Iran reviewing proposal for 5th round of nuclear talks
DUBAI, May 20 (Reuters) - Iran received and is reviewing a proposal for a fifth round of nuclear talks with the United States, Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said on Tuesday, according to state media.
U.S. President Donald Trump said last week that a new nuclear deal with Tehran was getting very close as the latter was provided with a proposal, adding that Iranians need to "move quickly or something bad is going to happen."
The U.S. president has repeatedly warned Iran it would be bombed and face severe sanctions if it did not reach a compromise to resolve its disputed nuclear programme.
An Iranian official told Reuters that the next round of talks could take place over the weekend in Rome, although this remains to be confirmed.
Although a foreign ministry spokesperson said Tehran would continue negotiations, talks remain on shaky ground as both Iran and the U.S. have clashed on the issue of nuclear enrichment.
Majid Takht-Ravanchi, another Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister, said on Monday that talks would fail if Washington insists that Tehran refrains from enrichment, which the U.S. says is a possible pathway to developing nuclear bombs.
Tehran says its nuclear energy programme has entirely peaceful purposes.
During his first, 2017-21 term as president, Trump withdrew the United States from a 2015 deal between Iran and world powers that placed strict limits on Tehran's enrichment activities in exchange for relief from international sanctions.
Trump, who branded the 2015 accord one-sided in Iran's favour, also reimposed sweeping U.S. sanctions on Iran. The Islamic Republic responded by escalating enrichment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump fails to overturn $5m damages award to E Jean Carroll for defamation
Donald Trump has lost his latest legal attempt to challenge the $5m in damages awarded against him for defaming E Jean Carroll, the New York writer whom a jury found was sexually abused by the now-US president in the 1990s. A US appeals court in New York City on Friday denied Trump's request to reconsider its decision in December to uphold the jury's award of $5m to Carroll. The court was divided in its opinion, with two Trump-appointed judges, Steven Menashi and Michael Park, dissenting. Carroll, a former magazine columnist, accused Trump of attacking her around 1996 in a department store dressing room in Manhattan. In 2023, a civil jury trial concluded that Trump did sexually abuse her and then defamed her in 2022 when he denied the allegations as a hoax and said that Carroll was 'not my type'. The jury awarded Carroll, who is now 81, a total of $5m in compensatory and punitive damages. More than two dozen different women have accused Trump over the past decade of sexual assault. Trump, who has denied all allegations against him, argued that the trial judge in the Carroll case should not have let jurors review the notorious 2005 Access Hollywood video of him bragging about groping women and that his alleged mistreatment of two other women also should not have been included. The emergence of the Access Hollywood tape was a bombshell in the closing stages of the 2016 presidential election but did not derail Trump's campaign. He beat Democrat Hillary Clinton to win the White House and, after losing to Joe Biden in 2020, triumphed again in 2024 and began a second term in January. The president, who turns 79 on Saturday, is appealing a separate $83m jury award to Carroll for defaming her and harming her reputation when he denied her claim in 2019. In Trump's appeal against this January 2024 ruling, the president is arguing that the US supreme court's decision to provide sweeping legal immunity to presidents should shield him for liability in this instance, too.
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves is leaving Britain defenceless
Last week, the Prime Minister said that we 'need to see the biggest shift in mindset in my lifetime: to put security and defence front and centre – to make it the fundamental organising principle of government'. The unfolding crisis in the Middle East underscores the need to do so. Now, more than ever, our national security must be the Government's overriding priority, trampling on any other competing demands for government money and ministers' time. But it isn't. This noble organising principle seems not to apply where it matters most: the Government's economic strategy. In her spending review this week, the Chancellor gave us her own definition of security: 'securonomics'. This ugly word, reeking of socialist greyness and uniformity, means – to quote Rachel Reeves – 'government must step up to provide security for working people and resilience for our national economy.' She is right about the need for economic resilience. For years, it has been clear that, in a turbulent world, the scale and structure of debt, combined with anaemic growth, makes our economy highly vulnerable to global shocks. Yet instead of rebuilding a fiscal buffer, the Chancellor has left us with a fiscal wafer so thin it could crack at the merest tap. Instead of bringing debt down, it will be higher at the end of the Parliament than today – and the cost of servicing it is already more than we spend on defence. And instead of supporting growth – critical to everything – the Government has suffocated it with higher taxes. Next, how has the Chancellor helped deliver 'security for working people'? For most working people, job security – the ability to find and keep a steady job – is key. Yet job insecurity is rising. By raising National Insurance on employers – a £25bn jobs tax – Rachel Reeves has provoked the biggest fall in employment in five years. Unemployment is ticking up. The broader definition of 'security' obviously encompasses our nation's defence. Although defence spending is set to rise to 2.5 per cent GDP during this Parliament, this is clearly not enough. At the upcoming Nato summit, the UK will be pressed to raise it to at least 3.5 per cent. But in Wednesday's spending review, what was the Chancellor's 'choice'? To give the NHS, not defence, a bigger slice of government largesse. 90 per cent of the total increase in spending from 2025-6 will go to health. The NHS will see a record cash investment: real-terms, day to day spending is set to increase by 3 per cent per year, costing an extra £29 billion. A government that sees defence as the organising principle of government would not have made that choice. It would have made the case that we need to move from a state that prioritises welfare to one that prepares for warfare. And as part of a strategy to put debt on a gradual downward path, it would have made tough decisions on spending overall – starting with a reform of incapacity and disability benefits, which now cost more than the defence budget. Instead, as her speech took us from spending more on affordable homes, to car production to training to buses in Rochdale, the Chancellor disorganised her Downing Street neighbour's organising principle, showing it the respect Tracey Emin had for her bed. There is only one conclusion one can draw from all this. Last week, when the Prime Minister said we need to make security and defence 'the organising principle of government', he left off four words: 'for this week only'.
The National
28 minutes ago
- The National
Keir Starmer's silence has emboldened Netanyahu in Iran attacks
Now, through tepid and inappropriate rhetoric, the UK government continues to collude with a state which has today attacked a regional power amidst major diplomatic negotiations, violating international law. And all while that same state simultaneously bombs Yemen and Lebanon, occupies Syria and uses the Iran attack as a smokescreen for its annexation of the Palestinian West Bank. Westminster has consistently stuck to the line that Israel has a right to 'self-defence'. But seemingly taking its cues on defence strategy from the 2002 film, Minority Report, Israel calls its strikes on Iran 'pre-emptive'. READ MORE: Israel 'already planning even more brutal' attacks on Iran, Donald Trump claims Current reports say civilians, including children, have died in the attacks across Iran. In an official response, Keir Starmer describes the strikes as 'concerning' and urges 'all parties to step back and reduce tensions urgently'. He says, 'Escalation serves no-one in the region. Stability in the Middle East must be the priority and we are engaging partners to de-escalate'. But Starmer fails to mention who exactly is escalating at this moment. Nor does he condemn the inflammatory actions of Netanyahu and his regime. But this is nothing new. In the past two years, we have witnessed our leadership pander to the Israeli state as it illegally occupies and starves Palestinians, killing more than 55,000 people in Gaza. At least 181 journalists and media workers have been killed. According to UNICEF, at the start of this year, more than 14,500 children were killed in Gaza — the numbers are now likely considerably higher. Gaza has the highest percentage of child amputees in the world. In response, we learn that our government sells fighter jet parts to the Israeli military, that the previous Conservative government threatened to withdraw funding from the International Criminal Court over its plans to issue arrest warrants for Israeli officials, and we now know IDF soldiers are being trained on UK soil. More than 300 UK Foreign Office Staff raised concerns over the UK's complicity in Israeli war crimes. Amnesty International, Oxfam, War on Want, Plan International, Christian Aid and myriad other third-sector organisations have spoken out against the UK government's role in supporting Israel. (Image: PA) 'The UK government must stop equivocating when it comes to the widespread breaches of international law Israel is clearly responsible for — this only serves to conceal the truth about the crimes of apartheid and genocide being inflicted daily on the Palestinian people,' says Karla McLaren, Amnesty International UK's Government Relations Manager. When it comes to the suppression of its own people, Iran's Islamic Republic regime is undoubtedly a bad actor. This in no way justifies Israeli aggression or the targeting of civilian populations. Westminster must make this clear. Our government needs to understand that people in Scotland will not stand for its complicity with Israel as it destabilises the Middle East, attacks regional powers, and enacts war crimes. National demonstrations will take place across the country this weekend, I hope to see you there.
