Israel warns Iranians near weapons facilities to leave
Israel's defence minister says it will target Iran's nuclear capabilities and weapons systems. (AP PHOTO) Credit: AAP
Menna Alaa El-Din, Muhammad Al Gebaly and Steven Scheer Reuters
Israel is warning Iranians living near weapons production facilities in Tehran to evacuate as the two nations continue to exchange missile attacks.
"The Israeli military will strike these sites and will continue to peel away the Iranian snake's skin in Tehran and everywhere - targeting nuclear capabilities and weapons systems," Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said in a statement on Sunday.
Israel had earlier issued an evacuation warning to Iranians residing near weapons facilities in Iran, an Israeli military spokesperson said in a post on X in Arabic and Farsi.
The spokesperson said the warning included all weapons factories and supporting facilities.
Israel launched its biggest military strike against Iran on Friday, saying its goal was to stop Iran from developing atomic weapons and to take out Iran's ballistic missile capabilities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
an hour ago
- Perth Now
Transparency boost: Reserve Bank homes in on key change
How Reserve Bank board members vote on interest rate decisions is set to become public knowledge, with the bank and the federal government positively disposed to implementing the transparency-boosting reform. The government's landmark review into the central bank's operations recommended it publish non-attributed votes in the board's post-meeting statement when it does not reach a consensus decision on monetary policy. While most of the review's 51 recommendations have already been accepted, a decision on board votes was put off until the central bank's new monetary policy board could meet and deliberate on the proposal. With two meetings under the new board's belt, Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock met with Treasurer Jim Chalmers on Wednesday to discuss the remaining changes, including signing an updated statement on the conduct of monetary policy. Dr Chalmers said the reforms were closer to completion - "and that's a very good thing". "They're all about reinforcing the Reserve Bank's independence, clarifying its mandate, modernising its structures and strengthening its accountability," he said. "I pay tribute to Governor Bullock, the bank's boards and its leadership for the reforms already in place and the constructive discussions we've been having about the rest. "A lot of progress has been made already and I'm looking forward to bedding down these final changes." Changes made to the Reserve Bank's operations have increased its transparency and communication with the public after the review found it had not always been clear or detailed enough. The review was prompted in part by previous governor Philip Lowe's forward guidance debacle. In 2021, amid great uncertainty at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr Lowe sought to reassure borrowers with comments that he did not expect the next cash rate rise to come into 2024, which the public eventually perceived to be a broken promise. Better communication was seen as a way to prevent such incidents from recurring. But publishing anonymised member votes has limited benefit when the board tends to vote unanimously most of the time. Critics say the consensus-focused board is prone to groupthink. Peter Tulip, chief economist at the Centre for Independent Studies and a former Reserve Bank researcher, said many board members could not articulate a coherent position on monetary policy, discouraging dissenting points of view. "But my strong view is that we don't want board members like that on the board. Anonymity shields them," he told AAP. Dr Tulip argued dissenting votes should be attributed to individuals to encourage the appointment of expert board members who would not rubber-stamp the governor's decision. While it was not among the review recommendations, Dr Tulip called for the Reserve Bank to publish its projections of the cash rate, which central banks, including the US Federal Reserve, do. The Reserve Bank's aversion to any forward guidance has been a "stupid over-reaction" to the embarrassment following Dr Lowe's misstep, Dr Tulip said. Presenting projections alongside a confidence interval would make the board's pronouncements less susceptible to misinterpretation. The board will consider its final decision on publishing votes when it meets on July 7-8. The board will welcome a new member at the meeting, with recently-appointed Treasury Secretary Jenny Wilkinson taking her ex-officio seat at the table in place of predecessor Stephen Kennedy. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese poached Dr Kennedy to become the nation's next top bureaucrat after the retirement of Glyn Davis as Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The treasurer will soon release a Statement of Expectations for the Reserve Bank's new governance board, which will make clear its role in overseeing the bank's culture and driving institutional change.
Perth Now
an hour ago
- Perth Now
Trump mulls adding 36 countries to US travel ban: memo
US President Donald Trump's administration is considering significantly expanding its travel restrictions by potentially banning citizens of 36 additional countries from entering the United States, according to an internal State Department cable seen by Reuters. Earlier this month, the Republican president signed a proclamation that banned the entry of citizens from 12 countries, saying the move was needed to protect the United States against "foreign terrorists" and other security threats. The directive was part of an immigration crackdown Trump launched this year at the start of his second term, which has included the deportation to El Salvador of hundreds of Venezuelans suspected of being gang members as well as efforts to deny enrolments of some foreign students from US universities and deport others. In an internal diplomatic cable signed by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the State Department outlined a dozen concerns about the countries in question and sought corrective action. "The Department has identified 36 countries of concern that might be recommended for full or partial suspension of entry if they do not meet established benchmarks and requirements within 60 days," the cable sent out over the weekend said. The cable was first reported by the Washington Post. Among the concerns the State Department raised was the lack of a competent or co-operative government by some of the countries mentioned to produce reliable identity documents, the cable said. Another was "questionable security" of that country's passport. Some countries, the cable said, were not co-operative in facilitating the removal of its citizens from the United States who were ordered to be removed. Some countries' citizens were overstaying the US visas they were being granted. Other reasons for concern were the citizens of the country were involved in acts of terrorism in the United States, or anti-Semitic and anti-US activity. The cable noted that not all of these concerns pertained to every country listed. "We are constantly re-evaluating policies to ensure the safety of Americans and that foreign nationals follow our laws," a senior State Department official said, declining to comment on specific internal deliberations and communications. "The Department of State is committed to protecting our nation and its citizens by upholding the highest standards of national security and public safety through our visa process," the official said. The countries that could face a full or a partial ban if they do not address these concerns within the next 60 days are: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cote D'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Ethiopia, Egypt, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Malawi, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, South Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Zambia and Zimbabwe. That would be a significant expansion of the ban that came into effect earlier this month. The countries previously affected were Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The entry of people from seven other countries - Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela - has also been partially restricted.
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Israel's attacks on Iran hint at a bigger goal: toppling the regime
But despite the damage inflicted by the unprecedented Israeli attack, decades of enmity towards Israel – not only among Iran's rulers but its majority-Shiite population – raises questions about the prospect for fomenting enough public support to oust an entrenched theocratic leadership in Tehran backed by loyal security forces. Loading Singh cautioned that no one knows what conditions would be required for an opposition to coalesce in Iran. Friday's assault was the first phase of what Israel said would be a prolonged operation. Experts said they expected Israel would continue to go after key Iranian nuclear infrastructure to delay Tehran's march to a nuclear bomb – even if Israel on its own does not have the capability to eliminate Iran's nuclear program. Iran says its nuclear program is for civilian purposes only. The UN nuclear watchdog concluded this week that it was in violation of its obligations under the global non-proliferation treaty. Israel's first salvoes targeted senior figures in Iran's military and scientific establishment, took out much of the country's air defence system and destroyed the above-ground enrichment plant at Iran's nuclear site. 'As a democratic country, the State of Israel believes that it is up to the people of a country to shape their national politics, and choose their government,' the Israeli embassy in Washington said. 'The future of Iran can only be determined by the Iranian people.' Netanyahu has called for a change in Iran's government, including in September. US President Donald Trump's administration, while acquiescing to Israel's strikes and helping its close ally fend off Iran's retaliatory missile barrage, has given no indication that it seeks regime change in Tehran. The White House and Iran's mission to the United Nations in New York also did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the matter. Israel has much further to go if it is to dismantle Iran's nuclear facilities, and military analysts have always said it might be impossible to totally disable the well-fortified sites dotted around Iran. The Israeli government has also cautioned that Iran's nuclear program could not be entirely destroyed by means of a military campaign. 'There's no way to destroy a nuclear program by military means,' Israel's National Security Adviser, Tzachi Hanegbi, told the country's Channel 13 TV. The military campaign could, however, create conditions for a deal with the US that would thwart the nuclear program. Analysts also remain sceptical that Israel will have the munitions needed to obliterate Iran's nuclear project on its own. Loading 'Israel probably cannot take out completely the nuclear project on its own without the American participation,' said Sima Shine, a former chief Mossad analyst and now a researcher at Israel's Institute for National Security Studies. While setting back Tehran's nuclear program would have value for Israel, the hope for regime change could explain why Israel went after so many senior military figures, potentially throwing the Iranian security establishment into confusion and chaos. 'These people were very vital, very knowledgeable, many years in their jobs, and they were a very important component of the stability of the regime, specifically the security stability of the regime,' Shine said. 'In the ideal world, Israel would prefer to see a change of regime, no question about that.' Loading But such a change would come with risk, said Jonathan Panikoff, a former US deputy national intelligence officer for the Middle East who is now at the Atlantic Council. If Israel succeeds in removing Iran's leadership, there is no guarantee the successor that emerges would not be even more hardline in pursuit of conflict with Israel. 'For years, many in Israel have insisted that regime change in Iran would prompt a new and better day – that nothing could be worse than the current theocratic regime,' Panikoff said. 'But history tells us it can always be worse.' Reuters
