Russia Issues Nuclear Warning on Israel-Iran Conflict—'Extremely Dangerous'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabko issued a warning on Monday related to potential issues at the Bushehr nuclear power plant due to Israel's ongoing strikes targeting Iran, saying the situation is "extremely dangerous."
"Naturally, the situation is extremely dangerous. So far, no serious damage has been done—according to our sources and information obtained from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—but this is just a happy coincidence. The risks remain far too high," Ryabko said, according to Russia's Tass News Agency.
He said "the military standoff needs to stop in order to stabilize the situation."
This is a developing story and will be updated with additional information.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
NATO ships are at rising risk. Top commanders tell BI it's time to rethink naval defense.
NATO warships are sailing into a dangerous new era of naval warfare in which the threats are growing fast, two senior alliance commanders recently told Business Insider. From the Black Sea to the Red Sea, the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have exposed key vulnerabilities and shown NATO what its naval forces need to operate in risky environments. Dangers to warships these days include threats like hostile drones, missiles, and other naval vessels, capabilities built on rapidly advancing combat technology. So what does NATO need? Layered defenses, cheaper ways to destroy enemy threats, and deeper ammunition stockpiles. Vice Adm. James Morley, the deputy commander of NATO's Joint Force Command Norfolk, told BI that Ukraine and the Red Sea "have revealed the need to be ready to deal with a higher level of intensity than we had previously scaled for, both in terms of stock and in terms of time on the front line." In the Black Sea, Ukrainian forces have repeatedly used domestically produced naval drones to damage and destroy Russian warships, showing the risks that relatively cheap, asymmetric combat solutions pose to conventional naval forces. Far away, at the southern end of the Red Sea, the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen have launched missiles and drones at merchant vessels and NATO warships defending international shipping lanes. In its efforts to fend off the Houthi attacks, the US Navy has faced its most intense combat since World War II, US officials have previously said. Morley said NATO warships are at a higher risk because of the number of global actors who are prepared to use military force. Weapons proliferation has given actors who might previously have been unable to threaten advanced navies a new ability to do so. In the case of the Houthis, for instance, the group's missile attacks have raised the level of danger in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden to a level not seen in years. The situation is different in Europe, where NATO warships have not been shot at but tensions are running high. There have been several incidents with Moscow that raise the level of risk. 'The mindset needs to be layered defense' Surface warships face an expanding range of threats, from anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles and torpedoes to enemy aircraft and drones. Some weapons now in play only recently saw combat for the first time. The high operational tempo in the Red Sea has informed Western military planners about what limitations they face regarding magazine capacity, weapons inventory, and reloading capabilities. Morley said that as the weaponry that can threaten warships increases, so must the defensive capabilities aboard the vessels in danger. It's important to invest in missile stockpiles and ensure that NATO defense industrial bases can produce enough and ships can carry enough should they sail into a fight. The days "of driving around with a silo of ammunition that never gets used is sadly now in the past," he said, explaining that "ships routinely come back from the Red Sea, for example, having expended ammunition, and they need to be resupplied and then get back out on patrol." US Navy warships, for instance, have expended significant quantities of SM-series interceptor missiles for air defense. Air defense isn't just about numbers. It's also about dollars. The rise of inexpensive strike drones — some just tens of thousands of dollars apiece — as a tool of naval warfare has NATO forces trying to figure out how they can cheaply defeat these threats without wasting a surface-to-air missile costing millions. The aim is to bring the cost difference between the threat and the interceptor much closer to parity. "I think the mindset needs to be layered defense," Morley said. Warships need the expensive, higher-end missiles to deal with sophisticated threats. But breaking the cost-curve challenge means having a range of capabilities so complex interceptors aren't expended on the simple threats. American Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, for instance, are kitted with options like the M2 Browning .50 caliber machine guns, Mark 38 turret systems, five-inch artillery cannons, and a variety of surface-to-air missiles. These weapons allow the warships to confront a range of threats, though some options, like the deck guns, come with drawbacks, such as permitting threats to get much closer to warships than desired. Big platforms aren't obsolete Adm. Pierre Vandier, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, who oversees alliance modernization efforts, said emerging technologies, like drones, have created new problems for larger platforms like warships, as has been the case in the Black Sea. Anything that exists on the water could effectively be hit. Vandier identified uncrewed systems as one of the biggest changes in naval warfare over the past decade and said one risk is that a warship could be overwhelmed by a swarm of drones. "You need to find ways on the ships to be protected from that and to engage multiple targets at the same time," he said. That could be kinetic, involving a physical strike, or some alternative, like electronic warfare. NATO is working to incorporate lessons learned from Ukraine and the Red Sea into its combat training. At last month's Formidable Shield 25 exercise, US sailors practiced using the deck guns to shoot down small quadcopter drones that they could face in a swarm attack. They also practiced defending against uncrewed surface vehicles like the ones Ukraine has used to batter Russia's Black Sea fleet. Exercises such as Formidable Shield allow allied navies to practice navigating air defense challenges and learn how to engage cheaper threats with cheaper defenses, thus saving the more expensive methods for the higher-end threats. Despite the growing number of threats to warships, Vandier said the rise of drones doesn't necessarily render them obsolete. Aircraft carriers, the flagships of a fleet, can project force globally with embarked aviation. They travel in heavily defended strike groups, making the carriers particularly formidable and hard to reach for enemy attacks. "To get to a carrier, you have layers," Vandier said. "It's a battle between the shield and the sword. My personal feeling is that the story is not finished for the big platforms. Not yet."
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Nuclear watchdog IAEA calls for crisis meeting over US attacks on Iran
The International Atomic Energy Agency has called for a crisis meeting at its Vienna headquarters after the US bombings on Iran's nuclear sites, the agency has signalled in a post on X. Director General of IAEA Rafael Grossi has cancelled a trip to Brussels on Monday, where he had planned to take part in a meeting of the EU's foreign ministers. Instead he will remain in Vienna where the IAEA's Board of Governors will now meet for extraordinary talks on the situation. Overnight, US planes bombed several Iranian nuclear sites, including Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow. Iran's National Nuclear Safety System Centre said in a statement that no radioactive releases had been detected after the bombings. 'There is no danger to the residents living around the aforementioned sites,' the statement said. The IAEA confirmed in a post on X that no increase in off-site radiation levels has been reported. Shortly after the bombings, EU Council president Antonio Costa posted a statement on X where he highlighted nuclear safety. "I call on all parties to show restraint and respect for international law and nuclear safety," Costa said. Meanwhile, in the wake of the US attacks Iran now has the legal right to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Head of the Foreign Relations Committee in the Iranian Parliament, Abbas Golroo told Tasnim News Agency, a semi-official outlet in Iran associated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The treaty aims to limit the spread of nuclear weapons.
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
World Responds to Strikes on Iran's Nuclear Sites
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. After President Donald Trump confirmed that U.S. B-2 bombers hit three of Iran's nuclear complexes on Saturday, pulling America into the Middle Eastern conflict, world leaders across the globe have reacted to the escalation. Late on Saturday night, Trump said the sites were "fully obliterated," calling the raids essential to halt Iran's push for a nuclear bomb. Tehran condemned what it called a "criminal" act and said the U.S. had "launched a dangerous war." In a post shared on the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, part of Iran's Armed Forces, wrote in Farsi, "Now the war has begun for us." Why It Matters After Saturday's development, concern over an international expansion on the Israel-Iran conflict has ramped up. The strikes follow weeks of rising tensions between Iran and Israel, after an Israeli attack earlier this month on Iranian nuclear and military sites. While the U.S. had previously held back, its direct involvement marks a new phase in the conflict. President Donald Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington D.C. on June 21, 2025. President Donald Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington D.C. on June 21, 2025. Carlos Barria/Pool via AP What To Know Houthi rebels in Yemen and Hamas have condemned the U.S. strikes, vowing to support Iran in its fight against "the Zionist and American aggression." The Iraqi government, which has close relations with both Washington and Tehran, condemned the strikes, saying the military development threatened peace and security in the Middle East. "The continuation of such attacks risks dangerous escalation with consequences that extend beyond the borders of any single state, threatening the security of the entire region and the world," government spokesman Bassem al-Awadi said in a statement. While it did not condemn the move, Saudi Arabia expressed "deep concern" about the U.S. attacks. "The Kingdom underscores the need to exert all possible efforts to exercise restraint, de-escalate tensions, and avoid further escalation," the kingdom's Foreign Ministry said in a statement. Qatar also refraining from condemning the attacks, but said it "regrets" escalating tensions in the Israel-Iran war. Doha's Foreign Ministry urged the countries involved to "avoid escalation, which the peoples of the region, burdened by conflicts and their tragic humanitarian repercussions, cannot tolerate." Condemning the airstrikes, Oman said they threatened "to expand the scope of the conflict and constitute a serious violation of international law and the United Nations charter." Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said the U.S. bombing could lead to a regional conflict that no country could bear and called for negotiations. "Lebanon, its leadership, parties, and people, are aware today, more than ever before, that it has paid a heavy price for the wars that erupted on its land and in the region," Aoun said in a statement on X. "It is unwilling to pay more, and there is no national interest in doing so, especially since the cost of these wars was and will be greater than its ability to bear." Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said Iran's nuclear facilities "represented a danger for the entire area," adding he would speak with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Mariano Grossi, on Sunday, "to understand the consequences that there may be from a security point of view." British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer called for Iran to return to the negotiating table to diplomatically end the crisis—the U.K., along with the European Union, France and Germany, tried unsuccessfully to find a solution in Switzerland last week with Iran. Winston Peters, New Zealand's foreign minister, also called for peace talks, saying the crisis is "the most serious I've ever dealt with." South Korea's presidential office held an emergency meeting on Sunday to discuss the economic and political impacts of the strikes, while Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba told reporters Sunday it was crucial to calm the situation as soon as possible. Australia's government, which closed its embassy in Tehran and evacuated staff on Friday, said in a statement: "We have been clear that Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile program has been a threat to international peace and security. We note the U.S. President's statement that now is the time for peace." What People Are Saying European Union Foreign Policy Chief Kaja Kallas said in a post on social media: "I urge all sides to step back, return to the negotiating table and prevent further escalation." U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, wrote on X: "I am gravely alarmed by the use of force by the United States against Iran today. This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge—and a direct threat to international peace and security. There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control—with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world. I call on member states to de-escalate." Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on X: "Last week, we were in negotiations with the U.S. when Israel decided to blow up that diplomacy. This week, we held talks with the E3/EU when the | decided to blow up that diplomacy. What conclusion would you draw?" The E3 refers to member states Germany, France and Italy. What Happens Next While a number of leaders have called for Iran to return to the negotiating table, the country's foreign minister has suggested it is unlikely that it will. "To Britain and the EU High Rep, it is Iran which must 'return' to the table. But how can Iran return to something it never left, let alone blew up?" Abbas Araghchi wrote in a post on X. This story contains reporting from The Associated Press.
