logo
Iran meets European powers amid threats of U.N. sanctions snapback

Iran meets European powers amid threats of U.N. sanctions snapback

The Hindu5 days ago
Iranian diplomats met counterparts from Germany, Britain and France on Friday (July 25, 2025) for renewed nuclear talks, amid warnings that the three European powers could trigger "snapback" sanctions outlined under the 2015 deal.
The meeting in Istanbul was the first since Israel's mid-June attack on Iran, which sparked a 12-day war and targeted key nuclear and military sites.
The European diplomats were seen leaving the Iranian consulate in the city, the venue for the talks, shortly before 2:00 pm (1100 GMT), after several hours inside.
There was no immediate information given by either side about the meeting.
Israel's offensive -- which killed top commanders, nuclear scientists and hundreds of others as residential areas were struck as well -- also derailed U.S.-Iran nuclear talks that began in April.
Since then, the European powers, known as the E3, have threatened to trigger the "snapback mechanism", which would reinstate U.N. sanctions on Iran by the end of August, under the moribund 2015 nuclear deal.
The option to trigger the snapback expires in October, and Tehran has warned of consequences should the E3 opt to activate it.
"Inaction by the E3 is not an option," a European source said, noting that Tehran would be reminded during the meeting that the snapback window closes within months.
The source said Europeans were preparing to trigger the mechanism "in the absence of a negotiated solution" and called on Iran to make "clear gestures" regarding uranium enrichment and the resumption of cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog.
Ahead of the talks on Friday, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said the meeting would be a "test of realism for the Europeans and a valuable opportunity to correct their views on Iran's nuclear issue", in remarks to the official IRNA news agency.
Sanctions
Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who attended the talks Friday alongside senior Iranian diplomat Majid Takht-Ravanchi, warned this week that triggering sanctions "is completely illegal".
He also accused European powers of "halting their commitments" to the deal after the United States unilaterally withdrew in 2018 during President Donald Trump's first term.
"We have warned them of the risks, but we are still seeking common ground to manage the situation," said Gharibabadi.
Iranian diplomats have previously warned that Tehran could withdraw from the global nuclear non-proliferation treaty if UN sanctions are reimposed.
Restoring sanctions would deepen Iran's international isolation and place further pressure on its already strained economy.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has urged European powers to trigger the mechanism.
Israel's June 13 attack on Iran came two days before Tehran and Washington were scheduled to meet for a sixth round of nuclear negotiations.
On June 22, the United States joined Israel's offensive by striking Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordo, Isfahan, and Natanz.
Before the war, Washington and Tehran were divided over uranium enrichment, which Iran has described as a "non-negotiable" right, while the United States called it a "red line".
The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran is enriching uranium to 60 percent purity -- far above the 3.67% cap under the 2015 deal and close to weapons-grade levels.
Tehran has said it is open to discussing the rate and level of enrichment, but not the right to enrich uranium.
A year after the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear deal, Iran began rolling back its commitments, which had placed restrictions on its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.
Israel and Western powers accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran has repeatedly denied.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

New Myanmar junta law: Jail for those who criticise election plan
New Myanmar junta law: Jail for those who criticise election plan

First Post

time25 minutes ago

  • First Post

New Myanmar junta law: Jail for those who criticise election plan

Myanmar's junta has enacted a harsh new election law criminalising dissent and protest against its planned vote, with penalties including prison and even the death sentence amid widespread opposition and a civil war. read more Myanmar's junta said Wednesday it has enacted a new law dictating prison sentences for critics or protesters of their planned election, which is being boycotted by opposition groups. The junta seized power in a 2021 coup, sparking a many-sided civil war, and has touted elections at the end of this year as a path to peace. Opposition groups – including democratic lawmakers ousted by the military takeover – and international monitors have called the poll a ploy to legitimise the junta's rule. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD State newspaper The Global New Light of Myanmar said the 'Law on the Protection of Multiparty Democratic Elections from Obstruction, Disruption and Destruction' was enacted on Tuesday. Its 14-page text forbids 'any speech, organising, inciting, protesting or distributing leaflets in order to destroy a part of the electoral process'. Individuals convicted face between three and seven years behind bars, while offences committed in groups can result in sentences between five and 10 years. The legislation also outlaws damaging ballot papers and polling stations, as well as the intimidation or harm of voters, candidates and election workers, with a maximum punishment of 20 years in prison. If anyone is killed during an attempt to disrupt the election 'everyone involved in the crime faces the death penalty', the law says. Swathes of Myanmar are beyond the control of the junta and some government census workers deployed last year to gather data ahead of the poll faced resistance and security threats. Data could not be collected from an estimated 19 million of the country's 51 million people, provisional results said, in part because of 'significant security constraints'. Analysts have predicted the myriad of anti-coup guerrillas and ethnic armed groups the junta is battling may stage offensives in the run-up to the vote as a sign of their opposition. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A UN expert called on the international community last month to reject the election plan as 'a fraud'. Tom Andrews, the UN special rapporteur on the rights situation in Myanmar, said the junta is 'trying to create this mirage of an election exercise that will create a legitimate civilian government'.

What made Google says YES to Europe on an AI law that Facebook, Instagram have outrightly rejected; and Europe's biggest companies want EU to ‘Stop the Clock'
What made Google says YES to Europe on an AI law that Facebook, Instagram have outrightly rejected; and Europe's biggest companies want EU to ‘Stop the Clock'

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

What made Google says YES to Europe on an AI law that Facebook, Instagram have outrightly rejected; and Europe's biggest companies want EU to ‘Stop the Clock'

Google has said yes to European Union's (EU) AI law that Facebook and Instagram parent Meta has almost gone to war over. Google has reportedly said that it will sign the EU's code of practice for artificial intelligence (AI). Google agreeing to EU AI law is a boost to the bloc as it tries to hold firm on its digital rules in the face of heavy pressure from the Donald Trump government and other Big Tech groups. Kent Walker, president of global affairs and chief legal officer at Google's parent company Alphabet, said that the company would sign 'with the hope that this Code, as applied, will promote European citizens' and businesses' access to secure, first-rate AI tools as they become available'. Though Google seems set to sign the Europe's AI Act, it also warned the regional bloc on the same. Kent Walker said that Google would also submit feedback, as the AI Act and the code 'risk slowing Europe's development and deployment of AI'. He added, 'Departures from EU copyright law, steps that slow approvals, or requirements that expose trade secrets could chill European model development and deployment, harming Europe's competitiveness.' With this, Google joins OpenAI and the French artificial intelligence company Mistral in signing the code. Microsoft president Brad Smith recently told Reuters that it was 'likely' that Microsoft would sign the code. The AI Act is set to come into force early next month. What is EU's AI Act EU's AI code requires regular documentation updates for AI tools and it also bans training of AI with paired content. It also needs compliance with content owners' opt-out requests and systemic risk assessments and post-marketing monitoring. EC president calls AI Act Red line that can't be crossed A statement on the EU-US trade deal signed by European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump last week said that the two economies 'intend to address unjustified digital trade barriers'. However, the EU has said its online rules are a red line and will not be changed. 'We are not moving on our right to regulate autonomously in the digital space,' a commission spokesperson said. Why Facebook has slammed EU AI Act Facebook owner Meta has vehemently refused to sign the AI code. Meta's vice president of Global Public Policy, Joel Kaplan said in a LinkedIn post that Europe might be 'heading down the wrong path'. He said that the code introduces ''legal uncertainties for model developers' and also impose requirements that go 'far beyond the scope of the AI Act'. 'Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI. We have carefully reviewed the European Commission's Code of Practice for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and Meta won't be signing it. This Code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act,' wrote Kaplan in a LinkedIn post. Last month, 44 of Europe's largest businesses – including Bosch, Siemens, SAP, Airbus and BNP – signed a letter calling for the Commission to 'Stop the Clock' in its implementation.

Drawing A Line In The Sand: Can UN Conference's Two-State Solution End Israel-Palestine Conflict?
Drawing A Line In The Sand: Can UN Conference's Two-State Solution End Israel-Palestine Conflict?

News18

timean hour ago

  • News18

Drawing A Line In The Sand: Can UN Conference's Two-State Solution End Israel-Palestine Conflict?

The seven-page 'New York Declaration' outlines a phased plan to end not only the war in Gaza but also the eight-decade conflict between Israel and Palestine A United Nations conference has advocated for a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians. France and Saudi Arabia have led this initiative, laying out the parameters for a Palestinian state. UN chief Antonio Guterres has described the two-state solution as the 'only realistic, just, and sustainable solution for peace in the Middle East". The seven-page 'New York Declaration" outlines a phased plan to end not only the war in Gaza but also the eight-decade conflict between Israel and Palestine. The plan aims to culminate in an independent, demilitarised Palestine that peacefully coexists with Israel and integrates into the wider Middle East region. High-level representatives at the UN conference have urged Israel to commit to establishing a Palestinian state. According to the declaration, the co-chairs, France and Saudi Arabia, the European Union, the Arab League, and 15 countries leading the working groups have agreed 'to take collective action to end the war in Gaza". The meeting comes at a time when reports indicate severe starvation and famine plaguing Gaza, exacerbated by Israeli policies and practices—a claim repeatedly denied by Israel. The conference was postponed from June and downgraded from world leaders to ministers. For the first time, the conference has established eight high-level working groups to examine and make proposals on various topics related to a two-state solution. The declaration condemns Israeli attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure in Gaza, highlighting the 'siege and starvation" that have caused a devastating humanitarian crisis. It also reports that Israel's ongoing offensive against Hamas has resulted in over 60,000 Palestinian deaths. The conference plan envisions the Palestinian Authority governing and controlling all Palestinian territory, supported by a transitional administrative committee established after a ceasefire in Gaza. It also advocates for the deployment of 'a temporary international stabilization mission" under UN auspices to protect Palestinian civilians, support the transfer of security to the Palestinian Authority, and provide security guarantees for both Palestine and Israel. Monitoring the ceasefire and future peace agreements will be a priority. Without directly naming Israel, the document criticises 'illegal unilateral actions" that threaten the realisation of an independent Palestinian state. This comes amid reports of Tel Aviv's plans to annexe the West Bank. The New York Declaration also condemns 'the attacks committed by Hamas against civilians" in southern Israel on October 7, 2023—the first condemnation of Hamas by Arab nations. These attacks resulted in the deaths of about 1,200 civilians, mostly Israelis, and the taking of 250 hostages, 50 of whom are still held. A crucial question remains: can a two-state solution be achieved without cooperation from Israel and its ally, the United States? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has opposed the two-state solution and rejected the meeting on nationalistic and security grounds. The United States has also boycotted the meeting, calling it 'unproductive and ill-timed". India has joined 120 nations calling for a two-state solution. These talks follow French President Emmanuel Macron's announcement at the United Nations General Assembly in September that France will formally recognise the state of Palestine. Recently, the UK's Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer extended his support but was quickly criticised by Netanyahu, who accused him of 'appeasing terrorists" after Starmer stated that the UK would recognise Palestine unless Israel took urgent steps to end the war in Gaza. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store