logo
Trump signals Iran nuke talks; CIA says strike damage 'severe'

Trump signals Iran nuke talks; CIA says strike damage 'severe'

US President Donald Trump said he would likely seek a commitment from Iran to end its nuclear ambitions at talks next week and credited US strikes on Iran with bringing a swift end to the war between Israel and Tehran.
Trump said his decision to unleash huge bunker-busting bombs in Sunday's attack had devastated Iran's nuclear programme and called the outcome "a victory for everybody".
"It was very severe. It was obliteration," he said, shrugging off an initial assessment by the US Defense Intelligence Agency that Iran's path to building a nuclear weapon may have been set back only by months.
Meanwhile, anxious Iranians and Israelis sought to resume normal life after 12 days of the most intense confrontation ever between the two foes and a ceasefire that took effect Tuesday.
Speaking in The Hague where he attended a NATO summit on Wednesday (local time), Trump said he did not see Iran again engaging in nuclear weapons development. Tehran has for decades denied accusations by Western leaders that it is seeking nuclear arms.
"We're going to talk to them next week, with Iran. We may sign an agreement. I don't know. To me, I don't think it's that necessary," Trump said.
"I'll tell you, the last thing they want to do is enrich anything right now. They want to recover," he said, referring to Western accusations that Iran has been enriching uranium to near-weapons-grade purity.
Later on Wednesday, US Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe said in a statement that the US air strikes had 'severely damaged' Iran's nuclear programme, but he stopped short of declaring that the programme had been destroyed.
The agency confirmed a 'body of credible evidence" that several key Iranian facilities were destroyed and would take years to rebuild, he said.
Israel's nuclear agency assessed the strikes had "set back Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years". The White House also circulated the Israeli assessment, although Trump said he was not relying on Israeli intelligence.
Trump said he was confident Tehran would pursue a diplomatic path towards reconciliation. The president gave no details on the discussions next week such as the venue and participants.
If Iran tried to rebuild its nuclear programme, "we won't let that happen. Number one, militarily we won't," he said, adding that he thought "we'll end up having something of a relationship with Iran" to resolve the issue.
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, dismissed what he called the "hourglass approach" of assessing damage to Iran's nuclear programme in terms of months needed to rebuild as besides the point for an issue that needed a long-term solution.
"In any case, the technological knowledge is there and the industrial capacity is there. That, no one can deny. So we need to work together with them," he said. His priority was returning international inspectors to Iranian nuclear sites, which he said was the only way to find out precisely what state they were in.
IRAN PRESIDENT HINTS AT DOMESTIC REFORMS
Israel's bombing campaign, launched with a surprise attack on June 13, wiped out the top echelon of Iran's military leadership and killed leading nuclear scientists. Iran responded with missiles that pierced Israel's defences in large numbers for the first time.
Iranian authorities said 627 people were killed and nearly 5000 injured in Iran, where the extent of the damage could not be independently confirmed because of tight restrictions on media. Twenty-eight people were killed in Israel.
Israel claimed to have achieved its goals of destroying Iran's nuclear sites and missiles; Iran claimed to have forced the end of the war by penetrating Israeli defences.
Israel's demonstration that it could target Iran's senior leadership seemingly at will posed perhaps the biggest challenge yet for Iran's clerical rulers, at a critical juncture when they must find a successor for Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, now 86 and in power for 36 years.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, a relative moderate elected last year in a challenge to years of dominance by hardliners, said it could result in reform.
"This war and the empathy that it fostered between the people and officials is an opportunity to change the outlook of management and the behaviour of officials so that they can create unity," he said in a statement carried by state media.
Still, Iran's authorities moved swiftly to demonstrate their control. The judiciary announced the execution of three men on Wednesday convicted of collaborating with Israel's Mossad spy agency and smuggling equipment used in an assassination. Iran had arrested 700 people accused of ties with Israel during the conflict, the state-affiliated Nournews reported.
During the war, both Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump publicly suggested that it could end with the toppling of Iran's entire system of clerical rule, established in its 1979 revolution.
But after the ceasefire, Trump said he did not want to see "regime change" in Iran, which he said would bring chaos at a time when he wanted the situation to settle down.
RELIEF, APPREHENSION, EXHAUSTION
In both Iran and Israel, residents expressed relief at the end of the fighting, but also apprehension.
"We came back after the ceasefire was announced. People are relieved that the war has stopped, but there's a lot of uncertainty about what comes next," said Farah, 67, who returned to Tehran from nearby Lavasan, where she had fled to escape Israeli bombing.
In Tel Aviv, Rony Hoter-Ishay Meyer, 38, said the war's end brought mixed emotions: relief that children could return to school and normal life resume, but exhaustion from the stress.
"Those past two weeks were catastrophic in Israel, and we are very much exhausted and we need to get back to our normal energy."

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

'New Middle East': This Is Netanyahu's Real Goal In The Region
'New Middle East': This Is Netanyahu's Real Goal In The Region

Scoop

time2 hours ago

  • Scoop

'New Middle East': This Is Netanyahu's Real Goal In The Region

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu persistently declares his ambition to "change the face of the Middle East". Yet, his repeated assertions seem to clash with the unfolding reality on the ground. Netanyahu's opportunistic relationship with language is now proving detrimental to his country. The Israeli leader undoubtedly grasps fundamental marketing principles, particularly the power of strong branding and consistent messaging. However, for any product to succeed over time, clever branding alone is insufficient; the product itself must live up to at least a minimum degree of expectation. Netanyahu's "product," however, has proven utterly defective, yet the 75-year-old Israeli Prime Minister stubbornly refuses to abandon his outdated marketing techniques. But what exactly is Netanyahu selling? Long before assuming Israel's leadership, Netanyahu mastered the art of repetition – a technique often employed by politicians to inundate public discourse with specific slogans. Over time, these slogans are intended to become "common sense". As a member of the Knesset in 1992, Netanyahu delivered what appeared to be a bombshell: Iran was "within three to five years" from obtaining a nuclear bomb. In 1996, he urged the US Congress to act, declaring that "time is running out." While the US pivoted its attention toward Iraq, following the September 2001 attacks, Netanyahu evidently hoped to eliminate two regional foes in one stroke. Following the fall of the Iraqi government in 2003, Netanyahu channeled all his energy into a new discourse: Iran as an existential threat. Between then and now, Iran has remained his primary focus, even as regional alliances began to form around a discourse of stabilization and renewed diplomatic ties. However, the Obama administration, especially during its second term, was clearly uninterested in another regional war. As soon as Obama left office, Netanyahu reverted to his old marketing strategy. It was during Trump's first term that Netanyahu brought all his marketing techniques to the forefront. He utilized what is known as comparative advertising, where his enemies' "product" is denigrated with basic terms like 'barbarism', ' dark age ', and so forth, while his own is promoted as representing ' civilization ', ' enlightenment ', and 'progress'. He also invested heavily in the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) marketing technique. This entailed spreading negative or misleading information about others while promoting his own as a far superior alternative. This brings us to "solution framing." For instance, the so-called "existential threats" faced by Israel can supposedly be resolved through the establishment of a "New Middle East." For this new reality to materialize, the US, he argues, would have to take action, not only to save Israel but also the "civilized world" as well. It must be noted that Netanyahu's "New Middle East" is not his original framing. This notion can be traced to a paper published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in March 2004. It followed the US war and invasion of Iraq and was part of the intellectual euphoria among US and other Western intellectuals seeking to reshape the Middle East in a way that suited US geopolitical needs. The Carnegie article sought to expand the definition of the Middle East beyond the traditional Middle East and North Africa, reaching as far as the Caucasus and Central Asia. American politicians adopted this new concept, tailoring it to suit US interests at the time. It was US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who largely rebranded"greater" to "new," thus coining the "New Middle East," which she announced in June 2006. Though Netanyahu embraced the term, he improvised it in recent years. Instead of speaking of it as a distant objective, he declared that he was actively in the process of making it a reality. "We are changing the face of the Middle East. We are changing the face of the world," he triumphantly declared in June 2021. Even following the events of October 7, 2023, and the Israeli war and genocide that ensued, Netanyahu never ceased using the term. This time, however, his emphasis on "change" rotated between a future possibility and an active reality. "I ask that you stand steadfast because we are going to change the Middle East," he stated on October 9 of that same year. And again in September 2024, he proclaimed that Israel was "pursuing" a plan to "assassinate Hezbollah leaders" with the aim of "changing the strategic reality of the Middle East." And again, in October, December, and January of this year. In every single instance, he contextualized the "change of the Middle East" with bombs and rockets, and nothing else. In May, coinciding with a major Israeli bombing of Yemen, he declared that Israel's "mission" exceeds that of "defeating Hamas," extending to "changing the face of the Middle East." And finally, on June 16, he assigned the same language to the war with Iran, this time remaining committed to the new tweak of adding the word "face" to his new, envisaged Middle East. Of course, old branding tactics aside, Netanyahu's Middle East, much like the US' old "greater Middle East," remains a pipe dream aimed at dominating the resource-rich region, with Israel serving the role of regional hegemon. That said, the events of the last two years have demonstrated that, although the Middle East is indeed changing, this transformation is not happening because of Israel. Consequently, the outcome will most likely not be to its liking. Therefore, Netanyahu may continue repeating, like a broken record, old colonial slogans, but genuine change will only happen because of the peoples of the region and their many capable political players. - Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ' Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out'. His other books include 'My Father was a Freedom Fighter' and 'The Last Earth'. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is

Ceasefire Holds, But Experts Warn Cyber Tensions Between Iran And The West May Be Far From Over
Ceasefire Holds, But Experts Warn Cyber Tensions Between Iran And The West May Be Far From Over

Scoop

time2 hours ago

  • Scoop

Ceasefire Holds, But Experts Warn Cyber Tensions Between Iran And The West May Be Far From Over

As a U.S.-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Iran holds for now, cybersecurity experts are urging vigilance—noting that while military activity may have paused, cyber tensions are likely to continue simmering beneath the surface. 'In light of recent developments, the likelihood of disruptive cyberattacks against U.S. targets by Iranian actors has increased,' said John Hultquist, chief analyst at Google's Threat Intelligence Group. 'Iran already targets the U.S. with cyberespionage… and individuals associated with Iran policy should be on the lookout for social engineering schemes.' A new report from cybersecurity firm Radware adds weight to those concerns, warning that the Israel-Iran conflict has seen an evolution into a hybrid war that includes cyberspace. According to their latest advisory: Nearly 40% of global DDoS activity recently targeted Israel, with signs of spillover affecting the U.S., U.K., and Jordan. Hacker groups such as DieNet, Arabian Ghosts, and Sylhet Gang have issued warnings or taken credit for attacks, some aimed at Western nations. AI-generated disinformation and deepfakes have appeared across digital platforms, contributing to confusion and information warfare. 'Critical infrastructure, supply chains, and global businesses could become collateral targets if cyber tensions escalate further,' said Pascal Geenens, Director of Threat Intelligence at Radware. 'The Israel-Iran conflict of 2025 is a stark illustration of how modern hybrid warfare plays out online as much as in the real world.' While the ceasefire has reduced the immediate risk of open military confrontation, experts believe that cyberspace may remain a domain for ongoing friction—especially as cyber operations allow for plausible deniability and targeted disruption. Hultquist cautioned that while Iranian cyber operations may sometimes exaggerate their impact, the risk for individual organisations remains serious. 'We should be careful not to overestimate these incidents and inadvertently assist the actors,' he said. 'The impacts may still be very serious for individual enterprises, which can prepare by taking many of the same steps they would to prevent ransomware.' For now, the digital front may be quiet—but beneath the surface, it's likely that espionage and influence operations are still underway.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store