Latest news with #nuclearproliferation
Reuters
11 hours ago
- Politics
- Reuters
US top diplomat Rubio discussed Israel-Iran war with key partners
WASHINGTON, June 19 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio met British foreign minister David Lammy on Thursday and held separate calls with Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot and Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani to discuss the war between U.S. ally Israel and its regional rival Iran. The U.S. State Department said that Rubio and the foreign ministers agreed that "Iran can never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon." Lammy said the same on X while adding that the situation in the Middle East "remained perilous" and a "window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution." The air war between Iran and Israel - which began on June 13 when Israel attacked Iran - has raised alarms in a region that was already on edge since the start of Israel's military assault on Gaza in October 2023. President Donald Trump will decide in the next two weeks whether the U.S. will get involved in the war, the White House said on Thursday. Trump has kept the world guessing on his plans, veering from proposing a swift diplomatic solution to suggesting Washington might join the fighting on Israel's side. Israel, which is the only country in the Middle East widely believed to have nuclear weapons, said it struck Iran to prevent Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapons. Iran, which says its nuclear program is peaceful, has retaliated with its own strikes on Israel. Iran is a party to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty while Israel is not. Israeli air attacks have killed 639 people in Iran, the Human Rights Activists News Agency says. Israel says at least two dozen Israeli civilians have died in Iranian attacks. The foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany and the European Union were due to meet in Geneva with Iran's foreign minister on Friday to try to de-escalate the conflict.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Why 'Big Short' investor Steve Eisman thinks the Israel-Iran conflict is good news for markets
The Israel-Iran conflict could be a positive for the stock market, Steve Eisman says. "The Big Short" investor said it would be a "disaster" if Iran developed and shared nuclear weapons. Eisman thinks markets are now focusing on how the conflict is impeding nuclear proliferation. Famed investor Steve Eisman said sees a silver lining to the conflict between Israel and Iran, which has rattled markets as it stretches into its fifth day on Tuesday. The investor, best-known for his bet against the US housing market preceding the 2008 financial crisis, said he believed developments unfolding between the two nations were potentially "extremely positive" for the stock market and the world. That's because he believes that, had there been no conflict between Israel and Iran this month, Iran would be closer to developing a nuclear weapon, Eisman said. That could result in other countries in the region gaining access to nuclear weaponry or building up nuclear weapons in response, which would have been a "disaster," he told CNBC on Tuesday. "And unfortunately Iran is run by, the only way you can call it is a death cult," Eisman said. "So, getting rid of a death cult anywhere on planet earth, I think, is a very positive thing, especially when that death cult is close to getting nuclear weapons." Eisman said he believed markets have started to digest the positive implications of the conflict. US stocks sank and oil prices spiked shortly after Israel first attacked Iran, but the market reaction has been more muted since, despite tensions creeping higher. US stocks were relatively flat on Tuesday, despite President Donald Trump leaving the G7 summit early to deal with conflict in the Middle East and stating on Truth Social that everyone "should immediately evacuate Tehran." "Now it's focused on it," he said of the latest market reaction to recent developments. "I think it's potentially unbelievably positive." Eisman's comments on conflicts in the Middle East have previously drawn criticism. Last year, Eisman was placed on leave from Neuberger Berman after he posted on X that the world was "celebrating" the death toll in Gaza. Eisman later wrote that the post was a "mistake" and deleted his X account. Eisman added that while the Israel-Iran conflict could ultimately be a positive for markets, the potential for a wider trade war from Trump's tariffs is one big thing he's worried about. "If we reach deals with all these countries and there's no trade war, I'm very positive on the US economy long-term, and I would be very positive on the market. If there's a trade war, chances are we go into a global recession," he said. Read the original article on Business Insider
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Why 'Big Short' investor Steve Eisman thinks the Israel-Iran conflict is good news for markets
The Israel-Iran conflict could be a positive for the stock market, Steve Eisman says. "The Big Short" investor said it would be a "disaster" if Iran developed and shared nuclear weapons. Eisman thinks markets are now focusing on how the conflict is impeding nuclear proliferation. Famed investor Steve Eisman said sees a silver lining to the conflict between Israel and Iran, which has rattled markets as it stretches into its fifth day on Tuesday. The investor, best-known for his bet against the US housing market preceding the 2008 financial crisis, said he believed developments unfolding between the two nations were potentially "extremely positive" for the stock market and the world. That's because he believes that, had there been no conflict between Israel and Iran this month, Iran would be closer to developing a nuclear weapon, Eisman said. That could result in other countries in the region gaining access to nuclear weaponry or building up nuclear weapons in response, which would have been a "disaster," he told CNBC on Tuesday. "And unfortunately Iran is run by, the only way you can call it is a death cult," Eisman said. "So, getting rid of a death cult anywhere on planet earth, I think, is a very positive thing, especially when that death cult is close to getting nuclear weapons." Eisman said he believed markets have started to digest the positive implications of the conflict. US stocks sank and oil prices spiked shortly after Israel first attacked Iran, but the market reaction has been more muted since, despite tensions creeping higher. US stocks were relatively flat on Tuesday, despite President Donald Trump leaving the G7 summit early to deal with conflict in the Middle East and stating on Truth Social that everyone "should immediately evacuate Tehran." "Now it's focused on it," he said of the latest market reaction to recent developments. "I think it's potentially unbelievably positive." Eisman's comments on conflicts in the Middle East have previously drawn criticism. Last year, Eisman was placed on leave from Neuberger Berman after he posted on X that the world was "celebrating" the death toll in Gaza. Eisman later wrote that the post was a "mistake" and deleted his X account. Eisman added that while the Israel-Iran conflict could ultimately be a positive for markets, the potential for a wider trade war from Trump's tariffs is one big thing he's worried about. "If we reach deals with all these countries and there's no trade war, I'm very positive on the US economy long-term, and I would be very positive on the market. If there's a trade war, chances are we go into a global recession," he said. Read the original article on Business Insider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Irish Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Irish Times
How the Israel-Iran war may develop
Wars are unpredictable. Even the Israelis and the Iranians cannot know how their current conflict will end. There are, however, a number of analogies to consider. The first is the six day war of 1967. The second is the Iraq war of 2003. A third scenario is a new type of conflict in which Iran uses unconventional means to strike back against Israel and the west. That could turn into a hybrid war, potentially involving terrorism or even weapons of mass destruction. The Netanyahu government would love a rerun of 1967 — in which an Israeli pre-emptive strike destroyed the Egyptian air force on the ground, in preparation for a rapid victory over Egypt, Syria and Jordan. Israel certainly has achieved rapid and spectacular early successes in this conflict. But taking out Iran's dispersed nuclear programme, much of it underground, is much more complicated than destroying targets on the ground. READ MORE [ Amount of aid getting into Gaza 'minuscule', Doctors Without Borders chief says Opens in new window ] Some critics, particularly in the US, fear that as a result we are witnessing a rerun of the early stages of the 2003 Iraq war. That, too, was supposedly fought to prevent nuclear proliferation, with the background ambition of bringing about regime change. After initial success for the US-led coalition, it turned into a bloody quagmire. It is most likely, however, that the Israel-Iran war will follow its own distinct path. One scenario that worries western security officials involves a desperate Iranian regime deciding to strike back through unconventional means. As one senior policymaker puts it: 'The reason this has not yet turned into world war three, is that Iran seems to have very limited means to strike back conventionally.' Another senior official says there may also be limitations on the Israeli government's ability to keep fighting at this intensity because its country has limited 'magazine depth' (weapons stockpiles, in non-jargon). If the Iranian regime believes that, nonetheless, it is going down to a bad defeat in a conventional conflict, it would have a difficult choice. It could meekly accept the situation and try to negotiate its way out of trouble. Or it could escalate by unconventional means. That threshold is more likely to be crossed if the regime believes it is in a battle for survival and needs to demonstrate its strength to the Iranian people and the world. Rage and the desire for vengeance should also not be underestimated. In Washington and Brussels there are concerns that if the Iranian regime is cornered it might lash out in desperation. In the recent past, the US has accused Iran of having covert biological and chemical weapons programmes. If those fears are correct, Tehran may have the means of striking back at Israeli or American targets in a deadly but deniable fashion. [ Was Iran developing nuclear weapons? Opens in new window ] The International Atomic Energy Agency has also stated that Iran has a considerable stockpile of uranium that is enriched to 60 per cent. It is generally believed that Tehran would need to get to 90 per cent enrichment to make a nuclear weapon. This could be done within days — although weaponisation would take much longer. However, weapons experts point out that it is actually possible to fashion a crude nuclear weapon with uranium enriched to 60 per cent. David Albright and Sarah Burkhard, of the Institute for Science and International Security think-tank, write that 'an enrichment level of 60 per cent suffices to create a relatively compact nuclear explosive; further enrichment to 80 or 90 per cent is not needed'. That kind of weapon would be suitable for 'delivery by a crude delivery system such as an aircraft, shipping container, or truck, sufficient to establish Iran as a nuclear power'. Iran could choose to demonstrate a crude nuclear weapon to try to shock Israel into ending the war. Another possibility is that it could actually set off a 'dirty bomb' — which uses conventional explosives to scatter radioactive material. The kind of scenario that experts worry about would be the use of a ship to detonate a device near the Israeli port of Haifa. These are the considerations that are being weighed — not just by Israel but by the US. It is generally believed that only America has bombs powerful enough to have a chance of destroying Iran's underground nuclear facility at Fordow. There are many in Washington who believe (or fear) that the US will join a second stage of the bombing campaign, in an effort to destroy Fordow and finish off Iran's nuclear weapons programme. But there would be no guarantee that even an American-led attack on Fordow could achieve that. Ehud Barak, the former prime minister of Israel, writes: 'The truth is, even the Americans cannot delay Iran's arrival at nuclear weapons by more than a few months.' Barak argues the only way to guarantee that Iran never goes nuclear is for the US and Israel 'to declare war against the regime itself until it is brought down'. But Donald Trump has repeatedly pledged to be a peacemaker and has called on Iran and Israel to make a deal. Just last month, he gave a landmark speech in Riyadh in which he scorned the idea that outsiders can bring positive change to the Middle East through force. It would be a supreme irony — and a terrible policy failure — if Trump found himself dragged into another war for regime change in the Middle East. - Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025
The Guardian
5 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
China haunts Bilderberg talks as usual suspects plot world domination
Deep within the glittering bowels of Stockholm's fanciest hotel, grave ruminations on the future of the world are taking place. A heady throng of tech billionaires, ministers, corporate titans and the king of the Netherlands have convened in Sweden for the 71st Bilderberg meeting – the publicity-shy annual policy conference that has long sustained conspiracy theorists – hosted this year by the fabulously wealthy Wallenberg family. The four days of transatlantic talks are taking place at the swanky Grand hotel, which is owned, like so much else in Sweden, by the Wallenbergs. The Swedish PM, Ulf Kristersson, turned up for welcome dinner on Thursday evening, and would have been about halfway through his second plate of meatballs when the first of Israel's rockets dropped on Tehran. What better time for the prospects of world war three to go up a gear than in the middle of a Bilderberg conflab, with nuclear proliferation slated for discussion, and the heads of Nato and MI6, and two of America's most senior military officers in the room. They're joined in Stockholm by the CEOs of several major defence suppliers such as Palantir, Thales and Anduril. Even the quietly spoken host of the conference, Marcus Wallenberg, happens to run an arms company. He's chair of Sweden's largest defence contractor, Saab. The Tehran attacks slot happily into the conference agenda, which includes the topics 'Middle East' and the rise of an 'authoritarian axis' – what Bilderberg insider Nadia Schadlow, a former deputy US national security adviser, describes as 'the growing collusion among revisionist powers'. According to Schadlow: 'An authoritarian axis is rapidly coalescing around China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, disrupting the belief that an international community has taken shape in the aftermath of the cold war.' Earlier this year, the Economist magazine, whose editor sits alongside Schadlow on Bilderberg's steering committee, struck a similar note, declaring: 'The rupture of the post-1945 order is gaining pace.' But the Economist handed Donald Trump a fair chunk of the blame for 'junking the transatlantic alliance'. What this means for Bilderberg is that seven decades of hard work nurturing the postwar international order are in danger of going up in – literal – smoke. Trump's vice-president, JD Vance, has taken every opportunity to lever the US and Europe apart. 'Europe being more independent', he said recently, 'is good for the United States.' Back last summer, before the election, he said: 'The United States has to focus more on east Asia. That is going to be the future of US foreign policy for the next 40 years, and Europe has to wake up to that fact.' The presence in Stockholm of Samuel Paparo, the head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, is a sign that Bilderberg has taken this to heart. Also, there's another member of the 'authoritarian axis' which looms far larger than Iran over this conference: China. Though the name 'China' doesn't actually appear on this year's agenda, the heightening struggle between America and China is a spectre which haunts at least half of the topics being discussed – from the 'geopolitics of energy and critical minerals' to 'defence innovation and resilience'. Just a couple of months ago, Eric Schmidt, the former Google boss and longtime Bilderberg board member, warned that 'China is at parity or pulling ahead of the United States in a variety of technologies, notably at the AI frontier'. Schmidt suspects that it will be only a matter of 'three to five years' before some form of super-intelligent AI is achieved. 'The geopolitical stakes, especially in the race with China, are enormous,' he says, because attaining super-intelligent AI would mean total and unassailable military domination. In short, it would give the winner 'the keys to control the entire world'. But here's the problem – 'due to the immense power requirements of large-scale AI', beating China to the super-intelligent punch would require 'potentially 100 times more energy' than is currently available. The head of the International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol, who is conferencing this year at Bilderberg, recently posted on X that 'global electricity demand from data centres powering AI is set to soar in the next decade'. In this desperate winner-takes-all race for the keys to the world, in which the 'geopolitics of energy' becomes ever more important, power stations – along with the data centers they feed – are going to become the No 1 military targets. Cue the AI drones. For the time being, before AI invents completely new and unimagined ways for us all to kill each other, drones are perhaps the biggest practical application of AI in warfare. There's a healthy swarm of drone manufacturers at this year's Stockholm summit, sharing their hopes and fears about 'defence innovation'. Hovering alongside Eric Schmidt there's the chairman of Thales – 'a leader in the fast growing market of unmanned aircraft systems'. Buzzing nearby is Gundbert Scherf, co-founder of German drone and AI company Helsing. One of the early investors in Helsing is also present: the CEO of Spotify, Daniel Ek, which presumably means that the Helsing drones will have the best playlists, booming out suggested songs as they swoop down to attack. The investment interlinking of Bilderberg participants is particularly intense around autonomous drone tech. Saab is an investor in Helsing. Helsing is collaborating with leading AI company Mistral, whose CEO is attending the conference. Mistral was funded by Schmidt, who's a huge fan of military UAVs. Schmidt's recent AI/drone expo, which took place last month in Washington, was co-sponsored by Palantir, which was set up by Bilderberg insider Peter Thiel, who is a major funder of Anduril, whose CEO, Brian Schimpf, is also in Stockholm. Schimpf is a former employee of Palantir, whose CEO, Alex Karp, is also on board of Bilderberg, having been ushered on to it by Thiel. And so it goes. Thiel's fingers can be found wriggling around in an awful lot of pies, not least the juiciest pie of all: the White House. The two senior White House officials at the Stockholm conference, Kevin Harrington and Michael Kratsios, both used to work for Thiel Capital. And Thiel's famously long list of influential acolytes includes none other than Vance. Only a few days ago, Vance was on a podcast defending Trump's proposed Palantir-powered database on every citizen, which was described by MSNBC as 'an unprecedented spy machine that could track Americans'. Vance waved away any such concerns: 'I don't believe that Palantir is collecting any information.' Thank heavens for everyone's freedoms, Palantir is run by self-confessed 'classic liberal' Alex Karp. In a recent earnings call, the idiosyncratic CEO said his company was busy 'building really great things', in order 'to power the west to its obvious innate superiority'. Karp throbs with what he calls 'productive narcissism' – at Palantir, he insists: 'We're proud of our moral stance'. His philosophy, as he sums it up, is this: 'If you've done something big and important, you're probably a good person.' Palantir is successful, ipso facto, it's doing good. As the Economist put it: 'Fast approaching is a might-is-right world.' It's a kind of Gordon Gekko morality that would be heartily approved of by Wall Street legend and Bilderberg faithful Henry Kravis of KKR, on whom Gekko was actually based. Of course, not all the tech luminaries at this year's Bilderberg are thinking in terms of world domination. Demis Hassabis, the co-founder of DeepMind, turned up in Stockholm with the 2024 Nobel prize for Chemistry in his back pocket and some rather more optimistic rhetoric about AI, which he thinks will usher in an era of 'radical abundance'. He thinks of AI as 'the cavalry' arriving to save us from ourselves. He says: 'I'd be very worried about society today if I didn't know that something as transformative as AI was coming down the line.' And Jack Clark, the co-founder of Anthropic, likes to think AI replace us in every last will help us find new ways of living fulfilling lives. His vision is of a world in which, freed up from our jobs, we'll engage in 'creative, fun exercises in getting AIs to build things, or make things, or carry out competitions and games where people can play them with one another'. Pulling back for a moment from the AI endgame to the world in 2025, there's one rather less jazzy item on the conference agenda worth mentioning – 'US economy'. But even this has everything to do with China. Taking part in the Stockholm summit is Republican congressman Jason Smith, a vocal fan of Trump's 'America first' trade policy. Smith has pledged to 'continue fighting to combat the economic and national security threat China poses to our great nation'. He's fully aligned with fellow conference goer Robert Lighthizer, an influential economic adviser close to Trump, who told CBS News earlier this year that 'China to me is an existential threat to the United States'. Lighthizer is urging a 'strategic decoupling' from Chinese trade, and most importantly, he says: 'We should disentangle our technology.' Here's where Trump's trade vision intersects with not just the long view of Silicon Valley's bullish billionaires, but with the longstanding transatlantic vision of Bilderberg. Thiel recently called for 'a very drastic reset with China' and urged other nations to do likewise. In other words, look at our success, and join us. Of course, the only thing wrong with this self-fulfilling meritocratic version of western civilization is that if the Chinese succeed in beating the west to the keys of the world, it will mean that they were the good guys after all.
