Iran to consult with Russia and China ahead of European nuclear talks
The meeting comes ahead of renewed nuclear talks with France, Germany and the UK —known as the E3 nations — scheduled for this Friday in Istanbul.
The three European powers, along with China and Russia, are the remaining parties to a 2015 nuclear deal that lifted sanctions on Iran in return for restrictions on its nuclear programme.
The deal began to unravel in 2018, when the US under President Donald Trump pulled out of it and began reimposing certain sanctions.
Since then, Iran has gradually increased its nuclear activities, including uranium enrichment up to 60%, a step away from weapon-grade nuclear materials, or 90% enrichment of uranium.
European countries have threatened to trigger the 2015 deal's 'snapback' mechanism, which would allow sanctions to be reimposed in the case of non-compliance by Tehran.
France, Germany and the UK have warned that they would do so if there is no progress on nuclear talks by the end of August.
Baghaei said Iran is "continuously coordinating" with Beijing and Moscw on how to prevent the snapback mechanism or "to mitigate its consequences".
'No plan' for renewed talks with Washington
On Sunday, Iran's Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, stated in a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres that the three European nations lack 'any legal, political and moral standing' to invoke such mechanisms, and accused France, Germany and the UK of failing to uphold their commitments under the deal.
'The European parties have been at fault and negligent in implementing' the nuclear agreement, Baghaei added.
He also noted that "we have no plan for talks with America, under the current situation."
Friday's talks will be the first since a ceasefire following a 12-day conflict waged by Israel against Iran in June, which also saw the US strike three major nuclear facilities in Iran.
Nearly 1,100 people were killed in Iran, including dozens of military commanders and nuclear scientists. A total of 28 civilians were killed in Israel.
Iran has long said its nuclear activities have aimed at peaceful purposes.
'The agenda is clear: removal of the sanctions and issues related to Iran's peaceful nuclear programme,' Baghaei said in his briefing on Monday.
Tehran has been one of Russia's key allies in its all-out war against Ukraine, providing the Kremlin with its domestically produced Shahed suicide drones.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Europe's migration crisis isn't just about boats – it's about strategy
Europe's migration crisis is not just a humanitarian emergency or a border control problem. It's a strategic breakdown. From the English Channel to Lampedusa, irregular migration continues to dominate headlines and decide elections. The response thus far from many European capitals has been predictable: short-term containment measures, bilateral return agreements, and new offshore processing schemes. And yet the flow continues, unabated and undeterred. Criminal networks that traffic in human lives adapt. Public pressure rises. And the policies, in turn, grow more reactive. To treat migration as a standalone issue is to miss a much broader point. Irregular migration is a symptom — not the disease. The deeper problem lies in a fragmented European foreign policy, the erosion of state sovereignty in transit countries, and the pervasive influence of malign non-state actors in eastern Libya, led by the renegade General Haftar and his international backers — foremost among them Russia — who malevolently weaponise irregular migration to strong-arm European decision-makers on a range of critical issues, including the recognition of Haftar's secessionist regime based in Benghazi. Strategic blind spots Across North Africa and beyond, these forces have been quietly reshaping migration into an effective lever for political pressure. In Libya, for example, irregular migration has not only become a source of illicit income for criminal networks — but it is also a strategic tool used by the authorities in the Haftar-controlled east to exert influence, extract concessions, or disrupt the European agenda. These networks do not operate in isolation. They are often embedded in local structures and enjoy quiet backing from international players who see irregular migration as a bargaining chip — not a humanitarian concern. Their goal is not stability, but leverage. Equally concerning is the European tendency to engage with these actors in good faith — despite their open disdain for political, legal and diplomatic norms, as well as ethical standards. This spectacle played out in full last week when an EU delegation was abruptly expelled from eastern Libya for the apparent crime of adhering to established diplomatic protocol. Many of these Haftar-aligned groups have a lengthy rap sheet of human rights violations, autocratic behaviour, and disregard for international law. While cooperation with such actors may be tempting for European policymakers eager to secure quick wins on migration and border security that placate domestic audiences, these efforts often amount to little more than window dressing. The reason for this is clear: the Haftar-led regime and its loyalists lack any genuine commitment to democratic principles, human dignity, and legal accountability. Their willingness to violate human rights, cooperate in abuses, or pursue agendas that undermine regional stability makes them unreliable and dangerous partners. Their actions are difficult to predict, and their goals more than often run counter to those of their European counterparts. By engaging these forces sans preconditions or pressure, Europe risks further entrenching them — and turning the serious humanitarian crisis of migration into an exploitable political tool, increasingly used to blackmail and coerce European states and institutions. This is not just a policy failure. It is a strategic vulnerability. Unless Europe urgently reconsiders whom it empowers and on what terms, irregular migration will continue to escalate — not simply as a movement of people — but as a symptom of geopolitical exploitation and structural disorder. The result is chaos. Libya, like other transit states, bears the burden of this political ambiguity. Non-regulatory migration continues to grow, and with tragic human consequences. Smuggling routes expand inland while migrants and refugees are left vulnerable to extortion, violence, and exploitation. European engagement remains focused on border control and externalisation. Proposals like the Rwanda model reflect the desire to contain the issue offshore — to move people, not solve problems. But as we've seen time and again – such deals – however politically useful, rarely survive legal or logistical scrutiny. What is needed is a shift in mindset, from reaction to strategy, from containment to cooperation. Four-point reset If Europe is serious about addressing irregular migration, four changes are essential. Deterrence cannot work without alternatives. Safe pathways, such as those piloted through Safe Mobility Offices in Latin America, should be replicated in North Africa. These can divert irregular flows by offering legal entry for asylum, work, or family reunification. Europe must cease dealing with actors who profit from people smuggling and border disorder as security partners. A clean break from engaging with illegitimate authorities — such as those in eastern Libya — combined with sustained political and economic pressure on subversive parallel state structures, is key to safeguarding Libyan state sovereignty, which in turn is essential to restoring border security. Post-Brexit paralysis on migration must end. A UK-EU admissions agreement rooted in shared responsibility — not unilateral returns — would help rebuild cooperation and restore credibility in clear, legal migration pathways. Voluntary repatriation programs remain vastly underused and underfunded. Europe and the UK must align funding to support returns that are humane, supported by reintegration services, and tied to development incentives for countries of origin. A time for strategic clarity If Europe is to regain control of its migration policy, it must first regain clarity in its strategy. Irregular migration is not just a movement of people — it is a reflection of how Europe engages with the world, and how the world responds in turn. The solution lies not in building higher walls or signing risk-shifting deals, but in crafting partnerships based on accountability, long-term interests, and mutual respect. The time for fragmented fixes is over. What is needed now is a coordinated vision — one that sees migration not as a threat to contain, but as a reality to govern wisely and humanely. Walid Ellafi serves as Minister of Communication and Political Affairs in the Libyan Government of National Unity (GNU).
France 24
2 hours ago
- France 24
US ‘strongly rejects' French plan to recognise Palestine, Saudis hail ‘historic decision'
France intends to recognise a Palestinian state in September at the UN General Assembly, President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday in hopes of bringing peace to the region, but the plan drew angry rebukes from Israel and the United States. Macron, who unveiled the decision on social media, published a letter sent to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas confirming France's intention to press ahead with Palestinian recognition and work to convincing other partners to follow suit. "True to its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognise the state of Palestine," Macron said. "I will make this solemn announcement at the United Nations General Assembly next September." Home to Europe's largest Jewish and Muslim communities, France will become the first major Western country to recognise a Palestinian state, potentially fuelling a movement so far dominated by smaller nations generally more critical of Israel. The news sparked anger in Israel and Washington. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the decision by one of Israel's closest allies and a G7 member, saying such a move "rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy." In a post on X, he added, "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." Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz described the move as "a disgrace and a surrender to terrorism," adding that Israel would not allow the establishment of a "Palestinian entity that would harm our security, endanger our existence." In response, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the United States "strongly rejects (Macron's) plan to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN general assembly." In a post on X, he said, "This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace. It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th." Spain, Saudi Arabia welcome decision Earlier, Canada also pressed Israel to seek peace, with Prime Minister Mark Carney condemning its "failure to prevent the rapidly deteriorating humanitarian disaster in Gaza" and reiterating support for a two-state solution. Carney also accused Israel of violating international law over the blocking of Canadian-funded aid to civilians in the war-torn Palestinian enclave. "Canada calls on all sides to negotiate an immediate ceasefire in good faith," he added. "We reiterate our calls for Hamas to immediately release all the hostages, and for the Israeli government to respect the territorial integrity of the West Bank and Gaza." Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, whose country already recognises Palestinian statehood, welcomed Macron's announcement. "Together, we must protect what Netanyahu is trying to destroy. The two-state solution is the only solution," said the Socialist leader and outspoken critic of Israel's offensive in Gaza. The Saudi Foreign Ministry welcomed Macron's "historic decision". "The Kingdom reiterates its call for all countries that have not yet recognised the State of Palestine to take similar positive steps and adopt serious positions that support peace and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people." In a diplomatic cable in June, the United States said it opposed steps to unilaterally recognise a Palestinian state, even saying it could go against US foreign policy interests and draw consequences. In June, Washington's ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, said he did not think an independent Palestinian state remained a US foreign policy goal. President Donald Trump has himself expressed doubts about a two-state solution, proposing a US takeover of Gaza in February, that was condemned by rights groups, Arab states, Palestinians and the UN as a proposal of "ethnic cleansing". Macron had been leaning towards recognising a Palestinian state for months as part of a bid to keep the idea of a two-state solution alive, despite the pressure not to do so. French officials initially weighed up the move ahead of a United Nations conference, which France and Saudi Arabia had planned to co-host in June to lay out parameters for a roadmap to a Palestinian state, while ensuring Israel's security. The conference was postponed under US pressure and after the 12-day Israel-Iran air war began, during which the closure of regional airspace made it hard for representatives of some Arab states to attend. It was rescheduled and downgraded to a ministerial event on July 28 and July 29, with a second event taking place with heads of state and government on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in September. Creating momentum The decision to make the announcement ahead of next week's conference aimed to give the French team at the United Nations a framework to work with other countries that are also considering recognising a Palestinian state or have misgivings in doing so. Diplomats say Macron has faced resistance from allies such as Britain and Canada over his push for the recognition of a Palestinian state. About 40 foreign ministers will be in New York next week. Israeli officials have spent months lobbying to prevent what some have called "a nuclear bomb" for bilateral ties. Sources familiar with the matter say Israel's warnings to France have ranged from scaling back intelligence sharing to complicating Paris' regional initiatives - even hinting at possible annexation of parts of the West Bank. Israel has been waging a devastating war in Gaza since the Palestinian militant group Hamas' deadly attack on Israel in October 2023 and says recognising a Palestinian state now would be equivalent to rewarding Hamas. Thanking France, the Palestinian Authority's Vice President Hussein Al Sheikh said on X that Macron's decision reflected "France's commitment to international law and its support for the Palestinian people's rights to self-determination and the establishment of our independent state."
LeMonde
5 hours ago
- LeMonde
In Beijing, Ursula von der Leyen considers China-EU relations to have reached 'an inflection point'
At least certain issues have been made clear. On Thursday, July 24, European Union leaders traveled to Beijing to speak directly with Chinese President Xi Jinping, followed by Prime Minister Li Qiang, about the series of disputes that have soured relations between the two economic superpowers. The visit was meant to mark half a century of diplomatic ties between China and Europe, but the tone mainly reflected the high level of European frustration. "As our cooperation has deepened, so have imbalances. We have reached an inflection point," said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, at the summit's opening at the Great Hall of the People in Tiananmen Square. Two major issues proved to be the main sources of tension: trade, with all the disputes it has generated, and the industrial and diplomatic support that China has continued to provide to Russia since Moscow launched its war in Ukraine. Protocol would have dictated that Xi travel to Brussels, since the previous summit was already held in Beijing, but Chinese diplomats ruled that out. The Europeans decided not to take offense, judging it essential to engage in person with the Chinese president, given how power is concentrated around him.
