Latest news with #GermanInstituteforInternationalandSecurityAffairs
DW
24-07-2025
- Business
- DW
Nuclear negotiations with Iran: What can we expect? – DW – 07/24/2025
On Friday, Germany, France and the UK will negotiate with Iran in Istanbul about the future of its nuclear program. The stakes are high for Iran. There is much at stake when representatives from Germany, France and the United Kingdom meet their counterparts from Iran in Istanbul on Friday to negotiate the future of Iran's nuclear program. If the talks fail, Iran risks a new wave of sanctions. Questions remain about the technical status of Iran's nuclear program after the attacks by Israel and the US on Iranian nuclear facilities in June. Or whether Iran can continue its program at all. The limited information available does not appear to support claims by US President Donald Trump that Iran's nuclear facilities and nuclear program have been "totally obliterated," said Hamidreza Azizi, an Iran expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP). In his view, Iran would likely be able to resume its enrichment program to a certain extent in the short to medium term. He estimates that the country still has much of the highly enriched uranium it stockpiled over the past few years. "Iran has not been deprived of its ability to enrich uranium," Azizi told DW. "So far, there has been no indication that Iran has actively taken steps to restart its program, but such a move would be more a matter of political decision-making, as well as military and security considerations, rather than technical capability." Michael Brzoska, a political scientist at the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, took a slightly different stance. He said it is likely to have become technically much more difficult for Iran to continnue enriching the uranium that is still available to a level suitable to make nuclear weapons. The centrifuges required for enrichment have probably been damaged to such an extent that they can no longer be used, Brzoska said. "Although it cannot be ruled out that there could be hidden centrifuges in other locations, there is currently no information on this." In order to exert pressure on Iran, Germany, France and the UK agreed with the US in mid-July this year to set Iran a deadline for reaching a nuclear agreement. This expires at the end of August. If no agreement is reached by then, the European partners plan to automatically reinstate previous UN sanctions against Tehran. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video It is entirely possible that the Iranian leadership is reconsidering its current strategy, Brzoska believes. Iran has repeatedly denied that it wants to use its nuclear program for military purposes. "But its behavior, especially the high-level enrichment of uranium, has brought it ever closer to this possibility," the expert pointed out. "And it has thus sparked fear among other states."Iran is currently sending out "mixed signals," Azizi told DW, explaining that Iranian officials, including the president and foreign minister, continue to insist that Iran remains open to diplomatic engagement. At the same time, he sees no indication that Iran is willing to soften its positions on other contentious issues, such as domestic uranium enrichment or its support for non-state actors in the region. "The leadership seems to be trying to buy time and avoid a renewed escalation until they determine how to address the various problems at hand," Azizi said. However, Iran's time is limited due to the end-of-August deadline jointly set by Germany, France, the UK and the US. After this date, the UN sanctions, which were lifted in 2016 as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the nuclear agreement, could once again be imposed. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The agreement contains a mechanism known as the "snapback," which entitles each of the states the signed at the time — the US, the UK, France, China, Russia, Germany and the EU — to launch a procedure that would automatically lead to the reintroduction of all UN sanctions against Iran after 30 days. The US withdrew from the agreement in 2018, under Trump's first administration, so it cannot initiate this mechanism. However, talks in mid-July show that the three European states have been coordinating closely with Washington. The US, meanwhile, has imposed its own sanctions against Iran. These target specific sectors of the economy, such as oil exports and banking transactions, and also include sanctions against third countries and companies that do business with Iran. In this respect, the outcome of the upcoming talks is highly important for Iran, said Brzoska. "Sanctions imposed by the US will ultimately be more important from an Iranian perspective. However, the snapback mechanism is likely to prompt a whole series of states to impose economic restrictions on Iran." These restrictions would affect oil exports, for example, as well as the transfer of so-called dual-use technologies, that is, technology that can also be used for military purposes. "Iran is therefore likely to work towards ensuring that the Europeans do not reapply this mechanism," Brzoska said. Beyond the possibility of not activating the snapback agreement, however, the three European states have no other incentives, or carrots, to offer Iran, said Azizi. This could make reaching an agreement more difficult, he believes. "The best we can realistically expect from the upcoming talks is that both sides might agree to extend the deadline for triggering the snapback mechanism, allowing more time for diplomacy and a potential diplomatic resolution."
The South African
21-07-2025
- Politics
- The South African
Eritrea's president warns of war as Ethiopia eyes Red Sea access
Eritrea's President Isaias Afwerki warned Ethiopia against launching a war over seaport access on 20 July 2025. Afwerki stated that Eritrea would resist any 'human wave' military strategy by Ethiopia's larger population. Ethiopia's Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed, has renewed calls for sea access through Eritrean territory. Eritrea and Ethiopia fought a deadly war from 1998 to 2000, which claimed tens of thousands of lives. Afwerki accused Abiy of attempting to divert attention from Ethiopia's internal crises. The president's remarks follow Ethiopia's revived seaport ambitions since early 2023. Eritrean forces have remained present in parts of northern Ethiopia, including areas of Tigray, despite provisions in the 2022 Pretoria Agreement that required the withdrawal of all non-ENDF forces. The Pretoria Agreement, signed on 2 November 2022, mandated the withdrawal of Eritrean and other non-federal forces from the Tigray region. In March 2025, Ethiopia's federal army engaged in intense clashes with the Fano militia in the Amhara region, resulting in over 300 reported militia deaths. Gerrit Kurtz, senior researcher at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), has stated that Eritrea benefits strategically from Ethiopia's internal divisions. Eritrean authorities have denied these allegations, labelling the reports of their military involvement as 'fabricated' and politically motivated. According to a June 2025 report by The Sentry, Eritrean forces looted factories, gold, and cultural artefacts from the Tigray region during the war. The report documents how looted gold and antiques were smuggled into Eritrea and monetised through state-controlled networks. Eritrean military officials used the proceeds to finance logistics and sustain war operations in Tigray. The United Nations imposed an arms embargo on Eritrea in 2009 under Resolution 1907, which was lifted in November 2018 following the peace agreement with Ethiopia. In 2019, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed received the Nobel Peace Prize for initiating the peace process with Eritrea; President Isaias Afwerki was not included as a laureate. Despite the 2022 Pretoria Agreement mandating foreign troop withdrawal, credible reports say Eritrean forces remain in northern Ethiopia, sparking regional stability concerns. Ethiopia's Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has publicly reiterated his support for peace, including fully implementing the 2022 Pretoria Agreement. However, he faces growing political pressure ahead of the 2026 national elections. Analysts such as William Davison (International Crisis Group) and Gerrit Kurtz (SWP) warn that Abiy may exploit ongoing tensions to consolidate domestic political support. Tigray's interim president, Getachew Reda, has called for restraint and denied any provocation from his administration amid renewed cross-regional accusations. Factions within the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) remain divided, hindering regional diplomacy and delaying full disarmament under the peace deal. International bodies, including the African Union (AU), United Nations (UN), and Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), continue to urge inclusive dialogue to prevent a relapse into conflict. The Horn of Africa remains geopolitically volatile, as overlapping crises in Ethiopia, Sudan, and Somalia fuel regional instability. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 11. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Mint
06-07-2025
- Business
- Mint
The warning signs for Russia's economy are flashing red
Russia's sanctions-defying economy, propelled higher by the Ukraine war, is suddenly coming back down to earth. Fueled by massive military spending and steady oil exports, Russia recorded some of the highest growth rates among major economies over the past two years. But in recent weeks economic indicators have been flashing red: Manufacturing activity is declining, consumers are tightening their belts, inflation remains high and the budget is strained. Russian officials are now openly warning of the risks of a recession, and companies from tractor producers to furniture makers are reducing output. The central bank said Thursday that it would debate cutting its benchmark interest rate later this month after lowering it in June. The sputtering of Russia's economic engine is unlikely to alter President Vladimir Putin's war objectives, as his strategic focus on neutering Ukraine overrides concerns for the broader health of the economy, analysts say. But the slowdown exposes the limits of his war economy and indicates that sanctions, while not dealing a knockout blow, are increasingly taking a toll. If sanctions tighten further or oil prices dip, Russia's economy could start to totter. In that, the downturn undermines Putin's bet that Russia can outlast Ukraine and the West, showing that Moscow would struggle to finance the war indefinitely. 'The growth model based on military spending alone is broken," said Janis Kluge, a Russia economics expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. 'Capacities in the civilian part have to shrink, freeing up workers so that the war machine can continue to grow. That's not sustainable." Russian Economy Minister Maxim Reshetnikov warned last month that Russia was teetering on the 'verge of a recession." Finance Minister Anton Siluanov called the situation a 'perfect storm." Putin, for his part, dismissed suggestions that the war is stifling the economy. In an echo of Mark Twain, he said that the reports of its death 'are greatly exaggerated." But the Kremlin leader also warned that a recession or stagflation 'should not be allowed under any circumstances." After a brief recession in 2022, military spending—the highest since Soviet times, at over 6% of gross domestic product this year—propped up Russia's economy and dulled the impact of Western sanctions. That compares with around 3% of GDP in the U.S. and around 2% in Germany last year. Spending on the military and security makes up about 40% of Russia's total government spending this year. Russia's ability to reroute oil exports to China, combined with Beijing's support in supplying electronics and machinery, delivered an additional economic boost. That made Russia an economic paradox: The most sanctioned major economy in the world was growing faster than the U.S. and most other advanced economies. But the sugar rush from the military spending created runaway inflation, pushing the central bank to raise interest rates to a record 21% to try to tame it. Higher rates increase borrowing costs for businesses, reducing investment and expansion plans and squeezing profits. The comedown has already started. In the first quarter, Russian GDP grew by 1.4% compared with a year earlier, official data shows, down from 4.5% in the fourth quarter of 2024. Russia's manufacturing sector contracted at its sharpest rate in more than three years in June, according to S&P Global's purchasing managers' index. Sales of new cars in Russia dropped nearly 30% in June year-over-year, according to the Association of European Businesses. Businesses across the country are feeling the brunt. Rostselmash, Russia's largest producer of agricultural machinery such as tractors and combine harvesters, said in May that it would cut production and investment and pull forward its mandatory annual leave for its 15,000 employees due to lack of demand. In Siberia, electricity grid operator Rosseti Sibir has said it was on the verge of bankruptcy due to its high debt load. The company had to halt investments, and it proposed tariff hikes for industrial users in several Siberian regions. Some analysts say the banking system is also increasingly unstable. The risks grew from a government decision after the invasion to control war-related lending at major Russian banks, according to a recent report by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. The state could direct banks to offer preferential loans—on state-determined terms—to Russian businesses involved in the war effort. With high interest rates having risen since then, companies that can't meet their obligations could potentially force the government to absorb the losses. Other analysts say that the Russian banking system remains stable and well capitalized, CSIS noted. Still, in May the Moscow-based Center for Macroeconomic Analysis and Short-Term Forecasting wrote in a report that the risk of a protracted systemic banking crisis in 2026 was 'moderate" and growing. The economic woes increase pressure on the Kremlin by shortening the financial runway it has to fund its fight in Ukraine. The government has been running a budget deficit throughout the war and projects it will continue for at least two more years. That provides an opening for the West if it manages to agree on powerful new sanctions on Moscow. Oil prices—which have been generally lower this year despite the turmoil in the Middle East—present another risk for Russia, which relies on energy sales for around a third of its budget revenues. The price of Russian crude has been consistently below the level assumed in this year's budget. Russia's oil-and-gas revenue in June fell to its lowest level since January 2023, Finance Ministry data showed on Thursday. 'Falling oil prices and tightening of the sanctions regime would be more keenly felt in the current situation," said Alexandra Prokopenko, a former Russian central bank official who is now a fellow at the Berlin-based Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. 'The risks are high." Write to Georgi Kantchev at
NBC News
18-06-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
Will Israel's airstrikes cause the collapse of the Iranian regime?
With his country having killed some of Iran's top military commanders and rattled its leadership, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says his government's aerial assault on Iran could trigger the collapse of the regime, opening the door to a popular uprising. 'It's impossible to predict, but it could be the result of our mighty action,' Netanyahu told reporters. 'We are changing the face of the Middle East.' That scenario, according to scholars who study Iran, as well as former U.S. and Israeli officials, is unlikely. The theocratic government remains deeply unpopular, but it still has a tight grip on power, and no organized opposition is poised to seize authority, they say. And if there is change at the top, it might come not from a popular uprising but from a coup within the regime, which might produce an even more authoritarian result. Still, the Iranian government is struggling to cope with the attacks. Some experts say that even if Israel's onslaught does not topple the regime, it could inflict permanent damage, leaving it in a weakened state that could embolden opposition activists or fuel internal power struggles inside the theocratic system. After having initially targeted nuclear and missile sites at the start of its air campaign last week, Israel has expanded its target list to include oil facilities, police headquarters and the state television center — all representing crucial elements of the government's political and economic power. 'They're going after the apparatus of repression inside the regime,' said Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a think tank that has called for imposing tougher sanctions and other measures against Iran. If they weaken the security services used to crush dissent in Iran, the strikes could open up more space for opponents of the regime, Dubowitz said. 'I think their hope is we can undermine and distract the security forces and have Iranians take to the streets, as they've been for many years now, and take back their country,' he said. 'It's one of the key pillars of the Israeli strategy.' Wary of foreign interference But Israeli missiles may not be the ideal vehicle for overturning Iran's authoritarian rule, experts said. Hamidreza Azizi, a former professor at Iran's Shahid Beheshti University who is now a visiting fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, said that several days into the conflict, 'we still see no sign of a popular uprising against the government.' On the contrary, Azizi said, 'images of devastation in civilian areas and the deaths of innocent people are making Iranians — who are inherently patriotic and emotionally connected to their nation — quite uneasy about Israel's ultimate intentions.' Suzanne Maloney, who has written about Iran's politics and advised previous U.S. administrations, said the Iranian people's dissatisfaction with the regime is also coupled with deep national pride and a wariness of foreign interference. 'Iranians are very well understood to resent their government. They're deeply critical of its failures, both in terms of how it has governed the country and how it has represented their interests on the world stage,' said Maloney, a vice president at the Brookings Institution think tank. 'But they also are fiercely nationalistic.' Given Iran's bitter experience with foreign meddling, distrust of outside powers is pervasive, and it is a 'third rail' in Iranian politics since a U.S.-British coup toppled a democratically elected prime minister in 1953, she said. Since it came to power in the 1979 revolution that toppled the country's pro-Western monarch, the Islamic Republic has a long record of repression, using its security services to crush protests and imprison dissidents. The government is also struggling to contain rising discontent over the ailing economy, which has been plagued by rampant inflation and financial misery for millions of Iranians, according to regional analysts and Western diplomats. Officials in Tehran have blamed U.S. sanctions for the economic troubles. Every few years, popular anger erupts in the streets. Most recently, demonstrators vented their outrage after the killing of Mahsa Amini, who died in a hospital in 2022 after the country's morality police arrested her for not adhering to the country's dress code, which requires women to conceal their hair and the shapes of their bodies. Iranian opponents of the regime have had mixed reactions to the Israeli strikes. Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the deposed shah, who ruled Iran for four decades until he was forced out by mass street protests in 1979, said that the regime in Tehran was 'at its weakest point' and that Iranians now had an opportunity to secure democratic rule. 'Now is our moment,' he said on X. Several prominent Iranian activists and filmmakers, including Nobel laureates Shirin Ebadi and Narges Mohammadi, wrote an op-ed calling for an immediate end to the fighting and demanded that the Iranian government halt uranium enrichment work. The group also denounced attacks on civilians by both Iran and Israel and called for a transition to democracy in Iran. 'Deeply committed to Iran's territorial integrity and the inalienable right of its people to self-determination under genuine sovereignty, we believe that continuing uranium enrichment and the devastating war between the Islamic Republic and the Israeli regime neither serves the Iranian people nor humanity at large,' it said. It added: 'Iran and its people should not be sacrificed for uranium enrichment and the ambitions of the Islamic Republic.' Imprisoned reformist Mostafa Tajzadeh — an ardent critic of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — has condemned Israel's barrage, arguing it did not offer a legitimate way to oust the regime. 'I know that some sections of the people are happy with these attacks, because they see them as the only way to change the failed clerical government,' Tajzadeh said in a letter from prison, according to Gooya, a Persian-language news website based in Belgium. 'But even if the war leads to such an outcome, Iran will be left in ruins, where most likely statelessness and chaos will prevail.' Tajzadeh, who was deputy interior minister more than 20 years ago and has favored a rapprochement with the West, called Israel's strikes 'the aggression of a foreign army, on the orders of someone who has been accused of war crimes' — referring to Netanyahu — which, 'in my opinion, lacks political and moral justification and has no precedent in post-constitutional Iran.' So far, there have been no signs of major defections from the country's political leadership, and most Iranians are focused on trying to seek safety amid daily bombing raids from Israel, said Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'I think people are under aerial bombardment, and they're just thinking about staying alive and staying safe, staying secure. They're not thinking about waging political protests,' he told MSNBC. Although an overwhelming majority of Iranians reject the government's rule, there is no opposition in waiting, and the regime remains heavily armed and organized, Sadjadpour said. 'At the moment, they probably are calculating 'kill or be killed,'' he said. 'And they have their fingers on the trigger right now.' Regime change Unlike their Israeli counterparts, President Donald Trump and his top aides have not encouraged the Iranian people to rise up or invoked the idea of ousting the regime. During his first term, Trump's deputies expressed solidarity with the Iranian people and privately argued that economic sanctions could cause the regime to unravel. But Trump and his current Cabinet are outspoken critics of previous U.S. attempts at 'regime change' in Iraq and elsewhere, and some of Trump's supporters worry the United States could be drawn into another military intervention in the Middle East. Daniel Shapiro, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank who was U.S. ambassador to Israel during the Biden administration, said Israel should stick to a more realistic goal of disabling Iran's nuclear and missile programs and steer clear of trying to shape Iran's internal politics. 'There are certainly plausible scenarios where this becomes a regime-threatening event, but I don't think it's imminent, and I don't think it should be the goal of the military campaign,' Shapiro said. An attempt to change the regime would be a 'massive undertaking' that would depend on factors beyond the control of any outside power, he said. 'That's a recipe for overreach and for getting drawn into a lengthy and potentially fruitless kind of military engagement. The memory is very heavy of what happened to us in Iraq,' Shapiro said. An elite coup? The Israeli assault has exposed widespread vulnerabilities in Iran's security and military establishment, which could fuel power struggles and possible defections, experts said. 'The Tehran regime is unlikely to be toppled by a popular uprising, but it is possible that Iran witnesses an elite coup,' said Lina Khatib, an associate fellow at the London think tank Chatham House. Israel's extensive infiltration of Iran's military and government, illustrated by its ability to assassinate top military commanders, shows that Israel most likely has a degree of support among elements of the Iranian regime, Khatib said. Even though those Iranians might not support Israel itself, they 'share with Israel the objective of regime change,' she said. Israel's bid to topple the Iranian government carries serious risks, including producing an even harder-line regime dominated by members of the country's Revolutionary Guard Corps, experts said. 'Given the history of this regime, given what the Iranian people have suffered, I think it's a wrongheaded and ineffective strategy and one that it may, in fact, backfire on Israel,' Maloney of Brookings said. 'Be careful what you wish for. An Iran that is racked by violence and chaos is not going to be a better neighbor,' she added.
DW
16-06-2025
- Politics
- DW
What's the US role in the Israel-Iran conflict? – DW – 06/13/2025
US President Donald Trump claims his country was not involved with Israel's attacks on Iran. At the same time, he threatens that if Tehran doesn't reach a nuclear deal with the US, attacks on Iran "will only get worse." The US government's political line after Israel's attack on Iran is clear: Washington had no part in it. "Israel took unilateral action against Iran," US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement shared by the White House. "We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region. Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense … Let me be clear: Iran should not target U.S. interests or personnel." The White House social media team posted the statement on social media platform X roughly an hour after the start of Israel's attacks on Iran early Friday morning. Later, on Friday evening, Iran launched retaliatory attacks on Israel. Before that, on Thursday, the US State Department posted a warning on X about the complex security situation in the Middle East: "We remind U.S. citizens in Israel and the broader region of the continued need for caution and encourage them to monitor the news for breaking developments." The US was informed about the attack in advance. But were they really not actively involved in any way? "Everything we know so far about the logistics, for example about the hidden drones in Iran, suggests that Israel carried out the attack alone," Sascha Lohmann, senior associate and part of the America regional research group at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, said in an interview with DW. "But we cannot completely rule out the possibility that the US helped." The deployment of 200 military jets that flew to Iran and back, for example, raises the question of whether the US military provided support with air-to-air refueling, according to Lohmann. Iran's nuclear program under attack Israel's attacks early Friday morning were mainly directed against military facilities and sites involved in Iran's nuclear program, such as the Natanz nuclear facility, where uranium is enriched, among other things. In addition to several leading figures in the Iranian military, at least six scientists and researchers working on Iran's nuclear program were killed. Since April 2025, Tehran and Washington had been holding talks to reach an agreement to replace the old nuclear deal with Iran, from which the US withdrew during Trump's first term in 2018. After Israel's attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure, Trump was quoted by Fox News reporter Bret Baier as saying that "Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb." Expert: Israel caught Iran by surprise To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video "We hope to get back to the negotiating table," Trump said, according to the right-leaning TV channel. "We'll see." Trump: Attacks on Iran 'will only get worse!' Trump used much harsher language on his social media platform Truth Social. He wrote in a post that he had given Iran many chances to reach a nuclear deal with him. If that doesn't happen, Trump says he warned Iranian leadership that they're facing an attack that's much worse than anything they could imagine. "The United States makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the world by far," Trump wrote. "Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come ― and they know how to use it." The Iranian hardliners who spoke out against a nuclear deal are "all DEAD now," Trump continued in his post, "and it will only get worse!" Meanwhile, US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff warned that Iran is also capable of causing considerable damage in Israel. Further nuclear negotiations between the US and Iran unlikely The next meeting between the US and Iranian delegations on a possible new nuclear agreement was supposed to take place this Sunday in Oman, but Iran canceled it. It is also unclear how the talks will proceed in the long term. Ali Shamkhani, a close confidant and advisor to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, is said to be among those killed in Iran. According to German news magazine Spiegel, Shamkhani played an important role in the nuclear talks between the US and Iran. He is said to have been open to an agreement, but also warned that the government in Tehran could end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and expel UN nuclear inspectors if Iran felt threatened. "As long as the conflict continues with its current intensity, it is difficult to imagine that the talks will continue," Lohmann said. This article was originally published in German
