Iran Israel war: Will Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Arab league, Gulf countries now join US, Israel against Tehran?
Live Events
FAQs
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
Qatar, the United Arab Emirates or UAE, and Saudi Arabia have condemned Iran's attack on Al-Udeid US military air base in Qatar. While, Arab league called Iran's missile attack 'unacceptable', a Gulf official warned that Iran's actions play into the hands of Israel, as per reports. The US military as of early this month about 40,000 servicemembers in the Middle East, many of them on ships at sea as part of a bolstering of forces as tensions rose again in the region, according to the Washington-based Council on Foreign Relations research and policy center. The US has military sites spread across the region, including in Qatar, Bahrain, Iraq, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Syria and the United Arab Emirates.Qatar Foreign Ministry condemned the attack on Al Udeid base by Iran's Revolutionary Guards calling it 'a flagrant violation of Qatar's sovereignty, its airspace, and international law.'The ministry added that the continuation of such military activities endangers security and stability of the region. Qatar's Defense Ministry says Iranian strikes on the gas-rich nation did not inflict any casualties. The ministry added that Qatari forces took part in intercepting Iranian missiles that were directed toward the Al Udeid base that houses U.S. troops.Qatar said it would push for diplomatic efforts for 'a serious return to the negotiating table and dialogue.'The United Arab Emirates on Monday condemned "in the strongest terms" Iran's attack against a U.S. military base in Qatar. The UAE's Foreign Ministry said it was a violation of international law and Qatar's sovereignty and airspace.Saudi Arabia on Monday condemned 'in the strongest terms' Iran's attack against a US military base in Qatar. The kingdom's Foreign Ministry described the action as a violation of international law and said it affirmed its 'full support' for Qatar.In recent years, Gulf countries Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have restored once-frayed ties with Iran.The Arab League chief has expressed his "complete solidarity" with Qatar following Iran's missile attack, calling it "unacceptable". Ahmed Abou-Gheit reiterated his warning about the risks the military escalation poses to the region. "We remain hopeful that the current confrontation will be contained as soon as possible," he wrote on X.The Iranian attack on Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar will impact relationship-building efforts that have been underway between the Arab Gulf states and Iran, a Gulf official told Reuters on Monday. "Iran's actions play into the hands of Israel, which wants to sow discord and derail recent improvements in relations between Iran and the Gulf countries," the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.A1. Iran launched missile attack on Al-Udeid US military air base in Qatar.A2. President of USA is Donald Trump.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
14 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump must offer Iran more than bombs, rage and humiliation
DONALD TRUMP was elected to keep America out of foreign wars. But on June 22nd American forces joined Israel's campaign against Iran, striking three nuclear sites. The president's task now is to press Iran's leaders into avoiding a ruinous regional escalation and, as a complement to that, to persuade them to abandon any thought of trying to get a nuclear weapon. Neither will be easy. America's assault, early on Sunday morning local time, involved waves of B-2 bombers repeatedly attacking facilities at Fordow and Natanz. Submarine-launched cruise missiles also struck Isfahan. Mr Trump hailed the success of the mission, saying that Iran's programme had been 'completely and utterly obliterated'. He also warned Iran not to retaliate. The bombing raid appears to have done serious damage to the three sites, but the president cannot be sure how much—not even Iran will have yet had time to assess its full extent. He is certainly right to be worried about Iranian retaliation. That risk explains why The Economist argued that rushing in was the wrong choice for America. We feared that the tradeoffs were, on net, negative: bombing would set back Iran's programme by an uncertain amount, but Iran, its proxies or terrorist cells could go on to kill American troops and civilians, terrorise the Gulf states and send energy prices soaring by, say, making the Strait of Hormuz too dangerous for tankers. Now that Mr Trump has rushed in, he must minimise the chances that the region spirals out of control. Fortunately, the strike itself appears designed to do just that. In the past nine days Israel has attacked a range of targets that are political, military and economic, as well as nuclear. It has also suggested that it might seek to trigger regime change. America, by contrast, focused exclusively on nuclear sites, some of which are thought to be beyond the reach of Israel's air force. Mr Trump has made clear that he is not attempting to overturn the regime—at least for as long as Iran shows restraint. Mr Trump should urgently turn to diplomacy. In his address he declared that 'now is the time for peace'. If he means what he says, he should immediately offer Iran an alternative that leads away from launching retaliatory missile strikes at American bases and Arab states. That means following up on the call by Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defence, to get Iran to return to talks about its programme. These would be more likely to get under way if, while insisting that Iran give up its stocks of enriched uranium and submit to intrusive international inspections, Mr Trump was open to the principle that Iran can have some enrichment capacity, probably as part of a regional consortium that operates outside the country. If Mr Trump fails to seize the moment, Iran will be more likely to redouble its efforts to become a nuclear-weapons power, in an even more clandestine fashion. A first, unwelcome step would be for it to say that it was leaving the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This would signal that the effect of American and Israeli bombing was to inflame its nuclear ambitions. Quitting the NPT would also put future efforts beyond the scrutiny of inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Nobody knows whether the regime has managed to stash enriched uranium and key components before America and Israel attacked. After the damage from the attacks, the IAEA will never be able to account for Iran's stocks. If Iran restarts its programme, progress towards a bomb could span several years, or it could be rapid. Either way, America will face the prospect of repeatedly having to help Israel strike it, or—as Sunday's mission suggests—doing the job itself. One motive for Iran to punish America today would be to complicate such future operations by showing that they carry a cost. The immediate offer of talks could help reduce any Iranian retaliation to face-saving strikes. If so, Mr Trump should ignore them and press Iran to come to the table. And lastly, Mr Trump should launch a drive to shift the Middle East out of a pattern of continual war. With this bombing, he has badly shaken his Arab allies. After his visit to the Gulf in May, they came to believe that he would restrain Israel while he continued to negotiate. The prospect of repeated attacks on Iran by Israel supported by America is a grave threat to their vision of a region that finds peace through prosperity. Mr Trump should attempt to rebuild trust using his new influence over Israel. Having helped its prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, by bombing Fordow, Mr Trump now enjoys unprecedented leverage over him. He should apply this not just to end the attacks of the Israeli air force on Iran—where it is anyway running out of nuclear targets—but also to get it to immediately end the war in Gaza, where it has reduced Hamas to ashes at the cost of tens of thousands of Palestinian lives. There has never been a more propitious moment for a comprehensive peace plan, nor a more urgent one—including for the Palestinians. In the past 20 months Israel has devastated Iran's malign control of a crescent of militias and client regimes in the region. Now it has weakened the other pillar of its defiance of America and the West: its nuclear programme. Iran was always an obstacle to the 'prosperity agenda' of the Gulf states. Now is a good time to discover if that has changed. Even if Mr Trump offers all this, Iran could nonetheless prefer to cause mayhem. Its leaders have just been humiliated. They were already unpopular at home, and have now left their people open to attack. The regime may calculate that, if it does not strike back, the coming months could bring a palace coup or a challenge from the streets. That would put America in a quandary. If Iran killed a lot of Americans Mr Trump would be forced to respond. His war aims would shift to requiring Iran to stop attacking, or even to demanding regime change. And yet, using air power alone, even America would struggle to impose either of those. An operation with the welcome aim of stopping nuclear proliferation could thereby end up accelerating it. How much better for Mr Trump, after a dazzling display of American power, to pour all his efforts into seeking diplomacy without delay. Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence.
New Indian Express
14 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Trump says Iran and Israel have agreed to a phased-in ceasefire over next 24 hours
Trump's announcement comes just before he leaves Tuesday for a NATO summit in the Netherlands, where he will likely make the case that his mix of aggression and diplomacy has succeeded. Never shy to suggest he deserves the Nobel Peace Price, Trump went so far as to give the conflict between Israel and Iran the name of the '12 day war,' a title that seemed to reference the 1967 'Six Day War' in which Israel fought a group of Arab countries including Egypt, Jordan and Syria. As Trump described it, the ceasefire would start with Iran and then be joined by Israel 12 hours later, with the president writing that the respective sides would 'remain PEACEFUL and RESPECTFUL.' The phased-in ceasefire was set to begin at roughly midnight Washington time and culminate within 24 hours. 'This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn't, and never will!' Trump said. The exact terms of the ceasefire other than the timeline provided by the Trump remained to be seen. On Sunday, the Trump administration had insisted that Iran abandon its program to enrich uranium for possible use in nuclear weapons as a condition of any lasting peace. While the bombings of the Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan facilities were a powerful show of force, it remained uncertain just how much nuclear material Iran still possessed and what its ambitions would be going forward.
Hans India
14 minutes ago
- Hans India
No basis for aggression
Moscow: Russian President Vladimir Putin met Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi in Moscow amid the ongoing conflict between Tehran and Tel Aviv. Putin, reiterating Russia's stand on the attack on Iran, said Iran has been attacked without pretext. Putin said the Iranian people will decide to change the regime, not any other country as the US repeatedly asked Iran to surrender. Putin also lashed out at the US and said Russia deeply regrets and condemns the US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. He also said that Russia is ready to help the Iranian people. "Dear Minister, I am very glad to see you. You are visiting Russia at a difficult time, at a time of sharp aggravation of the situation in the region and around your country," Putin said. Russia has extended support to Iran and openly condemned US strikes on its nuclear sites. Speaking on the same, Putin reiterated that there is no justification for the "aggression provoked against Iran". "Our position on the current events is well known. It is clearly stated, articulated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on behalf of Russia and, you know, the opposition that we have taken in the Security Council of the United Nations. The aggression provoked against Iran has absolutely no basis and no justification. We have long-standing good, reliable relations with Iran. We, for our part, are making efforts to provide assistance to the Iranian people," Putin added. The Iranian Minister thanked Russia for its stand in condemning the assault. "We appreciate Russia's stance in condemning this assault. The attack carried out by the United States is, first and foremost, an attack on the UN Charter, as it is entirely in violation of it," he said. "It is an attack on international law, an attack on legal norms and frameworks, and most importantly, an attack on the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the non-proliferation regime as a whole,' he added.
