&w=3840&q=100)
Iranian parliament approves bill to suspend cooperation with UN nuclear watchdog amid fallout from Israeli, US strikes
Iran's parliament approved a bill on Wednesday to suspend cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog, stateaffiliated news outlet Nournews reported. read more
Iran's parliament has approved a bill to suspend cooperation with the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, state-affiliated outlet Nournews reported on Wednesday, escalating tensions in the wake of recent Israeli and US military strikes on the country's nuclear facilities.
The legislation, which still requires final approval from Iran's Supreme National Security Council to take effect, signals a hardening stance by Tehran following what it sees as unjustified attacks aimed at halting its nuclear development.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf told state media that Iran will now accelerate its civilian nuclear programme. He criticised the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), claiming it had failed to condemn the attacks on Iranian nuclear infrastructure and accusing it of compromising its neutrality.
The parliament speaker was quoted as saying the IAEA had refused even to appear to condemn the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities and 'has put its international credibility up for sale.'
He said that 'for this reason, the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran will suspend its cooperation with the Agency until the security of the nuclear facilities is guaranteed, and move at a faster pace with the country's peaceful nuclear programme.'
Earlier this week, parliament's national security committee approved the bill's general outline and the committee's spokesperson, Ebrahim Rezaei, said the bill would suspend the installation of surveillance cameras, inspections and filing of reports to the IAEA.
Following the Israeli attacks on its nuclear sites, and U.S. bombing of underground Iranian nuclear facilities at the weekend, the Iranian government also faces calls to limit the country's commitments to the nuclear non-proliferation regime.
In an interview with Qatar's Al-Araby Al-Jadeed on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said: 'I think that our view on our nuclear programme and the non-proliferation regime will witness changes, but it is not possible to say in what direction.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
14 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump's Iran gambit: Why Xi Jinping stayed quiet-what it means for Taiwan
President Donald Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington, as Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth listen. (Carlos Barria/Pool via AP) On June 22, 2025, when US President Donald Trump authorized a series of unprecedented airstrikes against Iranian nuclear sites, it marked America's most significant military escalation in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq. While international condemnation was swift and predictable from nations like Russia, Turkey, and Pakistan, the most notable voice was the one largely missing from the chorus: China. As per an Opinion by Karishma Vaswani in Bloomberg, Trump's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites dramatically exposed the boundaries of China's influence, leaving Beijing relegated to the diplomatic sidelines. Despite robust rhetorical condemnation-branding the strikes as a 'serious violation' of international law-Chinese leader Xi Jinping has notably refrained from any meaningful diplomatic or military response. Instead, Trump swiftly transitioned from striking Iranian facilities to mediating a tenuous ceasefire between Israel and Iran, reinforcing Washington's longstanding dominance in global crises. China, meanwhile, stuck to a cautious script, advocating restraint without putting its geopolitical weight behind concrete diplomatic initiatives. Why it matters The cautious Chinese response underscores Beijing's strategic limitations, contradicting Xi's carefully cultivated narrative that China can counterbalance US power globally. China has steadily positioned itself as a responsible alternative to US leadership, especially under Trump's turbulent America First policies. But this crisis lays bare the stark gap between China's rhetoric of global responsibility and its actual influence in geopolitical flashpoints. At stake for Beijing is the credibility of its claims of promoting a multipolar world, raising questions among countries in the Global South and the Middle East about China's reliability as a genuine global power beyond economic partnerships. Zoom in Beijing's interests in Iran are substantial but complicated, rooted primarily in energy and economic investments. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Investire è più facile che mai BG SAXO Scopri di più Undo China imports approximately 90% of Iran's oil exports, accounting for nearly 14% of China's total crude imports. Yet despite such dependency, China's direct investments in Iran have been relatively modest compared to its stakes in Saudi Arabia or the UAE, reflecting cautious Chinese corporations wary of crossing US sanctions. The 25-year, $400 billion strategic partnership agreement inked in 2021 between Beijing and Tehran promised massive infrastructure and energy projects. Yet actual implementation has lagged due to fears of provoking Washington's ire. Bill Figueroa, a China-Iran expert at the University of Groningen, underlines this point clearly: "Chinese state-owned companies have largely stayed away, mostly out of fear of running afoul of US sanctions. " Trump's military strikes have thus sharpened these contradictions. With the US flexing its military might, Beijing's primary response has been passive: evacuating thousands of Chinese citizens from Iran and urging stability to safeguard its oil supplies through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz. Between the lines China's passivity in this crisis aligns with Xi Jinping's innate caution in foreign policy. Xi's strategic focus remains primarily domestic-on economic recovery, social stability, and avoiding confrontations that could disrupt the fragile US-China relationship, recently stabilized through trade negotiations. China's military presence abroad remains intentionally minimal. Its only overseas military base is a modest naval outpost in Djibouti, positioned alongside other foreign military installations, hardly signaling ambition for aggressive power projection. As per Vaswani, Jennifer Parker, a defense expert at the ANU National Security College, captured this strategic calculation succinctly: 'China's relationships with other nations are forged out of convenience. Beijing won't intervene significantly unless compelled to protect its own interests.' Moreover, Xi's caution also reflects deeper strategic thinking among Chinese policymakers who view US involvement in the Middle East as a distraction that ultimately benefits China's long-term objectives. This aligns with historical Chinese views of the region as a geopolitical quagmire capable of draining America's strategic resources, potentially hastening the decline of US global hegemony. William Figueroa, a China-Iran expert at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, bluntly told the washington Post: "China has little ability to affect the situation directly... it has no ability to militarily influence that conflict." What they are saying Chinese officials sharply criticized Trump's actions yet stopped short of decisive action or influence: China's UN ambassador Fu Cong emphasized, 'Iran was hurt but the United States' credibility was also damaged-both as a country and as a participant in any international negotiations.' A Global Times editorial condemned the attack, stating that Washington was 'adding fuel to the fire of war and pushing the Iran-Israel conflict to a more uncontrollable situation.' However, Beijing faced skepticism even from Iran-friendly corners. Gedaliah Afterman, a China expert at Israel's Reichman University, noted that despite close Sino-Iranian ties, 'it's not clear whether or not [China] could convince Iran,' especially given China's lack of meaningful leverage over military affairs or diplomatic outcomes. For countries in the Global South and the Gulf, China's championing of a multipolar world may now ring hollow. Governments are looking for reliable crisis partners, not just trade and development. Beijing's hands-off approach is raising doubts about how much weight it's really willing to carry. Karishma Vaswani in Bloomberg The big picture China's limited influence in the Iran crisis has deeper global implications. Despite diplomatic breakthroughs in the Middle East, such as the Saudi-Iranian normalization deal brokered by Beijing in 2023, China remains fundamentally constrained in leveraging its economic power into geopolitical clout during major crises. Trump's proactive yet aggressive approach in Iran contrasts sharply with China's cautious diplomacy, reinforcing global perceptions of US military dominance and diplomatic reach. This diminishes China's ability to effectively position itself as a credible alternative to US global leadership. Furthermore, Trump's assertiveness could reshape calculations in Beijing, particularly regarding potential US responses in other hotspots closer to China, such as Taiwan. Gedaliah Afterman noted: 'Trump's willingness to intervene with force in Iran might make Beijing think the US is more likely to respond militarily to a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan.' Conversely, other analysts suggest US military entanglement in the Middle East could reduce strategic pressure on China elsewhere, including on economic fronts. Mohammed Alsudairi, a China-Middle East expert at the Australian National University, said: 'US political and strategic bandwidth is limited. The US could be dragged into a quagmire, indirectly benefiting China.' What's next Looking forward, Beijing will likely continue its cautious approach in the Middle East. Its primary focus will remain on protecting economic interests, particularly securing oil supplies and safeguarding trade routes, without provoking further confrontation with the US. There is a possibility, however, that China might gradually seek to strengthen its diplomatic role in less contentious regional issues-continuing infrastructure investments and quiet diplomacy through the Belt and Road Initiative, rather than direct confrontation or military involvement. Yet the lingering question remains whether China will ever translate economic clout into genuine geopolitical power or if Beijing will consistently prefer caution, leaving the global stage largely dominated by more assertive powers like the United States. In this Iran crisis, China's restrained response revealed more clearly than ever the true extent-and the significant limitations-of its global ambitions.
News18
20 minutes ago
- News18
Trump Says Airstrikes Destroyed Iran's Nuclear Sites, US Intelligence Says It Didn't: Who Is Lying?
Trump's Iran airstrikes: The DIA found that Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium remained intact, as did its centrifuges Contradicting US President Donald Trump's claims, the early assessment by US intelligence suggests that the airstrikes in Iran on June 22 did not destroy Iran's nuclear sites. Trump had asserted that the US attack had ' completely obliterated" Iran's nuclear capabilities and that Iran would not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. To evaluate these claims, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Pentagon's intelligence arm, conducted a battle damage assessment. The DIA found that Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium were intact, as were its centrifuges. The assessment revealed that 400 kilograms of enriched uranium, enough to build up to 10 nuclear weapons, had been moved from the sites before the US strikes. Satellite images showed 16 trucks lined up days before the airstrikes on Fordow, suggesting Tehran may have relocated its uranium stockpiles. #BreakingNews | Iran's uranium stockpile is not destroyed: U.S Intel Sources @ayusureboutdat @akankshaswarups | #Iran #IsraeliranWar — News18 (@CNNnews18) June 25, 2025 THE MISSING URANIUM & FACTS US Vice-President JD Vance confirmed in an interview with ABC News that the Trump administration would engage with Iran regarding the missing enriched uranium. Meanwhile, Trump has criticised CNN, the New York Times, and MSNBC, accusing them of downplaying the success of the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The White House acknowledged the intelligence assessment, but disagreed with it. White House Press Secretary Karoline Levitt stated that the assessment was 'flat-out wrong," attributing the leak to an 'anonymous, low-level loser" in the intelligence community. Levitt emphasised that the mission was to obliterate Iran's nuclear programme, claiming complete success. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth supported the President's stance, suggesting that downplaying the bombs' devastation was an attempt to undermine the President and the mission's success. However, the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency remains at odds with the President, with further damage analysis going on. WHAT IS IRAN DOING? The UN's nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, had its verification suspended after June 13, leaving them without updates on the uranium's location. Analysts suggest that Iran's strategy involves maintaining nuclear leverage through deterrence, moving uranium to ensure rapid restart capability. US intelligence agencies have long concluded that while Iran enriches uranium, it has not built atomic bombs. This has fuelled debates over Iran's enrichment programme's significance versus actual weapons development. Iran's approach mirrors Iraq's under Saddam Hussein, who dismantled his WMD programs in the 1990s but never disclosed this, leading to the 2003 US invasion. As of 2025, the question remains: Is history repeating itself? Iran signals it has not abandoned nuclear ambitions, with enriched material and scientific knowledge preserved. Concealing its capabilities strengthens Iran's negotiating power without open escalation. Tehran's refusal to cooperate with the IAEA and hints at exiting the Non-Proliferation Treaty suggest a shift towards a more defiant nuclear posture, raising the question of whether military conflict is the solution to Iran's nuclear threat. First Published: June 25, 2025, 19:08 IST
Mint
21 minutes ago
- Mint
Op Sindhu update: 3,154 Indian nationals brought home from Iran, 4 Nepalese nationals evacuated
In a development under Operation Sindhu, a special flight carrying 296 Indian nationals and 4 Nepalese citizens arrived safely in New Delhi from Mashhad, Iran, at 4.30pm on 25 June 2025, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal posted on X. This latest evacuation brings the total number of Indian nationals repatriated from Iran to 3,154 since the operation began. Operation Sindhu was launched by the Indian government in response to escalating tensions and conflict in the region, particularly following recent military strikes by the United States and Israel on Iranian nuclear facilities. The strikes targeted key sites such as Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, intensifying fears of a broader conflict in the Middle East. Operation Sindhu was officially launched by the PM Narendra Modi-led India government on 18 June to evacuate Indian nationals from Iran amid escalating conflict between Iran and Israel. The first evacuation flight carrying 110 Indian students who had travelled by road to Armenia departed Yerevan on 18 June 2025 and arrived in New Delhi early on 19 June 2025. Since the onset of Operation Sindhu, multiple special flights and other modes of transport have been deployed to evacuate Indian nationals from various cities across Iran, including Tehran, Mashhad, and Isfahan. The evacuation has included vulnerable groups such as students, professionals, and tourists caught amid rising tensions. Nepalese nationals stranded in Iran have also been assisted as part of humanitarian cooperation between India and Nepal, reflecting regional solidarity in times of crisis. The evacuation efforts come in the wake of a 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran, which began with Israeli airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear and military sites, including key nuclear facilities. The strikes, supported by the United States, aimed to degrade Iran's nuclear programme but reportedly only set it back by months rather than completely destroying it, according to initial US intelligence assessments. Both nations claimed victory following intense missile exchanges and drone attacks, which caused casualties on both sides. A ceasefire brokered by the United States and facilitated by Qatar took effect on 24 June 2025, bringing a temporary halt to hostilities. Israel lifted wartime restrictions, reopening airports and allowing citizens to resume normal activities, while Iran also signalled compliance with the truce. Despite some initial accusations of violations from both sides, the ceasefire has largely held, offering cautious optimism for peace. However, tensions remain high, with both nations wary of future escalations. The conflict has underscored the fragile security situation in the Middle East and the challenges involved in achieving lasting peace.
