Iran denies US media claim of identifying secret nuclear facility
Tehran: Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi on Friday rejected a Fox News report claiming to have identified a new secret nuclear facility in Semnan province.
In a post on X, Araghchi dismissed the "Very Scary Satellite Images" touted by Fox News as part of an effort by Israel to derail the forthcoming indirect talks between Tehran and Washington.
"Like clockwork, more Very Scary Satellite Images are being circulated as Iran-US indirect nuclear talks are set to resume," Araghchi said.
Fox News reported that it had exclusively obtained satellite imagery purportedly showing a previously undisclosed Iranian nuclear weapons facility, a 2,500-acre compound codenamed "Rainbow Site" that the network said has been disguised as the chemical producer Diba Energy Siba and active for more than a decade, Xinhua news agency reported.
The rebuttal comes on the eve of the fourth round of Oman-mediated indirect talks on Iran's nuclear programme and US sanctions relief. To date, delegations from both sides have met three times, twice in Muscat on April 12 and April 26 and once in Rome on April 19.
On Thursday, a top Iranian military commander said that Iran prefers and prioritizes the path of diplomacy for resolving the nuclear issue, but is also ready for war if threatened, according to the official news agency IRNA.
"Our preference and priority regarding addressing the nuclear issue is the path of diplomacy and a fair manner, far from the atmosphere of threat. However, we are ready for any war on any scale," Chief Commander of Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Hossein Salami said at a commemoration ceremony in the northeastern city of Mashhad.
Based on its own political will, Iran voluntarily does not seek to develop nuclear weapons, and has excluded such weapons from its defence doctrine, Salami said.
The United States, which has "bitter experiences" of interferences in other countries, has proven itself to be untrustworthy and incapable of keeping its promises, Salami noted, adding that should the United States threaten Iran, Iran would be ready for a war.
"If you put a foot wrong, we will open the doors of hell to you," he said.
Salami's remarks came after Iran and the United States held three rounds of indirect talks with mediation from Oman throughout April, and also after fresh US sanctions were imposed in late April on a number of individuals and entities in Iran and other countries.
The fourth round of Iran-US talks, which was originally scheduled for May 3 in Rome, was postponed due to what Oman described as "logistical reasons."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
27 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump travel ban: Will Iran travel for 2026 FIFA World Cup?
USA, Canada, and Mexico are all set to host the 2026 FIFA World Cup together. However, President Donald Trump's latest travel ban has posed questions about whether certain qualified countries will now be allowed to travel to the US and take part. Starting Monday (June 9), citizens of 12 countries will no longer be allowed to get a US visa, according to a recent decision by Trump. Citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen have been banned by Trump and tighter restrictions have been applied to seven other nations (Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela). Trump explained his move by stating in a video, 'The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, has underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country, by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstay their visas. We don't want them.' As of now, Iran is the only country from the list to have already qualified to compete in the FIFA World Cup next year. Cuba, Sudan, and Haiti are currently in contention to contest. Venezuela is five points off the threshold for automatic qualification but a playoff might just cut the deal. Sierra Leone can still be involved through multiple playoff games while Burundi, Equatorial Guinea, and Libya have very slim chances. Under the current policy, sports teams of qualifying countries should still be able to contest since such a provision have been provided for 'any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the secretary of state.' However, this exception will only continue as long as there is no change to the current ban policy adopted by the US. Iranian fans hoping to catch their national team in the spotlight won't be so lucky however since the policy provides no such exceptions for fans of sporting teams. Getting an American visa had already been tough for Iranians even before the ban was implemented due to tougher vetting procedures. However, considering how those indulging in international travel for sporting events are usually from a higher wealth bracket, such individuals could still try to circumvent the process by using different passport options. The move has stirred a debate about the intersection of politics with global sport. Back in 2017, FIFA President Gianni Infantino had said, "Any team, including the supporters and officials of that team, who qualify for a World Cup need to have access to the country, otherwise there is no World Cup." Infantino has since developed close ties with Trump and has re-emphasized that sporting teams of all countries will face no barriers in coming to the US for participation next year. The event is expected to raise a majority of the soccer body's revenue in the 2023-2026 period. Questions have also been raised about the US' legitimacy to hold the upcoming 2028 Olympic Games with such strict travel policies against certain participating countries.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Trump vs Musk feud sparks mockery in Moscow: ‘Don't fight, guys!' say Russian officials
The ongoing public spat between US President Donald Trump and tech-billionaire Elon Musk has found unlikely spectators in Moscow, where top officials, tycoons, and media personalities gleefully weighed in with offers of peace talks, business deals—and sarcasm. 'Elon, don't be upset!' posted nationalist senator Dmitry Rogozin, formerly head of Russia's space programme. 'If you encounter insurmountable problems in the US, come to us. Here you will find reliable comrades and complete freedom of technical creativity,' he added on Musk's own platform, X. Elon @elonmusk , don't be upset! You are respected in Russia. If you encounter insurmountable problems in the US, come to us and become one of us – a 'Bars-Sarmat' fighter. Here you will find reliable comrades and complete freedom of technical creativity. — ROGOZIN (@Rogozin) June 6, 2025 Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev also joined the online fray, quipping: 'We are ready to facilitate the conclusion of a peace deal between D and E for a reasonable fee and to accept Starlink shares as payment. Don't fight, guys!' The clash between the US president and the world's richest man quickly became low-hanging fruit for Russia's political elite, many of whom have made a habit of mocking perceived chaos in Washington. Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT and one of Russia's most powerful media figures, jabbed at the row as a symbol of 'modern US. political culture' — calling it 'Sort of like the English Industrial Revolution. Only in reverse.' Kirill Dmitriev, head of Russia's sovereign wealth fund and a former advocate for US-Russia cooperation in space, lamented: 'Why can't we all just get along?' He later asked X's AI chatbot, Grok, how the pair might reconcile. @grok what needs to happen for @realDonaldTrump and @elonmusk to reconcile — Kirill A. Dmitriev (@kadmitriev) June 5, 2025 Even the Kremlin chimed in—carefully. Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov diplomatically called it an 'internal matter' for the US but expressed faith in Trump's ability to multitask. 'Presidents handle a huge number of different things at the same time, some more and some less important,' he said, Reuters reported. Others, like hardline nationalist businessman Konstantin Malofeyev, viewed the feud as a strategic opening: 'We can just be glad that they won't have time for us… the best time to strike back [against Ukraine].'
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
Facing crisis, Pak sent four letters to India asking it to end IWT abeyance
Pakistan has reportedly sent four consecutive letters urging India to reconsider its decision to place the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance following the terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 26 tourists. Sources revealed that the letters were dispatched by Pakistan's Ministry of Water Resources Secretary, Syed Ali Murtaza, to India's Jal Shakti Ministry, which then forwarded them to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). With Pakistan now facing an escalating water crisis, the tone of these appeals has grown increasingly urgent, according to individuals familiar with the matter. The sources further noted that even after India launched Operation Sindoor, targeting terror networks in both Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK), another letter regarding the IWT was sent by Pakistan. India firm on terror and treaty abeyance India has reiterated that there can be no dialogue while terrorism persists, maintaining that 'blood and water also can't flow together.' While the IWT was originally signed in the spirit of goodwill and cooperation, New Delhi asserts that Pakistan violated this spirit by continuing to promote cross-border terrorism. India has invoked its national security prerogative and affirmed that the treaty will remain in abeyance until Islamabad 'credibly and irrevocably' halts support for cross-border terror. This suspension was approved by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), India's apex strategic body, shortly after the 22 April Pahalgam terror attack. This marks the first time India has suspended the World Bank-mediated agreement. Following India's military response under Operation Sindoor, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has indicated a willingness to engage in peace talks to resolve bilateral issues. This shift came after several senior Pakistani politicians appealed to the Sharif government to address what they described as a looming 'water bomb' threatening the country after India's suspension of the IWT. 'We would die of hunger if we don't resolve the water crisis now. The Indus Basin is our lifeline as three-fourths of our water comes from outside the country, nine out of 10 people depend on the Indus water basin for their living, as much as 90 per cent of our crops rely on this water and all our power projects and dams are built on it. This is like a water bomb hanging over us and we must defuse it," Pakistani senator Syed Ali Zafar said in May. History and scope of the Indus Waters Treaty Signed in 1960, the Indus Waters Treaty regulates the sharing of six rivers — Indus, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej — between India and Pakistan. India has consistently maintained that Pakistan has undermined the treaty's goodwill by supporting terror activities and obstructing essential upgrades to key water infrastructure projects. India outlines its position at the United Nations Responding to Pakistan's criticism at the UN Security Council in New York on 24 May, India's Permanent Representative, P Harish, stated, 'Far-reaching fundamental changes have taken place not only in terms of escalating security concerns through cross-border terror attacks, but also growing requirements for producing clean energy, climate change, and demographic change.' India has formally approached Pakistan multiple times in the past two years to negotiate modifications to the treaty, but Pakistan has consistently refused. 'Pakistan has continued to consistently block any changes to this infrastructure, and any modifications of the provisions, which are permissible under the treaty,' Harish said. He also emphasised that, although the treaty's preamble is based on goodwill and friendship, Pakistan has waged three wars and facilitated thousands of terror attacks on India.
