aging populations frustrated by ineffectual governments — can rise to the occasion. Amid that haze of challenges, will Europe's main leaders leverage the crisis they face in Russia's threat, and fundamentally reorder their nations' priorities? Doing so would require asking voters to sacrifice some of their comforts — and real political courage. 'That this threat is now clear gives Europeans the chance to go beyond meetings in gilded palaces, and to convince people they face an existential choice,' Gerald Knaus, founding chairman of the European Stability Initiative, a think tank, told me. 'We need a clear narrative to make the case for a modern arsenal of democracy.' That is the concern that prompted Rutte's call to arms. Britons, like other Europeans, can maintain their generous public health care and other social services, he said, and ignore his recommendation that alliance members devote 5 percent of their economies to defense. But in that case, start studying the Cyrillic alphabet.

Time​ Magazine

2 hours ago

• Time​ Magazine

‘If Middle East Is Unstable, World Will Not Be at Peace': How China Views the Israel-Iran War

Iran's friends don't like the war decimating Tehran, but they're not ready to join the fight against Israel and potentially the U.S. Instead, Russia and now China have urged deescalation, emphasizing the dangerous consequences the escalating conflict could have on the whole world. 'If the Middle East is unstable, the world will not be at peace,' Chinese President Xi Jinping said Thursday. 'If the conflict escalates further, not only will the conflicting parties suffer greater losses, but regional countries will also suffer greatly.' 'The warring parties, especially Israel, should cease fire as soon as possible to prevent a cycle of escalation and resolutely avoid the spillover of the war,' Xi added. Xi's comments came in a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, in which both leaders called for a ceasefire, according to a readout by China's foreign ministry. Earlier this week, Russia warned that Israel's attacks have brought the world 'millimeters' from nuclear calamity, and Putin urged Trump against attacking Iran, as the President is mulling direct U.S. military engagement in the war that has already killed hundreds in Iran and dozens in Israel. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters that Putin and Xi 'strongly condemn Israel's actions, which violate the U.N. Charter and other norms of international law.' Ushakov added that Xi expressed support for Putin's suggestion to mediate the conflict, an offer Trump said he has rejected. China, like Russia, has also positioned itself as a potential peacebroker, though experts say it's unlikely Israel would accept Beijing as a neutral conciliator, given its past criticisms of Israel and ties with Iran. Here's what to know about how China has responded so far to the conflict and what it may see is at stake. Rhetorical but not material support 'Iran doesn't need communiqués or declarations, but concrete help, like anti-aircraft systems or fighter jets,' Andrea Ghiselli, a Chinese foreign policy expert at the University of Exeter, told France 24. But communiqués and declarations are all China is likely to offer, experts tell TIME. William Figueroa, an assistant professor of international relations at the University of Groningen, tells TIME that China's lack of military support should not come as a surprise. China has historically followed a policy of non-interference, focusing more on domestic issues while aiming to avoid entanglement in protracted foreign conflicts. Earlier this year, China similarly called on both India and Pakistan, the latter being an ' ironclad friend ' of China, to show restraint. And while it has been accused of providing ' very substantial ' support to Russia in its war against Ukraine, China has maintained that it doesn't provide weapons or troops to its neighbor. (Reports suggest, however, that its material support has included lethal systems.) White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday that the White House doesn't see 'any signs' of China providing military support to Iran 'at this moment in time.' Instead, China has offered words. Beijing has been 'harshly critical' of Israel, says Figueroa. In separate calls with his Iranian and Israeli counterparts over the past weekend, after Israel launched an attack on Friday against Iran, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi stressed that China 'explicitly condemns Israel's violation of Iran's sovereignty, security and territorial integrity.' It has also publicly advised the U.S. against greater involvement in the conflict. 'The heating up of the Middle East region serves no one's interests,' Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said on Tuesday. 'To fan up the flames, use threats and exert pressure does not help deescalate the situation and will only aggravate tensions and enlarge the conflict.' 'The international community, especially influential major countries, should uphold a fair position and a responsible attitude to create the necessary conditions for promoting a ceasefire and returning to dialogue and negotiation so as to prevent the regional situation from sliding into the abyss and triggering a greater disaster,' a Chinese state-media editorial declared on Thursday. China's diplomatic response reflects its priority to 'lower the temperature,' says Figueroa, particularly in tensions with the U.S. Diplomatic limitations China has sought to deepen its investments and influence in the Middle East over the years, which has raised the expectations of its regional diplomacy to 'sky high' levels, says Figueroa. But while Beijing touted brokering a historic truce between Saudi Arabia and Iran in 2023, the task before it now is much taller. Wang, the Chinese foreign minister, said China is 'ready to play a constructive role' in resolving the conflict, according to foreign ministry readouts of his calls with both Iran and Israel, but unlike with Saudi Arabia and Iran, Figueroa says, Israel has expressed no interest in negotiating a resolution. And even if Israel was interested in coming to the table, China is unlikely to be seen as a neutral arbiter given its ties with Iran, criticisms of Israel including over Gaza, and ongoing global power competition with the U.S., Israel's biggest ally. China has developed strong economic ties with Iran over the years, becoming Iran's largest trading partner and export market, especially for oil—a critical lifeline for Iran as the U.S. has placed severe economic sanctions on the country. Iran joined BRICS, the intergovernmental group China has viewed as an alternative collective of emerging powers to the Western-oriented G7, in 2024; joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a Beijing-backed security group, in 2023; and the two countries signed a 25-year cooperative agreement in 2021. While China has also maintained an economic relationship with Israel—China is Israel's second-biggest trading partner and the two countries have had an 'innovative comprehensive partnership' since 2017—Figueroa says it's 'not close enough to have a serious influence over Israel's actions.' When asked about the possibility of China acting as a mediator, Israel's Ambassador to Beijing Eli Belotserkovsky told the South China Morning Post on Wednesday, 'at this stage, we are concentrating on the military campaign. This is our main concern at the moment, and we need to see how things will develop.' Still, he added that Israel would 'continue talking to China as [part of] an ongoing process.' Failure to help bring peace to the Middle East could seriously dampen China's recent efforts to portray itself as an effective global peacebroker, especially after Ukraine already rejected a peace plan Beijing had proposed in 2023. And if Iran's regime falls, Marc Lanteigne, an associate professor of political science at the Arctic University of Norway, told France 24, the China-mediated truce with Saudi Arabia would also risk 'going up in smoke.' 'It is hard to predict how the conflict itself might impact [China's diplomatic] efforts,' Figueroa says. 'A wider conflict would undoubtedly complicate Chinese diplomatic efforts, which largely rest on their ability to provide economic development.' Economic concerns While the Iran-China trade balance is largely skewed in China's favor— around a third of Iranian trade is with China, but less than 1% of Chinese trade is with Iran —China is heavily dependent on the Middle East's oil. 'China is by far the largest importer of Iranian oil,' according to a statement in March by the U.S. State Department, which added: 'The Iranian regime uses the revenue it generates from these sales to finance attacks on U.S. allies, support terrorism around the world, and pursue other destabilizing actions.' Sara Haghdoosti, executive director of public education and advocacy coalition Win Without War, tells TIME that China 'has a vested interest in seeing the conflict end before Israel strikes more of Iran's oil infrastructure.' But China is less dependent on Iran itself than on access to the region's reserves. 'The Islamic Republic is a replaceable energy partner,' according to a Bloomberg analysis. For global oil markets too, changes to Iran's supply alone are unlikely to cause significant price disruptions. 'Even in the unlikely event that all Iranian exports are lost, they could be replaced by spare capacity from OPEC+ producers,' assessed credit agency Fitch Ratings earlier this week. Around 20% of the world's oil trade, however, passes through the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has threatened to close in retaliation if the U.S. joins the war. 'If the United States officially and operationally enters the war in support of the Zionists, it is the legitimate right of Iran in view of pressuring the U.S. and Western countries to disrupt their oil trade's ease of transit,' said Iranian lawmaker Ali Yazdikhah on Thursday, according to state-sponsored Iranian news agency Mehr News. Doing so would also impact China, for which more than 40% of crude oil imports come from the Middle East. The conflict's 'greatest impact on China could be on energy imports and supply chain security,' Sun Degang, director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Fudan University, told the South China Morning Post. 'While Beijing will continue to condemn the conflict, it will also seek to balance ties with Israel and the Gulf states and promote stable energy flows,' according to Bloomberg's analysts, especially as surging commodity prices would exacerbate domestic economic growth challenges already hampered by the trade war with the U.S. and an ongoing real estate crisis. In response to a question about the potential interruption of Iranian oil supplies to China, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun reiterated on Tuesday the need to 'ease tensions as soon as possible' in order to 'prevent the region from spiraling into greater turmoil.' A contained conflict could be good for China 'If a wider conflict breaks out,' Figueroa says, 'the impact on China's economic projects and investments in the region would be significant.' Foreign policy analyst Wesley Alexander Hill noted in a Forbes op-ed that an escalated conflict could force China into a bind between taking 'decisive action' to defend Iran, which might alienate Saudi Arabia, or doing nothing militarily and letting Israeli and potentially U.S. attacks 'continue to degrade Iranian export capacity,' which would leave other regional partners with a 'dim view [of] what Chinese commitment under pressure looks like.' Still, some analysts have suggested that China—as well as Russia—may be content for now to sit back and let things play out, with their higher priorities clearly elsewhere. According to Bloomberg Economics analyst Alex Kokcharov, a contained conflict in the Middle East could 'distract Washington from strategic competition with China.' Added Bloomberg's bureau chief in China, Allen Wan, in a newsletter Friday: 'Should the U.S. once again get tangled up in a war in the Middle East, that'd probably suit China just fine. Beijing and the [People's Liberation Army] would appreciate the chance to squeeze Taiwan tighter.' 'At very least, both powers [Russia and China] are content to watch the U.S. further squander goodwill with gulf Arab partners by backing another destabilizing conflict in the region,' Haghdoosti, the Win Without War executive director, tells TIME. And they, she adds, are likely 'shedding no tears that the U.S. military is currently burning through stocks of difficult-to-replenish missile defense interceptors to shield Israel.'