IAEA official to visit Iran for talks on new ‘cooperation framework'
Four killed in southeast Iran clashes
Iranian artist Mahmoud Farshchian dies at 96
Unemployment soars in Iran's Ilam despite rich natural resources
Iran returns prisoners to Evin after Israeli strike
A+ A-
ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - A senior official from the United Nations nuclear watchdog is set to visit Iran on Monday to discuss a new framework for cooperation between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Tehran, Iran's foreign minister confirmed on Sunday. The visit comes after weeks of tensions that saw Iran's parliament pass a law suspending cooperation with the agency.
Tehran's state-run news agency (IRNA) quoted Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi as stating that a deputy to IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi 'will visit Tehran tomorrow [Monday].' Talks will focus on developing a 'new framework for cooperation,' Araghchi stated, while reiterating that there would be 'no open inspection program.'
'We have not yet reached an agreement on the new framework, and cooperation will not begin until such an agreement is reached,' the senior Iranian diplomat stressed, adding that any framework would be strictly based on the law passed by parliament in late June.
The law mandates the suspension of 'all forms of cooperation with the IAEA that go beyond the country's core obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)." This includes halting implementation of the Additional Protocol, which had previously permitted intrusive, short-notice inspections by the agency.
The legislation further conditions any future cooperation on guarantees for the 'security and safety of Iran's nuclear facilities and personnel,' as well as 'formal international recognition of Iran's right to a peaceful nuclear program.' It also explicitly prohibits IAEA inspectors from visiting nuclear sites, with non-compliance deemed a criminal offense for Iranian officials.
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf in late June defended the legislation, accusing the IAEA of having become 'a political instrument,' blaming it for the flare up of the 12-day conflict between Iran and Israel, which also drew in the United States.
On June 13, Israel launched a series of airstrikes on Iranian territory, targeting nuclear facilities and killing several high-ranking military commanders and nuclear scientists. Iran retaliated with missile and drone strikes against Israeli targets.
Tensions escalated further when the United States conducted airstrikes on June 22 against Iran's Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz nuclear sites. In response, Iran fired ballistic missiles at the US-operated al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar. A ceasefire, brokered by Washington on June 24, has since held.
Notably, the Israeli strikes came just one day after the IAEA Board of Governors passed a resolution on June 12 declaring Iran in violation of its nuclear non-proliferation commitments.
Tehran rejected the resolution as 'politically motivated,' accusing Israel of supplying 'forged' intelligence to the agency.
Iran's Atomic Energy Organization (AEOI) also condemned the resolution, claiming Grossi had abandoned the agency's principle of impartiality.
Despite the intensifying rhetoric, Grossi in early July expressed cautious optimism about mending fences with Tehran, saying he was 'encouraged' by Iran's willingness to host an IAEA delegation.
Stalled nuclear talks
On broader nuclear negotiations, Araghchi confirmed Sunday that no new round of talks with the US has been scheduled.
'A new round of negotiations has not yet been scheduled, and nothing has been finalized,' he said. 'Indirect negotiations have also not been confirmed so far, and I am not confirming any country in this regard.'
Mediated by Oman, indirect US-Iran nuclear talks resumed on April 12, with five rounds held - the latest on May 23. These discussions marked the most serious engagement since the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), under which Iran curbed its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.
The sixth round of talks, planned for June 15 in Muscat, was canceled following the outbreak of the Israel-Iran conflict two days earlier.
Since the June 24 ceasefire, negotiations have stalled.
Araghchi previously demanded 'financial compensation' from the US for its strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, a request dismissed by Washington as 'ridiculous.' Meanwhile, the US has continued imposing new sanctions, including fresh measures last Thursday targeting Iran's oil and shipping sectors.
E3 pressures mount as 'snapback' looms
Commenting on ongoing talks between Iran and the E3 - France, Germany, and the UK - Araghchi on Sunday stated that discussions remain 'ongoing,' but dismissed their ability to trigger the JCPOA's snapback mechanism.
'From our perspective, 'snapback' is not a relevant issue, and Europe cannot take such an action. Given the positions they have taken, in our view, the Europeans are essentially no longer considered participants in the JCPOA,' he stated.
At the core of the dispute between Iran and the E3 is a high-stakes standoff driven by Iran's accelerating nuclear program and the E3's use of the looming snapback mechanism - a powerful diplomatic tool embedded in the JCPOA, which allows for the automatic re-imposition of UN Security Council sanctions on Iran if it violates its nuclear commitments.
Any of the remaining signatories of the 2015 deal - the E3 (France, Germany, and the UK), China, and Russia - can trigger this mechanism set to expire on October 18, 2025.
The E3 recently voiced alarm over Iran's enrichment of uranium in what drastically shortens Iran's breakout time to a nuclear weapon..
The European countries have further set an ultimatum, warning they will trigger a "snapback" mechanism by the end of August 2025 if Iran doesn't show a "firm, tangible, and verifiable commitment" to a nuclear deal.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot has stated that the E3 "will not hesitate for a single second to reapply all the sanctions" if European security is threatened by Iran's nuclear activities.
Whether diplomacy can be salvaged or a new phase of sanctions and confrontation awaits remains to be seen.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Shafaq News
an hour ago
- Shafaq News
Iraq's al-Sadr rejects missile displays during Arbaeen
Shafaq News – Baghdad Iraqi Patriotic Shiite Movement (Sadrist) Leader Muqtada al-Sadr condemned, on Thursday, the display of missile replicas in religious shrines during the Arbaeen pilgrimage, one of the world's largest annual Shiite gatherings commemorating the martyrdom of the third Shia Imam Hussein bin Ali. 'Militarizing shrines is forbidden,' Al-Sadr said in a brief handwritten note circulated by media outlets linked to his movement. His remarks came after videos surfaced showing pilgrims making missile-launch gestures—apparently referencing recent Iranian strikes on Israel—and exhibits inside the Imam Hussein shrine in Karbala featuring missile models widely interpreted as symbols of Iranian military power. The controversy coincided with an unannounced visit by Iranian officials to Iraq. Earlier this week, Israeli Army Spokesperson Avichay Adraee denounced the displays, alleging they glorify attacks by Iran's regional proxies 'who have suffered repeated defeats over the past two years.' Al-Sadr has long opposed pulling Iraq into regional conflicts, frequently clashing with Iran-backed factions. In June, he called for keeping Iraq out of the Iran–Israel confrontation, but accused Israel of crossing red lines with US support, warning that Iran might not be the last target if tensions continue to escalate.
Shafaq News
an hour ago
- Shafaq News
Iraqi–Iranian Security MoU rekindles a decade of border deals—and old controversies
Shafaq News – Baghdad A new security memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Iraq and Iran has reignited debate over sovereignty, parliamentary oversight, and Iraq's vulnerability to regional rivalries. Signed on Tuesday under the auspices of Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, the document upgrades an earlier security record into a broader agreement between National Security Advisor Qassem al-Araji and his Iranian counterpart Ali Larijani. Objectives and Security Provisions According to a senior Iraqi security source, the MoU aims to strengthen border protection, address the presence of Iranian opposition groups in the Kurdistan Region, and prevent the emergence of a PKK-style model in Iraq's frontier districts. It establishes mechanisms for intelligence sharing, joint patrols, counter-narcotics coordination, and monitoring ISIS movements along roughly 1,450 kilometers of border, about 600 kilometers of which lie inside the Kurdistan Region. Al-Araji said the accord builds directly on the March 2023 border security agreement, calling it its 'foundation.' That earlier deal focused on tightening control along the Kurdistan Region frontier, where Tehran has accused armed dissidents of staging cross-border attacks. Parliamentary Oversight and Political Reactions Kareem Abu Souda, a member of the parliamentary Security and Defense Committee, criticized the absence of legislative review, noting that the Council of Representatives had not been informed due to its current suspension. He told Shafaq News the committee 'rejects any external interference outside the framework of formal agreements,' and insisted any pact 'must be presented to Parliament in line with constitutional procedures.' Security expert Sarmad al-Bayati described the MoU as mutually beneficial for border management and threat reduction, linking it to the 2023–2024 withdrawal of armed Iranian opposition factions from Iraq. 'The memorandum does not contain secret clauses,' he stressed. MP Mukhtar al-Moussawi of the Foreign Relations Committee called Iran Iraq's 'strategic depth,' recalling Tehran's early military assistance against ISIS in 2014 and saying the agreement 'affirms that Iraq is not alone.' US Rejection and Regional Pushback The US State Department warned the MoU could weaken Iraqi security institutions and 'turn Iraq into a client state of Iran.' Spokesperson Tammy Bruce argued it undermined efforts to build independent Iraqi defense capabilities. Baghdad's embassy in Washington responded that Iraq is not subordinate to any state's policies, that its decisions reflect independent national will, and that it maintains balanced relations with both neighbors and the United States based on mutual respect and shared interests. Iran's Embassy in Baghdad also rejected Washington's position, calling it 'an unacceptable intrusion into the relations between two neighboring and sovereign states' and accusing the United States of pursuing a destabilizing approach in the region. The statement said such actions violate the UN Charter and international law. Domestic Political Divide Salah al-Zubaidi of the Iran-aligned al-Nasr Coalition said Washington has no right to dictate Iraq's security policy, though he acknowledged the possibility of US economic pressure to limit Iranian influence. Security analyst Ahmed al-Sharifi told Shafaq News that under the 2008 US–Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement, Washington can raise objections because Iran is a US adversary. 'For now, the MoU remains a security understanding, not a treaty, and therefore carries limited legal weight,' he said. Security expert Adnan al-Kanani described the memorandum as part of long-term cooperation but stressed political divisions over Baghdad's closeness to Tehran. He noted that distancing Iranian opposition elements—estimated at around 20,000 people, including families—remains a central goal. A Decade of Agreements and Flashpoints The 2023 accord, reaffirmed by al-Araji as the base of the current MoU, followed Tehran's September ultimatum to disarm and relocate armed Iranian Kurdish groups by the 19th of that month. Baghdad complied by moving them from border zones to designated camps. Those measures came after Iranian Revolutionary Guard missile and drone strikes in September and November 2022 against targets in the Kurdistan Region—operations Tehran framed as counter-terrorism, but which intensified pressure for formal border arrangements. Earlier milestones include the July 2017 military cooperation MoU, which expanded joint training and logistics but drew US concern over deepening Iranian military ties, and the December 2014 defense cooperation MoU signed at the height of ISIS's advance. The deeper legal backdrop is the 1975 Algiers Agreement, which settled land and river boundaries along the Shatt al-Arab—a reference point repeatedly revived in moments of crisis. Over the past decade—2014, 2017, 2023, and now 2025—each deal has been followed by cycles of coercion or escalation. The latest memorandum again seeks to codify border rules in hopes of reducing friction. Whether this MoU breaks that cycle will depend less on the language of the agreement than on transparent enforcement and Baghdad's ability to shield itself from the gravitational pull of competing regional powers. Potential spoilers, according to observers, include renewed Iranian strikes in Kurdistan, shifts in Iraq's domestic political balance, or US economic measures aimed at curbing Tehran's influence.
Rudaw Net
4 hours ago
- Rudaw Net
Syria Alawite violence ‘systematic', may constitute ‘war crimes': UN
Also in Syria SDF says investigating suspected ISIS attack in Deir ez-Zor Syria denies attacks on Kurdish neighborhoods in Aleppo US envoy says Syria vowed accountability for Suwayda violence Damascus, SDF trade blame over 'ceasefire violations' A+ A- ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - A United Nations commission investigating deadly March violence in Syria's Alawite-majority coastal areas said the attacks, which left over 1,400 dead, were 'systematic' and likely amounted to 'war crimes.' In March, violence erupted in Syria's Alawite-majority coastal areas after armed groups, many loyal to ousted president Bashar al-Assad, launched attacks on forces allied with the government, prompting Damascus to respond with force. A report by the the United Nations' Human Rights Council (UNHCR) commission in Syria, which 'examines serious violations, primarily targeting Alawi communities,' said the violence included 'acts that likely amount to crimes, including war crimes' committed by factions affiliated with the former regime, 'interim government force members,' and private individuals. 'These acts included murder, torture, abductions, and inhumane acts related to the treatment of the dead, as well as pillage and property destruction, including related to medical facilities,' the report summarized. The commission said that although the killings followed 'a systematic pattern across multiple, widespread locations,' it 'found no evidence of a governmental policy or plan to carry out such attacks.' At least 1,700 people - mostly Alawite civilians - were killed in the attacks, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, with many deaths blamed on the Syrian interim government and its affiliated forces. According to the report, 'Some 1,400 people, predominantly civilians, including approximately 100 women, were reported killed, most in massacres that ensued over a large geographic area, alongside other kinds of violence, looting, burning and displacement.' The violence, much of it filmed or photographed by the perpetrators, 'has deepened rifts between communities.' Damascus formed an investigative committee to probe the violence. In late July, the committee announced that it had identified nearly 300 suspects in connection with the events. Investigations by the committee documented 'serious violations against civilians,' including 'murder, premeditated murder, looting, destruction and burning of homes, torture, and sectarian insults.' The UN acknowledged that 'alleged perpetrators' were 'reportedly' arrested by the interim government but stressed that 'the scale of the violence documented in this report warrants expanding such efforts,' underscoring 'the need for clear accountability for all perpetrators, regardless of affiliation or rank.' The report also cited Syria's long record of human rights violations - particularly by the Assad regime - and the public's 'desire for accountability for the violations that occurred throughout the conflict,' combined with 'insufficient clarity on the new framework for justice' and a security vacuum, as factors that led 'some to take the law into their own hands.' Syrians rose against Assad in March 2011, sparking a full-scale civil war that has killed hundreds of thousands and left millions in dire humanitarian need. The report noted that the interim government has incorporated factions with 'well-documented histories of violations and abuses during the conflict.' The report added that the interim government has incorporated factions with 'well-documented histories of violations and abuses during the conflict.' In early June, US Special Envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack told Reuters that an understanding had been reached with Damascus on integrating foreign fighters loyal to the new administration. Three Syrian defense officials confirmed to the outlet that the plan includes around 3,500 foreign fighters - mainly Uyghurs from China and neighboring countries - being formed into a new military unit alongside Syrian nationals. Officials in northeast Syria (Rojava) have voiced concern over the decision, while China has also expressed fears about 'terrorism.' The March bloodshed sparked widespread condemnation, including from the United Nations, the United Kingdom, France, Iraq, and Iran. Saudi Arabia and Turkey expressed support for the new authorities in Damascus.
