Russia warns Trump he has opened 'Pandora's box' with strike on Iran as regime holds talks in Moscow and fears grow that the UK will now face terror backlash
Trump said the audacious attack by a squadron of stealth bombers in the early hours of yesterday had 'taken the bomb right out of [Tehran's] hands'.
But Moscow 's United Nations ambassador Vassily Nebenzia issued an ominous warning at an emergency meeting of the Security Council as he said: 'No one knows what new catastrophes and suffering it will bring.'
And he claimed Russia had offered mediation talks to find a peaceful and mutually agreeable solution to Iran's nuclear program, but the US, especially its leaders, are 'clearly not interested in diplomacy today'.
'Unless we stop the escalation,' Nebenzia warned, 'the Middle East will find itself on the verge of a large scale conflict with unpredictable consequences for the entire international security system, plus the entire world might end up on the verge of a nuclear disaster.'
Trump has sensationally called for a regime change in Iran as he held crisis talks with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Sunday.
The US president took to his Truth Social page to share updates about the country's military attacks on Iran, when he suggested that the current regime 'is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.'
'Why wouldn't there be a regime change,' Trump asked, rhetorically - even as he and Starmer urged Ayatollah Khameini to 'return to the negotiating table as soon as possible.'
Russian ex-president Dmitriy Medvedev claimed in a post on X/Twitter early on Sunday that the US strikes on three sites in Isfahan, Natanz, and Fordow had backfired and led to the opposite result from what Trump had set out to achieve.
In a taunting post, Medvedev claimed: 'Enrichment of nuclear material — and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons — will continue.'
Medvedev, who has served as President of Russia from 2008 to 2012, further stated that 'Iran's political regime has survived — and in all likelihood, has come out even stronger'.
He continued to claim that Iranians are 'rallying around the country's spiritual leadership, including those who were previously indifferent or opposed to it'.
His anti-US and pro-Iran social media rant was posted in English and broken down into ten points - gathering more than three million views.
Medvedev, who has served as Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia since 2020, has been regarded by some as a potential potential successor to Putin.
There are fears Britain and other allies could face a terror backlash from the regime's supporters.
Seven B-2 stealth bombers swept into Iranian airspace undetected yesterday, dropping 14 'bunker-buster' bombs on nuclear facilities as the US joined Israel in the biggest Western military action against the Islamic Republic since its 1979 revolution.
The UK was informed of the mission, codenamed Operation Midnight Hammer, but played no part. Cabinet minister Jonathan Reynolds last night warned that Iranian activity in the UK was already substantial, and it was 'naive' to think it won't escalate.
Britain's military bases in the region, such as RAF Akrotiri on Cyprus, were on the highest state of alert last night for revenge attacks, including by Iranian swarm drones.
Defence Secretary John Healey said: 'The safety of UK personnel and bases is my top priority. Force protection is at its highest level and we deployed additional jets [to Cyprus] this week.'
Other experts warned of a 'new era of terrorism' and US Vice President J D Vance said the FBI and law enforcement were on alert for threats on American soil.
Sir Keir Starmer and President Trump discussed the need for Iran to return to the negotiating table in a phone call last night, No 10 said.
A spokesman said: 'The leaders discussed the situation in the Middle East and reiterated the grave risk posed by Iran's nuclear programme to international security.
'They discussed the actions taken by the United States last night to reduce the threat and agreed that Iran must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.
'They discussed the need for Iran to return to the negotiating table as soon as possible. They agreed to stay in close contact in the coming days.'
The Prime Minister urged all sides to return to negotiations but said he had taken 'all necessary measures' to protect British interests in the region if the conflict escalates.
Before and after pictures of Fordow underground complex, taken on June 20 (left) and June 22 (right)
In an address to the nation as the B-2s were flying home, Mr Trump said: 'Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror.
'Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace.
'If they do not, future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier.'
President Trump boasted the US had 'taken the bomb right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could!)', while his Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed the US had offered Iran a civil nuclear programme but 'they rejected it'.
He added: 'They played us. They wouldn't respond to our offers. They disappeared for ten days. The President had to take action as a response.
'We are not declaring war on Iran. We're not looking for war in Iran. But if they attack us, I think we have the capabilities they haven't even seen yet.'
Last night, despite widespread calls to de- escalate, Iran president Masoud Pezeshkian said the US 'must receive a response for their aggression'.
And a senior adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, warned: 'There will no longer be any place for the presence of the United States and its bases' in the region.
Abbas Araghaci, Iran's foreign minister who described the US government as 'lawless and warmongering', is expected to meet Putin in Moscow today to discuss how to respond.
Speaking hours after the US strikes, Business Secretary Mr Reynolds told Sky News the risk from Iran in the UK was 'not hypothetical'.
He said: 'There is not a week goes by without some sort of Iranian cyber-attack on a key part of the UK's critical national infrastructure.
'There is Iranian activity on the streets of the UK, which is wholly unacceptable.
'It's already at a significant level. I think it would be naive to say that that wouldn't potentially increase.'
A statement of the E3 group, with the UK alongside France and Germany, said: 'We call upon Iran to engage in negotiations leading to an agreement that addresses all concerns associated with its nuclear programme.
'We stand ready to contribute to that goal in coordination with all parties.
'We urge Iran not to take any further action that could destabilise the region.'
But Iran threatened to hold the world hostage by closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway in the region and a chokepoint for world trade and oil transit.
Last night, the head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog said Iran's Natanz enrichment site was 'completely destroyed'.
The extent of the damage at the Fordow site, built into a mountainside and reinforced with layers of concrete, is unclear.
Discussing Fordow, Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said: 'There are clear indications of impacts. But, as for the assessment for the degree of damage underground... no one could tell you how much it has been damaged. One cannot exclude that there is significant damage there.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Hamas agrees to new Gaza ceasefire deal
Hamas has announced its acceptance of a new ceasefire proposal put forward by Arab mediators for the Gaza Strip. Gaza's Health Ministry reports the Palestinian death toll from the conflict has surpassed 62,000, with over 156,000 wounded. US President Donald Trump expressed doubt about the ongoing negotiations, saying that the remaining hostages held by Hamas would only be returned once the group is 'confronted and destroyed'. Israel said its positions on the ceasefire talks remain unchanged, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowing to continue the war until all hostages are returned and Hamas is disarmed. Concerns about a worsening humanitarian catastrophe persist, with Amnesty International accusing Israel of a deliberate starvation campaign. Hamas says it accepts new ceasefire deal as Palestinian death toll surpasses 62,000
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
‘Appeasing bullies never works': Readers split over Trump's push for Putin-Zelensky peace talks
It comes after the US president used last night's White House talks with European leaders to float the idea of a three-way summit with the Ukrainian and Russian presidents, which he said he hoped to arrange within the next two weeks. He later confirmed on Truth Social that he had spoken to the Russian president to begin making arrangements, raising the prospect of the first meeting between Zelensky and Putin since 2019. Reacting to the news, our community were united in the view that peace is urgent, but many worried Trump's involvement could destabilise efforts. 'Appeasing bullies never works,' one reader warned, while another concluded grimly: 'Both Trump and Putin use war for their own ends – small countries do not count.' Some feared the US president would concede too much in pursuit of a Nobel Prize and while many argued Ukraine cannot defeat Russia outright, there were warnings that ceding land would only embolden Putin. Others felt Macron and other European leaders must play a central role in negotiations to balance Trump's unpredictability. Another recurring theme was scepticism about security guarantees, with many doubting promises from either Trump or Putin would be 'worth the paper they are written on'. Here's what you had to say: There needs to be a strong European voice In February Trump chewed Zelensky in his mouth and spat him out. Yesterday all changed – why? Because Zelensky was backed by seven European leaders. Of course, Ukraine will have to cede territory because there is no chance of Ukraine defeating Russia, as in bringing it to its knees. But Putin can't keep losing fighting men forever, so there could be a compromise. If Zelensky meets Putin and Trump, Trump will give too much away so he gets his peace prize. Macron is smart – there needs to be a strong European voice in quadripartite negotiations. Truthfirstwarcasualty Trump could never negotiate peace Art of the Deal my foot! Trump couldn't negotiate his way out of a paper bag. If he had been the President of Ukraine instead of Zelensky, he would be taking orders from the Kremlin by now. Pomerol95 Where should talks be held? Where and how will any talks between Presidents of Ukraine and Russia occur? In my opinion, the "where" cannot be in USA, Russia, NATO nations, EU nations, or even the 46 Council of Europe nations. It is also likely that the host should not be a member of the ICC, and also be seen as neutral. That perhaps leaves Qatar as a front runner. Fair enough, as the ruler Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani is a diplomatically pragmatic and highly educated individual. His presence/oversight would solve the issue of such talks being not only neutral as possible, but being seen as such; obviously no member of NATO or EU can attend, let alone mediate. To keep the dialogue on path, there has to be a ceasefire, if only for a limited period, say seven days before, during, and after such a meeting. This to include no military actions, movements, supply, or any combat-related action. All else is solely between the two parties and their translators. Understandably, there will be facilities for private communication between parties and their governments or allies. We are not in the past era of "Great Powers" deciding things for others. The role of external parties is to facilitate the end of the conflict in a manner equitable to all parties. Jonathan Mills Appeasing bullies never works Trump isn't wrong – that is what Putin will demand to 'end' the war. But the big question for Ukraine, and for the rest of the world, is if he gets what he wants for being an aggressor, how long will his version of peace last? When will he decide to grab more land and make more demands on neighbours? The simple fact is appeasing bullies never works. Putin is the 'artful dodger' Given there's no ceasefire, and Trump knowingly put the onus back on Zelensky – by caving to Putin on territorial claims and Ukraine being prevented from joining NATO – Zelensky needs to stand his ground. Whilst Crimea is likely lost, he must oppose any further unlawful territorial gains from Putin. With respect to security guarantees from the US akin to NATO Article 5 stipulations, of course Putin has indicated his willingness to that, but I doubt they would be worth the paper they are written on. Putin will make claims Ukraine has been attempting to seize back Crimea or other parts of its territory, and all bets will be off. I reckon it's a ploy unwittingly agreed to by Trump – but would you trust either of these Presidents to keep their word? Trump regularly flip-flops and changes position all the time, and Putin is the 'artful dodger' when it comes to manipulating Trump and breaking peace agreements at will. StigStag The parallels with the 1930s are deeply worrying The parallels between now and the late 1930s are uncanny and deeply worrying, and the response of 'the leader of the free world' would be laughable if it weren't so pathetic, predictable, and serious. The continental Europeans know, or should remember, what it was like to have a war rage across their lands – something the Americans and British have never experienced. Surely we can learn and realise that the precautionary principle is key and take action to prevent another invasion. That means being appropriately armed and ensuring the territorial integrity of sovereign states is respected – and where military action has attempted to change that, then territorial integrity is restored by whatever means is necessary, hopefully by robust diplomacy. That means we need to cut Trump out of it and deal with this ourselves. Geejay Get serious in arming Ukraine This war has shown that agreements and opinions mean nothing. All that matters is capabilities. Ukraine already had a commitment from NATO to defend it in the Bucharest agreement. But Russia attacked anyway. However, this war has shown that Russia is no longer a first-class military power. The front has barely moved in three years – and that's despite Ukraine being severely outnumbered, having no tanks, aircraft, or long-range missiles, and being supplied with mostly old, outdated NATO weapons. If Europe got serious in arming Ukraine, how long would Russia last? So Ukraine definitely does have a hand at the table – especially considering how unpopular Trump and Putin are in Europe (and elsewhere) at the moment. Ajames Trump dividing Europe The truly scary thing is that Trump, via his tariffs and deals, has already succeeded to a large extent in dividing and thus dominating Europe. People are afraid to upset him – apparently Zelensky is wearing a suit to the meeting! Will they get tariffed, or lose their special deals? Or even be thrown out of the White House? A year ago, Europe would firmly have rejected the idea of Ukraine ceding territory – now it seems they may be putting pressure on Ukraine to do so, even though it isn't spoken out loud. Hungubwe Trump rambles, Putin manipulates Trump rambles, and clearly harbours grudges – not least against Joe Biden, who beat him in 2020. What all this has to do with the actual point of the meeting yesterday is difficult to fathom. It looks like just another Trump rant. There is plenty of precedent for postponing elections during wartime. Britain should have had one in 1940, but by cross-party agreement suspended them for the duration. Trying to get full and fair coverage when a war is raging is almost impossible. It seems to me both Trump and Putin are using war for different ends but with the same basic outcome – small countries do not count. Despite the bluster and accusations Trump threw at Biden yesterday, it was Putin who unleashed his forces against Ukraine on 24/2/2022. If that is not a blatant act of aggression then I do not know what is. Good thing European leaders were there yesterday. There is much more at stake in terms of our security in this war. Allowing Russia to keep its ill-gotten gains is not something we could support. Did they manage to pull Trump back from his favourable opinion of Putin? Who knows with Trump? We live in dangerous times. 49niner
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer hails ‘breakthrough' on security guarantees after crunch White House Ukraine talks
Sir Keir Starmer has hailed a "breakthrough" in efforts to end Vladimir Putin 's invasion of Ukraine as Donald Trump said he would broker a meeting between the Ukrainian and Russian presidents. The PM joined Voldymyr Zelensky, French president Emmanuel Macron and Nato secretary general Mark Rutte for crunch talks in the White House on Monday. And, following the meeting, Sir Keir said the UK and US would begin work on the specifics of security guarantees with the US as soon as Tuesday. "The two outcomes were a real significant breakthrough when it comes to security guarantees, because we're now going to be working with the US on those security guarantees," he told the BBC. "We've tasked our teams, some of them are even arriving tomorrow, to start the detailed work on that." Mr Trump said he had spoken directly with Vladimir Putin to begin planning a meeting between the Russian leader and Mr Zelensky, which will then be followed by a three-way meeting involving himself. The US president said Moscow will "accept" multinational efforts to guarantee Ukraine's security. Mr Zelensky, meanwhile, said he was "ready" for bilateral and trilateral meetings. But he told reporters following the White House meeting that if Russia does "not demonstrate a will to meet, then we will ask the United States to act accordingly". Nato secretary general Mark Rutte said the US and Europe would "do more" on tariffs and sanctions against Russia if the country "is not playing ball" on direct talks with Ukraine, in comments to Fox News. Sir Keir described the talks as "good and constructive" and said there was a "real sense of unity" between the European leaders, Mr Trump and Mr Zelensky. He said Mr Trump's plans to arrange the bilateral and trilateral meetings showed a recognition that Ukraine must be involved in talks. "That is a recognition of the principle that on some of these issues, whether it's territory or the exchange of prisoners, or the very serious issue of the return of children, that is something where Ukraine must be at the table." Mr Trump called the talks "very good". "During the meeting we discussed security guarantees for Ukraine, which guarantees would be provided by the various European countries, with a co-ordination with the United States of America," he posted on his Truth Social platform. "Everyone is happy about the possibility of PEACE for Russia/Ukraine. "At the conclusion of the meetings, I called president Putin and began arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between president Putin and president Zelensky. "After the meeting takes place, we will have a trilat which would be the two presidents plus myself." The US president met with Mr Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, on Friday, where he declared there was "no deal until there's a deal" to end more than three years of fighting in eastern Europe. "The Alaska summit reinforced my belief that while difficult, peace is within reach and I believe, in a very significant step, president Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine," he said on Monday. "And this is one of the key points that we need to consider." He later said: "We also need to discuss the possible exchanges of territory taken into consideration the current line of contact." Future three-way talks "have a good chance" of stopping the conflict, the US president said. But he appeared to share conflicting views on whether a ceasefire was necessary to stop the war. "I don't think you need a ceasefire," he originally said, before later explaining that, "all of us would obviously prefer an immediate ceasefire while we work on a lasting peace". Mr Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, had suggested over the weekend that measures similar to Nato's article five mutual defence provision - that an attack on one member is an attack on the entire bloc - could be offered by the US without Kyiv joining the alliance. Sir Keir welcomed plans for "Article Five-style guarantees" during Monday's talks and said that they would fit with the work of his "coalition of the willing" group of countries. He said to Mr Trump: "With you coming alongside, the US alongside, what we've already developed, I think we could take a really important step forward today - a historic step, actually, could come out of this meeting in terms of security for Ukraine and security in Europe." Sir Keir also described potential future trilateral talks as a "sensible next step". The prime minister had disrupted his holiday plans over the weekend to join calls, including with Mr Trump and Mr Zelensky, before he headed to Washington. Mr Zelensky, whom Mr Trump greeted at the door of the West Wing with a handshake earlier in the evening, wore a black shirt with buttons and a black blazer to the meeting at the White House. His attire had appeared to become a point of irritation for Mr Trump during a previous meeting in February. Early in the meeting, the Ukrainian described the talks as "really good", saying they had been "the best" so far. Mr Zelensky said: "We are very happy with the president that all the leaders are here and security in Ukraine depends on the United States and on you and on those leaders who are with us in our hearts."
