European Leaders: Iran Must Not Take Destabilizing Action
The leaders of Britain, France and Germany on Sunday urged Iran not to take any actions that would further destabilize the region following US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities overnight.
"We have consistently been clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon and can no longer pose a threat to regional security," the government heads of Germany, Britain, France, known as the E3, said in a joint statement.
"We call upon Iran to engage in negotiations leading to an agreement that addresses all concerns associated with its nuclear program. We stand ready to contribute to that goal in coordination with all parties."
The E3 also confirmed their support for the security of Israel, the statement said.
US forces struck Iran's three main nuclear sites, President Donald Trump said late on Saturday, warning Tehran it would face more devastating attacks if it does not agree to peace.
"We will continue our joint diplomatic efforts to defuse tensions and ensure the conflict does not intensify and spread further," the E3 statement said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
19 minutes ago
- Arab News
Netanyahu's delusional pursuit of a ‘new Middle East'
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu persistently declares his ambition to 'change the face of the Middle East.' Yet his repeated assertions seem to clash with the unfolding reality on the ground. Netanyahu's opportunistic relationship with language is now proving detrimental to his country. The Israeli leader undoubtedly grasps fundamental marketing principles, particularly the power of strong branding and consistent messaging. However, for any product to succeed over time, clever branding alone is insufficient; the product itself must live up to at least a minimum degree of expectation. Netanyahu's 'product,' however, has proven utterly defective. Yet the 75-year-old Israeli prime minister stubbornly refuses to abandon his outdated marketing techniques. But what, exactly, is Netanyahu selling? Long before assuming Israel's leadership, Netanyahu mastered the art of repetition — a technique often employed by politicians to inundate public discourse with specific slogans. Over time, these slogans are intended to become 'common sense.' As a member of the Knesset in 1992, Netanyahu delivered what appeared to be a bombshell: Iran was 'within three to five years' from obtaining a nuclear bomb. In 1996, he urged the US Congress to act, declaring that 'time is running out.' Iran has remained his primary focus Dr. Ramzy Baroud While the US pivoted its attention toward Iraq, following the September 2001 attacks, Netanyahu evidently hoped to eliminate two regional foes in one stroke. Following the fall of the Iraqi government in 2003, Netanyahu channeled all his energy into a new discourse: Iran as an existential threat. Between then and now, Iran has remained his primary focus, even as regional alliances began to form around a discourse of stabilization and renewed diplomatic ties. However, the Obama administration, especially during its second term, was clearly uninterested in another regional war. As soon as Obama left office, Netanyahu reverted to his old marketing strategy. It was during Trump's first term that Netanyahu brought all his marketing techniques to the fore. He utilized what is known as comparative advertising, where his enemies' 'product' is denigrated with basic terms such as 'barbarism,' 'dark age,' and so forth, while his own is promoted as representing 'civilization,' 'enlightenment,' and 'progress.' He also invested heavily in the FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) marketing technique. This entailed spreading negative or misleading information about others, while promoting his own as a far superior alternative. This brings us to 'solution framing.' For instance, the so-called 'existential threats' faced by Israel can supposedly be resolved through the establishment of a 'new Middle East.' For this new reality to materialize, the US, he argues, would have to take action to save not only Israel but also the 'civilized world.' It must be noted that Netanyahu's 'new Middle East' is not his original framing. This notion can be traced to a paper published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in March 2004. It followed the US war and invasion of Iraq, and was part of the intellectual euphoria among US and other Western intellectuals seeking to reshape the region in a way that suited US geopolitical needs. The Carnegie article sought to expand the definition of the Middle East beyond the traditional Middle East and North Africa, reaching as far as the Caucasus and Central Asia. American politicians adopted this new concept, tailoring it to suit US interests at the time. It was US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who largely rebranded 'greater' to 'new,' thus coining the 'new Middle East,' which she announced in June 2006. Clever branding alone is insufficient Dr. Ramzy Baroud Though Netanyahu embraced the term, he improvised it in recent years. Instead of speaking of it as a distant objective, the Israeli leader declared that he was actively in the process of making it a reality. 'We are changing the face of the Middle East. We are changing the face of the world,' he triumphantly declared in June 2021. Even following the events of Oct. 7, 2023, and the Israeli war and assault on Gaza that ensued, Netanyahu never ceased using the term. This time, however, his emphasis on 'change' rotated between a future possibility and an active reality. 'I ask that you stand steadfast because we are going to change the Middle East,' he said on Oct. 9 of that same year. And again, in September 2024, he proclaimed that Israel was 'pursuing' a plan to 'assassinate Hezbollah leaders' with the aim of 'changing the strategic reality of the Middle East.' And again, in October, December, and January of this year. In every instance, he contextualized the 'change of the Middle East' with bombs and rockets, and nothing else. In May, coinciding with a major Israeli bombing of Yemen, he declared that Israel's 'mission' exceeds that of 'defeating Hamas,' extending to 'changing the face of the Middle East.' And, finally, on June 16, he assigned the same language to the war with Iran, this time remaining committed to the new tweak of adding the word 'face' to his new, envisaged Middle East. Of course, old branding tactics aside, Netanyahu's Middle East, much like the old US 'greater Middle East,' remains a pipe dream aimed at dominating the resource-rich region, with Israel serving the role of regional hegemon. That said, the events of the past two years have demonstrated that, although the Middle East is indeed changing, this transformation is not happening because of Israel. Consequently, the outcome will most likely not be to its liking. Therefore, Netanyahu may continue repeating, like a broken record, old colonial slogans, but genuine change will only happen because of the peoples of the region and their many capable political players.
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Israel targeting Tehran's Evin prison, ‘agencies of repression': minister
Jerusalem: Israel targeted Tehran's notorious Evin prison as well as the command centers of security agencies in Iran responsible for 'maintaining the regime's stability,' a minister and the military said Israeli military 'is carrying out strikes of unprecedented force against regime targets and agencies of government repression in the heart of Tehran,' Defense Minister Israel Katz wrote on X as the Iran-Israel war raged for an 11th included Evin prison — 'which holds political prisoners and regime opponents' — as well as the command centers of the domestic Basij militia and the powerful Revolutionary Guards, he a separate statement, the military said that it was hitting command centers of security forces including the Revolutionary Guards, a wing of the Iranian military.'These forces... are responsible on behalf of the Iranian regime's military for defending the homeland security, suppressing threats, and maintaining the regime's stability,' it said in a began its military campaign against Iran on June 13 with strikes on the country's nuclear and missile facilities, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has described as an 'existential' threat for his the list of targets has widened since then, encompassing state television and the Iranian domestic security forces, raising speculation that Israel is seeking to topple Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Donald Trump hinted Sunday at interest in changing Iran's system of government, despite several of his administration officials earlier stressing that US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites overnight on Saturday-Sunday did not have that goal.'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump posted on his Truth Social journalists heard explosions in northern Tehran on Monday and Iran's Red Crescent reported a strike near its building in the prison is often used to hold foreign nationals and Iranians that are seen by rights groups as political is believed to hold around 20 European nationals, many of whose cases have never been published, in what some Western governments describe as a strategy of hostage-taking aimed at extracting prison is a large, heavily fortified complex located in a northern district of the Iranian capital, and is notorious among activists for alleged rights least three waves of incoming Iranian missiles were reported by the Israeli military on a hard-liner in Netanyahu's government, added that 'for every rocket fired at Israel's home front, the Iranian dictator will be severely punished, and the attacks will continue with full force.'
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
IMF warns US strikes on Iran could disrupt global economy
JEDDAH: The International Monetary Fund has warned that US airstrikes on Iran could amplify global economic uncertainty, with potential spillovers far beyond energy markets, its head told Bloomberg on Monday. IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said that the fund is closely monitoring the situation in the Middle East, particularly the impact of the conflict on oil and gas prices and supply routes. Georgieva's remarks come after the US military conducted targeted strikes on nuclear facility sites in Iran, effectively involving itself in Israel's campaign to dismantle the country's nuclear program, despite Tehran's threats of retaliation that could spark a wider regional conflict. US President Donald Trump stated that Iran's key nuclear sites were 'completely and fully obliterated' and warned the country against retaliatory attacks, asserting that the US could strike additional targets 'with precision, speed and skill.' Georgieva told Bloomberg that the IMF are looking at this 'as another source of uncertainty in what has been a highly uncertain environment' adding that the institution is watching for two things: 'One, how would that impact risk premia for oil and gas. There has been some movement upward— how far would it go? And two: would there be any disruption in energy supplies?' She went on: 'For now, no. But let's see how events would develop— whether either delivery routes or spillovers to other countries may occur. I pray, no.' The development saw Brent crude briefly rising by as much as 5.7 percent to $81.40 per barrel during early Asian trading on June 23 before retreating, according to Bloomberg. When asked whether the transmission mechanism, specifically the channels where she sees the greatest impact of the Middle East shock, is currently reflected in energy prices, the managing director confirmed that it is. 'There could be secondary and tertiary impacts. Let's say there is more turbulence that goes into hitting growth prospects of large economies, and then you have a trigger impact in a downward revision in prospects for global growth,' she told Bloomberg. 'As you know, we have already revised downward growth projections for this year, and we will be coming up with our next projections in July.' Georgieva continued: 'What we see in the first two quarters of the year broadly confirms the picture we painted in April, and it is somewhat slower global growth, but no recession.' The IMF's April report sounded a warning over the weakening global economy, sharply downgrading growth forecasts from January projections. The fund identified surging trade tensions, record-high tariff levels, and rising policy unpredictability as key threats to both short- and long-term economic stability.
