Trump says US and Iran will hold ‘direct' nuclear talks
Sitting beside Trump on Monday during a visit to the United States, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted that any resulting deal must follow what he called the 'Libya model,' meaning that Iran would have to dismantle and ship out of the country its entire nuclear infrastructure. But much of Libya's nuclear enrichment equipment had never been uncrated before it was turned over to the United States in 2003; Iran's nuclear infrastructure has been operating for decades, and is spread around the country, much of it deep underground.
Advertisement
Netanyahu was strangely quiet during a lengthy Q&A session with reporters, a sharp contrast to his last visit to Washington, two months ago. After a few introductory remarks, he was largely a spectator as Trump railed against European nations that he said had 'screwed' the United States, and threatened even more punishing tariffs against China unless it reversed its threat of retaliatory tariffs by Tuesday. He further muddied the waters about whether his tariff structure was intended to be a permanent source of revenue for the United States or whether it would just be leverage for negotiations.
Advertisement
Netanyahu left the Oval Office without a public commitment from Trump to wipe out the 17 percent tariff he had placed on Israel, one of America's closest allies. Getting such a commitment had been one of the key objectives of his trip, along with securing even more weapons for the war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip and for Israeli military action in the West Bank. If the two men discussed Israeli or joint Israel-US military options against the main Iranian nuclear sites, they gave no indication of having done so during their public comments.
The closest Trump came was to say: 'I think everybody agrees that doing a deal would be preferable to doing the obvious. And the obvious is not something that I want to be involved with, or frankly that Israel wants to be involved with, if they can avoid it.'
Advertisement
He added: 'So we are going to see if we can avoid it, but it's getting to be very dangerous territory, and hopefully those talks will be successful.'
Three Iranian officials with knowledge of talks with the United States said that Trump's description of the impending talks was not entirely accurate. They said Iran's understanding of discussions in Oman was that they would begin with indirect talks, where each country's negotiators would sit in separate rooms and Omani diplomats would carry messages back and forth, the officials said.
That setup would be similar to the indirect talks that the Biden administration had, in which the intermediaries were European officials. However, the Iranian officials said that Tehran would be open to direct talks with the United States if the indirect negotiations went well.
Trump is, to some degree, solving a problem of his own making. The 2015 nuclear accord resulted in Iran shipping out of the country 97 percent of its enriched uranium, leaving small amounts in the country, and the equipment needed to produce nuclear fuel. President Barack Obama and his top aides said at the time that the deal was the best they could extract. But it left Iran with the equipment and the know-how to rebuild after Trump pulled out of the accord, and today it has enough fuel to produce upward of six nuclear weapons in relatively short order.
How long that would take is a matter of dispute: The New York Times reported in early February that new intelligence indicated a secret team of Iranian scientists were exploring a faster, if cruder approach to developing an atomic weapon. Trump has presumably since been briefed on those findings, which came at the end of the Biden administration, and they have added urgency to the talks. Administration officials say they will not engage in a prolonged negotiation with Tehran.
Advertisement
This article originally appeared in
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Diplomatic win for UK hosting US-China trade talks
Sky News understands that the Trump administration approached the UK government to ask if it would host round two of the US-China trade talks. This is a useful 'diplo-win' for the UK. The first round was held in Geneva last month. News of that happening came as a surprise. The Chinese and the Americans were in the midst of a Trump-instigated trade war. President Trump was en route to Saudi Arabia and suddenly we got word of talks in Switzerland. They went surprisingly well. US treasury secretary Scott Bessent and his Chinese counterpart He Lifeng, met face-to-face and agreed to suspend most tariffs for 90 days. But two weeks later, the Trump administration accused Beijing of breaking the agreements reached in Geneva. Beijing threw the blame back at Washington. On Wednesday, Donald Trump and Xi Jinping spoke by phone. The Chinese claimed this call was at the Americans' request. Either way, the consequence was that the talks were back on track. "I just concluded a very good phone call with President Xi of China, discussing some of the intricacies of our recently made, and agreed to, trade deal," President Trump said this week. From that call came the impetus for a second round of talks. A venue was needed. In stepped the UK at short notice. Beyond being geographically convenient, UK government sources suggest that Britain is geopolitically in the right place right now to act as this bridge and facilitator. The UK-China relationship is in the process of a "reset". Other locations, like Brussels or other EU capitals, would have been less workable. Crucially too, for the UK, this is also potentially advantageous as it seeks to get its own UK-US trade agreement, to eliminate or massively reduce tariffs, over the line. Talks on reaching the "implementation phase" have been near-continuous since the announcement last month, but having the American principals in London is a plus. Sideline talks are possible, but even the presence of the US team in the UK is helpful. Read more from Sky News:Man wrongly deported from US to El Salvador has been returned to face criminal chargesMore than 40 'narco-boat' drug smugglers arrested in major police sting For all the chaos that President Trump is causing with his tariffs, he has instigated face-to-face conversations as he seeks resets. Key players are sitting down around tables - yes, to untangle the trade knots which Trump tied, but this whole episode has pulled foes together around the same table; it has forced relationships and maybe mutual understanding. That's useful. And for this next round, between superpowers, the UK is the host. Also useful.
Boston Globe
39 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Healey touts state tuition savings, criticizes federal cuts to Pell Grants
Overall, MASSGrant Plus Expansion program saved more than 34,000 Massachusetts students an estimated $110 million in the 2023-2024 academic year, the statement said. More than 7,730 middle income students saved an average of $3,856 each, according to data from the state Department of Higher Education, the statement said. Advertisement In the same statement, Healey urged the US Senate to reject Pell Grant cuts included in the federal budget reconciliation bill recently passed by Republicans in the U.S. House and supported by President Trump. The proposed cuts and eligibility restrictions would results in 42,000 Massachusetts students at public institutions losing $57 million in funding each year, according to Healey's statement said. 'Massachusetts is home to the best schools in the country, but we need to make sure that they are affordable for all of our students,' Healey's statement said. 'That's why I took action to increase financial aid at our public colleges and universities, which has already lowered costs for tens of thousands of students.' The drastic cuts proposed to the Pell Grant program would 'roll back the progress we have made and increase costs,' Healey said. Advertisement 'This is bad for our students and bad for our economy, as it would hold back our next generation of workers from being able to afford to go to school,' she said. Healey announced $62 million in new state funding to expand the MASSGrant program during a ceremony at Salem State University in November 2023. The new funding covered the full costs of tuition and mandatory instructional fees for Pell Grant-eligible students, and as much as half for middle-income students. Middle-income students are those whose families earn between $73,000 and $100,000 annually in adjusted gross income. The program was retroactive to the start of the fall 2023 semester for Massachusetts students at the states public institutions, including its 15 community colleges, nine state universities, and four University of Massachusetts undergraduate campuses. Funding for the expansion of the program also drew on $84 million Healey and the legislature had set earmarked for financial aid expansion in the FY24 budget, Healey's office said at the time. 'The dramatic enrollment increases our community colleges have seen over the last two years make it clear that free community college and expanded financial aid is a game changer for students in Massachusetts,' Luis Pedraja, chair of the Community College Council of Presidents, and president of Quinsigamond Community College said in the statement. 'The proposed Pell eligibility changes would be devastating to our students' ability to afford higher education and the community college presidents in Massachusetts urge the Senate to reject this ill-advised change,' Pedraja said. Education Secretary Patrick Tutwiler said he feared the impacts proposed cuts could have on students who struggle to afford college. Advertisement 'Low-income students deserve to go to college just as much as their higher income peers, and these changes are going to take us backwards – increasing dropout rates and leaving students saddled with more debt and no degree," Tutwiler said in the statement. Tonya Alanez can be reached at
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know
In February, President Donald Trump said he was considering a plan to pay out $5,000 stimulus checks to American taxpayers from the savings identified by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Are they happening? No official plan or schedule for such a payout has been released, and a decision on the checks would have to come from Congress, which has so far been cool to the idea. And there have been questions as to how much DOGE has actually saved. The idea was floated by Azoria investment firm CEO James Fishback, who suggested on Musk's social media platform X that Trump and Musk should "should announce a 'DOGE Dividend'" from the money saved from reductions in government waste and workforce since it was American taxpayer money in the first place. He even submitted a proposal for how it would work, with a timeline for after the expiration of DOGE in July 2026. "At $2 trillion in DOGE savings and 78 million tax-paying households, this is a $5,000 refund per household, with the remaining used to pay down the national debt," he said in a separate post. Musk replied, "Will check with the President." "We're considering giving 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% to paying down the debt," Trump said in a during the Saudi-sponsored FII PRIORITY Summit in Miami Beach the same month. DOGE has dismantled entire federal agencies, wiped out government contracts and led the firings of tens of thousands of federal workers, leaving many agencies struggling to continue operations. DOGE checks? Elon Musk dodges DOGE stimulus check question during Wisconsin rally: Here's what he said. Fishbeck suggested that the potential refund go only to households that are net-income taxpayers, or households that pay more in taxes than they get back. The Pew Research Center said that most Americans with an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 effectively pay no federal income tax. They would not be eligible. If DOGE achieves Musk's initial goal of stripping $2 trillion from U.S. government spending by 2026, Fishback's plan was for $5,000 per household, or 20% of the savings divided by the number of eligible households. If DOGE doesn't hit the goal, Fishback said the amount should be adjusted accordingly. 'So again, if the savings are only $1 trillion, which I think is awfully low, the check goes from $5,000 to $2,500,' Fishback said during a podcast appearance. 'If the savings are only $500 billion, which, again, is really, really low, then the [checks] are only $1,250.' However, while Musk talked about saving $2 trillion in federal spending during Trump's campaign, he lowered the goal to $1 trillion after Trump assumed office and said in March he was on pace to hit that goal by the end of May. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk lowered the projected savings further to $150 billion in fiscal year 2026. Musk left the White House at the end of May when his designation as a "special government employee" ended. DOGE, the advisory group he created, is expected to continue without him. That depends on who you ask. On its website, DOGE claims to have saved an estimated $175 billion as of May 30, "a combination of asset sales, contract and lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletions, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions." The site says that works out to $1,086.96 saved per taxpayer. However, many of DOGE's claims have been exaggerated and several of the initiatives to slash agency workforces have been challenged in court. DOGE has been accused of taking credit for contracts that were canceled before DOGE was created, failing to factor in funds the government is required to pay even if a contract is canceled, and tallying every contract by the most that could possibly be spent on it even when nothing near that amount had been obligated. The website list has been changed as the media pointed out errors, such as a claim that an $8 million savings was actually $8 billion. On May 30, CNN reported that one of its reporters found that less than half the $175 billion figure was backed up with even basic documentation, making verification difficult if not impossible. Some of the changes may also end up costing taxpayers more, such as proposed slashes to the Internal Revenue Service that experts say would mean less tax revenue generated, resulting in a net cost of about $6.8 billion. Over the next 10 years, if IRS staffing stays low, the cumulative cost in uncollected taxes would hit $159 billion, according to the nonpartisan Budget Lab at Yale University. The per-taxpayer claim on the website is also inflated, CNN said, as it's based on '161 million individual federal taxpayers' and doesn't seem to include married people filing jointly. This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: DOGE dividends: Will American taxpayers get a $5,000 check?
