UAE President discusses regional developments with French, Italian leaders
UAE President His Highness Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan held separate calls with French President Emmanuel Macron and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to discuss developments in the Middle East following Israeli strikes on Iran.
The leaders underscored the need for maximum restraint and for intensifying efforts to de-escalate tensions and resolve disputes through diplomatic means that preserve the region's security and stability.
They also discussed strategic relations and ways to strengthen them across various fields in support of shared interests, national news agency Wam reported.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
an hour ago
- Gulf Today
Netanyahu diverts global attention from Gaza war
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu chose Friday 13th as his lucky day, the day he would at long last launch his attack on Iran. As he has not been compelled to ceasefire in his Gaza war or held accountable for Israel's repression in the occupied West Bank, Netanyahu clearly believes there are no restraints on Israel. It can do whatever it wants. He prepared 30 years for this attack by falsely playing up Iran as an existential threat to Israel and arguing that military force was the sole means for countering this danger. He ignored the fact that the Western powers have armed Israel, including with nuclear weapons, to counter any attack from any or all regional antagonists. Netanyahu got lucky. His bombs have fallen on Iran's nuclear facilities and his drones and agents have slain Iran's senior military commanders and nuclear scientists. Most of the ballistic missiles fired by Iran at Israel have been intercepted over Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. For Netanyahu, the ratio of death sand injuries has been acceptable. By striking Iran, Netanyahu has preserved his fragile coalition which last week could have collapsed due to Ultra-Orthodox anger over the failure by parliament to exempt Jewish religious students from military service. Thanks to his low approval rating, he could not expect to emerge victorious from a new election and could face jail time over court cases for corruption. He also benefits from national unity forged by a new war at a time the Israeli public has become sharply divided over the Gaza war. Most Israelis are angry over his refusal to ceasefire and secure the return of Israeli hostages before Hamas is eliminated. Having failed to secure Hamas' end in 20 months, the Israeli army is unlikely to achieve it anytime soon. Reserve military officers and soldiers have refused to join their units while the war front has been in Gaza. Resisting attacks by Iran could force them to respond positively to a call-up. Netanyahu also diverted global attention from his war on Gaza which has killed more than 55,000 Palestinians, devastated the strip, and elicited International Criminal Court warrants for his arrest for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Timing was in Netanyahu's favour as Iran's "Axis of Resistance" has been reduced by Israeli attack to the vulnerable Houthis in Yemen. Hamas has been fought to a standstill in Gaza where 2.3 million Palestinians are being starved of food and medicine by Israel's blockade. Hizbollah has been corralled in Lebanon and Iraq's pro- Iranian militias have done nothing against Israel or US forces deployed in that country or elsewhere in the region. Netanyahu has also finished off US-Iranian negotiations on reviving the 2015 agreement limiting Iran's nuclear programme in exchange for lifting sanctions. This was torpedoed by Donald Trump in 2018 under pressure from Netanyahu and pro-Israeli US legislators. US and Iranian teams had completed five rounds of talks and had been set to meet yesterday for a sixth in Oman which has been brokering the effort. Trump had been optimistic a deal could be reached. Netanyahu can also celebrate the postponement of this week's high-level UN conference sponsored by Saudi Arabia and France on reviving the two-state solution for the creation of a Palestinian state. Netanyahu and his coalition partners not only reject the two-state solution but have announced the planting of 22 new Israeli settlements among the 160 already in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which - along with Gaza - Palestinians demand for their future state. However, Netanyahu's gamble on Friday 13th could prove to be unlucky. Friday 13th is regarded in the West as an inauspicious day. While Netanyahu has made no secret of his intention of bringing down the Iranian regime, this has made the ruling clerics all the more determined to resist and fight back, risking the lives of targeted Iranian figures and civilians. Tehran could respond to Netanyahu's bombs by changing its policy on bombs. Iran has pledged not to manufacture nuclear bombs, refrained from enriching uranium to 90 per cent purity for weaponization, and allowed intrusive monitoring of nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Following Israel's attack, Tehran could very well build weapons in secret sites buried deep within mountains where they could be inaccessible to the IAEA and Israeli bombs, including US-supplied 900 kg bunker-busters. Netanyahu may have also alienated mercurial Trump, Israel's chief international supporter. In the run-up to Netanyahu's attack, Trump — who claims to be a peacemaker — said, "I'd love to avoid a conflict. " He declared the US and Iran were "fairly close" to reaching agreement in ongoing talks. He stated, "As long as I think there is an agreement I don't want [Israel] going in because i think that would blow it." However, once Netanyahu launched his attacks on Iran, erratic Trump contradicted himself by suggesting that Israeli bombs might convince Iran to conclude a deal with the US on Trump's terms. This shows how little he understands Iran. It promptly responded by firing missiles at Israel to restore a certain level of deterrence and credibility. Israel's strikes have boosted Iran's hardliners who have argued for decades in favour of nuclear bombs. Iran's government reacted to Israel's onslaught by saying, "The world now better understands Iran's insistence on the right to enrichment, nuclear technology and missile power." Tehran is aware of the fate of countries like Libya, which cancelled its nuclear programme in 2003 and Ukraine, which rid itself of stockpiles of nukes when the Soviet Union collapsed. Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was overthrown and brutally murdered while Russia invaded Ukraine. Nuclear bombs do not solve anything. While believed to act as a deterrent, they have not deterred India and Pakistan, undeclared nuclear powers, from engaging in risky clashes, most recently over 78-year flashpoint Kashmir. While Netanyahu's attack on Iran may be regarded by some Western leaders as "self-defence" rather than unprovoked aggression, a war crime, his forever Gaza war has destroyed Israel's claims of victimhood and impunity which for nearly eight decades has protected Israel from accountability.
Sharjah 24
3 hours ago
- Sharjah 24
Abdullah bin Zayed, German FM discuss regional developments
Focus on regional tensions and Israeli-Iranian escalation The discussion addressed the recent escalation following Israeli military actions targeting the Islamic Republic of Iran, with both sides emphasizing the urgency of the situation. Call for de-escalation and conflict prevention Sheikh Abdullah and Minister Wadephul highlighted the importance of intensifying international efforts to de-escalate tensions and prevent the conflict from expanding further within the region. Support for diplomacy and dialogue Both leaders underlined the need to pursue diplomatic avenues and constructive dialogue as essential tools for resolving crises, ultimately supporting the preservation of regional peace and security.
Al Etihad
4 hours ago
- Al Etihad
Israel's attack on Iran constitutes strategic shift in regional conflict: TRENDS study
16 June 2025 00:26 ABU DHABI (ALETIHAD)An analytical study by TRENDS for Research and Advisory observed that the massive Israeli attack targeting Iran on June 13, 2025, represents an unprecedented strategic shift in the nature of the conflict between the two countries and carries profound connotations as well as complex regional and international study prepared by the Strategic Studies Department at TRENDS. It considered the Israeli military operation, called 'The Rising Lion', crossed all the traditional red lines that had governed the confrontation between Tel Aviv and Tehran for more than four to the study, the Israeli attack on Iran constitutes a strategic turning point in the regional conflict and carries profound implications that extend beyond being a mere military strike. Politically, this attack reflects a clear shift in Israeli deterrence doctrine - from a policy of constructive ambiguity and limited strikes to a strategy of large-scale pre-emptive attacks targeting Iran's military and scientific infrastructure. This indicates that the Israeli strikes were not limited to physical infrastructure but also included the assassination of prominent figures in the Iranian military leadership, including Chief of Staff Mohammad Bagheri and Commander-in-Chief of the IRGC, Hussein Salami. In addition, 25 scientists were targeted, at least six of whom were confirmed study argues that these directives suggest Israel's conviction that conventional deterrence is no longer sufficient, and that it is preferable - regardless of the cost - to pursue military and nuclear success against study also indicated that the Israeli operation conveyed a clear message to the international community: Israel would not wait for diplomatic agreements concerning Iran's nuclear programme. Instead, it is prepared to act unilaterally to defend its national security, even if doing so entails the risk of escalation with Iran and its allies. While the study suggested that the escalation would remain within the framework of a limited confrontation, subject to careful calculations by both parties, it did not rule out the possibility of a broader war if diplomatic efforts failed and military operations extended to include the targeting of American interests.
