G7 urges talks to resume for deal on Iran nuclear programme
Foreign ministers from the Group of Seven (G7) nations said on Monday they supported the ceasefire between Israel and Iran and urged for negotiations to resume for a deal to address Iran's nuclear programme, according to a joint statement.
Since April, Iran and the US have held talks aimed at finding a new diplomatic solution regarding Iran's nuclear programme. Tehran said its programme is peaceful and Israel and its allies said they want to ensure Iran cannot build a nuclear weapon.
"We call for the resumption of negotiations, resulting in a comprehensive, verifiable and durable agreement that addresses Iran's nuclear programme," the G7 foreign ministers said.
Last week US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire between US ally Israel and its regional rival Iran to halt a war that began on June 13 when Israel attacked Iran. The Israel-Iran conflict had raised alarms in a region on edge since the start of Israel's war in Gaza in October 2023.
Before the ceasefire was announced, Washington struck Iran's nuclear sites and Iran targeted a US base in Qatar in retaliation.
The G7 foreign ministers said they urged "all parties to avoid actions that could further destabilise the region".
US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff has said talks between Washington and Tehran were "promising" and Washington was hopeful for a long-term peace deal.
The G7 top diplomats denounced threats against the head of the UN nuclear watchdog on Monday after a hardline Iranian newspaper said International Atomic Energy Agency boss Rafael Grossi should be tried and executed as an Israeli agent.
On June 12, the UN nuclear watchdog's 35-nation board of governors declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in almost 20 years.
Israel is the only Middle Eastern country believed to have nuclear weapons and said its war against Iran aimed to prevent Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapons.
Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, while Israel is not. The UN nuclear watchdog, which carries out inspections in Iran, said it has "no credible indication" of an active, coordinated weapons programme in Iran.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
Over 14 million people could die from US foreign aid cuts: study
The study in the prestigious Lancet journal was published as world and business leaders gather for a UN conference in Spain this week hoping to bolster the reeling aid sector. Image: File More than 14 million of the world's most vulnerable people, a third of them small children, could die because of the Trump administration's dismantling of US foreign aid, research projected on Tuesday. The study in the prestigious Lancet journal was published as world and business leaders gather for a UN conference in Spain this week hoping to bolster the reeling aid sector. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) had provided over 40 percent of global humanitarian funding until Donald Trump returned to the White House in January. Two weeks later, Trump's then-close advisor -- and world's richest man -- Elon Musk boasted of having put the agency "through the woodchipper". The funding cuts "risk abruptly halting -- and even reversing -- two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations," warned study co-author Davide Rasella, a researcher at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal). "For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," he said in a statement. Looking back over data from 133 nations, the international team of researchers estimated that USAID funding had prevented 91 million deaths in developing countries between 2001 and 2021. They also used modelling to project how funding being slashed by 83 percent -- the figure announced by the US government earlier this year -- could affect death rates. The cuts could lead to more than 14 million avoidable deaths by 2030, the projections found. That number included over 4.5 million children under the age of five -- or around 700,000 child deaths a year. For comparison, around 10 million soldiers are estimated to have been killed during World War I. Programmes supported by USAID were linked to a 15-percent decrease in deaths from all causes, the researchers found. For children under five, the drop in deaths was twice as steep at 32 percent. USAID funding was found to be particularly effective at staving off preventable deaths from disease. There were 65 percent fewer deaths from HIV/AIDS in countries receiving a high level of support compared to those with little or no USAID funding, the study found. Deaths from malaria and neglected tropical diseases were similarly cut in half. 'Time to scale up' After USAID was gutted, several other major donors including Germany, the UK and France followed suit in announcing plans to slash their foreign aid budgets. These aid reductions, particularly in the European Union, could lead to "even more additional deaths in the coming years," study co-author Caterina Monti of ISGlobal said. But the grim projections for deaths were based on the current amount of pledged aid, so could rapidly come down if the situation changes, the researchers emphasised. Dozens of world leaders are meeting in the Spanish city of Seville this week for the biggest aid conference in a decade. The US, however, will not attend. "Now is the time to scale up, not scale back," Rasella said. Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 percent of all US federal spending. "US citizens contribute about 17 cents per day to USAID, around $64 per year," said study co-author James Macinko of the University of California, Los Angeles. "I think most people would support continued USAID funding if they knew just how effective such a small contribution can be to saving millions of lives." AFP
Daily Maverick
an hour ago
- Daily Maverick
Israel, Iran and the US — why 2025 is a turning point for the international order
The year 2025 will stand out as the point at which the post-1945 world order was smashed by these two countries as they wilfully ignored rules that had been respected and observed for decades. Israel's large-scale attack against Iran on 13 June, which it conducted without UN Security Council approval, prompted retaliation from Tehran. Both sides traded strikes, with more than 400 Iranians and 14 Israelis killed by 24 June. The escalation has broader consequences. It further isolates institutions like the UN, International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Court of Justice (ICJ), which have found themselves increasingly sidelined as Israel's assault on Gaza has progressed. These bodies now appear toothless. The world appears to be facing an unprecedented upending of the post-1945 international legal order. Israel's government is operating with a level of impunity rarely seen before. At the same time, US President Donald Trump and his administration are actively undermining the global institutions designed to enforce international law. Other global powers, including Russia and China, are taking this opportunity to move beyond the Western rules-based system. The combination of a powerful state acting with impunity and a superpower disabling the mechanisms of accountability marks a global inflection point. It is a moment so stark that we may have to rethink what we thought we knew about the conduct of international relations and the management of conflict, both for the Palestinian struggle and the international system of justice built after World War 2. The Israeli government is, in addition to its pre-emptive air campaign against Iran's nuclear programme, advancing with impunity on three other fronts. It is tightening its hold on Gaza and the prospect of a lasting occupation is increasingly possible. Senior Israeli ministers have also outlined plans for the annexation of large parts of the occupied West Bank through settlement expansion. This is now proceeding unchecked. Israel confirmed plans in May to create 22 new settlements there, including the legalisation of those already built without government authorisation. This is being accompanied by provocative legislation such as a bill that would hike taxes on foreign-funded NGOs. The Israeli government is also continuing its attempts to reduce the independence of the judiciary. Hardline elements of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's cabinet say they will collapse the government if he dares to change course. The ICJ moved with urgency in response to Israel's actions in Gaza and the West Bank. In January 2024, it found evidence that Palestinians in Gaza were at risk of genocide and ordered Israel to implement provisional measures to prevent further harm. Then, in May 2024, as Israeli forces pressed an offensive, the ICJ issued another ruling ordering Israel to halt its military operation in the southern Gazan city of Rafah immediately. It also called on Israel to allow unimpeded humanitarian access to the Gaza Strip. The court went further in July 2024, issuing a landmark advisory opinion declaring Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory illegal. The ICC took bold action by issuing arrest warrants for Netanyahu, his former defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the leaders of Hamas. Disregarding international law These dramatic attempts to enforce international law failed. Israel only agreed to a temporary ceasefire in Gaza in January when Washington insisted, which demonstrated that the US remains the only possible brake on Israel. But the second Trump administration is even more transactional than the first. It prioritises trade deals and strategic alliances – particularly with the Gulf states – over the enforcement of international legal norms. In January, Trump issued an executive order authorising sanctions on the ICC over the court's 'illegitimate' actions against the US and its 'close ally Israel'. These sanctions came into effect a little over a week before Israel launched its strikes on Iran. Trump then withdrew the US from the UN Human Rights Council and extended a funding ban on the UN's relief agency for Palestinian refugees. A further executive order issued in February directed the State Department to withhold portions of the US contribution to the UN's regular budget. Trump also launched a 180-day review of all US-funded international organisations, foreshadowing further exits or funding cuts across the multilateral system. In May, the US and Israel then advanced a new aid mechanism for Gaza run by private security contractors operating in Israeli-approved 'safe zones'. Aid is conditional on population displacement, and civilians in northern Gaza have been denied access unless they relocate. This approach, which has been condemned by humanitarian organisations, contravenes established humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality. Turning point In effect, one pillar of the post-war order is attacking another. The leading founder of the UN is now undermining the institution from within, wielding its Security Council veto to block action while simultaneously starving the organisation of resources. The US vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza on 4 June. The implications of this turning point in the international order are already playing out across the globe. Russia is continuing its war of aggression in Ukraine despite rulings from the ICJ and extensive evidence of war crimes. It knows that enforcement mechanisms are weak and fragmented and the alternative Trumpian deal-making can be played out indefinitely. And China is escalating military pressure on Taiwan. It is employing grey-zone tactics, doing everything possible in provocation and disinformation below the threshold of open warfare, undeterred by legal commitments to a peaceful resolution. These cases are symptoms of a collapse in the credibility of the post-1945 legal order. Israel's policy in Gaza and its attack on Iran are not exceptions, but the acceleration. They are confirmation to other states that law no longer constrains power, institutions can be bypassed and humanitarian principles can be used for political ends. DM Brian Brivati is a visiting professor of contemporary history and human rights at Kingston University in London, England.
TimesLIVE
an hour ago
- TimesLIVE
Government seeks extension of Trump tariff deadline to pursue trade deal
South Africa has asked for more time to negotiate a trade deal with US President Donald Trump's administration before his higher tariff regime goes into effect on July 9, the trade, industry and competition department said on Tuesday. Trump imposed a 31% tax on US imports from South Africa in April as part of his global 'reciprocal' tariffs, before pausing their application for 90 days to allow negotiations. South Africa aims to secure a trade deal that would exempt some of its key exports from the tariffs, including cars, car parts, steel and aluminium. It has offered to buy liquefied natural gas from the US in exchange. It is also seeking a maximum tariff application of 10% as a worst-case scenario, the department said. South African officials met assistant US trade representative for Africa Connie Hamilton in Luanda last week and learnt that the US was developing a template to use for its engagements with African countries. 'In view of this development, African countries, including South Africa, have advocated for the extension of the 90-day deadline to enable countries to prepare their proposed deals in accordance with the new template,' the department said. The US trade representative's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The US is South Africa's second-largest bilateral trading partner after China. In addition to car parts and other manufactured goods, South Africa exports agricultural products to the US and about 35,000 jobs in the citrus industry could be threatened if the tariffs take effect. President Cyril Ramaphosa presented the proposed trade deal during his visit to the White House in May, when Trump confronted him with false claims of a 'genocide' against whites in South Africa. Ramaphosa later said constructive discussions had followed. 'We urge South African industry to exercise strategic patience and not take decisions in haste, and government will continue to use every avenue to engage the US government to find amicable solutions,' said trade minister Parks Tau.
