Latest news with #NPT
Egypt Today
31 minutes ago
- Politics
- Egypt Today
Egypt's FM phone calls Iranian counterpart, Witkoff to de-escalate military conflict in the region
CAIRO – 20 June 2025: In a bid to contain the military escalation between Israel and Iran, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty made two phone calls with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi and US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff, said the Egyptian Foreign Ministry in a statement on Friday. Minister Abdelatty reiterated the need to exert all efforts to de-escalate and achieve a ceasefire, and to utilize the available diplomatic channels to contain the escalating situation and neutralize the risk of a comprehensive escalation of the situation in the Middle East. Abdelatty stressed the need to work to prevent the expansion of the conflict and the region from sliding into total chaos, the repercussions of which would not be immune. He reiterated the importance of exhausting all diplomatic and political channels to reach a sustainable agreement on the Iranian nuclear program. Since the outbreak of the war between Iran and Israel on June 13, Egypt has exerted tremendous diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the conflict in which hundreds of people were killed and thousands were injured. The war started when Israel, which has nuclear weapon and not a member of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), launched missile and drones towards Tehran and killed hundreds of nuclear scientists, military leaders and civilians to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon. Israeli missiles and drones have targeted several nuclear facilities in Natanz, Isfahan, Arak and Fordow, causing a minor level of radiation leakage as it was reported by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Israel, which is totally backed by the US, seeks to be the only country in the region that has nuclear weapons. In retaliation, Iran fired hundreds hypersonic missiles and drones on Israel, causing severe damage to buildings besides the Weizmann Institute of Science, Haifa refinery, and the Gav-Yam Negev Advanced Technologies Park. Israel, which continues its genocidal war on Gaza despite its war with Iran, attempts to draw the US in its conflict with Iran to also topple the Iranian Islamic regime, led by the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. However, Tehran, along with its regional allies in the Middle East in Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen, threatened if the US entered the war, the US interests in the Middle East will be targeted.
Barnama
2 hours ago
- Politics
- Barnama
IAEA To Continue Inspections In Iran When Security Conditions Permit
BERLIN, June 20 (Bernama-TASS) -- The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will continue its inspections in Iran in accordance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as soon as security conditions permit, said IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi, according to TASS. "The Agency is and will remain present in Iran. Safeguards inspections in Iran will continue as required by Iran's safeguards obligations under its NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement, as soon as safety and security conditions allow," the IAEA press service quoted him as saying. Israel began to launch airstrikes against Iran on June 13, targeting multiple locations including on its nuclear programme, prompting Iran to carry out retaliatory attack.
NDTV
4 hours ago
- Politics
- NDTV
Will He? Won't He? Should He? What To Make Of Trump's Plans For Iran
In the ongoing war between two arch-rivals, Israel and the Islamic Republic of Iran, the death and destruction and the utter defiance of international law by both sides under the garb of 'self-defence' have pushed the entire West Asian region and the world to the edge. Their conception of one another as an existential threat had played out mostly clandestinely in the past. However, in the last year and a half, their confrontation has been more direct, with the latest showdown shaping up to be a fight to the finish. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already declared that he intends to eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat through direct attacks on Iranian military and nuclear facilities. It has also proven its aerial and intelligence superiority in killing most of the military leadership in Iran and its top-level nuclear scientists. Iran, in turn, has retaliated by causing severe damage to Israeli military and civilian infrastructure, though not in equal measure. It's not over yet, though. While the world is deeply concerned with this escalation, which could envelop the whole region, what US President Trump does now will be decisive. Netanyahu is keen on effecting a regime change in Iran and even eliminating its supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei - something Trump has not greenlit, as per reports. A brute, no-holds-barred approach is now shaping up this emaciated and dysfunctional global order. Trump In A Sticky Spot Trump has an aversion to conventional or 'forever' wars - at least, so it had seemed, and he had maintained, throughout his presidential campaign last year. But now, at the formal request of Israel, the US under Trump is supporting the Israeli campaign against Iran through its naval and air power. It's important to remember here how Trump had given 60 days to Iran to conclude the nuclear deal negotiations, the last round of which was supposed to take place in Oman on Sunday, June 15. Both sides, however, kept shifting their goalposts, especially with regard to Iran's nuclear enrichment potential and threshold. The US insisted on Iran conceding that it would not pursue any uranium enrichment, but this was not acceptable to Tehran as it would tantamount to abject surrender. To be sure, nuclear enrichment is permitted under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) for civil nuclear energy purposes. Divisions Within Of course, Iran possessing a nuclear weapon is out of question, and the biggest red line. In 2015, a hesitant Iran did try to cut a deal with the Western world, promising to limit its nuclear programme in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. But even that was a red line for Israel, which has insisted that Iran is on the verge of making a weapon and has material for up to nine bombs. Indications by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) - whose intent and modus operandi Iran suspects - that Iran was not in compliance with the prescribed standards, added to the suspicion. Many observers in the US, including Senators and congressmen, believe that Israel wants to drag the US into its Middle East war on one pretext or the other, providing a fait accompli. The US has also taken some extreme steps on its part. Two days ago, the Trump administration officially removed Colonel Nathan McCormack from his post as the Joint Chiefs of Staff, allegedly because he called Israel a 'death cult' and said that America was acting as Israel's proxy. The MAGA Quandary As per various surveys, as many as 64% of Republicans are not in favour of the US getting directly involved in Israel's war against Iran. It may also not be seen favourably by his MAGA ('Make America Great Again') base, though at the moment, Trump doesn't seem too concerned about this, claiming that he was the one to popularise 'MAGA' in the first place. He has even decried the testimony of his own colleague, the National Intelligence Authority (NIA) head, Tulsi Gabbard, which had stated that Iran was nowhere near fully developing a nuclear weapon. Gabbard is not alone in echoing this sentiment. IAEA Director General Grossi also said recently in an interview that his agency 'did not have any proof of a systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon'. Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt had a bolder take. 'The reality is that Netanyahu attacked Iran not primarily to prevent a nuclear weapon but to prevent a nuclear agreement between the US and Iran. He was key in driving Trump to leave the original US-Iran JCPOA deal, and now wanted to prevent a new one,' Bildt said on X on June 18. Trump's decision at this stage is extremely critical and can change the course of this war, the region and the world. Unpredictable as he is, Trump might still consider giving Iranians and diplomacy a chance through a fast-track nuclear deal, even as Khamenei has retorted that Iranians are not the ones to surrender. The Arabs On the other hand, in unusual unity and camaraderie, the Arab countries, led by Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries, including Türkiye, Azerbaijan and Pakistan, have all condemned Israeli aggression and attacks on Iranian sovereignty. Most of them have even told the US that they would not allow their airspaces to be used in strikes against Tehran for fear of reprisals and becoming collateral damage. The distrust that they might be treated in the same way should they fall on the wrong side of the US-Israel combine, has also deepened. Tehran has also threatened to attack over two dozen US bases in the Middle East should the US join Israel in its war. This is the worry plaguing most Arabs today: they do not want to become a theatre of war. Pakistan, though, has once again tried to become relevant, being the land of 'mercenaries' and the rentier state that it is. First, it threatened Israel in support of Iran, but just a few days later, its Field Marshal General Asim Munir was in the US for a rare lunch with the US President. If America decides to use Islamabad as a minion yet again, it'd be no surprise. Russia , China and North Korea Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has already spoken to Trump, offering to mediate between Tehran and Tel Aviv. That's not an invalid proposition after all. While Moscow can handle Tehran, its strategic and security partner, the US can try to prevail upon Netanyahu, who has asked for American help. Moscow has also advised and warned the US to intervene militarily. These, however, are just diplomatic hopes that may never actually come to fruition. China on the other hand, which has significant geo-economic interests in the region, not only continues to criticise Israeli attacks but has also been reportedly providing assistance to the Iranian establishment. Its Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, was clear when he stated, 'Israel's actions violate international law. We cannot sit back and watch the regional situation slide into an unknown abyss.' Even North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un has accused Israel of 'state-sponsored terrorism', calling it a 'cancer-like entity'. All these are indications that if the US does enter the war, these powers may intervene on behalf of Iran, and not only at the UNSC. The Iranian Game Plan The 86-year-old Khamenei, who has been ruling Iran conservatively for over 36 years, has remained intransigent so far, though in the face of Israel's regime change threats and direct risk to his life, he has passed on his powers to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the military. He is said to be in some safe location, which Israelis and Americans claim they know about. By now, it's quite clear that Tehran failed to grasp the extent of the deep Israeli intelligence penetration in its country. It's also certain that even though many in Iran are thoroughly disgruntled by their regime's oppressive policies, that discontent is unlikely to work in Israel's favour, for, in such times of external aggression, most countries and people unite against the aggressors. Iranians have shown an intent to return to the table, and their Foreign Affairs Minister, Abbas Araghchi, has spoken to the EU, France, Germany and the UK, who have all favoured a non-nuclear Iran and a negotiated solution to end the war. The French are also against a regime change. In any case, an unstable Iran could be perilous for the whole region as well as the world. Along with Houthis, Iran has been mulling closing the strategic choke points of the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al-Mandab, which will directly impact oil supplies from the region, which, by the way, accounts for over 20% of global crude trade. All regional actors, especially oil majors, are actively engaging in shuttle diplomacy to avoid the kind of outcomes Libya and Iraq had seen, which had fuelled regional headaches, uncertainty and the rise of extremism and terrorism. Let's hope Iran does not become another Iraq or Libya, where half-baked information or manufactured evidence led to a terrible disaster, whose reverberations continue to haunt the international community and US credibility to this day. Trump will have to be very, very careful about what he does next.
India Today
5 hours ago
- Politics
- India Today
Khamenei's fatwa against nukes: Did Iran sell a lie to the world?
"When preserving Muslim blood becomes obligatory for everyone, if preserving the life of one Muslim depends on you, even lying becomes obligatory for you," said the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. This willingness to lie in times of threat and danger is seen by many as an intrinsic part of the Islamic Republic's strategy. That same obfuscation has shaped Iran's decades-long nuclear narrative, toggling between a claimed religious restraint and strategic aggression, centred around one claim: a "fatwa" or a religious decree by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei banning nuclear the heart of this narrative is a claim by a top Iranian official, who went on to become its president."The idea struck me to introduce the concept of a fatwa during the 2004 nuclear negotiations. There was no prior coordination," recalled Hassan Rouhani, then Iran's then-chief nuclear negotiator, in a 2012 interview with the BBC. He was the cleric who later served two terms as Iran's president from 2013 to 2021. Later, speaking to the Iranian magazine Mehrnameh, Rouhani described how, during talks with the foreign ministers of France, Germany, and the UK, he said, "The Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa declaring the acquisition of a nuclear bomb forbidden. This fatwa is more important to us than the NPT or any additional protocol. It matters more than any law."advertisementThis was 2004, and Iran was under scrutiny over its nuclear programme, which it claims is for peaceful, civilian the US invading Saddam Hussein's Iraq over its alleged stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in 2003, the heat was on Iran. The Islamic Republic's two undeclared nuclear facilities were also revealed by an Iranian opposition then, the "Khamenei fatwa" has become a central diplomatic tool wielded by Iran at nuclear talks, invoked to signal moral clarity while maintaining strategic yesterday once again -- after over two foreign ministers of Germany, France and Britain are likely to hold nuclear talks with their Iranian counterpart on Friday (June 20) in Geneva, Reuters reported, quoting a German diplomatic meeting will come as the Israel-Iran conflict enters its second June 13, Israel launched "Operation Rising Lion", a coordinated strike targeting Iran's nuclear and military infrastructure across multiple cities, including Tehran, Natanz, Shiraz, Kermanshah, and Esfahan. Iran retaliated with more than 400 missiles. Some evaded Israel's Iron Dome and caused civilian has been secretive about its nuclear facility in Dimona too. Combined with Iran's threats to annihilate Israel, its nuclear programme has been seen suspiciously by the Iran has claimed its right to civilian nuclear energy, and has time and again referred to the fatwa to claim that it would never go for nuclear-grade uranium has been referred to as the fatwa are remarks by Khamenei. It's technically not a fatwa, but Iranians say since the advice was from the Supreme Leader, it should be considered so."Fatwas can change," warned Mehdi Khalaji, an Iran expert and former seminarian. "Khamenei can easily issue another one."So, is the Khamenei fatwa more of a political valve than a theological wall?IRAN'S DIPLOMACY ON N-PROGRAMME AND THE FATWAThe turning point came in 2002, when the exiled opposition group National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) publicly revealed that the country had two undeclared nuclear facilities in Natanz and disclosures were confirmed by satellite imagery and later by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections, which uncovered advanced uranium enrichment activities and heavy water production, sparking international fears that Iran's nuclear programme was not strictly tensions mounting, the regime moved to craft a moral late 2003, amid the early phase of the nuclear standoff, Khamenei declared that the production and use of nuclear weapons were haram (forbidden).advertisementIn October 2003, under growing global pressure, Khamenei gave a speech declaring weapons of mass destruction forbidden."We don't want a nuclear bomb These things don't agree with our principles."This was a calculated move to present Iran's nuclear posture as rooted in coincided with the US invasion of Iraq, which heightened Iranian fears of becoming Washington's next responded by projecting religious restraint: a deliberate attempt to frame its position not as a result of geopolitical pressure, but of Islamic in 2004, presented those remarks as Khamenei's in August 2005, Iran formally cited the fatwa at an IAEA meeting in Vienna, claiming Islamic teachings prohibited such fatwa was never an irreversible decree. Instead, it was a result of political expediency, most notably a 2010 message where Khamenei called the use of nuclear weapons haram but said nothing about building or storing EXACTLY IS THE KHAMENEI FATWA?What Iranian diplomats later hailed as a "fatwa" began as the final paragraph of a 2010 message Khamenei sent to a Tehran disarmament conference. This was not a formal religious ruling, but a political statement repurposed as theology, according to a report by an American think-tank, the Atlantic portion of that message, promoted by Iranian diplomatic missions as a binding fatwa, reads:"We believe that adding to nuclear weapons and other types of weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical weapons and biological weapons, are a serious threat to humanity. The Iranian nation, which itself is a victim of the use of chemical weapons, feels more than other nations the danger of the production and accumulation of such weapons and is ready to put all its resources in the way of dealing with it. We consider the use of these weapons to be haram (forbidden), and the effort to protect mankind from this great disaster is everyone's duty."Though framed as a definitive religious decree, this statement was part of a broader diplomatic Iranian embassies abroad repeatedly marketed it as such, turning it into a central piece of Iran's diplomatic arsenal during nuclear to the Foreign Policy magazine, Khamenei actually issued an anti-nuclear fatwa in the mid-1990s upon a request for his religious opinion on nuclear weapons. It says the Khamenei letter was never made public as then Iran President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani argued against nuclear weapons, and the fatwa's publicity was deemed unnecessary FATWA AND RATIONAL FATWA: KHAMENEIThe Supreme Leader's official website has multiple pages dedicated to his views on nuclear weapons, including a list of 85 statements he's made on the of those, the word haram appears only three times, and always in reference to the use of nuclear weapons, never their production or storage. He has, in two cases, also described the use of weapons of mass destruction as a "great sin".The only instance in which Khamenei explicitly used the word "fatwa" appears in a 2015 speech:"We don't want a nuclear weapon. Not because of what they say, but because of ourselves, because of our religion, because of our rational reasons. This is both our religious fatwa and our rational fatwa. Our rational fatwa is that we don't need nuclear weapons today, tomorrow, or ever. Nuclear weapons are a source of trouble for a country like ours."Under Sharia, actions are ranked from obligatory to has never labelled the production of nuclear weapons as haram — only the use, and even that vagueness is strategic, say some experts. It lets Iran look peaceful while keeping the door open. For hardliners, it's enough to justify moving fatwas are flexible by design. In the 1890s, a tobacco-ban fatwa sparked a revolt, then quietly disappeared once it served its observers argue that Khamenei's "fatwa" is the same — a political signal, not a religious block, meant to calm the world, not limit BELIEVED IN IRAN'S NUCLEAR FATWA?For years, Iran's nuclear fatwa drew little between 2013 and 2015, as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) talks intensified, it became central to Tehran's diplomatic messaging. Iranian officials pushed it hard, and soon US diplomats and media echoed the claim that Iran was religiously bound to avoid nuclear was no accident. As revealed in diplomat-academic Javad Zarif's memoir The Undisclosed Secret, the fatwa was a calculated tool, used to boost Iran's credibility and ease Western strategy 2014, US Secretary of State John Kerry said: "I have great respect for a fatwa. A fatwa is a very highly regarded message of religious importance. And when any fatwa is issued, I think people take it seriously, and so do we, even though it's not our practice... President Obama and I both are extremely welcoming and grateful for the fact that the supreme leader has issued a fatwa", according to Iran the next few years, Iran shifted from nuclear restraint under the JCPOA to renewed defiance after the US exited the deal in May 2018, President Donald Trump pulled the US out of the JCPOA, calling it a "disastrous deal." He argued it failed to address Iran's missile programme, had weak enforcement, and gave Tehran sanctions relief without stopping its regional aggression or long-term nuclear on, Iran gradually ramped up its nuclear activity, enriching uranium beyond the deal's limits, installing advanced centrifuges, and restricting access to international economic pressure fuelled domestic unrest, and by 2020, following events like the killing of General Qassem Soleimani and the assassination of nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Iran's posture grew more defiant, signalling a shift away from earlier CAPABILITY OF 'CORNERED CAT' IRANIranian officials have hinted for years that the religious prohibition could disappear if the state is 2021, Intelligence Minister Mahmoud Alavi warned, "The Supreme Leader has explicitly said [nuclear weapons] are religiously forbidden. But a cornered cat may behave differently." If the West pushed Iran too far, he suggested, Iran might have no choice, according to a New York Times posture hardened further in 2023. Khamenei warned that world powers "cannot stop" Iran if it chooses to build a Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, claimed all technical components were in March 2024, cleric Mohammad Fuker Meibodi argued the Quran "commands Muslims to possess weapons that instil fear in enemies", hinting that nuclear arms now fit that command, according to the report by the Atlantic Reza Aghamiri, a nuclear scientist close to Khamenei's office, declared in 2022 that Iran could enrich to 99% and build a nuclear warhead "like North Korea".Two years later, he said Iran "has the capability" to build the bomb and that "the supreme leader could tomorrow change his stance".The rhetoric intensified even more after April 2024, when Iran conducted missile and drone strikes on Israel. Within days, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) nuclear security chief Ahmad Haghtalab warned of a potential doctrinal shift if Israel targeted Iran's nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) broadcast his remarks in April 20, 2024, the reformist Hammihan daily declared that proxy warfare had run its course, and Iran now needed deterrence, possibly through nuclear ambiguity or even THERE AN ACTUAL NUCLEAR THREAT FROM IRAN?Just days later, IRGC officer and MP Javad Karimi Ghodousi claimed Iran could test a bomb within a week "if [the supreme leader] issues permission".On April 23, he went further, saying a warhead could be assembled in half a day. The Foreign Ministry scrambled to contain the fallout, with spokesperson Naser Kanani insisting nuclear weapons "have no place" in Iran's in May 2024, Kamal Kharrazi, top adviser to Supreme Leader Khamenei, reinforced the an interview with Al Jazeera, he said, "We have no decision to build a nuclear bomb but should Iran's existence be threatened, there will have no choice but to change our military doctrine."Throughout late 2024 and early 2025, Iran steadily enriched uranium to 60% at Fordow and Natanz using advanced centrifuges, accumulating a stockpile sufficient for multiple warheads, according to the Arms Control it claimed peaceful intent under the NPT, officials began alluding to "special measures", a veiled reference to weaponisation or relocating May 2025, the IAEA reported Iran had amassed enough 60% enriched uranium for nine bombs and, for the first time in two decades, declared Tehran non-compliant with safeguards, according to a BBC June 12, the IAEA formally cited Iran for the breach. Tehran responded by announcing a new enrichment facility, likely fortified and concealed, though nominally under IAEA oversight.A Khamenei fatwa on nuclear weapons might exist, but what is more pertinent for discussion is the purpose why it was publicised later during negotiations, and what was achieved through the fatwa, it seems, was never a brake on Iran's nuclear ambitions, it was a mere cover. Framed as a moral prohibition, it served as a political tool to ease international pressure while Tehran expanded its nuclear capabilities in the shadows. Now, with officials openly hinting at weaponisation and enrichment levels reaching weapons-grade thresholds, the myth of religious restraint has collapsed. What remains is the reality: the fatwa was not a boundary, but a diplomatic deception. It was a lie used not to prevent a bomb, but to hide InMust Watch
Time of India
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
New clear danger
Hitting working nuclear facilities, as Israel is doing & US may do, is reckless, given the chance of radiation leak Aug will mark 80 years since the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki resulted in over 2.2L deaths. The aftermath affected victor, vanquished and the rest, and almost all nations agreed that nukes must not spread. The 'Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons', or NPT, resulted from this consensus in 1970. Iran was among its original signatories, Israel was not. And the pact has held up well, with only nine nuclear-armed states so far. All significant nuclear events since Nagasaki – Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima – have been accidents in times of peace. And each one has led to enhanced safeguards. But an old recklessness is creeping back. Soon after it invaded Ukraine in Feb 2022, Russia shelled and seized the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant – Europe's largest. Luckily, there was no radiation leak. And last Friday, Israel bombed three of Iran's major nuclear facilities at Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow. Now it has bombed Iran's Arak nuclear reactor, while the world's attention is riveted on Trump's plan to pulverise Fordow with 'bunker buster' bombs. These are extremely irresponsible and dangerous moves, as damage to an operational nuclear site can result in another Chernobyl. One thought this cavalier attitude had become taboo a long time ago. But it's like 1981 again when Israel destroyed Iraq's brand-new, French-made Osirak reactor at the Tuwaitha complex on the same pretext of self-preservation that it's been brandishing against Iran for decades. But Osirak was still a month away from being fuelled up. The Israelis themselves admitted they couldn't have touched it afterwards for fear of blanketing Baghdad with radiation. They exercised care in 2007 also, when they destroyed Syria's under-construction al-Kibar facility. US was so upset with Israel's 1981 raid it had termed it a 'source of utmost concern'. Now, Putin, Bibi and Trump have no qualms at all about attacking functioning reactors. The last time US did something more irresponsible was during the 1991 Gulf War when it destroyed two operational reactors at Tuwaitha. What will throwing caution to the wind now, after 34 years, achieve? Will it weaken Iran's resolve to make a bomb? Unlikely. In fact, Iran has already indicated its intent to exit NPT. If it does, it will be a setback for the whole non-proliferation consensus. Many other countries that have been watching these developments with alarm will think it prudent to get their own nuclear shield. We're 89 seconds from midnight on the 'Doomsday Clock'. A nuclearised world will only push us closer. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
