Iran dealt 'a heavy slap to America's face', Khamenei says
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Thursday the US had 'achieved nothing' after it joined the war to support Israel, and that Tehran had delivered 'a heavy slap to the US's face'.
'The US regime entered the war directly because it felt that if it didn't, the Zionist regime would be completely destroyed,' Mr Khamenei said in his first speech since the war with Israel. 'It entered the war in an effort to save that regime but achieved nothing,' he said.
'The Islamic republic delivered a heavy slap to the US's face. It attacked and inflicted damage on the Al Udeid Air Base, which is one of the key US bases in the region,' he claimed in his first public statement since a ceasefire ended 12 days of war on Tuesday. Qatar said it shot down 18 of the 19 missiles launched at the US base it hosts, with one falling at the base which had already been emptied.
The Iranian attack on the base was in retaliation for the US striking two nuclear facilities in Iran with massive bunker-buster bombs over the weekend, while a guided missile from a submarine struck a third. Mr Khamenei threatened to attack US bases in the region if Tehran is attacked again.
'The fact that the Islamic republic has access to key US centres in the region and can take action whenever it deems necessary is a significant matter,' he said. 'Such an action can be repeated in the future too. Should any aggression occur, the enemy will definitely pay a heavy price,' he added.
The supreme leader also hailed his country's 'victory' over Israel. 'I want to congratulate the great Iranian nation ... for its victory over the fallacious Zionist regime,' he said. 'With all that commotion and all those claims, the Zionist regime was practically knocked out and crushed under the blows of the Islamic republic,' he said.
Israel and the US have also claimed victory in the war, claiming to have destroyed Iran's nuclear facilities. Mr Trump said the unprecedented American attacks had resulted in the 'total obliteration' of Iran's nuclear capabilities, and said they had set the country's programme back 'decades'.
But leaked US intelligence cast doubt on that assessment, saying the strikes had probably set Tehran back by just a few months. 'They're not going to be building bombs for a long time,' said Trump, adding the strikes had set back the programme by 'decades' and that the ceasefire he had declared was going 'very well'.
Israel's military said Wednesday it was 'still early' to assess the damage the war caused to Iran's nuclear programme.
'I believe we have delivered a significant hit to the nuclear programme, and I can also say that we have delayed it by several years,' said Israeli military spokesman Effie Defrin. Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei acknowledged to Al Jazeera that its 'nuclear installations have been badly damaged, that's for sure'.
The supreme leader's rhetoric about the US was in stark contrast to Mr Trump's approach to the future of relations. He said on Wednesday that the US would hold nuclear talks with Iran next week, teasing the possibility of a deal even after boasting that recent US strikes had destroyed Iran's atomic programme.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian had said on Tuesday that his country was willing to return to negotiations over its nuclear programme, but that it would continue to 'assert its legitimate rights' to the peaceful use of atomic energy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Legal experts tell Fifa Israel breaking international law as it considers sanctions
A group of legal experts that includes two former UN special rapporteurs has told Fifa that Israel and its football association is breaking international law by holding professional football matches on occupied Palestinian territory. The unprecedented letter to international football's governing body comes as it continues to deliberate over whether it should sanction the Israeli Football Association (IFA), after a proposal submitted by the Palestine Football Association (PFA) in March 2024. Over a year later, two Fifa committees are still investigating the complaints, one of which relates to discrimination by the IFA, the other to Israeli football teams playing in illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian territory. Since the start of its war on Gaza, Israel has also killed over 350 Palestinian footballers, including Hani al-Masdar, one of Palestine's greatest players, and has destroyed the blockaded enclave's pitches and stadiums. In December 2023, footage showed Israeli troops turning Gaza's al-Yarmouk, once a 9,000-seat football ground, into a makeshift internment camp for Palestinian detainees. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Beitar Jerusalem, whose Israeli fans call themselves 'the most racist team in the country', has a de facto policy to exclude Arabs and Palestinians. The club has received support from senior Israeli government figures, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Letter to Fifa In the letter to Bruno Chiomento, chairman of Fifa's governance, audit and compliance committee, which is investigating what it calls 'the participation in Israeli competitions of Israeli football teams allegedly based in the territory of Palestine', the group of judges, lawyers and scholars outlined the 'unassailable facts' relating to the illegality of Israeli settlements. The 30 signatories to the letter include former UN special rapporteurs on human rights in occupied Palestine John Dugard and Michael Lynk, Ardi Imseis, who is representing Palestine at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Israeli historian Ilan Pappe and William Schabas, a member of the Sierra Leone truth and reconciliation commission. 'This letter doesn't explicitly tell Fifa to suspend or expel Israel, but it leaves them in no doubt that that's what their own rules require them to do' - Nicholas McGeehan, FairSquare The letter cites ICJ's 2024 pronouncement on Israel's illegal occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. It refers as well to the Fourth Geneva Convention, to UN Security Council Resolutions 446 from 1979, and to 2016's UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which describes settlements as 'a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-state solution'. 'In light of the above, the governance, audit and compliance committee need not concern itself with the question of the legality of Israeli settlements, but simply the issue of whether Israeli teams continue to play football matches in settlements in the West Bank,' the letter reads. 'If that is the case, as the PFA alleges and the IFA has never denied, then the IFA is ipso facto in violation of article 64 (2) of the Fifa Statutes, which states that 'Member associations and their clubs may not play on the territory of another member association without the latter's approval'.' Legal obligations Nicholas McGeehan, founder of FairSquare, a non-profit human rights group, told Middle East Eye that 'it speaks to the seriousness of the issue at hand, that academics of this stature would make an intervention like this'. McGeehan said that while 'this letter doesn't explicitly tell Fifa to suspend or expel Israel from international football, it leaves them in no doubt that that's what their own rules require them to do.' Shane Darcy, a law professor who signed the letter and is the deputy director of the Irish Centre for Human Rights, told MEE that the ICJ opinion of 2024, which found that Israel's presence in occupied Palestine was unlawful and must be ended 'as rapidly as possibly', was 'especially significant'. 'International organisations such as Fifa must play their part to ensure the respect of long-established rules' - Shane Darcy, Irish Centre for Human Rights 'Moreover, the court said that international organisations - which would include Fifa - are under an obligation not to recognise as legal the unlawful situation arising from Israel's presence in the West Bank,' he said. By allowing Israeli teams to play there, Darcy said, Fifa was not just going against its own statutes, it was going 'against fundamental precepts of international law as laid out by the World Court'. 'At a time when international humanitarian law is being disregarded with impunity in Gaza, international organisations such as Fifa must play their part to ensure the respect of long-established rules by its members.' The PFA first complained to Fifa about Israeli teams playing matches in occupied West Bank settlements, including Ma'aleh Adumim, Kiryat Arba, Givat Zeev, Bikat Hayarden and Ariel, in 2013. Four years later, in 2017, Fifa's council declined to take any action, saying that the 'final status of the West Bank territories is the concern of the competent international public law authorities', and that Fifa 'must remain neutral with regard to political matters'. In May 2024, after the PFA submitted its request to adopt sanctions against Israel, citing international law violations and the failure of the IFA in 'taking decisive action against discrimination and racism', Fifa President Gianni Infantino ignored requests for the matter to be put to a vote at the 74th Fifa congress. The decision has continued to be deferred since then. The IFA has called the Palestinian Football Association's request a 'cynical political move'.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Iran's uranium stock largely intact, say European officials
Iran's uranium stock has remained largely intact following US and Israeli strikes on the country, European officials have reportedly said. Citing preliminary intelligence reports, two European officials told the Financial Times that Iran's stockpile of 408kg of uranium enriched close to weapons-grade levels was not concentrated in Fordow, one of its two main enrichment sites. The reports said it had been distributed to various other locations across the country. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that just five days into the war, its inspectors lost track of Iran's uranium stocks. That amount, which could be easily transported in a container by truck, is enough for 10 nuclear warheads if Iran were to pursue weaponisation. Before Israel's attack, Iran and the US were in talks to curb the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Tuesday, after hostilities ended, that his country was willing to return to negotiations over its nuclear programme. Since launching strikes on Iran over the weekend, Trump has moved to de-escalate tensions. He thanked Iran on Monday for providing advance notice about its retaliatory strike on the US's al-Udeid military base in Qatar. Trump then announced a ceasefire a few hours after the attack. On Tuesday, he lashed out at both Israel and Iran when the truce appeared to wobble, saying the two foes "have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing'. Speaking at the Nato summit on Wednesday, Trump said both Iran and Israel were 'tired, exhausted' and 'satisfied to go home and get out'. He also said he would have no problem with Iran selling its oil to China. The US slapped sanctions on Iran's oil sales to Beijing during the nuclear talks. 'They just had a war. They fought it bravely. They are in the oil business… they are going to need money to put that country back into shape…. If they are going to sell oil, they are going to sell oil,' Trump said.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
UK government faces fresh questions over legality of F-35 exports to Israel
The chair of the UK parliament's international development committee has raised major concerns over the government's legal justification for continuing to send British-made F-35 components to Israel. In a letter sent to business secretary Jonathan Reynolds on Thursday, Labour MP Sarah Champion said that she was troubled by the government's decision to allow the export of the parts indirectly to Israel, given its own assessment that there were clear risks of serious violations of international humanitarian law by Israel in Gaza. "I remain concerned that there is a real risk that weapon components, manufactured in the UK, could be used in attacks, including those on aid workers or humanitarian infrastructure," she wrote. "Adherence to the rule of law, including international law, is fundamental if we are to take a position of leadership on the world stage. We must respect, and ensure respect for [international humanitarian law]." Last September, the government suspended around 30 arms export licences after a review ordered by the newly elected Labour government found that Israel might have used British-made weapons in serious violations of international law in Gaza. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters UK-made F-35 components sent to the F-35 programme's global pool were exempt over concerns that there was no way to stop sending British parts destined for Israel without disrupting the entire global fleet and endangering international peace and security. Court documents in a legal challenge to the government's arms exports to Israel show that senior British officials talked to their American counterparts shortly before the announced suspensions to try to stop UK parts from going to the pool, but concluded that there were too many obstacles. One main issue was that, under the governing MOU, the F-35 programme is overseen by an executive steering board, which is chaired by the US and comprises representatives of participating states, and makes decisions by consensus. All participant states would have to agree for components being used in Israeli F-35s to be limited, and logistics that are not currently used would have to be put in place to separate out components destined for Israel, the court documents outlined. However, Champion questioned whether the exemption of the UK-made F-35 parts from the suspension was compatible with the UK's legal obligations, particularly under the Arms Trade Treaty and the Genocide Convention. She has asked Reynolds 10 questions focused on these issues, including what legal authority the government has relied upon for the exemption. She also asked whether the government accepted that the duty to prevent genocide in Gaza had been triggered. If so, what steps "is the UK taking to employ 'all means' and do 'all in their power' to prevent genocide, as far as possible?" she wrote. Similar concerns have been raised by the UK-based Global Legal Action Network (Glan) and the Palestinian human rights organisation Al-Haq, which have challenged the UK government's decision in the High Court. They have also been raised by business and trade committee chair Liam Byrne in a series of letters sent to Foreign Minister Stephen Doughty over the past seven months. Most recently, Byrne has proposed that Doughty and other Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence ministers appear before his committee before the summer recess to answer questions, among other issues, about government data which shows that licences for the export to Israel of $169m worth of military equipment were approved in the three months following the September 2024 supensions. Champion's questions come as the UK government announced this week plans to purchase 12 new F-35 jets that can carry US nuclear weapons. She has asked Reynolds for answers by 11 July.
