France, UK and Germany Would Restore UN Sanctions on Iran Next Month without Progress on a Deal
The three countries' ambassadors to the United Nations met Tuesday at Germany's UN Mission to discuss a possible Iranian deal and reimposing the sanctions. The matter also came up in a phone call Monday between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the foreign ministers of the three countries, according to two US officials.
The State Department said after the call that the four had spoken about 'ensuring Iran does not develop or obtain a nuclear weapon.'
The officials and diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.
The UK, France and Germany are part of an agreement reached with Iran in 2015 to rein in its nuclear program, from which President Donald Trump withdrew the US during his first term, insisting it wasn't tough enough.
Under the accord that lifted economic penalties on Iran in exchange for restrictions and monitoring of its nuclear program, a so-called 'snapback' provision allows one of the Western parties to reimpose UN sanctions if Tehran does not comply with its requirements.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot told reporters in Brussels Tuesday that the three European countries would be justified in reapplying sanctions.
'Without a firm, tangible, and verifiable commitment from Iran, we will do so by the end of August at the latest,' Barrot said, according to Reuters. One of the diplomats confirmed his comments to The Associated Press.
The diplomats did not provide details of the deal being sought. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in recent days that Tehran would accept a resumption of nuclear talks with the US if there were assurances of no more attacks, following Israeli and US strikes on its nuclear facilities.
He said there should be 'a firm guarantee that such actions will not be repeated, stressing that 'the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities has made it more difficult and complicated to achieve a solution."
The United States and Iran held several rounds of negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program before the Israeli strikes began in June. Trump and his Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, said last week that talks would happen soon, but nothing has yet been scheduled.
Araghchi, whose country insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, said in a July 2 CBS interview that 'the doors of diplomacy will never slam shut.'
Iran's UN Mission had no comment Tuesday on the threat of renewed sanctions if there is no deal.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said last week that the US airstrikes so badly damaged his country's nuclear facilities that Iranian authorities still have not been able to access them to survey the destruction. Iran has suspended cooperation with the IAEA.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Why the Nile dam crisis demands action and accountability
The dispute over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam has become one of the world's major water conflicts. In recent weeks, it has gained renewed international attention, particularly after remarks from US President Donald Trump and a declaration by Ethiopia. As Ethiopia celebrates the 'completion' of the dam, Egypt views the announcement as a direct challenge to international law and a threat to the foundation of its national security. With its inauguration set for September, the question remains: will diplomacy prevail or will unilateralism triumph over cooperation? The GERD is Africa's largest hydroelectric power project, constructed by Ethiopia on the Blue Nile, the main tributary of the Nile River. Launched in 2011, the dam is expected to generate more than 6,000 megawatts of electricity. While it promises much-needed energy for Ethiopia's population, the project has been controversial from the start. Egypt depends on the Nile for 97 percent of its freshwater needs. For more than a century, its water rights were guaranteed by treaties and its downstream position. But the GERD, located just a few kilometers from the Sudanese border, threatens to disrupt that balance. In Cairo, the concern is existential. Despite years of negotiations and a 2015 Declaration of Principles signed by Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan, Addis Ababa has pressed ahead with construction and the phased filling of the dam's reservoir without a binding legal agreement on its operation. Cairo has repeatedly warned that such actions violate international norms governing transboundary watercourses. Ethiopia, however, has largely ignored these warnings, framing the GERD as a sovereign project. Trump this month broke the American diplomatic silence that had defined the Biden years, issuing frank statements about the dam. Speaking at a press conference, Trump described the Nile as the 'lifeline' of the Egyptian people, a description that aligns precisely with Cairo's long-standing argument. He also criticized the American role in having, as he put it, 'stupidly funded' the dam without adequately addressing its consequences. 'I do not know why they didn't solve the problem before they built the dam,' Trump said. For Egypt, these remarks were not only long overdue, but they were also a validation. President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi welcomed the comments, praising Trump's stance. Egyptian diplomats saw the US president's statements as a diplomatic turning point, bringing renewed pressure to bear on Ethiopia's unilateralism. From Ethiopia's side, the response was defensive and dismissive. Officials said the dam was funded domestically and some even portrayed Trump's comments as an insult to Ethiopia's sovereignty. But the broader reality is hard to ignore: the GERD has become a global concern and Ethiopia's dismissiveness only reinforces the perception that it is acting outside the bounds of international consensus. Days before Trump's remarks, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed announced that all construction on the GERD had been completed. He declared that the dam would be officially inaugurated in September, calling it a victory for Ethiopia and inviting neighboring countries to join in the celebration. Trump this month broke the American diplomatic silence, issuing frank statements about the dam. Dr. Abdellatif El-Menawy But in Egypt, this announcement was met with alarm. Cairo immediately condemned the move as a 'flagrant violation of international law' and an act of provocation. The Egyptian Ministry of Water Resources issued a statement calling Ethiopia's behavior 'destabilizing,' arguing that the move to operate the dam unilaterally undermines every principle of cooperation and trust in international water governance. The Ethiopian government claims that the dam will not reduce water flow downstream and that Egypt's concerns are exaggerated. But these assurances ring hollow, as experts note that the GERD's reservoir can hold 74 billion cubic meters of water, almost the entire annual flow of the Blue Nile. Egypt, already below the global water poverty line, cannot gamble on goodwill. Ethiopia has repeatedly rejected calls to sign a legally binding agreement governing how the dam is filled and managed during droughts. This refusal alone should cause alarm in the international community. What nation would accept such unilateral control over its primary source of life? Sudan, Egypt's southern neighbor and fellow downstream country, has long had an ambivalent position on the GERD. At times, it saw possible benefits, such as regulated water flow and access to cheap electricity. But in recent years, Khartoum has leaned closer to Cairo's position, especially after experiencing erratic water releases and infrastructure concerns. Today, Sudan is wracked by internal conflict and thus largely sidelined in the GERD diplomacy. However, the interim leadership has reaffirmed its opposition to any unilateral action by Ethiopia. In a meeting with El-Sisi last month, Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan stressed the need for a coordinated solution and joint safeguards. More broadly, the GERD dispute could destabilize the region. It threatens to fracture regional relations, provoke proxy conflicts and fuel instability in a region already grappling with conflict, economic crisis and foreign intervention. Under international law, the use of shared rivers is governed by two core principles: equitable and reasonable use, and the obligation not to cause significant harm. Egypt has abided by these rules and has called, again and again, for negotiations to reach a fair agreement. Ethiopia has adopted a narrow definition of sovereignty that places its national interests above regional stability. While no one denies Ethiopia's right to development, that right must be exercised within a framework of shared responsibility. It cannot come at the expense of 100 million Egyptians and the security of an entire region. The GERD is not a local dam. It is a regional project with continental consequences. Its success or failure will signal whether powerful upstream states can impose their will on downstream neighbors without consequence, or whether diplomacy, legality and fairness can still shape international outcomes. With the dam's inauguration looming and the US now taking a more decisive tone, the coming months will determine the future of one of the most important rivers on Earth. Trump's words, if backed by action, could revive negotiations and pressure Ethiopia to concede. But the international community must act decisively. Ethiopia's unilateralism cannot become the new norm. Letting one country control another's lifeline — without oversight, agreement or accountability — sets a dangerous precedent not just for Africa but for all transboundary river systems around the world.
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
Trump's latest demand: Washington football and Cleveland baseball teams should change names back
President Donald Trump wants Washington's football franchise and Cleveland's baseball team to revert to their former names. Trump said Sunday on his Truth Social site that 'The Washington Whatevers' should 'IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team.' 'There is a big clamoring for this. Likewise the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams with a storied past. Our great Indian people in massive numbers want this to happen. Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS GET IT DONE!!!' For all the latest headlines, follow our Google News channel online or via the app. Josh Harris, whose group bought the Commanders from former owner Dan Snyder in 2023, said earlier this year the name was here to stay. Not long after taking over, Harris quieted speculation about going back to Redskins, saying that would not happen. Guardians president of baseball operations Chris Antonetti indicated before Sunday's game against the Athletics that there weren't any plans to revisit the name change. 'We understand there are different perspectives on the decision we made a few years ago but obviously it's a decision we made. We've got the opportunity to build a brand as the Guardians over the last four years and are excited about the future that's in front of us,' he said. Both teams have had their current names since the 2022 seasons. Washington dropped Redskins after the 2019 season and was known as the Washington Football Team for two years before moving to Commanders. Cleveland announced in December 2020 it would drop Indians. It announced the switch to Guardians in July 2021. In 2018, the team phased out Chief Wahoo as its primary logo. The name changes had their share of supporters and critics as part of national discussions about institutions and teams to drop logos and names considered racist. The Guardians are the fifth name for Cleveland's baseball franchise. It joined the American League in 1901 as one of the eight charter franchises as the Blues. It switched to the Bronchos a year later and used the Naps from 1903 through 1914 before moving to the Indians in 1915. Washington started in Boston as the Redskins in 1933 before moving to the nation's capital four years later. Washington and Cleveland share another thing in common. David Blitzer is a member of Harris' ownership group with the Commanders and holds a minority stake in the Guardians.
Arab News
3 hours ago
- Arab News
America's AI energy revolution has global stakes
The next great American industrial revolution is not being shaped in think tanks; it is being built in real time. In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, once a powerhouse of steel and smoke, the US has launched a future rooted in artificial intelligence, energy innovation and industrial revival. What unfolded at the Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit last week was not just a domestic policy pivot. It was a global declaration. With more than $90 billion in private sector commitments, this initiative, spearheaded by the President Donald Trump-aligned state administration and welcomed by leaders on both sides of the aisle, sends a clear message to the world: the US intends to lead the AI era with power, precision and pragmatism. That message matters far beyond American borders. For leaders across the Middle East, this moment is worth watching, not just because of its scale but because of what it signals: the future of AI will be forged by the nations that control the energy, infrastructure and values that guide its use. AI is not an abstract Western luxury. It will soon define everything from national security and energy management to education, agriculture and healthcare. AI is already reshaping global trade, defense and diplomacy. In the Middle East, governments are investing heavily in smart cities, surveillance systems, digital health and fintech, all of which are powered by AI. But AI is not magic; it demands enormous amounts of energy to train, deploy and sustain. The summit in Pennsylvania highlighted this reality with refreshing honesty. Rather than chasing slogans or downplaying the environmental and industrial demands of AI, American leaders there did something rare: they confronted the energy challenge head-on. Their answer? Build data centers adjacent to power plants, particularly those utilizing natural gas and nuclear energy. This strategy, known as co-location, dramatically improves efficiency and allows for rapid expansion. It offers a potential model for energy-rich nations worldwide to consider as they scale up their own AI ambitions. Many global commentators will ask: is this American model just a return to fossil fuels? Is it an environmental rollback? The answer is not that simple. Washington is not abandoning its climate goals. However, it acknowledges a simple truth: wind and solar are essential, but they cannot yet deliver the reliable, large-scale power that AI systems need. For now, only natural gas and nuclear energy can provide that kind of steady and scalable supply. This is not about giving up on renewables; it is a practical step. A way to keep innovation moving forward while the clean energy future catches up. For Middle Eastern countries, especially those investing in AI through sovereign wealth funds and national tech strategies, this approach resonates. Gulf states like Saudi Arabia and the UAE are threading this same needle: investing in renewables while recognizing the transitional role of hydrocarbons and nuclear energy. What the US is doing in Pennsylvania may not just inspire them but also offer a playbook. At its core, the summit's announcements promise more than megawatts and microchips. They offer a blueprint for economic dignity. America's heartland, often overlooked by globalization, is being revitalized through high-skilled, future-focused jobs in energy, cybersecurity, engineering and data science. This is a model the world can learn from. Instead of viewing AI as a threat to traditional labor, the US is building an industrial policy that connects digital growth to human opportunity. The lesson is clear: if AI is built in a vacuum, it will deepen inequality. If it is built alongside energy, training and infrastructure, it can be a ladder. A new partnership model could emerge, in which US AI expertise is combined with Middle Eastern energy foresight. Dalia Al-Aqidi For Middle Eastern countries investing in youth-driven economies, that distinction is crucial. The AI revolution must be both technological and human. There is a bigger reason the summit matters: it proves that who builds AI, and the values behind it, matter. By leading with clean energy and private sector strength, America is doing more than securing its own future — it is offering a better option for others. The global market now has a choice: work with a democratic AI system built on trust and cooperation or risk getting locked into one built for control, not collaboration. Washington is not looking to go it alone. At the summit, Trump and others emphasized the importance of international cooperation, especially with energy producers and tech innovators abroad. That is where the Middle East comes in. The region is home to some of the world's most ambitious AI visions, from Saudi Arabia's NEOM to the UAE's national AI strategy. It is also home to some of the world's most valuable energy assets. A new partnership model could emerge, in which American AI expertise is combined with Middle Eastern energy foresight, leading to shared leadership in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. This is not science fiction. It is strategic alignment. Of course, no policy is perfect. Environmental concerns must be addressed and the digital divide must be bridged, not just within nations but between them. However, what is clear is that a vacuum of leadership is no longer an option. The world needs bold ideas and, more importantly, the courage to act on them. What happened in Pennsylvania is not a solution for every country. But it is a signal to all: the AI energy era has arrived and the stakes are global. What happens in places like Pittsburgh will shape how AI develops, how energy is used and how the world moves forward. This is not a threat, it is an opportunity for several nations to work together on a smarter, safer and more connected future. As we enter a new industrial age, the real questions are: who will lead it and what values will shape the path ahead?
