Iran says Israel's actions a 'declaration of war' and accuses US of supporting strikes
Iran 's envoy to the UN accused the US on Friday of providing full political and intelligence support to Israeli strikes on Iranian territory, calling the attacks a 'declaration of war' that killed dozens, including civilians.
Iranian ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani told the UN Security Council that 78 people had been killed in the strikes, with more than 320 others injured.
'The majority of them are civilians, including women and children,' he said.
'We will not forget that our people lost their lives as a result of the Israeli attacks with American weapons. These actions amount to a declaration of war.'
He accused Israel of seeking to derail nuclear deal negotiations with the US and escalate tension in the region.
'This aggression was intentional, co-ordinated and fully backed by a permanent member of this council,' he said. 'The United States' complicity in this terrorist attack is beyond doubt."
Israel's ambassador to the UN Danny Danon echoed this, saying the strikes on Iran are an act of "national preservation' which it undertook alone.
'Imagine when the head of the snake would do with a nuclear warhead?' he said. 'We acted because history has taught us that silence is complicity and hesitation is fatal.'
He told the council that Israeli intelligence had confirmed that Iran could have produced enough fissile material for several nuclear bombs within days.
'We struck the core of the nuclear programme, the underground enrichment facilities at Natanz. This facility was operating at a military grade capacity. Intelligence confirmed that within days, Iran could have produced enough material for multiple bombs,' he said.
On Thursday, Iran was censured by the UN's nuclear watchdog for not complying with obligations meant to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon.
US senior State Department official McCoy Pitt told the council that Washington was informed in advance of Israel's strikes on Iranian targets but was not militarily involved.
Mr Pitt said Israel had advised the US that 'this action' was necessary for its self-defence.
'Every sovereign nation has the right to defend itself, and Israel is no exception,' he said. 'President [Donald] Trump has repeatedly said, this dangerous regime cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons.'
He added that Washington continues to pursue a diplomatic solution aimed at preventing Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons or 'threatening' regional stability.
'Iran's leadership would be wise to negotiate at this time,' he asserted.
The head of the UN nuclear watchdog told the Security Council that the aboveground section of Iran's pilot fuel enrichment plant at Natanz where uranium was being enriched up to 60 per cent has been destroyed in recent Israeli strikes.
'This facility houses both the main fuel enrichment plant and the pilot enrichment plant,' said International Atomic Energy Agency director general Rafael Grossi.
Mr Grossi said radiation levels at the Natanz site remained unchanged, with no external radiological impact on the population or the environment. However, he warned of contamination risks within the facility.
'There is radiological and chemical contamination inside the Natanz facilities due to the impacts,' he said.
Mr Grossi also said that Iranian authorities informed them of attacks on two other nuclear facilities, Fordow and Isfahan, 'where a fuel plate fabrication plant, a fuel manufacturing plant, a uranium conversion facility … are located'.
Russia strongly condemned Israel's attacks on Iran, with its ambassador saying the "military adventure pushes the region to the brink of a large-scale war, and the responsibility for all of the consequences of these actions lies fully with the Israeli leadership and those who encourage them".
'One is left with the impression that the leadership of Israel is convinced that they have a completely free hand in the region, and they probably think that Israel can flout any legal norms and replace all international bodies, including the Security Council and IAEA,' Vasily Nebenzya said.
China's ambassador Fu Cong urged Israel to immediately cease all military 'adventurism' and called on countries with 'significant' influence over Israel to play a 'constructive' role.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
26 minutes ago
- The National
'We were negotiating': why Israel's attack caught Iran off guard
Less than a month ago in Tehran, senior Iranian diplomats engaged foreign journalists and analysts with a clear message: Iran sought dialogue, not confrontation. It wanted better relations with its Middle Eastern neighbours, they said, and, under the right conditions, with Western nations with which it had long been at odds. There was some optimism – albeit very cautious – about the prospects of reaching an agreement with the US for limitations on its nuclear programme in exchange for much-needed sanctions relief. Senior officials past and present stressed that Iran and its neighbours needed to look at what was possible, rather than be constantly on the look out for perils. 'One of my criticisms of my own country is that we have to depart from a threat-based perspective,' one former senior official said in a background briefing. 'We want an opportunity-based outlook, not a threat-based outlook.' In a glossy cobalt blue book of essays that accompanied the Tehran Dialogue Forum, a conference held by an Iranian Foreign Ministry-affiliated think tank, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi argued that US President Donald Trump was hesitant to drag the US into more wars. Saber-rattling would keep Iran on its toes and strengthen Washington's negotiating position 'without actually unleashing a ruinous conflict', Mr Salehi wrote. Iranian officials attempted to emphasise diplomacy, knowing well that Israel favoured military options, and the US had threatened action should nuclear talks collapse. In the following weeks, Iranian officials and observers made clear that they believed Israel wanted to strike, and that any attack could not take place without US knowledge and backing. 'We will immediately respond to the Zionist regime's possible attack on the country's nuclear facilities,' Iran's Supreme National Security Council said in a statement last week, before the Israeli strikes began. Iranian officials and analysts did not expect an attack to happen while there were active plans for more negotiations. US and Iranian officials have been planning to meet for a sixth round of discussions in the Omani capital Muscat on Sunday. 'We were in a limited negotiation process and did not expect military [action],' a senior Iranian government foreign policy researcher told The National on Friday. 'In fact, the Israeli regime sabotaged the diplomacy entirely with military action.' Hassan Ahmadian, assistant professor of West Asian Studies at the University of Tehran, said that 'Israeli warmongering against Iran was obvious and so the attack was never ruled out at any point'. 'Yet many in Iran believed that now the US had chosen dialogue with Tehran, it wouldn't unleash the Israelis against it,' he told The National. That moment came quicker than expected, though. For many in Iran, diplomatic talks have not yet failed, although they were facing significant headwinds over differing stances in Tehran's rights to uranium enrichment. President Trump appeared to justify Israel's attacks, which he later said took place with Washington's knowledge, by noting that a 60-day deadline he had imposed for nuclear talks to succeed had ended on Thursday. The point is that we were in a diplomatic process and we expected the other side to respect this joint diplomatic effort. Iranian government foreign policy researcher Some observers argue that Iran miscalculated the time it had available for negotiations, and Israel's willingness to really go through with an attack. In Tehran, however, many believe Israel miscalculated too, encouraged by what they see as international inertia over its bombing campaigns in Palestine, Lebanon and Syria. And because of the perception of US complicity, Washington is being held responsible as well. 'It's not about underestimating [Israel],' the government foreign policy researcher said. 'The point is that we were in a diplomatic process and we expected the other side to respect this joint diplomatic effort.' The US president was swayed from diplomacy to not saying no to military action, Iranian officials believe. Influence of, "Zionist lobbies" on the US government and "extremists" in US decision-making frameworks "should be considered the reason for this change in approach and finally, Israel carried out this attack," a second senior Iranian government official told The National. Israel's multipronged attack on Iran's nuclear and defence infrastructure has dramatically changed the playing field. As it pledged, Iran has responded, and there is room for further escalation if the exchange of strikes and counterstrikes continues. It has named its continuing strikes against Israel as 'Operation True Promise 3', linking it to previous operations of the same name on the country. Unlike past responses, which carefully balanced force with restraint to avoid spiraling escalation, such caution may now be less of a priority. ' Iran 's response cannot be similar to what happened in October or April 2024,' a regional source close to Iranian thinking and military circles, told The National. 'The proportionate retaliation must be strong enough to deter further Israeli aggression.' The escalation has endangered both the possibility of nuclear talks continuing and the likelihood of them succeeding, even if they resume. Iran's position on attending the negotiations scheduled for Sunday is unclear, its Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Saturday. The framework of thinking in Iran is shifting from diplomacy to war, observers believe. 'I suspect it's [Iran's] preferred diplomatic approach not to go ahead in parallel with the continuing military confrontation with Israel,' said Mr Ahmadian. 'And so, it's war now – diplomacy can only come afterwards.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed concludes US visit to deepen bilateral co-operation
Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, has concluded a working visit to the United States to advance strategic partnerships between the two nations. During the visit, Sheikh Abdullah held talks with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, focusing on deepening co-operation across sectors such as trade, science, advanced technology and artificial intelligence. The UAE Deputy Prime Minister and Mr Rubio reaffirmed the shared commitment to expanding ties that benefit the prosperity and stability of their respective countries. Commitment to regional security During his trip, Sheikh Abdullah also met Steve Witkoff, US special envoy to the Middle East. They reviewed regional developments, emphasising the importance of de-escalation and promoting security and stability, as well as the growing UAE-US partnership. State news agency, Wam reported that in a meeting with Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, Sheikh Abdullah explored joint pathways to enhance peace, sustainable development and international security co-operation. Discussions with US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick focused on economic and financial collaboration. Throughout his visit, Sheikh Abdullah reiterated the UAE's commitment to working closely with Washington to further enrich the bilateral partnership.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
About 20 million bpd of crude in focus amid Israel and Iran tensions
About 20 million barrels per day of oil and refined products could be affected if shipping operations are disrupted along the Strait of Hormuz amid the continued tensions between Israel and Iran, according to analysts. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow water channel in the Arabian Gulf between Iran and Oman, where oil tankers carry large volumes of oil and refined products to different destinations from Gulf producers as well as from Iran and Iraq. Iran in the past has threatened to close the strait for maritime traffic in retaliation for western pressure. Any closure could impact trade and oil supplies flowing to global markets. 'The Strait of Hormuz remains the critical chokepoint,' Jorge Leon, head of geopolitical analysis at Rystad Energy, said. 'Around 12 million barrels per day of crude oil pass through the strait, over 80 per cent of it bound for Asia. Including refined products, the total volume can reach up to 20 million barrels per day.' While Saudi Arabia and the UAE have spare pipeline capacity to bypass the strait, it is limited, he said. Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline and the UAE's Habshan-Fujairah pipeline together can handle around half of the flow, he added. 'The strait is jointly controlled with Oman, and past tactics have included seizing or harassing tankers by jamming their GPS signals to draw them into Iranian waters. This increases the risks of navigating the route.' Last year, Iran 's Revolutionary Guard seized a container ship with links to Israel in the Strait of Hormuz. Tensions across the Middle East rose on Friday after Israel launched a wave of strikes across Iran, killing senior military officials and hitting key nuclear sites. Iran also launched retaliatory missile strikes on Israel into Saturday morning, killing at least three people and wounding dozens, raising concerns of a wider Middle East war. Oil prices have surged in response to rise in tensions in the Middle East. Brent and West Texas Intermediate (WTI), the gauge that tracks US crude, had jumped more than 13 per cent before settling at around 8 per cent higher on Friday. 'While Iran has threatened to block the strait before, their current weakened position makes this uncertain. There's still a risk from Iran's proxies like Houthi rebels and Hamas, who may retaliate,' Phil Flynn, senior market analyst at the Price Futures Group, said. Last year, Houthi rebels have carried out attacks on ships passing through the Red Sea, disrupting maritime traffic and causing oil prices to rise on supplies worries. Many shipping companies were forced to reroute and take a longer route around the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of Africa to transport cargo to Europe and other destinations. Houthis said they launched attacks on ships, in solidarity with Hamas fighting against Israel in Gaza. Shipping companies urged to take extra measures 'The situation is very tense, and we have reports that more shipowners are now exercising extra caution and are opting to stay away from the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf,' Jakob P Larsen, chief safety and security officer with shipping association Bimco, told The National in a statement. If the US is perceived to be involved in attacks, 'the risk of escalation increases significally,' which will impact freedom of navigation in the Red Sea and Strait of Hormuz. 'Such an escalation could include missile attacks on ships or laying of sea mines in the strait,' he added. Bimco has advised shipowners to follow developments closely and implement ship defence measures as tensions continued to rise between Israel and Iran. India's directorate general of shipping also urged Indian-flagged vessels and Indian seafarers transiting through the Strait of Hormuz "to exercise due caution while operating in or navigating through the region," according to an advisory on its website. Oil at $100 per barrel There is an elevated risk premium in the market that could push oil prices higher, analysts said. 'While a full blockade remains unlikely, the possibility, even if small, helps explain the elevated risk premium in the market today,' Mr Leon said. Iman Nasseri, managing director of Middle East at FGE Nexant, expects oil to jump above $100 per barrel if the strait is closed. "It seems like $70 to $80 (per barrel) would be the range for the short term if there is no closure of strait, if the strait gets closed, then we're looking at $90 and even above $100," Mr Nasseri told The National.
