Kremlin says it sees that Israel does not want mediation efforts with Iran amid 'galloping escalation'
MOSCOW, June 17 (Reuters) - The Kremlin said on Tuesday that it saw that Israel did not want mediation efforts over its conflict with Iran, now in its fifth day amid what Moscow said was "galloping escalation".
Israel launched its air war with a surprise attack last week that has killed nearly the entire top echelon of Iran's military commanders and its leading nuclear scientists. Iran has responded with a barrage of strikes on Israeli cities.
In a call with reporters, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called on both sides to exercise "maximum restraint".
"The situation is continuing to escalate rapidly. The level of unpredictability is absolute," he said.
Peskov said that Russia's offer to mediate between the warring sides if necessary still stood, but that it saw Israel was for now not interested in seeking a peaceful solution.
Russia signed a strategic partnership treaty with Iran in January, but the pact does not include a mutual defence clause. It also has longstanding ties with Israel, though these have been strained by the war in Ukraine and Israel's bombing of Gaza.
Peskov said the Russian embassy in Tehran was coordinating with Russian citizens and providing them with opportunities to evacuate the country via neighbouring Azerbaijan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
40 minutes ago
- The Independent
Instead of ending wars, ‘America First' is being dragged into more of them
It is difficult to discern exactly what the 'big stuff' is that prompted President Trump to leave the G7 summit and return to Washington a day early. Mr Trump wouldn't say what, precisely, but he did advise the 9 million residents of Tehran to 'immediately evacuate' their homes, causing mass panic. Any lingering hopes that the president was going back to the White House to work full time on a ceasefire were extinguished when Mr Trump declared that suggestions to that effect made by the president of France were mistaken: 'I'm not looking for a ceasefire, we're looking at better than a ceasefire.' What the president does want, in his words, is 'an end, a real end, not a ceasefire,' and a 'complete give-up' by Iran. At the same time, though, the president told the world that he had not contacted the Iranians to engage in peace talks in any 'way, shape, or form' because they 'should have taken the deal that was on the table'. Given that many American diplomats have left the region – and the USS Nimitz and its carrier strike group are transferring from the Pacific – it seems plain that the US government is at least contemplating how force (or the threat of it) might have to become necessary to pursue American strategic objectives. President Trump has long been perfectly clear about what one of those prime objectives is: Iran 'just can't have a nuclear weapon'. On that point, at least, he has the backing of his allies, endorsed in the G7 communique, which added that Iran is a 'source of terror'. As is his style, weeks ago he tried a bold – if unlikely – diplomatic initiative to strike a deal, with direct talks in Rome between American and Iranian officials. These were stalling even before Israel started its bombardment of Iran's labs, uranium enrichment facilities and other targets – and the US-Iran talks have since broken down. Yet even now, there is speculation that – pressured by Israel's actions and backed with a major US naval taskforce heading towards the Persian Gulf – Mr Trump may try to use this opportunity to achieve a breakthrough deal. Asked by reporters if he might dispatch his vice-president, JD Vance, and roaming negotiator Steve Witkoff to Iran for this purpose, Mr Trump did not rule it out. 'Peace through strength' is a slogan that the president frequently uses, but thus far in his presidency, it has seldom worked out in practice. This time, the world must hope, will be different. If diplomacy fails? Mr Trump could simply allow Israel to continue its efforts to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities, such as they are, and to so destabilise the theocratic regime that it is overthrown by the Iranian people. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, has made no secret of his wish for 'regime change', addressing the 'Persian' people directly and having his photograph taken with the exiled son of the last shah of Iran, who was toppled by the ayatollahs in the revolution of 1979. Subcontracting the task of disarming Iran and persuading the people of Iran to replace their government with a more palatable, peace-loving alternative, all without any direct US involvement, must have some attractions for American foreign policy (though Mr Trump reportedly vetoed an assassination attempt on the supreme leader of Iran). That carries significant risks, however, which will be apparent to the defence, security and state department officials briefing Mr Trump. For some weeks, Israel has used the George W Bush playbook as applied in the last Gulf war to justify its attacks in Iran – a pre-emptive military strike to remove the threat of weapons of mass destruction, and, as the Americans did with Saddam Hussein, offering regime change as an alternative to destruction and defeat. A similar ultimatum is now being issued by Mr Trump, with Israeli backing – give up your nukes and you can stay in power. If not... But the world knows how that Iraqi story ended – a fractured country that fell into civil war and the rule of Isis, an even more murderous and dangerous entity than the Baathists. The collapse of Iran into chaos and civil war would be a far greater disaster for the world than anything that has happened in Iraq, Libya, Syria or Afghanistan in terms of the consequences for turning a stable (if malign) state into a failed one. Iran is in another league of military and political importance. If there was fighting for control of Iran – and the ayatollahs cannot be expected to meekly slink away to their holy places – then that would soon spread to Yemen, and restart the horrific proxy war there with Saudi Arabia. Russia remains Iran's friend and ally, and relies on its Shahed drones that proved so effective in Ukraine. What would Vladimir Putin do to protect his interests? If America intervenes, or acquiesces in Israel's escalating campaign, the regional conflagration so long feared between Israel and Iran would not remain a private dispute between the two regional superpowers of Israel and Iran, not least because Tehran's client terrorists in Hezbollah, the Houthi rebels and, above all, Hamas will continue to be involved. The more nations and groups become involved, the more unpredictable events will become, and the harder it will be for America to control them. Instead of ending far-away wars, this 'America First' is being dragged into more of them. That's very much 'big stuff' – and big risks.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Russia says Israel attacks on Iran are illegal, notes Iran's commitement to NPT
June 17 (Reuters) - Russia's Foreign Ministry on Tuesday denounced continued Israeli attacks on Iran as illegal and said a solution to the conflict over Tehran's nuclear programme could only be found through diplomacy. A ministry statement posted on Telegram noted Iran's "clear statements" on its commitment to adhere to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and its willingness to meet with U.S. representatives. The statement also said Moscow was waiting for the International Atomic Energy Agency to provide "unvarnished" assessments of the damage caused to Iranian nuclear facilities by Israeli attacks.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Iranian ambassador riles MPs with his lies as conflict with Israel rages
Waiting to watch the Iranian ambassador lie to the foreign affairs committee, a Parliament security guard told me I couldn't bring my bag into the room. I asked why, as Press usually can; he reacted as if I'd pulled a gun. He accused me of disrespect and gave me 'one warning'. What did I say? It wasn't my words but my 'body language'. He claimed I had rolled my eyes. 'I'd ask you to have respect for the committee,' he instructed. A tall order – it's my job to take the mick out of it. But I've been through enough Iranian border posts to know never to argue with a man in a black uniform, so I sat through the committee exuding the utmost respect, holding my eyelids open with my fingers lest they roll, and nodding at everything said by His Most Serene Excellency, Mustapha Leak. Which was hard because it was very silly. Emily Thornberry introduced the ambassador graciously – this woman wants to live – and observed 'how very stressful it must be to be living in Iran right now'. I'll say: the head of the military was killed four days after his predecessor, before the poor fellow even had a chance to complete his workplace orientation. He died without learning the fire drill. The precision of the kill suggests the Israelis are learning with practice. Hitherto, when they tried to assassinate a Hamas fighter, they'd level four hospitals. Yet now they can land a drone on a speck of uranium and prick its atoms, one-by-one. The ambassador – middle-aged, simply dressed with a nice watch – launched into a diatribe against the 'terrorist and criminal … Israeli regime'. When he passed the 15 minute mark, Emily informed him we only had the room for an hour. 'May I finish?' he demanded, unused to being interrupted mid-interrogation, and looked about for some electrodes. Though I normally mock MPs, I will give credit to Abtisam Mohamed for asking him why, if Iran is peaceful, it is drafting legislation to leave the nuclear proliferation treaty? (Parliament is independent, he answered: gosh that was difficult not to laugh at). Also, Blair McDougall for asking why Iran arms Russia? And John Whittingdale for asking after a dissident journalist stabbed in London. 'This is an irrelevant question!' replied Seyed Ali Mousavi. The Islamic Revolution is about 'self-determination'; its proxies are 'liberation movements'. And their fighters, presumably, explode with joy. The ambassador's little friend, sitting behind, handed him a note: I think it read: 'Do better or you'll never see your goat again.' But Dan Carden, who has gravitated from Leftie troublemaker to Labour statesman by investing in a pair of glasses, pressed him on how many citizens his regime has recently killed – and his embarrassing response was to insist his republic is a 'government' not a 'regime'. Yet he'd called Israel a 'regime', too! Thornberry said she had invited the Israelis to take part, but they had declined to respond to these insults. Just as well. We'd be sitting under a pile of rubble. The division bell rang and the ambassador left the building to go and get stoned. No doubt civilians are dying in Iran, but its citizens also hate this man's lying, murdering superiors – and disrespecting one's government is a first step towards democracy.
