'Will Israel accept' Iran if it's not a nuclear threat?
Meron Rapoport says Netanyahu's Iran strikes distract from Gaza & asks if he would oppose Iran without a nuclear threat.
Meron Rapoport, editor at Local Call, argues that Netanyahu's strikes on Iran serve mainly to distract from Israel's failing war in Gaza, and questions whether Netanyahu would still oppose the Iranian leadership if its nuclear threat were removed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
Can Iran really shut down the Strait of Hormuz?
Amid Israel's ongoing attacks in Gaza and Iran, US President Donald Trump's unprecedented decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites has deepened fears of a regional conflict in the Middle East. Over the weekend, the United States military carried out its first known strikes against Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution toppled pro-Western Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Tehran has vowed to respond, prompting fears of escalation. During an address to a meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Istanbul, Turkiye on Sunday, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the US crossed 'a very big red line' by attacking Iran's nuclear facilities. One way Iran could retaliate is to shut the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade route where one-fifth of the world's oil supply – roughly 20 million barrels – and much of its liquified gas, is shipped each day. That would lead to a surge in energy prices. So, what do we know about the strategic passage, and can Iran afford to block it in response to the US and Israeli aggression? What is the Strait of Hormuz? The Strait of Hormuz lies between Oman and the United Arab Emirates on one side and Iran on the other. It links the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea beyond. It is 33km (21 miles) wide at its narrowest point, with the shipping lane just 3km (2 miles) wide in either direction, making it vulnerable to attack. Energy traders have been on high alert since Israel launched a wave of surprise attacks across Iran on June 13, fearing disruptions to oil and gas flows through the strait. While the US and Israel have targeted key parts of Iran's energy infrastructure, there has been no direct disruption to maritime activity in the region so far. Still, even before the US strikes on Saturday, the escalation of the conflict between Israel and Iran had sparked ocean freight rates to surge in recent weeks. Freight intelligence firm Xeneta said average spot rates have increased 55 percent month-over-month, through to last Friday. Who would need to approve the closure? Iran has in the past threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, but has never followed through on the threat. Iran's Supreme National Security Council must make the final decision to close the strait, Iran's Press TV said on Sunday, after parliament was reported to have backed the measure. However, the decision to close the strait is not yet final, as parliament has not ratified a bill to that effect. Instead, a member of parliament's National Security Commission, Esmail Kosari, was quoted in Iranian media as saying: 'For now, [parliament has] come to the conclusion we should close the Strait of Hormuz, but the final decision in this regard is the responsibility of the Supreme National Security Council.' Asked about whether Tehran would close the waterway, FM Araghchi dodged the question on Sunday and replied: 'A variety of options are available to Iran.' In his first comments since the US strikes, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that Israel has made a 'grave mistake' and 'must be punished', but did not make any specific reference to either Washington or the Strait of Hormuz. How would the closure work in practice? Iran could attempt to lay mines across the Strait of Hormuz. The country's army or the paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) may also try to strike or seize vessels in the Gulf, a method they have used on several occasions in the past. During the 1980s Iran-Iraq war, the two sides engaged in the so-called 'Tanker Wars' in the Persian Gulf. Iraq targeted Iranian ships, and Iran attacked commercial ships, including Saudi and Kuwaiti oil tankers and even US Navy ships. Tensions in the strait flared up again at the end of 2007 in a series of skirmishes between the Iranian and US navies. This included one incident where Iranian speedboats approached US warships, though no shots were fired. In April 2023, Iranian troops seized the Advantage Sweet crude tanker, which was chartered by Chevron, in the Gulf of Oman. The vessel was released more than a year later. What would it mean for the global economy? US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday called on China to encourage Iran to not shut down the Strait of Hormuz after Washington carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Speaking to Fox News, Rubio said: 'It's economic suicide for them if they do it [close the strait]. And we retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries' economies a lot worse than ours.' For starters, shutting Hormuz risks bringing Gulf Arab states – which have been highly critical of the Israeli attack – into the war to safeguard their own commercial interests. Closing the strait would also hit China. The world's second-largest economy buys almost 90 percent of Iran's oil exports (roughly 1.6 million barrels per day), which are subject to international sanctions. According to Goldman Sachs, a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz could push oil prices above $100 per barrel. That would push the cost of production up, eventually affecting consumer prices – especially for energy-intensive goods like food, clothing and chemicals. Oil-importing countries around the world could experience higher inflation and slower economic growth if the conflict persists, which could prompt central banks to push back the timing of future rate cuts. But history has shown that severe disruptions to global oil supplies have tended to be short-lived. Before the start of the second Gulf War, between March and May 2003, crude oil surged by a whopping 46 percent at the end of 2002. But prices quickly unwound in the days preceding the start of the US-led military campaign. Similarly, Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 sparked a sharp rally in oil prices to $130 a barrel, but prices returned to their pre-invasion levels of $95 by mid-August. These relatively quick reversals of oil price spikes were largely due to global spare production capacity available at the time, and the fact that the rapid oil price increase curbed demand.
Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
As Israel-Iran war escalates, Ukraine fears ‘more losses' to Russia
Kyiv, Ukraine – There is a Persian word millions of Ukrainians fear. Shahed – also spelled as Shaheed or Shahid, originally a Quranic term for 'martyr' or 'witness' – is the name given to the triangular, explosives-laden, Iranian-designed drones that became a harrowing part of daily life and death in wartime Ukraine. These days, they are assembled in the Volga-region Russian city of Yelabuga and undergo constant modifications to make them faster, smarter and deadlier during each air raid that involves hundreds of drones. Their latest Russian versions shot down in Ukraine earlier this month have artificial intelligence modules to better recognise targets, video cameras and two-way radio communication with human operators. 'The word 'Shahed' will forever be cursed in Ukrainian next to 'Moscow' and 'Putin',' said Denys Kovalenko, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Kovalenko's face and arms were cut by glass shards after a Shahed exploded above his northern Kyiv neighbourhood in 2023. Shaheds are the most visible and audible part of the military alliance between Moscow and Tehran that is being tested this month amid attacks by Israel and the United States on Iran. Other aspects of the alliance that affect the Russia-Ukraine war include Iranian-made ammunition, helmets, and flak jackets, according to Nikita Smagin, an author and expert on Russia-Iran relations. However, the year 2022, when Putin started the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, was the 'peak of Iran's significance for Russia as a military partner', Smagin told Al Jazeera. The Kremlin has invested tens of billions of dollars into its military-industrial complex and shadow systems to supply chips, machine tools and dual-purpose goods for its weapons that bypass Western sanctions. The flow of military technologies usually went the other way as Moscow supplied advanced air defence systems, missiles and warplanes to Tehran, keeping Israel worried. In 2009, then-Israeli President Shimon Peres told this reporter in Moscow that his visit was aimed at convincing the Kremlin to 'reconsider' the sale of S-300 surface-to-air missiles to Tehran. Russia's advanced Su-35 jets were supposed to be delivered to Tehran earlier this year, but were not seen in the Iranian sky. Washington's arms supplies to Israel have already affected Kyiv's ability to withstand Russia's air raids and slow advance on the ground. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on June 9 that the White House decided to divert 20,000 anti-drone missiles earmarked for Kyiv. 'Without the help of the United States, we'll have more losses,' Zelenskyy said in televised remarks. More Ukraine-bound military aid may now be diverted to Israel, and the Kremlin 'counts on this scenario', analyst Smagin said. This possible diversion already alarms Ukraine's top brass. Arms that were 'made for Ukraine will go to the Middle, so there are no illusions about it', Lieutenant General Ihor Romanenko, former deputy head of Ukraine's general staff of armed forces, told Al Jazeera. There should be no illusions about Russia's ability to protect Iran, he said. Even though Moscow and Tehran hail their strategic partnership, it does not envisage a mutual defence clause. Therefore, the Kremlin will hardly be able to commit to military action similar to the Russian air raids against Syria's then-opposition to support then-President Bashar al-Assad's faltering regime, he said. 'They won't change anything significantly,' Romanenko said. 'But they will have enough for arms supplies.' Any arms supplies may, however, enrage US President Donald Trump, who has so far showed unusual leniency towards Moscow's actions in Ukraine as his administration botched peace talks between Moscow and Kyiv. Moscow's condemnation of Israeli and US strikes on Iran evoked a sense of hypocrisy, some observers said, as Russia's description of the attacks sounded familiar. 'No matter what arguments are used to justify an irresponsible decision to subject a sovereign state's territory to missile and bomb strikes, [the decision] rudely violates international law, the United Nations charter and the resolutions of the UN Security Council,' Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Sunday. 'Moscow and Iran compete for China's market' There is an area where Russia and Iran compete for multibillion-dollar oil trade profits that keep their sanctions-hobbled economies afloat. 'Moscow and Iran compete for China's market, and China will respectively have to buy more Russian oil at a higher price,' Smagin said. A third of global oil exports go through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow channel between Iran and Oman that is fully controlled by Tehran's 'mosquito fleet' of tiny warships. Crude prices will skyrocket worldwide if Tehran opts to close the strait to tankers. It would also strike a financial bonanza for Russia that could further finance the war in Ukraine. And as Moscow's war in Ukraine consumes most of Russia's resources, its reputation in the Middle East will suffer. 'Reputation-wise, Russia suffers huge losses as it risks not to be seen as a great power in the Middle East,' Smagin said. If Tehran rejects Trump's 'ultimate ultimatum' to work out a peace deal, Washington's attention to Iran and Israel may spell disaster for Kyiv. 'Undoubtedly, the US's refocusing on the Middle East and Iran is a geopolitical catastrophe for us; there's nothing to argue about,' Kyiv-based analyst Aleksey Kuschch told Al Jazeera.
Al Jazeera
2 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
UN nuclear chief estimates damage to Iran's facilities ‘very significant'
The United Nations nuclear chief has estimated that military attacks by Israel and the United States have inflicted considerable damage to Iran's nuclear facilities. Rafael Grossi on Monday told an emergency board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – the UN's nuclear watchdog – that craters caused by ground-penetrating US bombs were visible at Fordow, the cornerstone of Iran's nuclear enrichment programme. Israel said as it launched the attacks on Iran on June 13 that Tehran was close to developing a nuclear weapon. The US made the same claim as it entered the conflict directly on Saturday, striking Iran's three key nuclear facilities: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. US President Donald Trump claimed the strikes had 'obliterated' the three sites. Grossi said while 'no one, including the IAEA, is in a position to have fully assessed the underground damage at Fordow', it is expected to be 'very significant'. That is because of 'the explosive payload utilised and the extreme vibration-sensitive nature of centrifuges', Grossi added. The IAEA chief also pointed out that the Natanz and Isfahan facilities were bombed by US warplanes and Tomahawk cruise missiles and damaged as well. At Natanz, he said, the US hit a fuel enrichment plant. At Isfahan, it destroyed several buildings including some 'related to the uranium conversion process', while the entrances to tunnels used to store enriched material were hit. The Israeli military continued its daytime strikes across Iran on Monday, with huge explosions reported in Tehran and other areas. Officials from Israel and Iran also reported another attack on Fordow. Iran has continued to launch waves of missiles and drones against Israel and has promised to retaliate against the US. Tehran has also threatened to quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and lawmakers have backed an effort to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. Iran has accused Grossi and the IAEA of being complicit in the conflict, saying that its 'biased' reporting on Iran's nuclear activities was used as a 'pretext' by Israel for its attack. During the IAEA board meeting, Grossi again emphasised that 'armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place', but did not directly condemn Israel or the US for the attacks. He called for Iran and the US to return to the series of negotiations that were cancelled by the Israeli strikes, warning that 'violence and destruction could reach unimaginable levels' should the conflict persist. He reiterated that IAEA inspectors must be admitted to assess the damage at the nuclear facilities. At this point, no rise in radiation has been reported. 'I'm ready to travel immediately to Iran. We need to keep working together despite existing differences,' Grossi said. Iranian authorities have not indicated whether they would be open to extending an invitation for the watchdog chief to visit. Former IAEA official Tariq Rauf told Al Jazeera that Iran's short-term nuclear enrichment capacity has been damaged or destroyed, but that the country still has about 9,000kg (19,800 pounds) of enriched uranium – at levels between 2 and 60 percent – that is unaccounted for. 'At some point, the IAEA will need to go in and again make material balance to ensure that all the material is there,' Rauf said.
