Iran blames the US for Israeli airstrikes amid escalating tensions
Iran facing Israeli airstrike over the allegation of developing nuclear weapons.
Image: Independent Media Archives
The Iranian government has blamed the United States of America for the Israeli airstrike on its country this week.
In a statement released on Friday through its embassy in Pretoria, Iran's Foreign Affairs Ministry said the Zionist regime's aggressive actions against Iran could not have happened without US coordination and approval.
'Consequently, the US government, as the primary patron of this regime, will also bear responsibility for the dangerous repercussions of the Zionist regime's reckless actions,' read the statement.
In February, US President Donald Trump signed a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM), calling on Iran to be stopped from engaging in any nuclear programmes.
He said Iran should be denied a nuclear weapon and intercontinental ballistic missiles, and that its terrorist network should be neutralised and its aggressive development of missiles, as well as other asymmetric and conventional weapons capabilities, be countered.
The memorandum read: 'In 2020, President Trump declared that as long as (he is) President of the United States, Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.'
International media reported on Friday that the Israeli military attacked Iran's nuclear and military sites, killing senior military officials and nuclear scientists.
According to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), among those who were killed in the early hours of Friday in Tehran, Iran's capital, was Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Major-General Hossein Salami.
In another statement released on Thursday, the Iranian government said the country only has a 'peaceful nature of its nuclear programme'.
It said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)'s Board of Governors had been misled by France, the UK, Germany, and the US to cast doubt about the nature of its nuclear programme.
The Ministry stated that Israeli attacks on Iran constitute a violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations (UN) Charter.
'In accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter, Iran reserves the legitimate and legal right to respond to this aggression. The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will not hesitate to defend Iran's sovereignty with full strength and in the manner they deem appropriate,' read Friday's statement.
The Ministry also called on the UN to carry out its mandate of preventing aggression, breach of peace, and threats to peace.
'The Islamic Republic of Iran underscores the Security Council's obligation to take immediate action against this violation of international peace and security, stemming from the Zionist regime's blatant aggression.
'We call upon the President and members of the Council to act without delay in this regard,' the Ministry said.
FDD said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the airstrike on Iran through the operation 'Rising Lion' as aimed at rolling back the Iranian threat to Israel's survival.
FDD said Netanyahu said the strikes will 'continue for as many days as it takes to remove this threat'.
It said Netanyahu stressed his gratitude to Trump 'for his steadfast stance', against Iran's nuclear weapons.
In defence of Israeli action, FDD Chief Executive Officer Mark Dubowitz said the Israeli inaction would have had a far greater cost.
'Israel did what had to be done: defend itself, the West, and ultimately the Iranian people from the genocidal ambitions of the mullahs.
'Nuclear talks were heading to collapse under Tehran's defiance, and sanctions alone couldn't stop Iran's race toward multiple nuclear weapons,' said Dubowitz.
However, South Africa's former member of the IAEA Board of Directors, Dr Abdul Samad Minty, told the International Union of Scientists publication early this year that the IAEA had previously found no evidence that Iran was developing nuclear weapons.
'When I was on the board of the IAEA, I was able to expose in many cases that Iran was complying with the peaceful requirements of the IAEA, but the Western countries continued to support Israel's case that Iran was developing nuclear weapons.
'There was no evidence at that time that Iran was developing nuclear weapons, but they thought that all nuclear cooperation with Iran should be stopped, because it had the potential in the end to develop nuclear weapons,' the publication quoted Minty.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
an hour ago
- eNCA
Marines deployed in LA ahead of mass anti-Trump protests
USA - Armed Marines arrived on the streets of Los Angeles Friday, part of a large deployment of troops ordered by Donald Trump that has raised the stakes between the US president and opponents claiming growing authoritarianism. Men in fatigues and carrying semiautomatic rifles were seen around a federal building, where passersby questioned why they were in an area 11 miles (18 kilometers) from the protests against immigration raids. "Taxpayer dollars could be used for other things," RonNell Weaver told AFP. "Is this really necessary?" AFP witnessed Marines temporarily detaining one man at the federal building before they handed him over to law enforcement. The US military would not say why he was detained, despite multiple requests, but the incident appeared to be a minor - albeit extremely rare - example of federal troops detaining a US civilian. Seven hundred Marines - normally used as crack troops in foreign conflicts - along with 4,000 National Guard soldiers are tasked with protecting federal buildings, while local police handle protests over Trump's sweeps for undocumented migrants. An intense legal battle is underway over Trump's authority to deploy troops on US soil as the country braces for widespread protests Saturday, when the Republican will be overseeing a rare large-scale military parade in Washington. The parade celebrates the 250th anniversary of the US Army but also coincides with Trump's 79th birthday, and will be the first time tanks and other heavy weaponry have rolled through the capital city in three decades. In response, a "No Kings" movement has sprung up promising to stage protests in more than 2,000 places across the country, including a large demonstration expected in Los Angeles, which organizers say will feature a "20-foot-tall balloon of Trump wearing a diaper." "Unprecedented" crowds could attend, Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell told reporters Friday. Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert Luna, whose deputies are part of a large law enforcement response in the enormous city, urged protesters to behave properly. "It's a good cause, but we do not want violent agitators out there destroying property or committing acts of violence," he said. - California v Trump - In a show of political force, Trump overrode the objections of Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom to deploy California's National Guard. The president has repeatedly exaggerated the scale of violence, claiming that without troops, Los Angeles would be "burning to the ground right now." On Thursday, District Judge Charles Breyer ruled Trump's actions were "illegal" and ordered that he return control of the guard to Newsom. Breyer said the LA unrest fell "far short" of the "rebellion" Trump had described. However, a higher court quickly paused the order pending an appeal hearing with the Trump administration next Tuesday. The Department of Justice slammed Breyer's ruling as "an extraordinary intrusion on the President's constitutional authority as Commander in Chief." The dispute mirrors multiple other tussles over Trump's attempts to expand the limits of presidential power -- but is the first to involve troops. - Hamlet - Many in Los Angeles are angry about immigration raids carried out as part of Trump's ambition to deport vast numbers of undocumented migrants from the country. About 100 mostly good-natured protesters gathered Friday evening outside the federal detention center in Los Angeles that has been at the heart of the rallies, ahead of a nightly curfew placed on the downtown area by Mayor Karen Bass. In a sign of how contained the demonstrations have been, however, those attending a performance of "Hamlet" - Shakespeare's play about a mad prince - and other shows at nearby venues were exempt from the curfew. Outrage at Trump's raids and the use of masked, armed immigration agents backed by uniformed soldiers have also sparked protests in other cities, including San Francisco, New York, Chicago and San Antonio, Texas. Tensions hiked further Thursday when California Senator Alex Padilla, a Democrat, was handcuffed and forcibly removed from a news conference by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
IOL News
6 hours ago
- IOL News
Trump's white South African resettlement plan and the global colour line
The narrative that white South Africans are victims of racial persecution has long circulated in far-right echo chambers, sustained by groups like AfriForum and amplified by conservative US media. Yet no credible human rights body has substantiated claims of systematic violence or oppression based on race in South Africa. Image: File/X THE arrival of over 3 000 white South Africans in the United States under President Donald Trump's fast-tracked refugee resettlement programme is a racial spectacle of historic proportions. Framed by Trump as a rescue mission from 'racial discrimination' and even 'genocide' in post-apartheid South Africa, the scheme repackages whiteness as victimhood while reasserting racial hierarchies through the veneer of humanitarian concern. Cheryl Harris's seminal concept of 'whiteness as property' is especially instructive here. This programme protects not the displaced, but the entitlements embedded in whiteness — land, social status, and the right to global mobility. These arrivals, facilitated under a controversial executive order, mark the first time in US history that white South Africans have been accepted en masse as refugees. The move has drawn intense scrutiny, with South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola dismissing the claims as 'unfounded and inflammatory'. He clarified that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had no involvement and had consistently found no basis for refugee status for white South Africans. 'The resettlement of South Africans under the guise of being 'refugees' is a political project to delegitimise our democracy,' Lamola asserted. The narrative that white South Africans — particularly Afrikaner farmers — are victims of racial persecution has long circulated in far-right echo chambers, sustained by groups like AfriForum and amplified by conservative US media. Yet no credible human rights body has substantiated claims of systematic violence or oppression based on race in South Africa. In February 2025, Trump signed Executive Order 14152: Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa, suspending non-essential aid. He cited South Africa's land reform policies and its support for Palestine at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as evidence of 'anti-white discrimination'. His language echoed apartheid-era rhetoric, framing land expropriation without compensation — a constitutional measure designed to redress historical injustice — as proof of racial targeting. This is not a story about humanitarian rescue. It is about the repackaging of privilege as persecution. Trump's administration, by reclassifying specific 'South African communities' for humanitarian parole, has revived the settler-native divide. As Mahmood Mamdani has noted, this manoeuvre casts descendants of apartheid's beneficiaries as 'refugees' and South Africa itself as the oppressor. Achille Mbembe's critique of global humanism is relevant here: the programme renders Black suffering invisible while privileging whiteness as a passport to refuge and legitimacy. Consequently, while Black refugees languish in camps, whiteness is deemed inherently worthy of protection, effectively enacting a form of apartheid within the asylum system itself. The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as someone fleeing a 'well-founded fear of persecution.' Neither the Convention nor US law has ever interpreted this to include the loss of economic dominance or historical privilege. Fleeing land redistribution or reduced social status does not amount to persecution, especially when these changes are legally enacted by a democratic society seeking to correct historical wrongs. The parallels to earlier racial engineering are striking. In 1932, the US-sponsored *Carnegie Poor White Study* analysed the 'problem' of poor whites in South Africa. The initiative was not rooted in concern for poverty but in preserving white supremacy. The report warned that poor whites threatened the racial order and recommended state interventions to uplift them, while black South Africans were systematically excluded from similar support. This laid the foundation for apartheid's white welfare state and established a pattern of American intervention when white South Africans faced hardship, real or perceived. Trump's resettlement scheme is the 21st-century iteration of this pattern. White South Africans are framed not as beneficiaries of a violent racial order, but as victims of transformation, worthy of rescue. South Africa's Constitutional Court recently affirmed that acquiring foreign nationality — whether through refugee resettlement or otherwise — does not automatically strip someone of South African citizenship. In a landmark ruling, the Court struck down a section of the Citizenship Act that had quietly revoked citizenship without due process, calling the move irrational and unconstitutional. However, the case of these white South Africans is unique. Their refugee claims are based on false premises and a political agenda. South Africa may therefore have grounds to argue that accepting the US offer constitutes a voluntary renunciation of citizenship. The Constitutional Court's ruling on dual citizenship might not protect them in this politically charged context. Nowhere is the hypocrisy more glaring than in the American South. In the Mississippi Delta, six Black farmworkers filed a federal lawsuit in 2021 after being replaced by white South Africans brought in under the H-2A visa programme. The plaintiffs, many descended from enslaved people who built Southern agriculture, earned just $7.25 per hour — the federal minimum wage — while their white South African replacements were paid over $11. The lawsuit alleges that these Black workers were forced to train their replacements, who were then housed in better accommodations and elevated in status simply because they were white. Between 2011 and 2020, the number of South Africans on H-2A visas increased by 441%, making them the second-largest national group in the programme. The majority are white. The message is clear: in the racial calculus of US capitalism, white foreign labour is worth more than black American lives. Mexican seasonal workers, once the backbone of US agriculture, are also increasingly excluded — both by border walls and by labour policies that privilege whiteness over need. The result is a reshuffling of the global racial order, disguised as economic necessity. Trump's South African refugee programme is less about humanitarian concern and more about reaffirming a hierarchy of global suffering, where privilege continues to mask itself as victimhood. What we are witnessing is the reinforcement of a global colour line — one where whiteness retains its claim to mobility, safety, and opportunity, while blackness and brownness are rendered threats to be contained. The implications are profound: Refugee systems that prioritise whiteness over need. Economic visas favour white foreign farmers over Black citizens. Historical privilege is purposely mistaken for victimhood. This is not humanitarianism. It is neo-colonialism in motion. As the world watches Trump engineer the next stage of global apartheid, we must ask: What kind of refugee is it when only the privileged are welcome? When does skin colour ration citizenship, safety, and opportunity? If the notion of 'refuge' is to mean anything, it must centre justice, not historical comfort. Siyayibanga le economy! * Siyabonga Hadebe is an independent commentator based in Geneva on socio-economic, political and global matters. ** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL.
Daily Maverick
8 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Watch – A look at Israel's attack on Iran and Trump's authoritarian turn
In this episode of The Readiness Report, Redi Tlhabi and veteran journalist Phillip van Niekerk, delve into the escalating tensions in the Middle East, following a significant Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear and military sites. They discuss Israel's motives, potential repercussions, and the United States' ambiguous role in these developments. The discussion also touches on domestic issues in the US, including Trump's controversial military parade on his birthday, the crackdown on immigrants in California, and increasing authoritarian tendencies under his administration.
