Israel Fired Warning Shots at Europe, China Diplomats by Mistake
By and Alisa Odenheimer
Save
Israeli soldiers mistakenly fired warning shots at diplomats representing the European Union, UK, France, China, Russia and other countries on Wednesday.
The diplomats — none of whom were hurt — were visiting the West Bank town of Jenin and, according to the Israel Defense Forces, deviated from an approved route in what it described as an active combat zone.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Intercept
10 minutes ago
- The Intercept
War Powers Resolution From House Democratic Leaders May Not Limit Trump's War Powers
As Democrats try to push forward legislation that would block further strikes on Iran, one measure advanced by House leadership could actually strengthen the Trump administration's justification for subsequent attacks, anti-war advocates warn. House progressives on Wednesday were trying to reach a compromise with Democratic leaders that would curb further U.S. military involvement in Iran while satisfying concerns from pro-Israel members about American support for Israel's missile defense. There are three different war powers resolutions in play in Washington. In the Senate, a resolution from Tim Kaine, D-Va., appears to be on track for a vote on Friday. In the House, however, Democrats remain sharply divided between two resolutions. 'There's no upside to advancing a competing War Powers Resolution. It's not just unnecessary — it's actively counterproductive,' Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, said in a statement. 'There's still time to reconcile this on the House side, and we hope an agreement can be reached to enable a strong vote with the best possible language.' The resolutions in both chambers face long odds, thanks to near-unanimous support from the majority Republicans for President Donald Trump's strikes. Congressional Democrats are responding to Trump's strikes by pursuing a vote under the War Powers Act, the Vietnam War-era law designed to limit presidents' ability to launch military action abroad without congressional approval. Kaine's initial resolution introduced last week directs Trump to halt hostilities against Iran, while making clear that the president can still defend the U.S. from imminent attack. Kaine's resolution has drawn support from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. It is expected to come to a voter later this week. Amid concerns from pro-Israel Democrats, Kaine said Tuesday that he was co-sponsoring an amendment to his resolution with Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Andy Kim, D-N.J. The amendment is intended to continue to allow the U.S. to participate in Israeli missile defense. Pentagon officials said last April that the U.S. — not Israel — shot down most Iranian drones and missiles during an Iranian attack. 'This amendment would leave no doubt that Senator Kaine's resolution would ensure that President Trump has to make the case to the American people for further action against Iran without constraining our ability to help defend the Israeli people from Iranian attacks,' Kim said in a statement. While most Senate Democrats appeared to have coalesced around Kaine's resolution, House Democrats remained split on Wednesday over how to respond to Trump's strikes. Advocates last week said they were frustrated that Democratic leaders were not moving forward with a resolution as Trump publicly mulled attacking Iran. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., teamed up with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to introduce a resolution. After the strikes were launched, three House Democratic committee ranking members introduced an alternative resolution that its authors claim would also force Trump to cease hostilities with Iran. The sponsors are Reps. Jim Himes of Connecticut, Adam Smith of Washington, and Gregory Meeks of New York. Anti-war advocates worry that the House leadership measure could actually wind up strengthening Trump's justification for launching further strikes on Iran. In an apparent nod to Israel, the leaders' resolution would give the president the power to 'defend the United States or an ally or partner of the United States from imminent attack.' Trump has already justified his strike on Iran as an act of 'collective self-defense of our ally, Israel,' according to a letter he sent Congress, despite the assessment of U.S intelligence agencies that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. Critics say the House Democratic leadership resolution mirrors the language of Trump's justification far too closely. 'We think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution.' 'We think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution,' said Yasmine Taeb, the legislative and political director for the Muslim advocacy group MPower Change. 'This war powers resolution gives the impression that the president has broad authority to be able to engage in military offensive action with respect to Iran — if Israel is asking us to.' Spokespersons for Himes, Meeks, and Smith's offices did not immediately comment. Khanna has said that his resolution is intended to preserve the U.S. military's ability to participate in Israeli missile defense. Advocates said they understood there were ongoing discussions about a compromise. The two sides have ample time: A vote on the measure is not expected to come to the floor before mid- to late-July. Whether or not the two sides come to an accord, however, the push to respond to Trump's strikes could face serious pushback from Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson. Johnson said Tuesday that he thought the War Powers Act itself was unconstitutional and signaled that he may use a procedural move to prevent it from coming to the floor. The War Powers Act states that resolutions brought under its auspices must be fast-tracked to the House floor within 15 working days. Johnson, however, could try to block the resolution from receiving such a 'privileged' status — although that would likely force a vote on the procedural maneuver itself. Massie's co-sponsorship of the resolution gave it bipartisan support, but it's unclear whether he will continue to push its passage in the face of intense pressure from the White House and the ceasefire announced by Trump on Monday. Massie has said he is taking a 'wait and see' approach. As a shaky ceasefire between Israel and Iran continued to hold Wednesday morning, progressives in the House said they were pursuing a vote on their preferred resolution despite the opposition from Johnson. Khanna said at a Capitol press conference that blocking the vote with a procedural maneuver would be an 'unprecedented abrogation of congressional power.' 'The fundamental point here is that we don't know what the strikes accomplished, but we do know a lot of the harm,' Khanna said. 'It has hardened the resolve in Iran to now race towards a nuclear weapon.'
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Investors still don't believe in Europe's defense buildup — but they should, Goldman Sachs says
Investors have been drawn to European markets due to the 'Sell America' trade and EU spending. But market skepticism remains about Europe's short-term defense spending and its growth impact. Goldman Sachs predicts EU defense spending will rise, driven by geopolitical challenges. Investors have flocked to European markets in recent months, fueled by the "Sell America" trade and bets that a ramp-up in EU government spending would drive growth. The enthusiasm sent leading European stock indexes surging — but investors are still not entirely convinced, wrote Goldman Sachs analysts in a Tuesday note. "Market participants remain skeptical about Europe's ability to increase defence spending in the short term, questioning both the availability of funding and its effectiveness to boost growth," the analysts wrote. The Stoxx Europe 600 index is up 6.6% so far this year, while Germany's DAX index is up nearly 19% and trading near record highs. Goldman is even more optimistic. The Wall Street giant expects euro-zone and UK defense spending to rise to 2.7% and 2.5% of GDP, respectively, by 2027 due to geopolitical challenges and the US administration's demands for higher NATO contributions. In 2024, the EU spent 326 billion euros, or about 1.9% of its GDP, on defense. The UK spent 53.9 billion pounds, or 2.3% of its GDP, on defense that year. The Goldman analysts added that the region already has a strong industrial base to build on, since 25% of global arms production comes from Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and the UK. The analysts wrote that they expect most EU countries to ramp up defense spending alongside Germany from 2026, with Italy, Spain, and possibly France tapping the EU's 150 billion euro Security Action for Europe, or SAFE, credit line. But investors need more to gain more confidence in Europe's industrial turnaround, wrote the analysts. Specifically, they will need to see real, concrete spending from Germany and the rollout of SAFE. "Defence spending, because of its capital intensity and focus on R&D, is likely to be an essential element in shifting the narrative," they wrote. Goldman Sachs' assessment of Europe's defense spending plans comes amid the two-day NATO summit in the Netherlands that started on Tuesday. The allies are expected to announce a commitment to increase defense spending to 3.5% of GDP and another 1.5% of GDP on related infrastructural and cybersecurity. Defense spending as a share of GDP has fallen since the 1980s to its lowest level in the last decade, when it went below 2%. In 2022 — following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine — military spending started to rise. In comparison, the US spends over 3% of its GDP on defense. Read the original article on Business Insider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Where is Iran's enriched uranium? Questions loom after Trump claims victory.
WASHINGTON − Amid President Donald Trump's scramble to save the Israel-Iran ceasefire and his claims to have "obliterated" Iranian nuclear sites, a key question remains unanswered − where's the uranium? Trump's June 23 ceasefire announcement came after his administration said it destroyed three of Iran's major nuclear facilities – Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. The U.S. strikes "completely and totally obliterated" Iran's nuclear facilities, Trump said June 21 after the bombs were dropped. Initial assessments showed all three sites "sustained extremely severe damage and destruction," Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters. But watchers of Iran's nuclear program say a massive question mark looms over the U.S. operation – what happened to Iran's enriched uranium? That's "not the question before us," Vice President JD Vance said in a June 23 Fox News interview, dodging the question of what happened to Iran's uranium stockpile. The bombing had, more importantly, destroyed Tehran's ability to enrich uranium to the level needed for a nuclear weapon, he said. "I do think that the uranium was buried," he added. Nuclear experts disagreed. "Significant nuclear materials remain unaccounted for," said Kelsey Davenport, the Arms Control Association's director for nonproliferation policy. "Our understanding is that some of them were taken away by Iran, and we don't know where they are," David Albright, a former United Nations nuclear weapons inspector, said of the enriched uranium stockpiles in a June 24 CNN interview. More: Inside the attack: Details revealed of secret US mission to bomb Iran Satellite images showed new craters at the Fordow and Natanz facilities where U.S. "bunker buster" bombs made impact. "It is clear that Fordow was also directly impacted, but the degree of damage inside the uranium enrichment halls can't be determined with certainty,' Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in a June 22 report. Officials and nuclear experts say most of Iran's enriched uranium was stored in an underground complex near the Isfahan facility, which the U.S. struck with Tomahawk missiles fired from a Navy submarine, demolishing several above-ground facilities, satellite images show. Grossi reported damage to several buildings and entrances to the underground storage tunnels, but it's unclear what happened to any uranium that may have been held in the tunnels. "It does not appear like the underground facility has been targeted at all," said Sam Lair, a research associate at Middlebury College's James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies. "Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan all include deeply buried facilities where it will be challenging to assess the extent of the damage without boots on the ground at these sites," said Davenport. Lair said Iran had ample time to move enriched uranium out of the underground tunnels before Israel first struck the facility on June 13. Even if they had not yet moved the uranium by the time Israel launched its first attack of the 12-day conflict, "they had a period where Isfahan was not being targeted, and they could have done so," he said. Satellite images from Maxar Technology captured vehicles activity at Fordow in the days leading up to the U.S. strikes, including a line of cargo trucks parked outside. And Hassan Abedini, deputy political director for Iran's state broadcaster, told reporters after the U.S. bombing that Iran "didn't suffer a major blow because the materials had already been taken out." Iran's enriched uranium is central to Israeli and U.S. justifications for their attacks. According to the IAEA, Iran has enriched more than 400 kilograms − about 880 pounds − of uranium to 60%, enough to make around nine nuclear weapons if it is further enriched to weapons grade, which is around 90%. "The risk posed by the 60% enriched uranium is amplified because Iran may have also stashed centrifuges at an undeclared site," said Davenport. On June 13, the day Israel launched its attack on Iran, citing the dangers of its nuclear program, the IAEA said Iran had revealed plans for a new enrichment site. "The Iranians, on some level, were preparing for an outcome similar to this," Lair said. Another site is "ready to have centrifuges installed somewhere, and not very many people are talking about it." On June 24, Iranian nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami told Mehr News the nuclear program – which Iran asserts is peaceful – would be restored. "The plan is to prevent interruptions in the process of production and services," Eslami said. But Trump vowed in a post on Truth Social: "IRAN WILL NEVER REBUILD THEIR NUCLEAR FACILITIES!" This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: What happened to Iran's enriched uranium? Experts say it's a mystery
