Putin on Iran and Germany's Merz

ST PETERSBURG, Russia, June 19 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin made the following comments to senior news agency editors on the conflict between Iran and Israel and on whether he would be willing to speak to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
ASKED ABOUT ISRAELI REMARKS ABOUT POSSIBLE REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN:
"You always need to look at whether the goal is achieved or not when starting something. We see that today in Iran, with all the complexity of the internal political processes taking place there, we are aware of this, and I think there is no point in going deeper, but nevertheless there is a consolidation of society around the country's political leadership. This happens almost always and everywhere, and Iran is no exception. This is the first thing.
"The second thing that is very important is that everyone is talking about it, I will only repeat what we know and hear from all sides, these underground factories, they exist, nothing has happened to them. And in this regard, it seems to me that it would be right for everyone to look for ways to end hostilities and find ways for all parties to this conflict to come to an agreement with each other in order to ensure both Iran's interests, on the one hand, for its nuclear activities, including peaceful nuclear activities, of course (I mean peaceful nuclear energy and the peaceful atom in other areas), as well as to ensure the interests of Israel from the point of view of the unconditional security of the Jewish state. This is a delicate issue, and, of course, you need to be very careful here, but in my opinion, in general, such a solution can be found."
ASKED IF HE WOULD BE WILLING TO SPEAK TO GERMANY'S MERZ:
"If the Federal Chancellor wants to call and talk, I have already said this many times - we do not refuse any contacts. And we are always open to this... At some point, when our European partners decided to inflict a strategic defeat on us on the battlefield, they themselves stopped these contacts. They stopped, let them resume. We are open to them.
"I do doubt if Germany can contribute more than the United States as a mediator in our negotiations with Ukraine. A mediator must be neutral. And when we see German tanks and Leopard (battle tanks) on the battlefield, and now we are looking at the fact that the Federal Republic is considering supplying Taurus (missiles) for attacks on Russian territory using not only the equipment itself, but also using Bundeswehr officers... Here, of course, big questions arise. It is well known that if this happens, it will not affect the course of hostilities, that is excluded. But it will spoil our relationship completely.
"Therefore, today we consider the Federal Republic, just like many other European countries, not a neutral state, but as a party supporting Ukraine, and in some cases, perhaps, as accomplices in these hostilities. Nevertheless, if we are talking about a desire to talk about this topic, to present some ideas on this subject, I repeat once again, we are always ready for this."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

20 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

'Defiant' Israelis show little sign of backing down against Iran - but as the country continues to pay the price for its resilience, its citizens ask 'We're doing the world's dirty work, so why can't you British give us some moral support?'

The building has not so much blown up as imploded. Thickets of metal protrude from what was once the roof of this apartment block. It's as if a vengeful god has reached down from the heavens and yanked out its steel entrails. Next to it a skyscraper stands scorched, its side mottled with soot. The asphalt on the street below is torn, gaping open like a wound. Nearby, a carpet of shattered glass glints in the morning light. I'm in Ramat Gan in central Tel Aviv, where an Iranian missile attack has just struck several residential buildings. Emergency services have cordoned off the impact site. Police warn curious onlookers to watch their step, as throngs of gathered Press push against the makeshift barriers. One cheeky TV crew tries to scoot around them and is gently pushed back. Just hours earlier, I was awoken in my hotel room by an air-raid siren sounding across the city. An automated Hebrew voice then wafted into my room: get to an air-raid shelter – fast. A couple of soft thuds later, I understood that the city had just been hit. Israel may indeed have mastery of Iran's skies. It may be deploying its air defences highly effectively. But Iranian missiles are nonetheless getting through, and they are striking the heart of Israel's premier city. One thing is clear to me: this war is far from over. Israelis understand this. And, for the moment, they are united behind their government. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains controversial (and loathed by many), but for now the consensus is that resolving the country's domestic politics can wait. It's time to deal with Iran – once and for all. The Israelis have had enough. And I don't blame them. I have studied the drama of the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear programme, and by extension the Iran-Israel conflict, for almost 20 years. Iran's war on Israel has been relentless. The mullahs declared a proxy war against the state of Israel in 1991. Ironically, this came after Israel had quietly sold them weapons during the eight-year Iran-Iraq war. Jerusalem was desperate to rekindle relations with the state it had been allies with under the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, before he was ousted in the Islamic Revolution of 1979. It got a de facto declaration of war in response. Since then, the Iranians have expanded their malignant influence into Syria, Lebanon and Gaza to create what they call a 'ring of fire' around Israel – to scorch and burn the Jewish state at every opportunity. It's been effective. Even before the horrors of October 7, Iranian-backed proxies had killed and wounded thousands of Israelis. Shortly after I left the crash site, I spoke to Dr Meir Javedanfar, who teaches Iranian politics at Reichman University, on the Mail's weekly global news podcast, Apocalypse Now. Like so many Israelis, he looked tired, the result of sleep deprivation following repeated night-time missile attacks. Javedanfar was born in Tehran, and he explained proudly to me: 'Bar Mitzvah'd in Tehran, too!' Like so many others, including myself, he once thought that some type of reform could come to the Islamic Republic. But, like me, he saw that everyone who ever tried to bring reform was bypassed, imprisoned, tortured or killed. The Iranians have not let up against Israel, even for a moment. In a statement two days after October 7, Ayatollah Khamenei said that, while Iran was not involved in the Hamas massacre, the 'hands and forehead of its planners must be kissed'. Like so many Israelis, Javedanfar has had enough. 'From now on, Israel refuses to live with a regime that sponsors terror organisations who kill our civilians,' he told me. 'The Iranian regime wants Israel dead. It wants Israeli citizens dead. It denies the Holocaust. It is so depraved that it has Holocaust cartoon competitions. 'No Israeli government is willing to live with this any more. And so, on June 13 we acted – with amazing success, which was no surprise. Special operations are to Israel what watches are to Switzerland. Our expertise.' Make no mistake, the war is tough on the people here. As I walk through the streets, the normally bustling city is quiet, bereft of traffic. I stroll along the promenade on Frishman Beach. Normally I'd eat at Greko, a Greek restaurant overlooking the Mediterranean Sea. But it's boarded up. Matthew Morgenstern, Professor of Aramaic at Tel Aviv University, sets out what Israelis are facing now. 'Starting with Gulf War One in 1991, I've been through almost 35 years of wars here. But I've never experienced anything like this. Every single day, hundreds of people on the home front have lost their homes. 'It seems that they only need to get one missile through a day and the damage is done. I've been calling this 'Iranian Roulette' – will we be the ones to be hit this time?' The mullahs are hoping that these attacks will force the Israeli government into abandoning the fight. I'm sceptical. Throughout the day I trade messages and calls with a former defence official still in regular contact with the government and the security services. He sums up the mood here. 'The people of Israel are incredibly determined and defiant,' he tells me. 'Despite the awful price we are paying personally, physically, emotionally, there is still wall-to-wall support for this operation. Netanyahu is not a popular prime minister here. But after almost two years of fighting wars against Islamic death cults on seven fronts, all backed by Iran, the people of Israel are saying enough is enough.' I feel that sentiment all around me. It hangs in the air like the salt I smell drifting over from the Mediterranean Sea. Two events over the past week have hardened resolve yet further. The first is the killing of a seven-year-old Ukrainian girl, Nastya Buryk , and her family in an Iranian strike on the coastal town of Bat Yam. Nastya had come to Israel from Odesa for cancer treatment along with her grandmother Lena and two cousins, Konstantin, nine, and Ilya, 13, all of whom were killed alongside her. Her mother Maria is still beneath the rubble. The second is Thursday's missile attack on Soroka Hospital, in the southern city of Be'er Sheva, which serves the entire Negev region, not least the many Palestinians who go especially to be treated there. According to Israel's ministry of health, 71 people have been injured. The people are enraged. But they also know this cannot last for ever. And there is one question that naturally comes to the Israeli mind: will the Americans get involved? Well, the Israelis are certainly keen that they do. 'This is Trump's Churchillian moment,' the former Israeli defence official tells me. 'He has the opportunity, with a day or two's work, to strike at the heart of the worst and most destabilising regime since the end of the Second World War. 'You don't want the world's most dangerous weapons in the hands of the world's most dangerous regime. 'Israel has already done most of the work. Trump can and must finish the job.' Trump can indeed finish the job. As John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern Institute at West Point, told me on my podcast, the US has 'one of the quickest solutions to the remaining nuclear sites. The massive ordnance penetrator, the GBU-57 – a 30,000lb bunker-busting munition that can penetrate 200ft into concrete and reinforced steel.' Moreover, as Spencer also pointed out, it can only be deployed by the US B-2 bomber. 'This is really the only military solution, and only an American bomb dropped from an American plane can deliver it,' he said. But is it certain to destroy nuclear facilities buried deep in the mountains? And will Donald Trump sanction its use? So far the signs are mixed. Trump has been deploying the plural pronoun on social media, claiming 'we' – rather than Israel alone – have achieved extraordinary feats against the mullahs. Trump remains wary of war. But, clearly, the urge to claim credit for what is – so far – an extraordinary military operation is pressing on him. He's given the ayatollahs two weeks to make a deal. This is probably no surprise. If there's one thing Donald Trump enjoys more than making a deal, it's making a deal when the other side is so desperate he can put them over a barrel. He's betting that the mullahs, getting smashed up daily by Israel, need respite. He's betting that he can exploit this fact to demand terms so tough that Iran's path to a nuclear bomb is blocked, at least for now. But Iran's leadership also have a say. And they run a dictatorship, not a democracy. Concede too much and they risk emboldening enemies, not least their own people. For a regime built on projecting strength and fear, humiliation is fatal. If the mullahs refuse to fold, Trump may well decide to step in at the final moment and then take the credit. If the Israelis are defiant, they are also confused. In going after Iran's nuclear programme, they are doing the world a service. 'We are happy to take them out ourselves,' a friend told me as we drank smoothies in a cafe just off Dizengoff in central Tel Aviv. 'But why can't you just give us your moral support? We're doing this for everyone.' She's right. As German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently observed: 'This is the dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.' And yet, it seems we struggle to acknowledge even that. From our own government we hear the usual cringeworthy calls for calm and 'de-escalation'. Don't they understand how ridiculous they sound? If Britain, with all its history and expertise and capabilities, has truly given up on trying to influence world events then it's better to just say nothing. Now is not the time to back down. The question is simple. What would we in Britain do if a country had for decades promised to wipe us off the face of the Earth? What would we do if that country paid for proxy groups to launch thousands of rockets over decades at our towns and cities – at our children? If it provided the funding and training for the biggest massacre of British people since the Second World War? What would we in Britain demand that our government do? The answer is unequivocal: bring that regime to an end. The Israelis are just trying to take out Iran's nuclear programme – to everyone's benefit.

BBC News

20 minutes ago

• BBC News

Give new recruits £10,000 to join army, says Sir Ed Davey

New soldiers should be offered a £10,000 bonus to rapidly boost troop numbers to deal with an increasingly unpredictable world, the Lib Dems have government should also distribute pamphlets to make sure every British home is "war-ready" and able to deal with blackouts and chaos caused by the outbreak of conflict or cyber-attacks, Lib Dem Leader Sir Ed Davey Lib Dems claim the plans will "urgently" boost to the number of trained soldiers from just under 71,000 to more than 73, the face of a "barbaric" Russian President Vladimir Putin and an "erratic" US President Donald Trump, Sir Ed said the UK must be better prepared. Over the weekend, Sir Ed visited Estonia to see British troops on what he called Nato's "frontline with Russia".His visit had shown him "it is clear given the threat of a barbaric Putin and the challenge of an erratic Trump, we need to do more to make Britain war-ready," he said."War readiness also starts at home," Sir Ed added, "which is why I am calling for a public awareness campaign aimed at every home in Britain - to make sure we're all prepared for the possibility of a conflict or hostile acts such as major cyber-attacks".Under the plans, new recruits receive a £10,000 bonus after completing training and serving for two armed services personnel would be offered a £20,000 payment if they return to serve two additional starting salary for new recruits to the British Army is £26,334 a a government scheme launched last November, a total of 17,000 armed forces personnel became eligible for retention engineers can get £30,000 if they sign up for a further three years, with privates and lance corporals eligible for £8,000 for four proposed Lib Dem scheme would be limited to 3,000 personnel, including new recruits and re-enlistees, with its £60m cost covered by the main defence plans are drawn up with the expectation that defence spending would rise to 2.5% of national income or GDP by 2027 - as promised by Lib Dems have called for the uplift in defence spending to be funded through an increase of the Digital Services Tax - a 2% levy on the biggest social media and tech companies, which raises about £800m a Lib Dems argue the bonus scheme would "urgently increase" the number of trained UK regular soldiers up to 73,000 - from the 70,752 listed in the most recent official month, the government set out plans for a small increase to the size of the regular army to 76,000 full-time soldiers after 2029 - although this has yet to be has also proposed a 20% increase in Active Reserves "when funding allows" - most likely after 2030 following an overhaul of the armed forces. The government is consulting on plans to regenerate military homes with £7bn of funding by 2025, after bringing the defence estate back under Ministry of Defence (MoD) control last Conservatives have called for an increase in UK troop numbers but have not set out how many they think are week, the shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge set out plans to have military homes run by a housing association to tackle the "poor" state of accommodation and stem an exodus of a third of UK troops were considering leaving the armed forces due to the standard of accommodation, the Ministry of Defence's (MoD) own survey found. Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.

Times

29 minutes ago

• Times

How Israel could go it alone without US bunker buster bombs

The United States appears to have sent two B-2 stealth bombers to a military base in the Indian Ocean. The decision to send the warplanes, shortly after sending the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier to the region, could be a last minute negotiating tactic or a prelude to war. The bombers, which were probably making their way to Guam or the Diego Garcia military base, are equipped with the capability to use 'bunker buster' bombs which could offer the best chance of taking out Iran's Fordow nuclear facility. However, President Trump is still uncommitted for the time being to offensive action and is talking up diplomacy. If the president is unwilling to use his assets in the region to attack Iran, the question arises of how far the Israelis might be able to go on their own. Several targets, including the heavy-water reactor at Arak and the most important uranium enrichment plant, Natanz, have already been struck. The boss of the International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed that the centrifuges there were stopped so abruptly by airstrikes that they have been 'severely damaged if not destroyed altogether'. But other key sites are believed to remain intact, including the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Centre and the uranium enrichment plant deep underground at Fordow. The first of these (also a subterranean facility) is thought to have been the storage site for the 400-plus kilograms of uranium already enriched close to weapons grade. The second site is home to the most secure processing facilities available to the Islamic Republic. So, what are the other options? Expert opinion seems divided. Yoav Gallant, Israel's defence minister until last year, in an article in the Free Press co-authored with Sir Niall Ferguson, argued, 'only one air force has the power to finish off Fordow … only America can do this'. Gallant, however, like many on the Israeli side, wants to draw the Americans in, and US attacks on this and other deeply buried facilities might turn out to be more a question of delaying for longer than completely eliminating Iran's nuclear programme. Even if America does join in the assault, Fordow's centrifuges, shielded by 80-90 metres of rock, may prove invulnerable to its 'bunker buster' — the massive ordnance penetrator or GBU-57 bomb which is rated as effective down to 60m. Speaking on an Israeli podcast, Zohar Palti, Mossad's former analytical chief, said of Fordow: 'It would be better if the Americans strike there. They truly have the capacity to make the place 'evaporate', and I chose that word deliberately.' The phrasing was chilling, hinting that a tactical or low-yield nuclear weapon might be the only way to ensure its destruction. The idea of a nuclear weapon being used, something the White House would not rule out this week, seems like an extraordinary escalation but might be threatened at this stage as another attempt to intimidate Iran into making concessions. It's fascinating also that the Mossad veteran implied that a deep penetration unconventional weapon was a capability the US has, but not Israel. If President Trump's desire to avoid another Middle Eastern war means he sits this one out, it's possible the Israelis may have secretly produced a better penetrator weapon than its publicly acknowledged inventory suggests. There's also been some speculation — shades of blowing up the Death Star — that Fordow has an Achilles heel, a ventilation shaft that could provide a pathway for a bomb. But so far Israel has not attempted an assault on Fordow. David Albright, an American academic who's spent many years looking at Iranian nuclear sites, is one of those who's more upbeat about the chances of putting it out of action, saying 'Israel doesn't need the United States to come in with bunker busters and destroy it … Israel can do it on its own'. He argues that destroying generators, ventilation systems and so on at Fordow's other support plant could wreck the centrifuges inside in the same way that Natanz's were. It's noteworthy also that this week Israel bombed the factory where new enrichment machines are made. If all else fails, it's likely that the Israelis also have a plan to attack Fordow using ground forces. Their main airborne formation, the 98th Paratroopers Division, was withdrawn from Gaza earlier this month to be ready for action elsewhere. Israeli C-130 transport planes have also been seen over Syria, apparently on missions to or from Iran. There could be many reasons for those flights, for example to set up refuelling points for Israeli aircraft or ferry their forward air controllers to or from operations. But the suppression of Iran's air defences has been so extensive that it may soon be viable to mount the type of airlift needed to insert a force of several thousand troops to a forward mounting base near Fordow. It could be that a desire to retain the option of such a mission lies behind the fact that the tunnel entrances of the complex have not yet been attacked. They might need to be used by an assault force after all. This type of operation, though, would be fraught with difficulty — indeed in the view of Gallant and Ferguson it's 'not realistic'. There are thousands of Iranian troops deployed around the plant, so casualties could be high. Although the quantity of explosive needed to destroy it from the inside out might be a lot less than bombing it, it would remain considerable. While the Israelis are likely to have developed numerous plans, Iran may still hold some wild cards. 'All enriched materials have been transferred and are in secure locations,' Major General Mohsen Rezaie of the Revolutionary Guard Corps said earlier this week. He added: 'We will come out of this war with our hands full.' Many believe Iran has indeed dispersed its stockpile of highly enriched uranium from Isfahan to other sites too. A third uranium enrichment site at a secret location is believed to have been under preparation when the conflict started. What all the 'kinetic' options require — from GBU-57 bombs to ground forces — is an continuing onsite inspection regime to ensure that in the months or years to come Iran's nuclear project is not reconstituted. That might be necessary even in the 'regime change' scenario: note that international organisations are currently trying to secure the remnants of Syria's chemical arsenal. At talks with the UK, France, and Germany in Geneva on Friday, Iran showed both its willingness to engage on these issues but also its refusal to give up uranium enrichment. That's a longstanding position which is, so far, unchanged by the war. This refusal to bend may be sufficient for President Trump, mindful of the political divisions within his Maga movement, to say that a deal is impossible, despite his recent attempts to pressure Iran into one. His line last week — saying 'I may or may not' attack — may also simply have been stalling for time while final military deployments went ahead. Evidently Pentagon planners have wanted to head off various contingencies if, for example, Iran were to retaliate against their bases or diplomatic facilities in the region. But with the arrival of two stealth bombers, alongside two aircraft carriers and soon a number of F-22 stealth fighters and tanker planes, Trump will be able to deliver a final ultimatum to Iran. When that happens, the question of whether Israel can take out Fordow and other key facilities on its own may become academic.