Australia urged to spearhead regional carbon tariffs
Teaming up with other regional economies to impose tariffs on carbon-intensive iron and other goods has been pitched as key to Australia's future as a major player in emerging green industries.
The case for Asian carbon border tariffs has been made by think tank Climate Energy Finance days after the federal energy minister signalled openness to charges at the border on emissions-heavy steel and cement.
Carbon border adjustment mechanisms, known as CBAMs, can level the playing field for heavy industries subject to domestic carbon pricing.
Without them, steelmakers and other producers may choose to move factories offshore to countries with less stringent regulations on pollution, a problem known as "carbon leakage".
The European Union has been leading the charge and its carbon border adjustment mechanism is scheduled to come into full force in 2026.
There was a strong case for an Asian equivalent building on the 17 domestic carbon pricing schemes already across the region, Climate Energy Finance net-zero transformation analyst and report author Matt Pollard said.
This includes Australia, which forces big polluters to pay a carbon penalty if their emissions are above a certain threshold via the safeguard mechanism.
China, South Korea, Japan and Singapore also have carbon pricing in some shape or form.
With most emissions-intensive goods produced in Asia for export traded within the Asia Pacific, a regional border mechanism would effectively function as a price on carbon in international trade.
"As a result, lower-emission products can more effectively compete against higher-emissions products in a global market," Mr Pollard explained.
The think tank wants Australia to spearhead the conversation as part of its bid to co-host the COP31 climate summit alongside Pacific nations.
Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen would not rule out the possibility of carbon tariffs on specific sectors, such as steel and cement, during an interview on ABC's Insiders on Sunday
He cited an ongoing review into carbon leakage headed by Australian National University climate change economics expert Frank Jotzo.
"We want to ensure Australian industry is best placed to compete in a decarbonising world," he said on Sunday.
Opposition energy and emissions reduction spokesman Dan Tehan criticised the minister for floating the idea immediately after winning the federal election.
"He's put electricity prices up, he's put gas prices up, and he's put emissions up, and now he wants to follow Donald Trump's lead and put in place tariffs," Mr Tehan said on social media platform X on Sunday.
Mr Pollard rejected the comparison to the US president's "erratically applied, economically and industrially destructive and investment-deterring" tariff agenda.
"Carbon border adjustment mechanisms are not discriminatory, and enhance globalisation, international collaboration and climate action - which is intrinsically a global problem," he said.
While they are tariffs by nature, carbon border adjustment mechanisms have the opposite objectives of the Trump administration's trade policies that are designed to "enhance protectionism and isolationism".
The push for regional Asian carbon tariffs was welcomed by groups like clean energy industry body Smart Energy Council and economic think tank The Superpower Institute.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
Workers' retirement nest eggs set for super boost
Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products." Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products." Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products." Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products."
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
EU-Aust free trade deal: a "middle finger to Trump"
There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations. There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations. There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations. There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations.
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
No breakthrough in European talks with Iranian diplomat
A meeting between Iran's foreign minister and top European diplomats yielded hopes of further talks but no immediate breakthrough, a week after war erupted between Israel and Tehran, over Iran's nuclear program. Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief, emerged from talks at a Geneva hotel about 3 1/2 hours after Iran's Abbas Araghchi arrived for the meeting. It was the first face-to-face meeting between Western and Iranian officials since the start of the conflict. In a joint written statement issued after the talks ended, the three European nations and the EU said that they "discussed avenues towards a negotiated solution to Iran's nuclear program." They reiterated their concerns about the "expansion" of the nuclear program, adding that it has "no credible civilian purpose." In a separate statement, Lammy stressed that the aim of Europe and the US was that Iran should stop all uranium enrichment. He said that "there can be discussions about the energy needs of Iran" but added that "zero enrichment is the starting point." Lammy told British media outlets that there is "a window of within two weeks where we can see a diplomatic solution," and urged Iran "to take that off ramp." US President Donald Trump has given a time-frame of two weeks for a decision on whether the US will get involved in the conflict, on Israel's side. "Military operations can slow Iran's nuclear program but in no way can they eliminate it," said French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot. "We know well -- after having seen what happened in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya — how illusory and dangerous it is to want to impose regime change from outside." Barrot also said that European nations "invited the Iranian minister to envisage negotiations with all parties including the United States, and without waiting for the end of the strikes." The French Foreign Minister said Araghchi agreed "to put all the issues on the table including some that weren't there before" and "showed his disposition to continuing the conversation — that we started today — and for the Europeans to help facilitate, including with the United States." Araghchi addressed reporters outside the meeting venue after the talks ended. He expressed support for continuing discussions with the three European countries and the EU. He also denounced Israel's attacks against nuclear facilities in Iran and expressed "grave concern" over what he called "non-condemnation" by European nations. Israel says it launched its airstrike campaign to stop Iran from getting closer to being able to build a nuclear weapon. Iran and the United States had been negotiating over the possibility of a new diplomatic deal over Tehran's program, though Trump has said Israel's campaign came after a 60-day window he set for the talks. Iran's supreme leader has rejected US calls for surrender and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause "irreparable damage to them." Just before meeting the European diplomats, Araghchi made a brief appearance before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. He said that Israel's "attacks on nuclear facilities are grave war crimes," and insisted that "we are entitled … and determined to defend our territorial integrity, national sovereignty and security with all force." Iran has long insisted its nuclear program is peaceful, though it was the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60 per cent, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90 per cent. A meeting between Iran's foreign minister and top European diplomats yielded hopes of further talks but no immediate breakthrough, a week after war erupted between Israel and Tehran, over Iran's nuclear program. Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief, emerged from talks at a Geneva hotel about 3 1/2 hours after Iran's Abbas Araghchi arrived for the meeting. It was the first face-to-face meeting between Western and Iranian officials since the start of the conflict. In a joint written statement issued after the talks ended, the three European nations and the EU said that they "discussed avenues towards a negotiated solution to Iran's nuclear program." They reiterated their concerns about the "expansion" of the nuclear program, adding that it has "no credible civilian purpose." In a separate statement, Lammy stressed that the aim of Europe and the US was that Iran should stop all uranium enrichment. He said that "there can be discussions about the energy needs of Iran" but added that "zero enrichment is the starting point." Lammy told British media outlets that there is "a window of within two weeks where we can see a diplomatic solution," and urged Iran "to take that off ramp." US President Donald Trump has given a time-frame of two weeks for a decision on whether the US will get involved in the conflict, on Israel's side. "Military operations can slow Iran's nuclear program but in no way can they eliminate it," said French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot. "We know well -- after having seen what happened in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya — how illusory and dangerous it is to want to impose regime change from outside." Barrot also said that European nations "invited the Iranian minister to envisage negotiations with all parties including the United States, and without waiting for the end of the strikes." The French Foreign Minister said Araghchi agreed "to put all the issues on the table including some that weren't there before" and "showed his disposition to continuing the conversation — that we started today — and for the Europeans to help facilitate, including with the United States." Araghchi addressed reporters outside the meeting venue after the talks ended. He expressed support for continuing discussions with the three European countries and the EU. He also denounced Israel's attacks against nuclear facilities in Iran and expressed "grave concern" over what he called "non-condemnation" by European nations. Israel says it launched its airstrike campaign to stop Iran from getting closer to being able to build a nuclear weapon. Iran and the United States had been negotiating over the possibility of a new diplomatic deal over Tehran's program, though Trump has said Israel's campaign came after a 60-day window he set for the talks. Iran's supreme leader has rejected US calls for surrender and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause "irreparable damage to them." Just before meeting the European diplomats, Araghchi made a brief appearance before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. He said that Israel's "attacks on nuclear facilities are grave war crimes," and insisted that "we are entitled … and determined to defend our territorial integrity, national sovereignty and security with all force." Iran has long insisted its nuclear program is peaceful, though it was the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60 per cent, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90 per cent. A meeting between Iran's foreign minister and top European diplomats yielded hopes of further talks but no immediate breakthrough, a week after war erupted between Israel and Tehran, over Iran's nuclear program. Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief, emerged from talks at a Geneva hotel about 3 1/2 hours after Iran's Abbas Araghchi arrived for the meeting. It was the first face-to-face meeting between Western and Iranian officials since the start of the conflict. In a joint written statement issued after the talks ended, the three European nations and the EU said that they "discussed avenues towards a negotiated solution to Iran's nuclear program." They reiterated their concerns about the "expansion" of the nuclear program, adding that it has "no credible civilian purpose." In a separate statement, Lammy stressed that the aim of Europe and the US was that Iran should stop all uranium enrichment. He said that "there can be discussions about the energy needs of Iran" but added that "zero enrichment is the starting point." Lammy told British media outlets that there is "a window of within two weeks where we can see a diplomatic solution," and urged Iran "to take that off ramp." US President Donald Trump has given a time-frame of two weeks for a decision on whether the US will get involved in the conflict, on Israel's side. "Military operations can slow Iran's nuclear program but in no way can they eliminate it," said French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot. "We know well -- after having seen what happened in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya — how illusory and dangerous it is to want to impose regime change from outside." Barrot also said that European nations "invited the Iranian minister to envisage negotiations with all parties including the United States, and without waiting for the end of the strikes." The French Foreign Minister said Araghchi agreed "to put all the issues on the table including some that weren't there before" and "showed his disposition to continuing the conversation — that we started today — and for the Europeans to help facilitate, including with the United States." Araghchi addressed reporters outside the meeting venue after the talks ended. He expressed support for continuing discussions with the three European countries and the EU. He also denounced Israel's attacks against nuclear facilities in Iran and expressed "grave concern" over what he called "non-condemnation" by European nations. Israel says it launched its airstrike campaign to stop Iran from getting closer to being able to build a nuclear weapon. Iran and the United States had been negotiating over the possibility of a new diplomatic deal over Tehran's program, though Trump has said Israel's campaign came after a 60-day window he set for the talks. Iran's supreme leader has rejected US calls for surrender and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause "irreparable damage to them." Just before meeting the European diplomats, Araghchi made a brief appearance before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. He said that Israel's "attacks on nuclear facilities are grave war crimes," and insisted that "we are entitled … and determined to defend our territorial integrity, national sovereignty and security with all force." Iran has long insisted its nuclear program is peaceful, though it was the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60 per cent, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90 per cent. A meeting between Iran's foreign minister and top European diplomats yielded hopes of further talks but no immediate breakthrough, a week after war erupted between Israel and Tehran, over Iran's nuclear program. Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief, emerged from talks at a Geneva hotel about 3 1/2 hours after Iran's Abbas Araghchi arrived for the meeting. It was the first face-to-face meeting between Western and Iranian officials since the start of the conflict. In a joint written statement issued after the talks ended, the three European nations and the EU said that they "discussed avenues towards a negotiated solution to Iran's nuclear program." They reiterated their concerns about the "expansion" of the nuclear program, adding that it has "no credible civilian purpose." In a separate statement, Lammy stressed that the aim of Europe and the US was that Iran should stop all uranium enrichment. He said that "there can be discussions about the energy needs of Iran" but added that "zero enrichment is the starting point." Lammy told British media outlets that there is "a window of within two weeks where we can see a diplomatic solution," and urged Iran "to take that off ramp." US President Donald Trump has given a time-frame of two weeks for a decision on whether the US will get involved in the conflict, on Israel's side. "Military operations can slow Iran's nuclear program but in no way can they eliminate it," said French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot. "We know well -- after having seen what happened in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya — how illusory and dangerous it is to want to impose regime change from outside." Barrot also said that European nations "invited the Iranian minister to envisage negotiations with all parties including the United States, and without waiting for the end of the strikes." The French Foreign Minister said Araghchi agreed "to put all the issues on the table including some that weren't there before" and "showed his disposition to continuing the conversation — that we started today — and for the Europeans to help facilitate, including with the United States." Araghchi addressed reporters outside the meeting venue after the talks ended. He expressed support for continuing discussions with the three European countries and the EU. He also denounced Israel's attacks against nuclear facilities in Iran and expressed "grave concern" over what he called "non-condemnation" by European nations. Israel says it launched its airstrike campaign to stop Iran from getting closer to being able to build a nuclear weapon. Iran and the United States had been negotiating over the possibility of a new diplomatic deal over Tehran's program, though Trump has said Israel's campaign came after a 60-day window he set for the talks. Iran's supreme leader has rejected US calls for surrender and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause "irreparable damage to them." Just before meeting the European diplomats, Araghchi made a brief appearance before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. He said that Israel's "attacks on nuclear facilities are grave war crimes," and insisted that "we are entitled … and determined to defend our territorial integrity, national sovereignty and security with all force." Iran has long insisted its nuclear program is peaceful, though it was the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60 per cent, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90 per cent.
