Trump vetoed Israel's plan to assassinate Iran's Supreme Leader: Report
According to Reuters, top US officials said that Washington has been in constant contact with Israeli counterparts following Israel's large-scale assault on Iran aimed at halting its nuclear program. While it remains unclear whether Trump directly conveyed the decision, sources confirmed he has been in regular communication with PM Netanyahu throughout the crisis.In a separate televised interview with Fox News, Netanyahu suggested that regime change in Iran could be a consequence of Israel's ongoing military campaign, which began Friday. He confirmed he had notified Trump ahead of the attacks.Despite the worsening conflict, Trump struck a dual tone. On his social media platform Truth Social, he issued a stern warning to Tehran, vowing that 'the full strength and might of the US armed forces' would be unleashed if Iran targets American interests.advertisement'If we are attacked in any way, shape, or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the US armed forces will come down on you at levels never seen before,' Trump warned.The warning to Iran came after Tehran reportedly threatened to target US, UK and French military bases and ships in the region if they attempted to block Iranian strikes on Israel, Reuters reported.At the same time, he expressed hope for diplomacy, saying, 'We can easily get a deal done between Iran and Israel and end this bloody conflict.'Amid the rising tensions, Trump again urged both Iran and Israel to 'make a deal', saying that diplomacy as a way forward. He also claimed that his past efforts had brought peace between several nations, though he lamented that he 'never got credit' for those successes.Trump also pointed to his administration's role in easing tensions between Serbia and Kosovo, as well as helping to foster peace between Egypt and Ethiopia over earlier disputes.Meanwhile, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in a phone call with Trump on Sunday, offered Ankara's support as a mediator to help resolve the nuclear dispute fueling the crisis between Israel and Iran.Meanwhile, Israel launched a third consecutive day of airstrikes on targets inside Iran, some of which reportedly bypassed air defense systems and struck central urban areas. Israel has threatened further escalation.According to Washington-based Human Rights Activists, an NGO monitoring developments in Iran, at least 406 people have been killed and 654 wounded in the strikes so far. The Iranian government has not released official casualty figures. Diplomatic talks aimed at de-escalating the crisis and addressing Iran's nuclear program were reportedly canceled in light of the ongoing violence.Tune InMust Watch
IN THIS STORY#United States of America
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
a minute ago
- Hindustan Times
India warns Pakistan of ‘painful consequences' to any misadventure
New Delhi: India on Thursday warned Pakistan of 'painful consequences' in the event of any misadventure, responding to 'war-mongering and hateful comments' from Pakistan's civilian and military leadership—particularly army chief field marshal Asim Munir's nuclear threats. On Tuesday, Shehbaz Sharif promised to 'teach India a lesson' if it interferes with Pakistan's water supply. (Representative photo) External affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal, while addressing a weekly media briefing, subtly alluded to India's military response during Operation Sindoor when commenting on recent aggressive rhetoric from Pakistan, including statements by Munir, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and defence minister Khawaja Asif. 'We have seen reports regarding a continuing pattern of reckless, war-mongering and hateful comments from Pakistani leadership against India,' Jaiswal said. 'Pakistan would be well advised to temper its rhetoric, as any misadventure will have painful consequences, as was demonstrated recently.' He added that it is a 'well-known modus operandi of the Pakistani leadership to whip up anti-India rhetoric time and again to hide their own failures.' Since last week, Pakistan's leadership has escalated its rhetoric over issues ranging from threats to use nuclear weapons to the possibility of war if India restricts the flow of cross-border rivers amid the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty. Munir, elevated to field marshal following four days of hostilities with India in May, reportedly told the Pakistani diaspora in the US last week that Pakistan could use its nuclear weapons to take down India and 'half the world' in case of an existential threat, and would use missiles to destroy Indian dams on shared rivers. Also read: Outcome of India-Pakistan conflict: Much to be pleased about, much to learn On Tuesday, Shehbaz Sharif promised to 'teach India a lesson' if it interferes with Pakistan's water supply. 'I want to tell the enemy today that if you threaten to stop our water, keep this in mind—you cannot snatch even one drop from Pakistan,' he said. At a related event on Wednesday marking Pakistan's response to Operation Sindoor, Sharif announced the creation of an 'Army Rocket Force Command' to enhance missile combat capabilities. A senior official told Reuters that the force, meant for conventional conflict, 'is obvious that it is meant for India.' Asif stated over the weekend that any violation of Pakistan's sovereignty would provoke a 'swift, surefire and proportionate response.' Meanwhile, former Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari described India's suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty as an 'attack,' affirming that Pakistan would not back down if forced into war. India initially responded to Munir's nuclear threats by warning that such rhetoric sparks doubts about Pakistan's nuclear command-control integrity, given its military's proximity to terrorist groups. The ministry reiterated that India will not succumb to nuclear blackmail. Also Read: Pakistan took 48 hours to admit intrusion, refused to take back body initially: BSF Following the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack by The Resistance Front (a proxy for Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba), India applied punitive diplomatic and economic measures, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty and launching Operation Sindoor on May 7. Four days of hostilities followed, ending with a mutual understanding on May 10. Jaiswal also rejected a recent ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, which instructed India to 'let flow' waters of western rivers under the Indus Waters Treaty. 'India has never accepted the legality, legitimacy or competence of the so‑called Court of Arbitration. Its pronouncements are therefore without jurisdiction, devoid of legal standing, and have no bearing on India's rights of utilisation,' he said. He added that India rejects Pakistan's 'selective and misleading references to the so-called 'award.'' Referring to India's June 27 statement that the Indus Waters Treaty 'stands in abeyance,' Jaiswal noted it was a sovereign decision motivated by 'Pakistan's continued sponsorship of cross‑border terrorism, including the barbaric Pahalgam attack.' India has not participated in arbitration proceedings since Pakistan challenged components of the Kishanganga (330 MW) and Ratle (850 MW) hydropower projects under the treaty. While the World Bank appointed both a neutral expert and a Court of Arbitration in 2016, India only recognized and engaged with the neutral expert, rejecting the Court of Arbitration.
Economic Times
a minute ago
- Economic Times
Trump is aiming for Pakistan-style compliance from India, but his plan is not working
Synopsis Amidst rising tensions, the US-India trade relationship faces turbulence as Trump's administration imposes tariffs, allegedly to pressure India on geopolitical issues like Russian oil imports. India views these actions as an infringement on its sovereignty, resisting demands to compromise on agriculture, patent laws and military sourcing. India's refusal to play a compliant role, unlike Pakistan, frustrates Trump. "Trump wants a vessel like Pakistan. India refuses to behave like one." That blunt assessment from Ajay Srivastava, founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI), captures the essence of the US-India trade saga: it's less about economics than geopolitics. While headlines focus on tariffs and trade deficits, the underlying story is about power, leverage and sovereignty. Speaking to Economic Times, Srivastava explains, "Washington expects compliance, and India is not yielding." Trump, who is set to meet Russian leader Vladimir Putin on Friday at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska, has long framed tariffs as a tool to 'fix trade deficits,' but India's case suggests a different motive. On August 7, the US announced it would raise tariffs on Indian goods from 25% to 50%, citing Delhi's purchase of Russian oil. India called the move 'unfair' and 'unjustified,' with the new rate set to take effect on August 27. The White House framed the tariffs as a way to cut Russia's energy revenues and pressure Vladimir Putin toward a ceasefire. With this increase, India becomes the most heavily taxed US trading partner in Asia, joining Brazil which faces similar steep tariffs amid tense bilateral relations. The economic stakes for India are high. In 2024, India exported $87 billion worth of goods to the US. According to US Census Bureau data for May 2025, imports from India stood at $9.43 billion, while US exports to India were $3.82 billion, resulting in a US goods trade deficit, or an Indian surplus, of roughly $5.6 billion. If the 50% tariffs remain in place, nearly all of India's annual exports to the US could become commercially unviable. Meanwhile, the US continues to run a $45.7 billion goods trade deficit with India, yet these tariffs disproportionately affect Indian exports compared with goods from other Srivastava, the message is clear: 'Trade deficit is just for the namesake. It's about forcing countries to fall in line with a geopolitical agenda.' India imports roughly 20% of its GDP in goods, spanning petroleum, machinery and electronics, yet Washington appears less concerned with trade imbalances than with pressuring India to compromise on and dairy have emerged as key sticking points in India-US trade talks, which collapsed earlier this month. On August 7, Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared, 'India will never compromise on the well-being of its farmers, dairy producers and fishermen.' New Delhi has consistently resisted US pressure to open these sectors, arguing that doing so would threaten millions of small farmers. Historically, India has kept agriculture largely off the table in trade agreements to safeguard domestic to Srivastava, US demands extend far beyond tariffs: opening government procurement, diluting patent laws that could make medicines costlier, limiting future digital taxes, and shifting military sourcing to the US. 'Even if we open agri and dairy, no trade deal will happen with this. Not a trade issue. They want you to open your government procurement, dilute patent laws, commit to never charge digital tax in future, buy military from the US, the list is endless,' he adds, 'Trump imposed 50% tariffs on Brazil partly over politics and partly because Brazil asked Twitter to remove anti-Brazil content. Records show India generates even more such requests, so he could use that as an excuse too. He can conjure unlimited reasons to impose tariffs if he's unhappy. My sense is he doesn't want a partner in India, he wants a vassal. India refuses to play that role; it insists on an equal partnership. That's the basic problem.'The US approach to Russian oil imports is uneven. China, Russia's largest crude buyer, faces no comparable tariff threats, while India is under heavy pressure. 'Even if the US demanded zero imports from Russia, India's imports would fall anyway due to economic circumstances,' notes Srivastava. European and US bans on petroleum products derived from Russian crude are already reducing India's imports, independent of Washington's selective approach reflects a broader pattern in US trade policy. Brazil, for example, faced a 50% tariff despite running a surplus with the US, largely over political disagreements including its stance on Venezuela and former President Bolsonaro. Venezuela itself is under secondary sanctions for buyers of its oil, though some firms, like Chevron, have received exemptions. These cases suggest that political alignment often outweighs economic between Russia and the US has dropped roughly 90% since the Kremlin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, though last year the US still imported $3 billion worth of Russian goods, according to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis and Census Bureau. Meanwhile, the European Union, a partner in sanctions against Russia, imported $41.9 billion (36 billion euros) of Russian goods in 2024, Eurostat data the US pressures India to cut Russian oil imports, market forces and global regulations are already reshaping trade flows. Europe and US bans on petroleum products ensure India's imports will decline regardless of Washington's actions. Srivastava cautions, however, that the US may find new reasons for tariffs, keeping India under continuous has built a buffer against such pressures. Exports constitute roughly 20% of GDP, compared with 90% for Vietnam, a country far more vulnerable to US-imposed shocks. 'Vietnam will suffer more. We will suffer, but we will absorb it properly. Country will bounce back. All we need to do is not to surrender,' Srivastava US consumers will also feel the impact of tariffs. About 90% of prescriptions in the US rely on generics imported from India. While the total trade value may be under $10 billion, disruption affects the majority of prescriptions, potentially raising prices significantly. Companies may eventually source alternatives over three to four months, but the immediate effect is inflationary.'Indian exports will suffer, but we need to consider whether it's better to endure this and use it to push delayed reforms, like diversifying exports, rather than falling into a bad deal. This isn't really about trade; it's about surrendering sovereignty,' Srivastava Srivastava, Trump's broader strategy is political theatre. 'Basically, he wanted to hit China. He couldn't, so he has to show his domestic voters that he is a big man, that a bully can show strength by hitting someone. He couldn't hit China, so let's hit India, that's the only thing.'With China, Trump launched a trade war over the large trade deficit, but Beijing hit back by restricting supplies of critical materials, he noted. 'India hasn't used those levers, which is why Washington expected Delhi to yield immediately.'India's refusal to play a compliant role, unlike Pakistan, frustrates Trump. At the same time, India maintains strategic autonomy, engaging with Russia on defence, limiting deep Chinese investment to marketing and distribution, and managing relations with the US on equal footing. 'We are a big country, big economy, and so we have to have workable, good relations with everyone, without being in anybody's camp,' Srivastava pre-Galwan, Chinese investment has been superficial. 'China doesn't invest in deep manufacturing. They will not supply any technology. They will invest in marketing of cars, garments, two, $5 billion here and there, but we don't want that. So we have to evaluate very carefully,' he says.'We can have targeted strategic relationships, like with Russia for defence, but moving closer to China is complicated. There's the border dispute and a $100 billion trade deficit,' he export-oriented economy, diversified supply chains and robust domestic market allow it to absorb short-term shocks while resisting long-term concessions. 'All we need to do is not enter into any relationship that costs us the medium or long term,' Srivastava takeaway is clear: Trump's tariffs are less about trade and more about leverage. Every tweet, every tariff threat, every demand is a political signal designed to demonstrate strength to domestic voters. 'Every day he abuses us on Twitter. That shows India has entered his mind,' Srivastava response emphasises sovereignty, resilience and strategic foresight. "Trade deal is not a trade deal. It's about bargaining for your sovereignty. And India is not bargaining."
Hans India
a minute ago
- Hans India
Temper rhetoric, any misadventure will have painful consequences: India warns Pakistan
New Delhi: India on Thursday slammed Pakistan over its continuous "reckless, war-mongering and hateful comments" against New Delhi, terming it a "well-known modus operandi" of Pakistani leadership to whip up "anti-India" rhetoric to hide its own failures. While addressing a weekly media briefing on Thursday, Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal also warned Pakistan of "painful consequences" in case it engages in any misadventure. "We have seen several statements. We have seen reports regarding a continuing pattern of reckless, war-mongering and hateful comments from Pakistani leadership against India. It is well-known modus operandi of the Pakistani leadership to whip up anti-India rhetoric time and again to hide their own failures. Pakistan would be well-advised to temper its rhetoric, as any misadventure will have painful consequences, as was demonstrated recently," said Jaiswal in response to a question on the recent controversial statements made by Pakistani Army Chief General Asim Munir. The MEA's strong response came after Munir during his recent visit to the United States warned that Pakistan will never allow India to choke the Indus River and will defend its water rights at all costs even if its forces will have to destroy any dam that India sought to build on it. "We will wait for India to build a dam, and when they do so, we will destroy it ... The Indus River is not the Indians' family property. We have no shortage of resources to undo the Indian designs to stop the river," Munir was quoted as saying by leading Pakistani daily Dawn at an event organised by members of the Pakistani-American community in Tampa, Florida, last week. India, which has already made it clear that it will not give in to nuclear blackmail, had earlier reacted strongly to the comments made by Munir. On Monday, Jaiswal stated, "Our attention has been drawn to remarks reportedly made by the Pakistani Chief of Army Staff while on a visit to the United States. Nuclear sabre-rattling is Pakistan's stock-in-trade. The international community can draw its own conclusions on the irresponsibility inherent in such remarks, which also reinforce the well-held doubts about the integrity of nuclear command and control in a state where the military is hand-in-glove with terrorist groups." In the statement, MEA also expressed regret that these remarks were made in a friendly third nation. "It is also regrettable that these remarks should have been made from the soil of a friendly third country. India has already made it clear that it will not give in to nuclear blackmail. We will continue to take all steps necessary to safeguard our national security," the MEA statement mentioned. Earlier in April, India had hit out strongly at the Pakistani Army Chief for referring Kashmir as Islamabad's "jugular vein". "See, how can anything foreign be their jugular vein? This is a Union Territory of India. Its only relationship with Pakistan is the vacation of illegally-occupied territories by that country," said Jaiswal during a regular media briefing on April 17.
