Iran says it held 'frank' nuclear talks with European powers
The meeting in Istanbul was the first since Israel launched an attack on Iran last month targeting key nuclear and military sites, sparking a 12-day war and leading Tehran to pull away from working with the UN watchdog.
The European diplomats were seen leaving the Iranian consulate shortly before 1100 GMT after spending several hours inside.
Israel's offensive -- which killed top commanders, nuclear scientists and hundreds of others and in which residential areas and military sites were struck -- also derailed US-Iran nuclear talks that began in April.
Since then, the European powers, known as the E3, have threatened to trigger a so-called "snapback mechanism" under a moribund 2015 nuclear deal that would reinstate UN sanctions on Iran by the end of August.
The sanctions trigger expires in October, and Tehran has warned of consequences should the E3 opt to activate it.
Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who attended the talks alongside senior Iranian diplomat Majid Takht-Ravanchi, wrote on X he had used the meeting to criticise the European stance on the 12-day conflict with Israel.
He said the snapback mechanism had also been discussed, adding: "It was agreed that consultations on this matter will continue."
Before the talks, a European source said the three countries were preparing to trigger the mechanism "in the absence of a negotiated solution".
The source urged Iran to make "clear gestures" on uranium enrichment and the resumption of cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog.
- 'Common ground' -
Gharibabadi warned earlier in the week that triggering sanctions -- which would deepen Iran's international isolation and place further pressure on its already strained economy -- would be "completely illegal".
He accused European powers of "halting their commitments" under the 2015 deal, which the United States unilaterally withdrew from in 2018 during President Donald Trump's first term.
"We have warned them of the risks, but we are still seeking common ground to manage the situation," said Gharibabadi.
Iranian diplomats have previously warned that Tehran could withdraw from the global nuclear non-proliferation treaty if sanctions were reimposed.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has urged European powers to trigger the mechanism.
Israel's June 13 attack on Iran came two days before Tehran and Washington were scheduled to meet for a sixth round of nuclear negotiations.
On June 22, the US joined Israel's offensive by striking Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordo, Isfahan, and Natanz.
Before the war, the US and Iran were divided over uranium enrichment -- Tehran describing it as a "non-negotiable" right, Washington calling it a "red line".
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says Iran is enriching uranium to 60 percent purity -- far above the 3.67 percent cap under the 2015 deal and close to weapons-grade levels.
Tehran has said it is open to discussing the rate and level of enrichment, but not the right to enrich uranium.
A year after the US withdrew from the nuclear deal, Iran began rolling back its commitments, which had placed restrictions on its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.
Israel and Western powers accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran has repeatedly denied.
- 'New form' -
Iran insists it will not abandon its nuclear programme, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi describing the position as "unshakable".
Though he claimed enrichment had come to a halt because of "serious and severe" damage to nuclear sites caused by US and Israeli strikes.
The full extent of the damage sustained in the US bombing remains unclear.
Trump claimed at the time the sites had been "completely destroyed", but US media reports based on Pentagon assessments cast doubt on the scale of destruction.
Since the 12-day war, Iran has suspended cooperation with the IAEA, accusing it of bias and failing to condemn the attacks.
Inspectors have since left the country but a technical team is expected to return in the coming weeks after Iran said future cooperation would take a "new form".
Israel has warned it may resume strikes if Iran rebuilds facilities or moves toward weapons capability.
Iran has pledged a "harsh response" to any future attacks.
bur-jxb/rmb
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SBS Australia
an hour ago
- SBS Australia
Trump says 'great progress' made in US envoy Witkoff's meeting with Putin
United States President Donald Trump said his special envoy Steve Witkoff had made "great progress" in his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, as Washington continued its preparations to impose secondary sanctions. The meeting came two days before a deadline set by Trump for Russia to agree to peace in Ukraine or face new sanctions. Trump has been increasingly frustrated with Putin over the lack of progress towards peace and has threatened to impose heavy tariffs on countries that buy Russian exports. A White House official said while the meeting had gone well, secondary sanctions that Trump has threatened against countries doing business with Russia were still expected to be implemented later this week. "My Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff, just had a highly productive meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Great progress was made!" Trump said in a post on Truth Social. "Everyone agrees this war must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come," he added. Kremlin foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov, who was present, told Russian news outlet Zvezda: "We had a very useful and constructive conversation". He said the two sides had exchanged "signals" on the Ukraine issue and discussed the possibility of developing strategic cooperation between Moscow and Washington, but declined to give more details. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he believed Moscow was now more amenable to a ceasefire. "It seems that Russia is now more inclined to a ceasefire. The pressure on them works. But the main thing is that they do not deceive us in the details — neither us nor the US, " Zelenskyy said in his nightly address. Writing separately on the X social media platform, Zelenskyy said he had discussed Witkoff's visit to Russia with Trump, adding that he had reiterated Ukraine's support for a just peace and its continued determination to defend itself. "Ukraine will definitely defend its independence. We all need a lasting and reliable peace. Russia must end the war that it itself started," Zelenskyy said, adding that European leaders had joined the call with Trump. Trump on Truth Social said he had updated some of Washington's European allies following Witkoff's meeting. Since the two sides resumed direct peace talks in May, Russia has carried out its heaviest air attacks of the war, killing at least 72 people in the capital Kyiv alone. Trump last week called the Russian attacks "disgusting". Ukraine continues to strike Russian refineries and oil depots, which it has hit many times. Pressure on India Meanwhile, Trump took a key step toward punitive measures when he imposed an additional 25 per cent tariff on imports from India, citing New Delhi's continued imports of Russian oil. No similar order was signed for China, which also imports Russian oil. The new measure raises tariffs on some Indian goods to as high as 50% — among the steepest faced by any US trading partner. The Kremlin says threats to penalise countries that trade with Russia are illegal.
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Donald Trump says he wants to stop Vladimir Putin's 'war machine' but his sanctions–tariffs combo could backfire
Donald Trump is searching for a way to end the bloodshed in Ukraine and the US president's latest plan involves combining two of his favourite punishments: more sanctions, more tariffs. This time, it's where they're going — far from the front lines — that's important. And some analysts are warning it could backfire. After weeks of bluster, things got real on Wednesday with an executive order for an additional 25 per cent levies on all US imports from India. Combined with the 25 per cent "reciprocal" tariff announced last week, it becomes a 50 per cent tariff on a country Trump said was fuelling the "war machine" by buying billions of dollars of Russian oil. The White House has flagged more announcements in the coming days. Trump is trying to dig an economic hole around Moscow so big it forces his counterpart there, Vladimir Putin, back to the negotiating table. It's a simple strategy. Measures designed to hurt Russia's finances that have been in place for years will effectively be expanded to include those who line the Kremlin's pockets. India and China have already been singled out for what's known as secondary sanctions. Combined with new tariffs, like those announced on Wednesday, the US could end up being the one that pays the price. Russia has already been subjected to a multitude of penalties imposed by Western governments, including Australia, and their allies, before and after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Moscow's banks are blocked from accessing global financial markets. Oligarchs' assets abroad are frozen. Many countries have shunned trade. All this was designed to stop Putin's ability to fund his military. And yet, more than three years later, it continues to fight. It's become clear that ending the war will take something more. That's where the US president's new plan comes in. India's external affairs ministry released a statement on Wednesday calling the extra tariffs "extremely unfortunate" and warning the country would "take all actions necessary to protect its national interests". Michael O'Kane is a senior partner at London's Peters&Peters law firm and the co-founder of the Global Sanctions website, which tracks the latest developments in this space. He's sceptical about the effectiveness of secondary sanctions, because the West "continually underestimates Russia's ability to pivot and evade any new measures that are being put in place". "And I don't see any reason why that isn't going to continue." One of the main ways the Kremlin does this is by exporting its oil via a so-called "shadow fleet" of ships. It's estimated this force comprises around 1,400 aging tankers that supply a black market of exports and evade the West's naval net with flags of convenience and convoluted ownership structures. "We now have an under-the-radar network of vessels, agents and brokers who are engaged in this activity," O'Kane says. "The two main buyers are India and China, and they are hugely complex, enormous economies where there's a great deal of difficulty in putting some kind of stranglehold on them." Trump's sanctions/tariffs combination will have different repercussions for China, India and Russia, but experts say the US will be affected too. India's new 25 per cent levies are set to begin in 21 days, while previously announced 25 per cent tariffs will come into effect on Thursday. It means by the end of the month, New Delhi will face some of the highest levies on exports of all the US's trading partners. "With such obnoxious tariff rates, trade between the two nations would be practically dead," Madhavi Arora, an economist at Emkay Global, told the Reuters news agency. While that will hurt India more than the US, slapping new taxes on an important strategic partner could cause significant geopolitical consequences for Washington. "The United States security competition with China in the South China Sea and down into the Indian Ocean is a matter of significant concern to the White House," O'Kane says. "They need to have formidable allies. That's why we've seen this AUKUS arrangement being set up, it's all with the view of being able to contain China from a security perspective. "India plays an important role too, and it would seem to me as though taking action against India at this stage could undermine this effort." While India has begun to learn its fate, new US tariffs and secondary sanctions on China — a superpower with which it is currently locked in trade negotiations — haven't yet been revealed Beijing also welcomes Russia's oil, and immunity from Trump's wrath appears unlikely. Dr Patricia M Kim is a fellow at the Brookings Institution's Centre for Asia Policy Studies and John L Thornton China Centre. "It's hard to imagine Beijing would publicly side with Washington against Moscow or appear to bow to American pressure by cutting purchases of Russian oil," she says, adding any new tariffs announced by the White House would have consequences for Beijing and "deal a blow to Chian's export-driven sectors, especially those heavily reliant on the US market". "But it would hurt the US as well." Unlike its trade relationship with India, the US imports masses of cheap electronics and consumer goods from China's manufacturing hubs — all of which could become a lot more expensive for Americans already complaining about the cost of living. It also relies on rare earths from China, which accounts for almost 70 per cent of global production, to build things like planes, missiles and cars. Earlier this year, the US got a taste of how Beijing reacts to being targeted, when a suite of new tariffs were met with swift reciprocal measures. The world's two largest economies got into the ring, and while they've temporarily stopped throwing punches, the White House has hinted this week it may start again. Trump's new plan to try and put pressure on Russia may seem straightforward, but it could pave the way for a new reality after the guns fall silent in Ukraine, and some will find it frightening. Russia exploiting its new, lucrative black market. India cosying up to the Kremlin. And a disrespected China searching for new ways to punish a country that can't do without its wares.
ABC News
3 hours ago
- ABC News
Warnings RBA's move to end card surcharges could hike banking costs or lower rewards points
The Reserve Bank's proposal to end card surcharges aims to save consumers money, but experts warn it could have unintended consequences. RMIT finance professor Angel Zhong told ABC News that, in practice, it could increase banking costs and leave Australians footing the bill. The RBA has said scrapping credit and debit card surcharges would save every adult using a card around $60 a year. The proposed changes include a cap on interchange fees, which means banks will miss out on about $900 million in revenue each year, according to Professor Zhong. "Banks will experience a deduction in their banking revenue, so they need to recoup it somewhere," she said. Surcharges are already banned in Europe and the United Kingdom. Professor Zhong said research into the international experience demonstrated a potential for increased costs to be passed on: A surcharge ban could lead to higher payment costs for small businesses, said Matthew Addison, chair of the small business peak body COSBOA. "Each other time [the payment providers] have lowered one fee, another fee has increased or the service package that is provided to the merchant changes," he said. "While one fee comes down, maybe the cost of the terminal will go up." If payments can no longer be passed on to customers, he said, small businesses might have to increase prices. "At the moment, small business is not in a position to absorb any more costs," he said. While the RBA's review found a lower cap on interchange fees would save business $1.2 billion a year and leave 90 per cent better off, industry groups and merchants have continued to express concern. "Big businesses aren't surcharging because their cost structure of merchant fees is less than a quarter of what small businesses are paying," Mr Addison said. ABC News asked ANZ, Westpac, the Commonwealth Bank and NAB how they planned to recoup costs if the proposals went ahead. The banks said they were unable to comment while they worked on submissions for the central bank by a late August deadline. Melanie Evans, deputy chair of the Australian Banking Association and chief executive of ING in Australia, told The Business that delivering more bang for buck to Australians was important. "But if the economics of our payment systems change then, of course, business models will also change accordingly," she said The banks want mobile wallets, such as Apple and Google Pay included in the review. "We would suggest that there's also opportunity to look more broadly at digital wallets and other forms of payments in the system," said Ms Evans. More Australians are using mobile wallets to tap and go, with payments up almost 30 per cent in the past year. Each time a customer pays using a mobile wallet, the banks pay the tech giants a fee. Professor Zhong said that was where banks could offset lost revenue from the cap on interchange fees. "It would require reforms in other areas in terms of fees charged by mobile wallets to Australian banks," she said. Stakeholders have until August 26 to make submissions regarding the RBA's proposals.
