Iran would view US as ‘participant' in any Israeli attack on its nuclear sites
Iran has said that it will hold the US responsible for any Israeli attack on its nuclear sites in remarks that set a fraught backdrop for the fifth and probably most important round of talks between Iran and the US on the future of Iran's nuclear program.
Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, issued the warning on Thursday after reports appeared in the America media claiming US intelligence understood Israel was planning an attack on Iranian nuclear sites – with or without American support – if the talks broke down.
The report may be accurate or alternatively an attempt by the US to strengthen its negotiating hand before the indirect talks in Rome, which are being mediated by Oman. Israel has repeatedly said it will attack Iran's nuclear sites, while Donald Trump has said the US will do so if the talks break down.
Araghchi said in a letter to the United Nations: 'Iran strongly warns against any adventurism by the Zionist regime of Israel and will decisively respond to any threat or unlawful act by this regime.'
He said Iran would view Washington as a 'participant' in any such attack, and Tehran would have to adopt 'special measures' to protect its nuclear sites and material from any attacks or sabotage. Araghchi said the UN nuclear inspectorate, the IAEA, would only be subsequently informed of such steps.
An adviser to Iran's supreme leader said in April that Tehran could suspend cooperation with the UN nuclear inspectors or transfer enriched material to safe and undisclosed locations.
In a separate statement released on Thursday, Iran's Revolutionary Guards said Israel would receive a 'devastating and decisive response' if it attacked Iran.
Guards spokesperson Alimohammad Naini said: 'They are trying to frighten us with war but are miscalculating as they are unaware of the powerful popular and military support the Islamic Republic can muster in war conditions.'
Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on Tuesday that US demands for Tehran to stop refining uranium were 'excessive and outrageous', his most unequivocal statement that Iran will not abandon the capacity to enrich. But he said he did not expect the talks with the US to succeed.
The US special envoy, Steve Witkoff, has insisted that Washington's red line is that Iran must end all uranium enrichment. In the 2015 deal with six world powers, from which Trump withdrew in 2018, Iran had been allowed to enrich to 3.67% purity, sufficient for producing fuel for commercial nuclear power plants.
Iran has since enriched to 60%, bringing it close to the purity required to make a nuclear bomb. Araghchi initially said the US public demand for zero enrichment was not being repeated in private discussions, but the issue appears to have become the central battleground of the talks. The US says zero enrichment is the only way to end the risk of Iran aquiring a nuclear bomb, and has suggested Tehran follows the model of the United Arab Emirates that imports uranium for its single civil nuclear program.
But Iran says it has a right to enrich under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and argues there is no reason for it to be treated unlike any other state.
Explaining Iran's determination to enrich domestically, as opposed to import, Ellie Geranmayeh of the European Council on Foreign Relations said: 'Iran really does feel that it has paid a huge cost for its right to enrich on its own soil. It has not only paid billions in actually setting up the infrastructure, but it has paid billions in sanctions that were imposed on it and the loss of oil sales. Iranian officials believe they have paid with blood, in reference to scientists that have been assassinated throughout the course of the last few decades working on this programme. This programme and the right for enrichment for civil nuclear purposes, has now become an issue of national pride.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
36 minutes ago
- The Independent
No kids, excess heat and payment plans. What to know about Hajj 2025
Muslims from around the world are in the Saudi city of Mecca for the Hajj, one of the Five Pillars of Islam. In the coming days, people will immerse themselves in religious rituals and acts of worship that originated more than 1,400 years ago. They also have to contend with excess heat and other earthly factors, like a ban on children under the age of 12 and a crackdown on unauthorized entry. Here's what to know about this year's Hajj: Beating the heat in the Saudi desert Last year's pilgrims struggled through burning sun and suffocating hot weather, with the mercury hitting 47 degrees Celsius (117 degrees Fahrenheit). More than 1,300 people died. This year, Saudi authorities are advising caution in direct sunlight, telling pilgrims to avoid going out during the day and uncovering their heads, except for rituals, unless necessary. An official safety kit emphasizes the importance of light-colored clothing and umbrellas. It also has details on recognizing and treating the symptoms of dehydration and heat exhaustion. But it's tough to avoid the heat and crowds when the Hajj is outdoors. It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for many, elevating the personal stakes further, and temperatures in Mecca are already 41 degrees Celsius (about 106 Fahrenheit). Although the desert kingdom spends billions of dollars on crowd control and cooling, the volume of pilgrims and climatic conditions make it difficult to guarantee people's safety. A ban on children under 12 at the Hajj Saudi Arabia has banned children under 12 from this year's Hajj — one of the biggest policy changes in recent years. Riyadh reportedly introduced the ban as a precautionary measure to ensure children's safety during the pilgrimage, which could be a dangerous environment for them because of the huge crowds. Children are exempt from doing the Hajj and are not required to fulfill other Islamic obligations, like prayer and fasting, until they reach puberty. But that doesn't stop some parents from wanting to take their children to experience the Hajj and see the holiest site in Islam, the Kaaba, the black, cube-shaped structure that is the focal point for daily prayers. Father of five Talha Ayub, from the Pakistani city of Lahore, said his kids were staying with their grandparents while he and his wife performed the Hajj in a 'more relaxed way.' 'Even if children were allowed, we probably wouldn't have taken them because the weather is extremely harsh this year,' said Ayub, whose children are aged 1 to 13. 'I have mixed feelings about leaving them behind. I'll miss them.' There's no official age breakdown for pilgrims, but most are between 35 and 64. Layaways and lowering the price tag The price of a Hajj ranges from $4,000 to $20,000, depending on the length of stay, level of comfort, and country of departure. Depreciating currencies, high inflation, and tax hikes in Saudi Arabia also have an impact on how much Muslims end up paying. The countries that typically send the most pilgrims are developing nations. Some have trimmed the price of government-backed Hajj programs to make them more affordable. But this step isn't always enough. Farid Ahmed Majumder, secretary general of the Hajj Agencies Association of Bangladesh, said the country was allowed to send some 127,000 pilgrims this year but failed to meet this quota, mainly because of higher costs. Pakistan has reduced the price of the state-run Hajj program. It has also debuted a flexible payment system. Farmer and small business owner Zaheer Ahmad said he didn't have enough money to pay for his Hajj up-front, 1.2 million rupees or about $4,255. He paid in three installments, applying for the Hajj in December with an advance and finishing his payments in February. 'Otherwise, I might not have been able to go for Hajj at all,' he said. In Saudi Arabia, which has also introduced flexible payments, domestic pilgrims pay 20% within 72 hours of booking, another 40% during Ramadan and the final 40% the following month. Managing wait times and overcrowding Although the Hajj is a once-in-a-lifetime obligation, people don't want to wait a lifetime to fulfill it. But the Hajj has limited capacity, countries have set quotas, and there is only one time each year to do it. Patience really is a virtue and everything needs to align: availability, health, and finances. Muslim-majority countries like Indonesia and Malaysia have decades-long waiting lists for the Hajj. Indonesia has 5.4 million people awaiting their turn, with the number increasing each year. While there is nothing to stop people from performing the Hajj more than once, some governments believe this practice deprives others of the opportunity, especially in countries where demand is high. India has a ban on 'repeaters' and excludes applications from anyone who has previously performed the pilgrimage through the national Hajj committee, although there are exceptions from those accompanying certain categories of people like the elderly. With a restricted supply of Hajj spaces, it's inevitable that people will try to find ways to get to the holy city and stay there. In April, to curb unauthorized Hajj pilgrimages and control inbound travel, Saudi Arabia suspended the issue of short-term visas for 14 countries: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Nigeria, Jordan, Algeria, Sudan, Ethiopia, Tunisia, Yemen, and Morocco. People have in the past traveled to Saudi Arabia on short-term visas and entered Mecca without official permission for the Hajj. Authorities said that many of those who died in the heat during last year's Hajj were unregistered and unable to access air-conditioned pilgrim amenities. The Interior Ministry warned in May that a fine of up to 20,000 riyals, or about $5,330, would be imposed on anyone attempting to enter Mecca during the Hajj without the correct visa. ___ Associated Press writers Sheikh Saaliq in New Delhi, Julhas Alam in Dhaka, Bangladesh, and Munir Ahmed in Islamabad contributed to this report. ___ Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
I went on hunger strike to save my wife – why won't Starmer help Laila Soueif like he helped us?
The pain of being separated from your child by prison walls is almost impossible to convey. During our family's six year ordeal, the cruelty of Nazanin being kept apart from our daughter Gabriella by the capricious machinery of Iran's 'justice' system often threatened to overwhelm us. And now our hearts are breaking to see our dear friend Laila Soueif on the edge of life and death, in an attempt to save her eldest child Alaa Abd el-Fattah, a brave and principled British-Egyptian writer who has done nothing to deserve the years he has spent behind bars separated from his mother, young child and sisters. Like Nazanin, Alaa is imprisoned unlawfully after a sham legal process, a fact attested to by United Nations experts. Like Nazanin, his family's fate hangs increasingly on the efforts of the British government, which has the means to resolve the case but was far too slow off the mark in responding to an intolerable injustice – and treated it as merely a diplomatic inconvenience. After seeing the end of his most recent five year sentence – for sharing a Facebook post about torture – pass in September without his release and without any acknowledgment from the British government, Laila embarked on a hunger strike in protest. She is still on that hunger strike, nearly nine months later. Only now, she is in a central London hospital bed. When we visited Laila's bedside last week, her daughters were anxiously monitoring her dangerously low blood sugar levels. Her endurance has been utterly astonishing but her body cannot hold out forever. Her doctors implore her to accept some nutrients, but she is determined that she will not relent without tangible progress towards his release. She reminds everyone that behind those prison walls, Alaa has himself been on hunger strike for nearly 100 days. For us, Laila Soueif's protest brings back memories of Richard's 21-day hunger strike and sit-in outside the Foreign Office in 2021, what that felt like as his body shut down, and we were left with stubborn will, the growing fear in the family's eyes. It was a step he took in desperation, when the British government had also downplayed the end of Nazanin's sentence, and the Iranians had reconvicted her, and told her to prepare for a new bout of imprisonment, while the UK watched on. While Richard was sitting hungry and cold on the London pavement, he had a visit from Keir Starmer, then leader of the opposition. Days later, he called Nazanin – then on house arrest in Tehran – and committed to do what he could to help get her home. His promise to our family, and his continued backing for her freedom and resolve to the government, was important for the ultimate success of our campaign. He took a celebration photo with us days after Nazanin came home. What we ask now is that as prime minister, Keir Starmer shows this same leadership to secure the release of Alaa. In February, he met Laila and made another promise, to press for Alaa's release. He has spoken to President al-Sisi about the case and stressed to him the 'anguish' the family are going through. Those were good first steps, but Alaa and his family need much more – and faster. We learned a lot about the power of politicians' words in our case, negative and positive. But we also learned to judge a government by its actions, not its words. Leading parliamentarians and former senior diplomats have called for stronger steps, including reviewing Britain's travel advice to Egypt to highlight the risks of unfair imprisonment, considering legal action and even sanctions. All this was done for Iran in our case. This government came to power promising to learn the lessons from our case, and to make protection of arbitrarily detained British nationals a key pillar of its foreign policy. Nazanin was invited to hear this announced at Labour conference. The election manifesto committed to establishing a legal right to consular protection, a promise we are still waiting to be kept. As shadow foreign secretary, David Lammy was often critical of the Tory government's drift in Alaa's case. Now it is his drift and decision making which has prompted her hunger strike. Ultimately Alaa's case – like Nazanin's before it – asks a simple question of this government: when it comes to unfair imprisonments overseas, what does the protection of a British passport actually mean? The promises of opposition are often forgotten when politicians get into government. But when it comes to arbitrary detention and torture, where people are so acutely vulnerable without their government's protections, the consequences of a failure to deliver can be particularly traumatic - as we discovered in our own case across the years of waiting for a prime minister to keep his word. Increasingly, it also asks: what price a mother's love? It took reserves of strength Nazanin never knew she had to overcome her enforced separation from Gabriella. Laila is using every last drop of energy in her body in an effort to be reunited with her son. Visiting her this week was something humbling, but also haunting to see. The whole family is a prisoner now. We implore the prime minister and his government to honour his promises: Time to bring Alaa home to Laila – and time to change the way this country deals with the arbitrary detention of its citizens, before desperation strikes the next family.
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
Has Ukraine proved Trump wrong?
👉Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim on your podcast app👈 This week, Richard and Yalda talk about 'Operation Spiderweb' - the Ukrainian drone attack that is being described by some analysts as 'Russia's Pearl Harbor'. How did Ukraine pull this unprecedented attack off? Where does this leave peace talks? And how might President Putin respond? Richard and Yalda also reflect on the difficulties of not being able to report from inside Gaza. Israel has previously said it has escorted journalists to Gaza to allow them to report safely. Yalda also dissects the Gaza special programme she fronted and dissects two of the interviews she did. One which saw a former UN humanitarian chief use the word genocide to describe Israel's actions in Gaza, and the other which saw a heated debate with Netanyahu's former adviser. You can watch Yalda's special programme here: Episodes of The World With Richard Engel And Yalda Hakim will be available every Wednesday on all podcast platforms.
