Russian president Putin shocks everyone with two massive steps in a day, Trump will be both happy and sad because…, Iran will now…
In two massive developments impacting the geopolitical world, Russian President Vladimir Putin surprised everyone by taking two steps simultaneously. Media reports have it that the Russian President h
By Abhijeet Sen Edited by Abhijeet Sen
Advertisement
Russian President Putin and Donald Trump
In two massive developments impacting the geopolitical world, Russian President Vladimir Putin surprised everyone by taking two steps simultaneously. Media reports have it that the Russian President has on one hand, agreed to hold peace talks to end the Ukraine war, and on the other hand, he has held a surprise meeting with Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's top nuclear advisor Ali Larijani on Tehran's nuclear program. Here are all the details you need to know about the two significant developments between Iran, Russia and US.
On the meeting with Ali Larijani on Sunday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that it was an unannounced meeting in which Larijani shared with the Russian president his 'assessment of the deteriorating situation in the Middle East and the Iranian nuclear program.'
Advertisement ===
What was decided in Russia-Iran secret talk?
In the recent development, it has been reported that Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on the meeting with Ali Larijani that it was an unannounced meeting in which Larijani shared with the Russian president regarding Putin's 'assessment of the deteriorating situation in the Middle East and the Iranian nuclear program.'
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky proposes fresh talks with Russia
In the recent development, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said that Kyiv has proposed to hold a new round of peace talks with Moscow next week. Notably, Rustem Umerov, who headed the Ukrainian delegation in the previous two talks in Istanbul, had sent the Russian side the offer to hold the meeting next week, Zelensky said in his recent address to the nation as per a report by IANS news agency.
Advertisement ===
'The momentum of the negotiations must be stepped up,' Zelensky said. 'Everything should be done to achieve a ceasefire.'
Russia rejects US President's 50-day ultimatum
In response to Trump's statement, Russia rejected US President's 50-day ultimatum to agree to a Ukraine ceasefire, dismissing the threat of 'severe tariffs' as unacceptable. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov emphasised that Moscow favours a diplomatic resolution to the Ukraine conflict and is ready to negotiate.
(With inputs from agencies)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
18 minutes ago
- Hans India
Reckless decision: Rubio slams France's recognition of Palestine state
Washington: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio dismissed French President Emmanuel Macron's move to officially recognise the state of Palestine, calling it a 'reckless decision'. 'The United States strongly rejects Emmanuel Macron's plan to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly. This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace. It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7,' Rubio said on Friday in a post on X. The remarks came after French President Macron announced France's decision to recognise the Palestinian state. 'Consistent with its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognise the State of Palestine. I will make this solemn announcement before the United Nations General Assembly this coming September. The urgent priority today is to end the war in Gaza and to bring relief to the civilian population,' Macron stated in his social media post. Condemning the decision, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the move' rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy.' 'We strongly condemn President Macron's decision to recognize a Palestinian state next to Tel Aviv in the wake of the October 7 massacre. Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became. A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it. Let's be clear: the Palestinians do not seek a state alongside Israel; they seek a state instead of Israel,' said Netanyahu in a post on X. In a strongly worded statement, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar said, 'The French President's pretension to create by mere words an illusionary arrangement in our land is ridiculous and not serious. His statement this evening shows that all the conditions that he himself set a few weeks ago - have that remains is the illusionary state he presumes to establish." "A Palestinian state will be a Hamas state, just as the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip twenty years ago led to Hamas taking control of it,' Sa'ar emphasised. Meanwhile Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz called the move 'a disgrace and a surrender to terrorism'. 'Macron's announcement of his intention to recognise a Palestinian state is a disgrace and a surrender to terrorism, granting a reward and encouragement to the murderers and rapists of Hamas, who carried out the most horrific massacre of the Jewish people since the Holocaust. Instead of standing with Israel in this time of trial, the French president is acting to weaken it,'the Israeli Defence Minister stated 'We will not allow the establishment of a Palestinian entity that would harm our security, endanger our existence, and undermine our historical right to the Land of Israel. We are all united to prevent this grave danger,' he added.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Europeans, Iranians meet as return of sanctions looms over nuclear deadlock
Iranian and European diplomats are set to meet in Istanbul Friday to embark on the latest drive to unpick the deadlock over Tehran's nuclear programme. Representatives from Britain, France and Germany, known as the E3 nations, will gather at the Iranian consulate building for the first talks since Iran's 12-day war with Israel in June, which involved US bombers striking nuclear-related facilities. The talks are centred on the possibility of reimposing sanctions on Iran that were lifted in 2015 in exchange for Iran accepting restrictions and monitoring of its nuclear programme. The return of sanctions, known as a snapback mechanism, remains on the table, according to a European diplomat speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the talks. A possible delay in triggering snapback has been floated to the Iranians on the condition that there is credible diplomatic engagement by Iran, that they resume full cooperation with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), and that they address concerns about their highly-enriched uranium stockpile, the diplomat said. European leaders have said sanctions will resume by the end of August if there is no progress on containing Iran's nuclear programme. Tehran, meanwhile, has said the US, which withdrew from the 2015 deal during President Donald Trump's first term, needs to rebuild faith in its role in negotiations. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said Iran's engagement was dependent on several key principles that included rebuilding Iran's trust as Iran has absolutely no trust in the United States. In a social media post Thursday, he also said the talks shouldn't be used as a platform for hidden agendas such as military action. Gharibabadi insisted that Iran's right to enrich uranium in line with its legitimate needs be respected and sanctions removed. Iran has repeatedly threatened to leave the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which commits it to refrain from developing nuclear weapons, if sanctions return. Friday's talks will be held at the deputy ministerial level, with Iran sending Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-e Ravanchi. A similar meeting was held in Istanbul in May. The identity of the E3 representatives were not immediately clear but the European Union's deputy foreign policy commissioner is expected to attend. The UK, France and Germany were signatories to the 2015 deal, alongside the US, Russia and China. When the US withdrew in 2018, Trump insisted the agreement wasn't tough enough. Under the original deal, neither Russia nor China can veto reimposed sanctions. Since the Israeli and US strikes on Iran, which saw American B-52 bombers hit three nuclear sites, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has accused the E3 of hypocrisy, saying they failed to uphold their obligations while supporting Israel's attacks. Against the backdrop of the conflict, which saw Iran respond with missile attacks on Israel and a strike on a US base in Qatar, the road ahead remains uncertain While European officials have said they want to avoid further conflict and are open to a negotiated solution, they have warned that time is running out. Tehran maintains it is open to diplomacy, though it recently suspended cooperation with the IAEA. A central concern for Western powers was highlighted when the IAEA reported in May that Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched to 60 per cent just below weapons-grade level had grown to over 400 kilograms. In an interview with Al Jazeera that aired Wednesday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Iran is prepared for another war and reiterated that its nuclear programme will continue within the framework of international law while adding the country had no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons. A spokesman for Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said Thursday the country's nuclear industry would grow back and thrive again after the recent attacks by Israel and the US. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
West Asia on the boil: The strategic fallout of Israel-Iran clashes
The US and Israel's collaboration in dismantling Iranian nuclear facilities through the use of critical and cutting-edge technology from the air has inflicted considerable damage on Iran read more This handout satellite image provided by Maxar Technologies and dated June 29, 2025 shows a view of tunnel entrances at the Fordo (Fordow) Fuel Enrichment Plant complex, about 30 kilometres north of Qom in central Iran. AFP The recent attack and counter-attack between Israel and Iran have widened the scope of the conflict in West Asia. The long-simmering tension between them conflagrated into a condition that bordered on a full-blown war. The US and Israel's collaboration in dismantling Iranian nuclear facilities through the use of critical and cutting-edge technology from the air has inflicted considerable damage on Iran. It is difficult to assess the scope and nature of the damage to the nuclear facilities in an authoritarian country, where everything is guarded closely and access to information is not a right. Iran's clandestine pursuit of nuclear enrichment in deep underground facilities makes it difficult to determine the gravity of damage. However, Iran threatens to attack American military bases in the region. Therefore, the recent hiatus is short-lived or a sort of preparation for something consequential in the near future. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The cycle of violence has already begun, and it may intensify sooner or later to a different level. Every move has seen a countermove in the past. For instance, Israel's attack on Iran's nuclear and military sites coincided with the latter's attack on Tel Aviv and Haifa—critical areas from security, civilian, commercial, and defence perspectives. Israel's impregnable air defence system, known as Iron Dome, was penetrated by Iranian missiles, causing considerable damage. These developments sent shockwaves worldwide concerning their possible escalation and concomitant ramifications. The potential global economic consequences of a full-scale war—or even the persistence of the ongoing conflict—will have significant geopolitical implications for the region and beyond. To understand the character of the conflict, the following aspects assume salience: Geographical Non-Contiguity Israel and Iran do not share a common border. This geographical factor is a war-negative factor. Missile exchanges between the two countries are not new. Iran has disproportionately carried out air attacks on Israel in the past. Israel's Iron Dome has usually prevented destruction. Tel Aviv has consistently directed its efforts to thwart Iran's resolve to build a nuclear warhead. The former strikes the latter's nuclear facilities to prevent the completion and test-firing of a nuclear perceives an existential threat from Iran, which is determined to destroy Israel for ideological and religious reasons. Geography is a significant deterrent. Iran uses Iraqi and Jordanian airspace to attack Israel. Israel also uses Syrian and Iraqi airspace to carry out air offensives against Iran. Aerial war using other nations' airspace is untenable and expensive in the long run. Air defence and AI-based disabling technology may render missiles imprecise and erratic. Israel has reportedly taken control of Iranian airspace, posing an enormous challenge to Iranian air power. Sanctioned Iran and the Nuclear Issue Iran is the most sanctions-affected country in the world. International sanctions were imposed and expanded against Iran for obstinately pursuing its nuclear programme, creating regional disorder, and for its debilitating human rights record. These chronic sanctions have proven economically disastrous. Today, China is the largest importer of Iranian crude. Sanctions have affected Iran's crude exports to other countries. The barrage of sanctions has hit its economy. Funding proxies, uranium enrichment, and nuclear facilities have drained its resources. Domestic investment for progress and quality of life has shrunk abysmally. Tehran continues its nuclear programme despite sanctions. Its nuclear issue is the most pressing one in the region. Iran enriched uranium up to 60% purity, prompting Israel to allege that Tehran is closer to producing nuclear weapons. It launched 'Operation Rising Lion', attacking Isfahan, Natanz, and other Iranian nuclear facilities. Fordow, Iran's most fortified underground nuclear facility, has many centrifuges that remain immune to Israeli attack. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD However, several factors constrain Tehran's nuclear ambition. Iran, the P5, and Germany signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)/Iran nuclear deal in 2015, limiting uranium enrichment to 3.67 per cent, sufficient for electricity production. However, Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018, citing inherent weaknesses in the treaty. After the US withdrawal, Iran further enriched its uranium. Tehran maintains that it has every right to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. This is just a statement, contradicting Iran's professed objective of Israel's destruction. On the other hand, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi, in a June 2025 address, said, 'Unless and until Iran assists the agency in resolving the outstanding safeguard issues, the agency will not be in a position to provide assurance that Iran's nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful.' The first round of Iran-US nuclear talks was held in Muscat in April 2025 with Oman's mediation. The sixth round of talks halted in the wake of the conflict. However, Iran has said it is ready for diplomacy with the US, provided Israel stops its aggression. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Understanding the regional geopolitical dynamics of West Asia through the lens of structural realism, one can ask: Will Iran weaponise nuclear power to checkmate Israel and intensify anti-West proclivities? Be that as it may, Iran's ideological moorings and theological orthodoxy indicate the likelihood of using nuclear capacity for veto power and obstructionist politics. Ideological Antithesis Iran is ideologically anti-West. The Shia Islamism of Iran is an antithesis to Western liberalism, democracy, gender equality, and religious freedom. Israel is pro-West and pro-US. Iran does not acknowledge Israel as a state and treats it as an occupying power. There is a deep-seated ideological conflict between the two countries, proving Samuel Huntington's thesis of the 'clash of civilizations', which posits that cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world. This civilisational and ideological enmity, rooted in deep history, is unlikely to resolve quickly. The seeds of conflict rarely die—even after centuries. They lie dormant, waiting for conditions to re-emerge. The dust of conflict hardly settles despite the heavy cost it inflicts. Constructivists also see the Iran-Israel conflict through an ideological lens and find their antagonism deeply rooted. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Iran's Proxy Warfare Iran has a well-developed proxy framework. It uses its proxies effectively to secure itself from direct confrontation with Israel and the US. Tehran employs such asymmetric warfare strategies through Hamas, Houthis, Hezbollah, and Kataib Hezbollah to counter the growing geopolitical and geostrategic weight of Israel and the USA. It disrupts peace in the region through proxies and promotes religious radicalism. The Israeli counter-offensive against Hamas and Hezbollah after the October 7 brutal episode has defanged their leadership. Top leaders among them include Hassan Nasrallah, Secretary-General of Hezbollah; Fuad Sukr, top commander of Hezbollah; Nabil Kaouk, Deputy Head of Hezbollah Central Council; Ismail Haniyeh, leader of Hamas; Mohammed Deif, Commander of the Military Wing of Hamas; and Ibrahim Aqil, Commander of the Radwan Force. The US has also gone against the Houthis, known for disrupting Red Sea trade. Iran is adept at grey warfare. It rarely confronts enemies directly but targets them through proxies. Since its proxies have been weakened by Israel's concerted attacks, Iran is now exposed to direct confrontation. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Hegemony of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) dates back to the 1979 revolution. It is Iran's most powerful organisation, reporting directly to the Supreme Leader. It is anti-West and anti-Israel. Religious orthodoxy is its core value. It is reported that recent Israeli airstrikes eliminated top leadership, including Hossein Salami (Head of the IRGC), Gholami Rashid (Commander of Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters), Amir Ali Hajizadeh (Commander of IRGC Aerospace Forces), and Esmail Qaani (Commander of Quds Force). Despite setbacks, the IRGC is a powerful organisation with political and economic hegemony in Iran. It can bypass the elected government and operates under the direct command of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei (Velayat-e-Faqih). It has wings such as a ground force, Basij paramilitary, naval force (patrolling the Strait of Hormuz), air force (handling the missile programme), and cyber command (espionage and propaganda). It supports armed non-state actors to resist Western systems and views Israel as a perpetual enemy. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Its proxies include Al-Ashtar Brigades in Bahrain; Kata'ib Hezbollah, Badr Organisation, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, Hezbollah Harakat al-Nujaba, and Kata'ib Sayyed al-Shuhada in Iraq; Hezbollah in Lebanon; Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas in Palestine; Fatemiyoun Brigade, Zainabiyoun Brigade, Quwat al-Ridha, and Baqir Brigade in Syria; and the Houthis in Yemen. The Quds Force handles external missions while Basij suppresses domestic unrest. Regional Faultlines Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia compete for Islamic leadership. Saudi Arabia is naturally positioned for this role due to its custodianship of Islam's two holiest sites—Mecca and Medina. Turkey and Iran promote Islamic causes to assert leadership despite Shia-Sunni divides. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) represents Islamic unity, yet tensions remain. The Iran-Saudi conflict is intensified by the Yemen war. Turkey, a NATO member, has its own regional vulnerabilities like Kurdish separatism and is unlikely to openly side with Iran. The UAE and Saudi Arabia have chosen a developmental path and avoid religious radicalism. They prioritise stability and trade, aligned with neoliberal and multipolar worldviews. Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are diversifying their economies, investing globally, building infrastructure, and embracing AI. These states focus on delivering on their Vision Documents and maintaining regime security—hence, avoiding direct entanglement in conflicts. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The American Strategy The US uses an offshore balancing strategy to check Iran's rise. It is Israel's unwavering ally, supporting it militarily to deter Iran's nuclear ambitions. Nuclear-armed Iran would destabilise the region and threaten Israel's existence. The US also supports GCC states—Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain—against Iranian threats. It ensures energy security and free navigation in critical waterways like the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb. The US Central Command (CENTCOM) is headquartered in Bahrain, with bases in Kuwait (Camp Arifjan), UAE (Al Dhafra), Qatar (Al Udeid), Iraq (Erbil), etc., to deter geostrategic risks. The recent US-Israel joint strike against Iranian nuclear sites underscores this strategic resolve. If Iran retaliates against US assets, it may prompt further US strikes to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities. Tehran's defiance suggests an escalation is imminent. Russia's Position Russia may support Iran militarily or logistically, but not overtly. It could not intervene meaningfully in Syria after Assad's ousting—Assad now lives under Putin's protection in Moscow. Russia is too mired in its Ukraine war to engage elsewhere. War fatigue limits its options. Any support for Iran will be covert and material. China's Transactional Approach China may supply Iran with material and weapons. True to Sun Tzu's thinking, China avoids direct confrontation, especially on others' behalf. It excels in 'grey zone' warfare, preferring ambiguity. A transactional power, China prioritises its economic interests—particularly uninterrupted access to Iranian oil. While it may support Iran materially, it will do so discreetly, avoiding antagonism with Israel or the West. Jajati K Pattnaik is an Associate Professor at the Centre for West Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Chandan K Panda is an Assistant Professor at Rajiv Gandhi University (A Central University), Itanagar. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
