Iran's supreme leader dismisses US nuclear proposal
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says abandoning uranium enrichment was "100 per cent" against the Islamic republic's interests, rejecting a central US demand in talks to resolve a decades-long dispute over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Oman, which has mediated talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
After five rounds of talks, several hard-to-bridge issues remain, including Iran's insistence on maintaining uranium enrichment on its soil and Tehran's refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium - possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of state, said nothing about halting the talks, but said the US proposal "contradicts our nation's belief in self-reliance and the principle of 'We Can'".
"Uranium enrichment is the key to our nuclear program and the enemies have focused on the enrichment," Khamenei said during a televised speech marking the anniversary of the death of the Islamic Republic's founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
"The proposal that the Americans have presented is 100 per cent against our interests ... The rude and arrogant leaders of America repeatedly demand that we should not have a nuclear program. Who are you to decide whether Iran should have enrichment?," he added.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Reuters reported on Monday that Tehran was poised to reject the US proposal as a "non-starter" that failed to soften Washington's stance on uranium enrichment or to address Tehran's interests.
Trump has revived his "maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran since his return to the White House in January, which included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
Trump wants to curtail Tehran's potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran's clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of devastating sanctions.
During his first term, Trump ditched Tehran's 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran's economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact's limits.
Iran's clerical establishment is grappling with multiple crises - energy and water shortages, a plunging currency, losses among regional militia proxies in conflicts with Israel, and rising fears of an Israeli strike on its nuclear sites - all intensified by Trump's hardline stance.
Iran's arch-foe Israel, which sees Tehran's nuclear program as an existential threat, has repeatedly threatened to bomb the Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Tehran has vowed a harsh response.
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says abandoning uranium enrichment was "100 per cent" against the Islamic republic's interests, rejecting a central US demand in talks to resolve a decades-long dispute over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Oman, which has mediated talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
After five rounds of talks, several hard-to-bridge issues remain, including Iran's insistence on maintaining uranium enrichment on its soil and Tehran's refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium - possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of state, said nothing about halting the talks, but said the US proposal "contradicts our nation's belief in self-reliance and the principle of 'We Can'".
"Uranium enrichment is the key to our nuclear program and the enemies have focused on the enrichment," Khamenei said during a televised speech marking the anniversary of the death of the Islamic Republic's founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
"The proposal that the Americans have presented is 100 per cent against our interests ... The rude and arrogant leaders of America repeatedly demand that we should not have a nuclear program. Who are you to decide whether Iran should have enrichment?," he added.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Reuters reported on Monday that Tehran was poised to reject the US proposal as a "non-starter" that failed to soften Washington's stance on uranium enrichment or to address Tehran's interests.
Trump has revived his "maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran since his return to the White House in January, which included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
Trump wants to curtail Tehran's potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran's clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of devastating sanctions.
During his first term, Trump ditched Tehran's 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran's economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact's limits.
Iran's clerical establishment is grappling with multiple crises - energy and water shortages, a plunging currency, losses among regional militia proxies in conflicts with Israel, and rising fears of an Israeli strike on its nuclear sites - all intensified by Trump's hardline stance.
Iran's arch-foe Israel, which sees Tehran's nuclear program as an existential threat, has repeatedly threatened to bomb the Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Tehran has vowed a harsh response.
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says abandoning uranium enrichment was "100 per cent" against the Islamic republic's interests, rejecting a central US demand in talks to resolve a decades-long dispute over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Oman, which has mediated talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
After five rounds of talks, several hard-to-bridge issues remain, including Iran's insistence on maintaining uranium enrichment on its soil and Tehran's refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium - possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of state, said nothing about halting the talks, but said the US proposal "contradicts our nation's belief in self-reliance and the principle of 'We Can'".
"Uranium enrichment is the key to our nuclear program and the enemies have focused on the enrichment," Khamenei said during a televised speech marking the anniversary of the death of the Islamic Republic's founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
"The proposal that the Americans have presented is 100 per cent against our interests ... The rude and arrogant leaders of America repeatedly demand that we should not have a nuclear program. Who are you to decide whether Iran should have enrichment?," he added.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Reuters reported on Monday that Tehran was poised to reject the US proposal as a "non-starter" that failed to soften Washington's stance on uranium enrichment or to address Tehran's interests.
Trump has revived his "maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran since his return to the White House in January, which included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
Trump wants to curtail Tehran's potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran's clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of devastating sanctions.
During his first term, Trump ditched Tehran's 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran's economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact's limits.
Iran's clerical establishment is grappling with multiple crises - energy and water shortages, a plunging currency, losses among regional militia proxies in conflicts with Israel, and rising fears of an Israeli strike on its nuclear sites - all intensified by Trump's hardline stance.
Iran's arch-foe Israel, which sees Tehran's nuclear program as an existential threat, has repeatedly threatened to bomb the Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Tehran has vowed a harsh response.
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says abandoning uranium enrichment was "100 per cent" against the Islamic republic's interests, rejecting a central US demand in talks to resolve a decades-long dispute over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Oman, which has mediated talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
After five rounds of talks, several hard-to-bridge issues remain, including Iran's insistence on maintaining uranium enrichment on its soil and Tehran's refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium - possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of state, said nothing about halting the talks, but said the US proposal "contradicts our nation's belief in self-reliance and the principle of 'We Can'".
"Uranium enrichment is the key to our nuclear program and the enemies have focused on the enrichment," Khamenei said during a televised speech marking the anniversary of the death of the Islamic Republic's founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
"The proposal that the Americans have presented is 100 per cent against our interests ... The rude and arrogant leaders of America repeatedly demand that we should not have a nuclear program. Who are you to decide whether Iran should have enrichment?," he added.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Reuters reported on Monday that Tehran was poised to reject the US proposal as a "non-starter" that failed to soften Washington's stance on uranium enrichment or to address Tehran's interests.
Trump has revived his "maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran since his return to the White House in January, which included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
Trump wants to curtail Tehran's potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran's clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of devastating sanctions.
During his first term, Trump ditched Tehran's 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran's economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact's limits.
Iran's clerical establishment is grappling with multiple crises - energy and water shortages, a plunging currency, losses among regional militia proxies in conflicts with Israel, and rising fears of an Israeli strike on its nuclear sites - all intensified by Trump's hardline stance.
Iran's arch-foe Israel, which sees Tehran's nuclear program as an existential threat, has repeatedly threatened to bomb the Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Tehran has vowed a harsh response.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
39 minutes ago
- ABC News
Is Trump trying to normalise troops on US streets?
Sam Hawley: Across America, the number of protests against Donald Trump's immigration raids is increasing, a week since the LA rallies began. But it's Donald Trump's decision to deploy armed forces on US soil that's really causing a stir. Today, Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University, on why it's an authoritarian move Trump has long wanted to take. I'm Sam Hawley on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily. Karen Bass, LA Mayor: I have declared a local emergency and issued a curfew for downtown Los Angeles. News report: Thousands of National Guard troops and Marines deployed by President Trump are on the ground in LA in response to the protests. An overnight curfew in the city will remain in place indefinitely. News report: As Los Angeles enters its sixth day of protests against the policy, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE, announced it was deploying tactical agents to Seattle, Chicago, Philadelphia, New York and Northern Virginia. Protester: I want to say to each and every one of you, you are not alone. The world is watching Los Angeles. Sam Hawley: Ilya, it's a week since these protests in LA first began, but it's been an extraordinary week, not so much because of the protests, but because of the US President's reaction to them. Ilya Somin: Yes, that's right. The protests themselves are not that extraordinary, nor is the level of violence that has occurred, which is so far at least pretty modest in scope. Rather, it's the domestic use of the military and the attempt to assert federal control over National Guard, which if not completely unprecedented, certainly is unusual and certainly in modern times has not been done without much more substantial reason than exists here. Sam Hawley: And I would have thought it's pretty ironic, Ilya, that Donald Trump pardons almost everyone involved in the January 6th riots and then sends in the military for these protests. Ilya Somin: So I would say it's more than an irony. It's pretty obvious and blatant hypocrisy. What happened in 2021 was a genuine insurrection and a genuine attempt to overthrow the government effectively to keep in power a person who had no legal claim to it. On the other hand, what is going on now is fairly small-scale violence and property destruction. I condemn it. The people who do it should be prosecuted, but it's not anywhere near the level of what happened on January 6th. In many cases, Trump's immigration policies and the activities of ICE themselves, as well as trying to deport people without due process, seizing people when they're going to immigration hearings, sending people to imprisonment in El Salvador, which is lawless on many levels and which several courts have ruled against. So I think it is Trump's law breaking which precipitated this crisis and he and his policies are principally to blame for it. That doesn't justify people reacting with violence that harms innocent people in response. That's wrong and I condemn it, but it is also the case when the government itself acts lawlessly, they can't rightly count on the cooperation of citizens that normally they might come to expect. Sam Hawley: Some of these protesters have been flying the Mexican flag. That plays into Donald Trump's hands, doesn't it? That's what he wants. Ilya Somin: Maybe. If I were organising a protest, and I'm no political activist, but if I was, I probably would not wave Mexican flags, but that people have a first amendment right to wave whatever flags they want, whether I approve of them or not. Sam Hawley: All right, so, Ilya, we're going to unpack with you the significance of Donald Trump's intervention in these protests. To do that, I just wondered if you could first take us to Fort Bragg. That's a military base in North Carolina. Donald Trump addressed troops there during the week, didn't he? Donald Trump, US President: It's a beautiful sight to be with you in a place called Fort Bragg. Sam Hawley: What was he actually telling them? Ilya Somin: As I understand it, you know, he was telling them that the US had been invaded and that he would use force to prevent it in Los Angeles. Donald Trump, US President: What you're witnessing in California is a full-blown assault on peace, on public order, and a national sovereignty carried out by rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion of our country. We're not going to let that happen. Ilya Somin: And he was at least strongly implying he would use force even against peaceful protesters, and he got the troops to cheer. Donald Trump, US President: Time and again, our enemies have learned that if you dare to threaten the American people, American soldier will chase you down, crush you, and cast you into oblivion. That's what happens, unfortunately. In Los Angeles, the governor of California, the mayor of Los Angeles, they're incompetent. Ilya Somin: From what I have read, what they did is troops who seemed inclined not to be supportive of Trump, they had the right to just not appear at that speech. And so the people who were there were sort of self-selected to be his supporters. The bottom line, though, is it's unusual and a violation of political norms, at the very least, for the president to openly advocate the use of force domestically and to use troops as a backdrop for what is obviously a blatantly partisan political speech, at the very least. It may not be illegal to do that, but it's certainly a violation of political norms, though in fairness, over the last decade, we've seen a lot of norms be violated, and this will be far from the first. Sam Hawley: All right. And he told these troops that he'd liberate LA. Donald Trump, US President: Very simply, we will liberate Los Angeles and make it free, clean and safe again. It's happening very quickly. Sam Hawley: And he called the protesters animals and the foreign enemy. Quite extraordinary. Ilya Somin: Yes. I think that language speaks for itself and you don't really need me to say much more, except that it's both wildly inaccurate and to say the least, hugely inappropriate. Sam Hawley: Yeah. All right. Well, let's just talk a bit more about his decision to send in the US Marines and the National Guard to LA, even though the local authorities, the police insist they were being brought under control. It's hardly surprising he acts in this manner, is it? I mean, he has form. Ilya Somin: In one sense, it's not surprising because it seems like he wanted to do this even in his first term during the much larger actually protests and riots that occurred after the death of George Floyd. And at that time he was prevented by his secretary of defence and by military officials. This time around, he has sort of more cooperative loyalists or one might say, toadies who are less willing to counter his worst impulses. So while it's not surprising that this individual wanted to do it, it is, I think, at the very least, a major breach of norms and at least arguably a violation of law as well. Sam Hawley: But just explain for me how that relates to now and what Donald Trump is doing now. Ilya Somin: So I think in two ways. One is he clearly did want to use the military back then, and he clearly has sort of these authoritarian instincts going way back. At one point, even years before he was president, he praised the Chinese government for their crackdown in Tiananmen Square, which a massacre that killed hundreds or even thousands of protesters. Donald Trump, US President: I was not endorsing it. I said that is a strong, powerful government that put it down... they kept down the riot. It was a horrible thing. It doesn't mean at all I was endorsing it. Ilya Somin: And so he has these instincts going way back, but also his frustration over what happened in 2020 may make it even more likely that he would want to do things differently now. Sam Hawley: So you seem to be suggesting that sending in the National Guard and the Marines could be somewhat sinister in a way. Ilya Somin: I think at the very least, it's quite possible, given that the actual legal and policy argument for doing so is extremely weak. So either at best is just a very poorly thought out initiative by the administration, but at worst, it is indeed sinister, as you suggest. Sam Hawley: But to what end? What's the aim? Ilya Somin: So one possible aim could simply just be to look strong or to satisfy his instincts to be strong and tough. Another possibility is that they want to normalise the idea that you can use troops domestically so that they have this in their toolkit going forward. And that obviously would be extremely sinister, as you suggested. Sam Hawley: What, so it's a practice run for the future? Ilya Somin: Yeah. If you normalise something and you succeed in getting people to accept it, and obviously those are two big ifs, then it's easier to do it the second or third or fourth time around. Sam Hawley: All right. Well, Ilya, Trump's deployed the Marines to LA and the National Guard, but there are limits, aren't there, on what those forces can do? Just explain that. Ilya Somin: So under the current set of statutes that he's invoked, it seems like the limits are that they can only sort of protect federal facilities and perhaps federal personnel. And from what I've read and heard they actually haven't been doing very much other than sort of being in the streets and guarding certain federal facilities. But if he were to invoke the Insurrection Act, a law he hasn't invoked yet, then at least it's possible that they would have much broader law enforcement authority to just enforce ordinary laws and could then act much more aggressively. And there's also the issue of even if he doesn't invoke the Insurrection Act, whether he could simply just order them to do things which are illegal, but on the hopes that nobody would stop him from doing it, even if it is illegal under the letter of the law. Sam Hawley: Right. And just to point out that Insurrection Act, it's not used very often. We haven't seen it used much in American history, right? Ilya Somin: Not much. The last time, if I recall correctly, was with respect to the LA riots of 1992, which really was much larger scale violence than anything going on right now. But certainly it was the case that there was large scale riots. The LA police at that time were just not able to control them. They were taken by surprise. Whereas right now, from what I've heard, things are sort of calming down. There has been some destruction of property and some relatively low level violence, but nothing like what happened in LA in 1992 or at some other notorious riots in American history. Sam Hawley: All right. Well, Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, in a televised address said that Donald Trump is destroying democracy, that California may be the first, but it won't be the last. Gavin Newsom, California Governor: When Donald Trump sought blanket authority to commandeer the National Guard, he made that order apply to every state in this nation. This is about all of us. This is about you. California may be first, but it clearly will not end here. Other states are next. Sam Hawley: Now, we should point out, of course, that he is a Democrat and could potentially be a presidential nominee in the future. But what do you make of his comments? Ilya Somin: I think his concerns are at least plausible and well taken. We don't know whether the administration has a plan to make use of this precedent in the future, but I think the risk is great enough that this is the kind of thing that, if at all possible, you want to cut off before we go down that road and take more risk. Sam Hawley: All right. Well, Ilya, Donald Trump's next big scheduled event is this military parade in Washington over the weekend. The president says any protests there would be met with a very big force. Donald Trump, US President: For those people that want to protest, they're going to be met with very big force. You know, this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force. Ilya Somin: I don't know what force he has in mind or whether he even plans to carry out that threat in any way or not. But obviously, if he does use force, even against peaceful protesters, that would both be a violation of the First Amendment and I would argue a crime as well. Sam Hawley: But Ilya, if the LA riots are the start of something bigger for Trump, what legally can be done to stop him? I note the California governor is taking action in the court to halt the troop deployment, but does that achieve anything? Ilya Somin: So it depends to some extent on whether he wins the action, if so, whether Trump would obey the decision. So we'll have to see what happens in court on that. And if there is a decision by the court against Trump, whether they would obey the injunction or not. You know, if troops commit crimes or shoot people illegally or whatnot, criminal liability can result there. There would also be civil liability as well. But it all depends on exactly what is done and under what circumstances. And if the Insurrection Act is invoked, then there could be litigation about that. And, you know, there would be questions that I think in modern times, there's little, if any, judicial precedent on. Sam Hawley: We see headlines suggesting it could be the start of a civil war. That's going a bit far, I would think at this point. But there is a concern about that. Ilya Somin: So I think a civil war, to my mind, is still unlikely. But obviously, the very fact that we're talking about that is itself not a great sign. Sam Hawley: Ilya Somin is a law professor at the George Mason University in Virginia, and the B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute, which is a libertarian think tank. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead. Audio production by Adair Sheppard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. ABC News Daily will be back again on Monday. Thanks for listening.
Perth Now
an hour ago
- Perth Now
More than 200 die in Air India plane crash
More than 200 people were killed when an Air India plane bound for London with 242 people on board crashed minutes after taking off from the western city of Ahmedabad on Thursday, authorities said, in the world's worst aviation disaster in a decade. At least one person is known to have survived, police said, and the man told Indian media how he had heard a loud noise shortly after take-off. The plane, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, came down in a residential area, crashing onto a medical college hostel outside the airport during lunch hour. It was headed for Gatwick Airport, south of the British capital. City police chief GS Malik told Reuters that 204 bodies had been recovered from the crash site - both passengers and medical students. Vidhi Chaudhary, another senior police officer, said police found one survivor and said there could be more. "Thirty seconds after take-off, there was a loud noise and then the plane crashed," 40-year-old survivor Ramesh Viswashkumar told the Hindustan Times from his hospital bed, adding he was desperate to hear what had happened to his brother, who was also on the flight. "It all happened so quickly. When I got up, there were bodies all around me. I was scared. I stood up and ran. There were pieces of the plane all around me. "Someone grabbed hold of me and put me in an ambulance and brought me to the hospital." Police chief Malik said the bodies recovered could include both passengers and people killed on the ground. "Chances are there could be some more survivors among those who are in hospital," police officer Chaudhary told Reuters. "There are also chances that the death toll will go up. More than 50 injured are in hospitals at present." Parts of the plane's body were scattered around the building into which it crashed. The tail of the plane was stuck on top of the building. The passengers included 217 adults, 11 children and two infants, a source told Reuters. Of them, 169 were Indian nationals, 53 were Britons, seven Portuguese, and one Canadian, Air India said. Australia's High Commission in New Delhi and the Consulate-General in Mumbai are urgently following up with the local authorities to find out whether any Australians were on board, a spokesperson for Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs said. According to air traffic control at Ahmedabad Airport, the aircraft departed at 1.39pm local time from runway 23. It gave a Mayday call, signalling an emergency, but thereafter there was no response from the aircraft. One television channel showed the plane taking off over a residential area and then disappearing from the screen before a huge jet of fire can be seen rising into the sky from beyond the houses. Boeing said it was aware of initial reports and was working to gather more information. Boeing shares fell five per cent as the crash posed a major setback for the plane manufacturer as its new CEO looks to rebuild trust following a series of safety and production challenges. "The tragedy in Ahmedabad has stunned and saddened us," Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi posted on X. "It is heartbreaking beyond words." British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said images emerging of the crash were "devastating", and that he was being kept informed as the situation developed. A Buckingham Palace spokesperson said King Charles was also being kept updated. The owners of Air India have said it will provide 10 million rupees ($A179,000) to the families of each of the dead, cover all medical expenses of those injured and help rebuild the hostel of the medical college.
Perth Now
2 hours ago
- Perth Now
Wall St dips as Middle East tensions rise, Boeing drops
Wall Street's main indexes have slipped as signs of rising tensions in the Middle East hurt risk sentiment and investors sought more clarity on Washington's recent trade deals with China. Boeing declined 4.7 per cent after an Air India 787-8 Dreamliner jet crashed minutes after taking off in India's western city of Ahmedabad, killing more than 200 people. Underscoring increased volatility in the Middle East, President Donald Trump said on Wednesday US personnel were being moved out of the region as it could be a "dangerous place" and the United States would not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. "The clearing out of our embassies in the Middle East of non-essential employees sends a signal that we're anticipating some turbulent times," said Kim Forrest, chief investment officer at Bokeh Capital Partners. A senior Iranian official said on Wednesday Tehran will strike US bases in the region if nuclear negotiations fail and conflict arises. China on Thursday affirmed a trade deal with the US, saying both sides needed to abide by the consensus. Traders are still waiting for more details on the trade framework discussed. In early trading on Thursday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 140.49 points, or 0.33 per cent, to 42,725.28, the S&P 500 lost 5.58 points, or 0.09 per cent, to 6,017.36 and the Nasdaq Composite lost 39.52 points, or 0.20 per cent, to 19,576.35. Five of the 11 major S&P 500 sub-sectors fell. Communication services dropped the most, with an about 0.7 per cent decline, while utilities gained 0.8 per cent. Alphabet declined 1.1 per cent, while Nvidia nudged 0.3 per cent higher. Among other movers, Oracle shares rose 12.1 per cent after the cloud service provider raised its annual revenue growth forecast. US-listed shares of gold miners also advanced, as bullion prices hit a one-week high. Newmont gained 2.4 per cent, Harmony Gold was up 2.1 per cent and AngloGold Ashanti rose 5.2 per cent. After a tame consumer price report on Wednesday, softer-than-expected producer price data and largely unchanged initial jobless claims helped reduce investor jitters around tariff-driven price pressures. Traders are pricing in 53.7 basis points of rate cuts by year-end, per data compiled by LSEG. They are penciling in a 60 per cent chance of a 25 bps cut in September, according to the CME Group's FedWatch tool. Policymakers are widely expected to keep rates unchanged next week. With investors increasingly expecting Trump to reach favourable trade agreements with several countries in the coming weeks, the benchmark S&P 500 index is just 2.1 per cent below its record high touched in February. The tech-heavy Nasdaq is about 2.9 per cent from record levels hit in December. Goldman Sachs trimmed its US recession probability to 30 per cent from 35 per cent on easing uncertainty around Trump's tariff policies. Declining issues outnumbered advancers by a 1.35-to-1 ratio on the NYSE and by a 2.03-to-1 ratio on the Nasdaq. The S&P 500 posted four new 52-week highs and three new lows while the Nasdaq Composite recorded 24 new highs and 39 new lows.
