US issues first wave of Iran sanctions after ceasefire in 12-day war
Among those targeted by the sanctions announced on Thursday are Iraqi businessman Salim Ahmed Said and his United Arab Emirates-based company, which the US accused of smuggling Iranian oil by blending it with Iraqi oil.
'Iran's behavior has left it decimated. While it has had every opportunity to choose peace, its leaders have chosen extremism,' US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.
'Treasury will continue to target Tehran's revenue sources and intensify economic pressure to disrupt the regime's access to the financial resources that fuel its destabilizing activities.'
After the ceasefire was reached on June 24, US President Donald Trump said China could buy Iranian oil, suggesting the US might lift its sanctions on Tehran's energy exports.
But the promise was short-lived. Trump wrote in a social media post last week that he 'immediately dropped all work on sanction relief' in response to statements by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei claiming victory over Israel.
The US president also said he stopped Israel from assassinating Khamenei, saving him from a 'VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH'.
Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz had said Israel sought to kill Khamenei but there was 'no operational opportunity' for the assassination.
Israel launched air strikes against Iran without direct provocation on June 13, killing hundreds of Iranians, including civilians and top military officials.
The US joined the Israeli campaign and attacked three Iranian nuclear sites. Iran responded with missile strikes against Israel and an attack on an airbase housing US soldiers in Qatar.
Trump claimed the US air raids 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear facilities.
On Wednesday, the Pentagon said the US bombing operation set back Iran's nuclear programme by one to two years.
But it is not clear where Iran's stockpiles of highly enriched uranium are.
The country passed a law last month to suspend cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), over the agency's failure to condemn the US and Israeli attacks.
The move has sparked rebukes by the US and several European countries.
On Thursday, Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei suggested Iran is in indirect contact with the US – through Oman and Qatar – to find a diplomatic solution to the crisis.
'Diplomacy must not be abused or used as a tool for deception or for simply a sort of psychological warfare against their adversaries,' Baghaei told Sky News.
He added that Tehran feels its diplomatic efforts have been 'betrayed'.
Hours before Israel started the war last month, Trump reiterated a US commitment to diplomacy.
And days before the US attacks, he said he would make a decision on joining the war within two weeks to allow talks between Iran and European powers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
17 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Elon Musk revives third party idea after One Big Beautiful Bill passes
Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk has weighed in publicly for the first time since the passage of President Donald Trump's signature piece of budget legislation, commonly known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill'. On Friday, Musk took to his social media platform X to once again float the possibility of a third party to rival the two major ones — the Democrats and the Republicans — in United States politics. 'Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system! Should we create the America Party?' Musk asked his followers, attaching an interactive poll. Musk has maintained that both major parties have fallen out of step with what he describes as the '80 percent in the middle' – a number he estimates represents the moderates and independents who do not align with either end of the political spectrum. His desire to form a new party, however, emerged after a public fallout with Trump over the 'One Big Beautiful Bill', a sweeping piece of legislation that passed both chambers of Congress on Thursday. Yet again on Friday, Musk revisited his objections to the bill, albeit indirectly. He shared Senator Rand Paul's critique that the bill 'explodes the deficit in the near-term', responding with a re-post and the '100' emoji, signifying his full agreement. The 'One Big Beautiful Bill' has long been a policy priority for Trump, even before he returned to office for a second term on January 20. His aim was to pass a single piece of legislation that included several key pillars from his agenda, allowing him to proceed with his goals without having to seek multiple approvals from Congress. But the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' has been controversial among Democrats and even some Republicans. The bill would make permanent the 2017 tax cuts from Trump's first term, which critics argue disproportionately benefit the wealthy over middle- to low-income workers. It also raises the debt ceiling by $5 trillion and is projected to add $3.3 trillion to the country's deficit, according to a nonpartisan analysis from the Congressional Budget Office. Further funding is earmarked to bolster Trump's campaign to crack down on immigration into the US. But to pay for the tax cuts and the spending, the bill includes cuts to critical social services, including Medicaid, a government health insurance programme for low-income households, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Fiscal conservatives opposed the debt increase, while several other Republicans worried about how Medicaid restrictions would affect their constituents. But in recent weeks, Trump and other Republican leaders rallied many of the holdouts, allowing the bill to pass both chambers of Congress by narrow margins. Senator Paul of Kentucky was one of only three Republicans in the Senate to vote 'no' on the bill. In the aftermath of its final passage on Thursday, he wrote on social media: 'This is Washington's MO: short-term politicking over long-term sustainability.' Trump is slated to sign the bill into law in a White House ceremony on Friday. The debate over the bill, however, proved to be a tipping point for Trump and Musk's relationship. In late May, during his final days as a 'special government adviser', Musk appeared on the TV programme CBS Sunday Morning and said he was 'disappointed' in the legislation, citing the proposed increase to the budget deficit. 'I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful,' Musk told a CBS journalist. By May 30, his time in the Trump administration had come to an end, though the two men appeared to part on cordial terms. But after leaving his government role, Musk escalated his attacks on the 'One Big Beautiful Bill', warning it would be disastrous for the US economy. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk wrote on June 3. Musk went so far as to suggest Trump should be impeached and that he had information about the president's relationship with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, though he did not offer evidence. Those posts have since been deleted. Trump, meanwhile, accused Musk on social media of going 'CRAZY' and seeking to lash out because the bill would peel back government incentives for the production of electric vehicles (EVs). On June 5, Musk began to muse about launching his own political party. 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' he wrote. In follow-up posts, he noted that his followers appeared to agree with him, and he endorsed a commenter's suggestion for the party's potential name. ''America Party' has a nice ring to it. The party that actually represents America!' Musk said. As the world's richest man and the owner of companies like the carmaker Tesla and the rocket manufacturer SpaceX, Musk has billions of dollars at his disposal: The Bloomberg Billionaires Index estimates his net worth at $361bn as of Friday. But experts warn that third parties have historically struggled to compete in the US's largely two-party system, and that they can even weaken movements they profess to back, by draining votes away from more viable candidates. Musk's estimate about the '80 percent in the middle' might also be an overstatement. Polls vary as to how many people identify as independent or centrists. But in January, the research firm Gallup found that an average of 43 percent of American adults identified as independent, matching a record set in 2014. Gallup's statistics also found a decline in the number of American adults saying they were 'moderate', with 34 percent embracing the label in 2024. Still, on Friday, Musk shared his thoughts about how a potential third party could gain sway in the largely bifurcated US political sphere. He said he planned to take advantage of the weak majorities the major parties are able to obtain in Congress. 'One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,' he wrote. 'Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.'
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
One tick and ‘anti-Semitic' fruit: The curse of being Palestinian
It was a normal Teams meeting at the end of a busy week. Colleagues were discussing the hospital weekend plans. I was there too, nodding, half-present. My mind was elsewhere – on a message I'd sent earlier that morning to a friend in Gaza. I glanced at my phone. One tick. WhatsApp users know the signs: one tick means the message was sent. Two ticks mean it was received. Two blue ticks, it was read. For most people, it's a minor delay. But when you're texting a Palestinian friend in Gaza during a war, one tick carries a sense of dread. Maybe his phone's out of charge – normal in a place where power was cut off 20 months ago. Maybe there's no service – Israel often cuts communication during attacks. But there's a third possibility I don't allow myself to think about, even though it's the most likely outcome if you are living through a genocide. Still one tick. Back in the meeting. We wrap up. Plans are made and people start to think about their own weekend plans. I glance again. Still one tick. This is the curse of being Palestinian. Carrying the weight of your homeland, its pain, its people – while being expected to function normally, politely, professionally. Then, I was told my Teams background was 'potentially anti-Semitic.' It was a still-life image: figs, olives, grapes, oranges, watermelon, and a few glass bottles. A quiet nod to my culture and roots. But in today's climate, even fruit is political. Any symbol of Palestinian identity can now be interpreted as a threat. Suddenly, I was being questioned, accused, and possibly facing disciplinary action. For a background. For being Palestinian. I felt silenced, humiliated, and exposed. How was my love for my culture, for art, for my people being twisted into something hateful? Why is my choice of virtual background more controversial than the devastating violence unfolding in real time? This is not isolated. Many of us – Palestinians, or anyone else who cares about Palestine – are being challenged on our humanity across organisations, all driven by external pressure. And then it happened. Two blue ticks. My friend was alive. He messaged: they fled their home in the early hours of the morning. He carried his children, walked for hours, left everything behind. No food, no shelter. But alive. How could I explain to him what had happened to me that day? That while he ran for his life, I was threatened with disciplinary action about a painting of fruit? That I was accused of racism for an image, while he was witnessing the destruction of entire families? This is what it means to be Palestinian today. To constantly navigate a world that erases your humanity, silences your voice, distorts your identity. To be told your pain is political. Your joy is provocation. Your symbols are offensive. I've worked in the NHS for 25 years. It's more than a job – it's part of who I am. And now, along with two colleagues, I'm taking legal action. Not for ourselves, but to protect the NHS from external political lobbying. To say, firmly and clearly, that our National Health Service should belong to its patients and its staff – not to those who seek to silence, intimidate or twist it into serving a toxic agenda. What happened to me is not just unjust – it is unlawful. Speaking up against genocide is not only my moral responsibility as a human being, but also my right as a British citizen in a democratic society. I don't write this to compare my experience with my friend's suffering. I write it to expose the absurdity, the cruelty, of how Palestinians are treated across the world. Whether under bombs or under suspicion, we are made to justify our existence. It shouldn't be this way. Being Palestinian is not a crime. But too often, it feels like the world treats it as one. The author is currently pursuing legal action, alongside two NHS colleagues, challenging, among other things, allegations of antisemitism. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
IAEA inspectors depart Tehran after US-Israel-Iran conflict
A team of inspectors from the UN's nuclear watchdog have left Iran, following Tehran's decision to suspend cooperation with the organisation after its 12-day conflict with Israel and the United States. In a statement posted on X on Friday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said its employees would return to its headquarters in Vienna, Austria. IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi stressed 'the crucial importance' of holding talks with Iran to resume its monitoring and verification work as soon as possible, the post added. The inspectors stayed in the Iranian capital throughout the recent fighting, which started on 13 June when Israel targeted Iranian military sites and killed some of the country's most senior commanders, top scientists, and a number of civilians. The US later became involved in the conflict, dropping bunker buster bombs on nuclear facilities in Iran, in a mission the Trump administration claimed had significantly set back the country's nuclear programme. In the aftermath of the US and Israeli aerial attacks, Iran, which has said it is still committed to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), but made painfully clear its burgeoning distrust of the IAEA. Since the start of the conflict, Iranian officials have sharply criticised the IAEA not only for failing to condemn the Israeli and US strikes, but also for passing a resolution on June 12 accusing Tehran of non-compliance with its nuclear obligations, the day before Israel attacked. On Wednesday, Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian ordered the country to cut ties with the nuclear watchdog. A bill to suspend cooperation had already been passed in the Iranian parliament and approved by the country's Guardian Council. Guardian Council spokesperson Hadi Tahan Nazif said the decision had been taken for the 'full respect for the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Islamic Republic of Iran'. The bill itself says the suspension 'will remain in effect until certain conditions are met, including the guaranteed security of nuclear facilities and scientists', according to Iranian state television. The US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce called Iran's decision to suspend cooperation with the IAEA 'unacceptable', urging Tehran 'to reverse course and choose a path of peace and prosperity'. 'Iran cannot and will not have a nuclear weapon,' she reiterated. Tehran denies wanting to produce a nuclear bomb, reiterating for years that its nuclear programme is for civilian use only. Neither US Intelligence, nor Grossi said they had found any proof Tehran was building a nuclear weapon.
