Latest news with #P5+1
See - Sada Elbalad
20-07-2025
- Politics
- See - Sada Elbalad
Iran's FM: No Conviction Yet to Resume Nuclear Talks with U.S.
Ahmed Emam Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated on Saturday that Tehran remains unconvinced of the utility of resuming negotiations with Washington, citing the need for 'a genuine will from the other side aimed at reaching a mutually beneficial solution.' In an interview with China's CGTN, Araghchi emphasized that the recent escalation was not a mere conflict but 'a blatant act of aggression by Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran.' He said Iran had no choice but to defend itself, and that its response had forced the attackers to retreat and seek an unconditional ceasefire. 'We stood our ground bravely and compelled the aggressors to step back and request a ceasefire — which we accepted,' Araghchi said. 'However, this ceasefire remains fragile. Given the track record of this \[Israeli] entity, we cannot trust it. We remain fully prepared for any possible violations.' Araghchi reiterated that Iran did not initiate the war and does not wish for it to continue. 'We were prepared for it, and we remain ready in case it reignites — although we do not seek its prolongation,' he said. Addressing the future of the nuclear deal, the foreign minister stressed that Iran is still waiting to witness seriousness from its counterparts. 'We are fully confident that our nuclear program is entirely peaceful, and we are open to sharing this certainty — but that can only happen through negotiations.' Referring to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) reached with the P5+1 group, Araghchi noted it was widely welcomed internationally, but the United States' unilateral withdrawal from the agreement derailed its progress. 'That unfortunate decision has led directly to the current situation,' he remarked. When asked about the possibility of returning to the nuclear accord, Araghchi responded: 'Yes, I believe it is possible. But, as I said, it depends on a real will from the other side. The military option must be ruled out, and the path forward must be through diplomatic solutions.' He concluded by stressing that the recent attack on Iranian nuclear facilities proved that military approaches are ineffective. 'There is no solution but a negotiated diplomatic one — and that will only materialize if the other side abandons military ambitions and begins to make amends for the damage done. Only then will Iran be ready to return to the negotiating table.' read more Gold prices rise, 21 Karat at EGP 3685 NATO's Role in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict US Expresses 'Strong Opposition' to New Turkish Military Operation in Syria Shoukry Meets Director-General of FAO Lavrov: confrontation bet. nuclear powers must be avoided News Iran Summons French Ambassador over Foreign Minister Remarks News Aboul Gheit Condemns Israeli Escalation in West Bank News Greek PM: Athens Plays Key Role in Improving Energy Security in Region News One Person Injured in Explosion at Ukrainian Embassy in Madrid News Israeli-Linked Hadassah Clinic in Moscow Treats Wounded Iranian IRGC Fighters News China Launches Largest Ever Aircraft Carrier Sports Former Al Zamalek Player Ibrahim Shika Passes away after Long Battle with Cancer Arts & Culture "Jurassic World Rebirth" Gets Streaming Date Videos & Features Tragedy Overshadows MC Alger Championship Celebration: One Fan Dead, 11 Injured After Stadium Fall Lifestyle Get to Know 2025 Eid Al Adha Prayer Times in Egypt Arts & Culture South Korean Actress Kang Seo-ha Dies at 31 after Cancer Battle News "Tensions Escalate: Iran Probes Allegations of Indian Tech Collaboration with Israeli Intelligence" Sports Get to Know 2025 WWE Evolution Results News Flights suspended at Port Sudan Airport after Drone Attacks
BBC News
15-07-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Witness History The Iran nuclear deal
On 14 July 2015, Iran agreed to temporarily limit its nuclear programme. The deal was signed in Vienna, the capital of Austria. Officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), it was agreed between Iran and a group of world powers known as the P5+1 – the US, UK, France, China, Russia and Germany, together with the EU. The accord came after years of tension over Iran's alleged efforts to develop a nuclear weapon. Iran insisted that its nuclear programme was entirely peaceful, but much of the international community did not believe that. Iran agreed to limit its nuclear programme and facilitate international inspections, in return for economic sanctions relief. Baroness Catherine Ashton, who was the European Union's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, tells Ben Henderson how the plan was achieved. Eye-witness accounts brought to life by archive. Witness History is for those fascinated by the past. We take you to the events that have shaped our world through the eyes of the people who were there. For nine minutes every day, we take you back in time and all over the world, to examine wars, coups, scientific discoveries, cultural moments and much more. Recent episodes explore everything from the death of Adolf Hitler, the first spacewalk and the making of the movie Jaws, to celebrity tortoise Lonesome George, the Kobe earthquake and the invention of superglue. We look at the lives of some of the most famous leaders, artists, scientists and personalities in history, including: Eva Peron – Argentina's Evita; President Ronald Reagan and his famous 'tear down this wall' speech; Thomas Keneally on why he wrote Schindler's List; and Jacques Derrida, France's 'rock star' philosopher. You can learn all about fascinating and surprising stories, such as the civil rights swimming protest; the disastrous D-Day rehearsal; and the death of one of the world's oldest languages. (Photo: Baroness Catherine Ashton and Javad Mohammad Zarif, Iranian Foreign Minister, during nuclear negotiations in 2014. Credit: Dieter Nagl/AFP via Getty Images)
Time of India
20-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Iran claims foiled Israeli assassination attempt on its foreign minister Abbas Araghchi amid war
Iranian security forces have reportedly stopped an attempt to assassinate Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Tehran, a plot that officials are calling a 'major Israeli conspiracy .' The dramatic revelation comes amid the Iran and Israel war, and as Araghchi prepares for high-stakes nuclear talks with European leaders in Geneva. The news broke after Mohammad Hossein Ranjbaran , adviser to Minister Araghchi, posted on X (formerly Twitter) that Iranian intelligence had uncovered and stopped a sophisticated assassination plot targeting the foreign minister. Ranjbaran credited the 'unknown soldiers of the homeland', a phrase commonly used to refer to Iran's intelligence and security operatives, for averting what he described as a potentially devastating attack. 'If it were not for the security measures of the unknown soldiers of the homeland, perhaps a few days ago the great Israeli conspiracy against him would have been carried out in Tehran, which, thank God, failed,' Ranjbaran wrote, as reported by Tasnim News Agency. He further stated that since it was announced Araghchi would travel to Geneva for negotiations with the European 'troika' (France, Germany, and the UK), concerns about Israeli targeting had intensified. 'Yes, there certainly was and still is such a threat. Nevertheless, Seyed Abbas Araqchi considers himself a soldier of the motherland more than the head of the diplomatic service,' Ranjbaran added. Live Events Seyyed Abbas Araghchi, is one of Iran's most experienced diplomats and currently serves as the country's Minister of Foreign Affairs. With over three decades of service, Araghchi has shaped Iranian foreign policy on some of its most pivotal issues, including nuclear negotiations and regional diplomacy. He was Iran's chief nuclear negotiator in the P5+1 talks. Despite the foiled plot, Araghchi remains undeterred, according to his adviser. 'He seeks martyrdom,' Ranjbaran said, emphasizing the minister's commitment to his mission regardless of personal risk. Araghchi is currently en route to Geneva for talks with his European counterparts, who are seeking to de-escalate the Iran-Israel conflict and revive diplomatic channels. As international attention turns to the outcome of the Geneva talks, Iranian officials have made clear that security threats—whether real or perceived—will not deter them from pursuing their strategic and diplomatic objectives.
Express Tribune
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Slugfest in the Middle East
Listen to article Slugfest, yes; but of no ordinary consequences. It will take the world to keep it contained. Iran in the western construct is Middle East, not West Asia, and it is important to note. It comes under the geographical responsibility of US Central Command that oversees the Middle East. Israel too is a part as is Pakistan on its eastern most boundary. Nothing moves in the US CENTCOM AOR without its consent or at least without its notice. To imagine anything else is naïve. That is why the CENTCOM was created with its forward Headquarters conveniently placed in Al Udeid in Doha, Qatar. General Kurilla, the CENTCOM Chief, knows it all. Dial back a few weeks. President Trump wanted a 'deal' with Iran on the Nuclear Enrichment issue. Iran too wanted to settle now that a more aggressive administration was in power in Washington with its own peculiar worldview and willingness to support Israel to establish its dominance over the Middle East. For the more pliable wary of Israeli prowess there exist the Abraham Accords to help secure their future for Israel's acceptability only if Iran, the remaining stumbling block, could be subdued. The Houthis in Yemen would then easily acquiesce too. Iran's aspiration to be a nuclear power was already established. Agreement with the P5+1 had laid limits on Iran's ambition (Iran is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty). But then Trump chose to dump the Agreement in 2018, three years after the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) was first signed. It opened the space for Iran to pursue its nuclear enrichment programme at its own pace. The IAEA could visit to inspect if Iran was complying to the limits of enrichment levels and the stockpiled enriched uranium. Iran though built in greater ambiguity. It is said that Iran moved significantly ahead of its below-5 per cent limit on enrichment under the Agreement and held a significantly higher value of stockpiled enriched uranium than stipulated. In 2023 it was reported that Iran had enriched up to and over 83 per cent level. It was barely short of the magical 90 per cent mark to turn into a weapon. Trump in his second term, aware of the leeway the US exit had afforded Iran, sought an immediate renegotiation of the deal to rein Iran in. Implicitly he may have had in mind to reinforce his credentials of a deal and a peacemaker before the Alfred Nobel Committee. Israel did not seem to agree nor did some from within Trump's team. Donald Trump's was the stated position. More likely it left space for its partner, Israel, to eliminate or at the least significantly degrade Iran's nuclear programme as a living and present danger to Israel's long-term health and security. Iran had/has two major nuclear enrichment facilities, one at Natanz, that Israel struck with some effect in the ongoing war with Iran, and at Fordow near Qom, which is far more sophisticated and secure where enrichment levels are suspected to have been breached. When Iran was reluctant to enter negotiations, Trump declared a sixty-day window for Iran to agree to a deal proposed by the US, else the cost to Iran would be heavy and unbearable in military terms. Five rounds down and sixth on the anvil when it was more than likely that Iran was coming around to agree on most terms, Israel attacked Iran. It was the sixty-first day from the day Trump had announced the window of opportunity. Coincidence? Or a well deliberated execution? I don't think it needs much thought. What has followed since June 13 has been a conflagration ready to envelop the whole region unless handled with care. Both sides rain missiles on each other and wreak untold pain and misery. Soon, civilian populations will be the victims to test and breach their threshold of tolerance and of the two societies and their political masters. In a slugfest, one who can absorb more is usually the one to prevail. Mohammad Ali, the late Boxing Champion, perfected this art and established a psychological edge over his opponent by inviting him to give him body blows. The national character of Iran and its thousands of years of civilisational history and the size of its population hold it in better stead than Israel which is still young as a nation even if it boasts of a history of suffering over centuries. In the Iranian character, death is celebrated albeit with remorse; in the Israeli experience suffering and victimhood is emphasised to gain empathy. These two characteristics will hugely define the ultimate victor in the civilisational sense. Either Iran will now run out of its missiles or Israel will breach its threshold of pain. Each may be the first sign for that side to find accommodation or exhaust itself to desperate resort. How might Iran's nuclear programmes be affected will depend on the damage the programme suffers, possibly delaying the timeline for weaponising its ability – an important Israel-US aim for this war. Negotiations will surely follow when the war finally ends but how much Iran may give to the US will depend on how Iran has fared in the war in perceptions and in real terms. If Iran seems to have held her line resolutely the regime and the ongoing system in power will sustain and survive – it can surely outrun Israel in this madmen race. Or if the US offers it a chance for peace on terms that may save the regime and buy time and keep foundations of Iran's nuclear programme, Iran may take that route. It would be prudent in a long game. It will also save the region from chaos, uncertainty and falling dominoes which are sure to follow. Regime change, the deeper or implicit political objective, is a more complicated and extended effect of the war and where might it first happen, Iran or Israel, is moot. What is of essence here is that Israel and its supporters are now loudly calling for the US to intervene on Israel's behalf; that Israel with its existing capacity cannot complete the mission of eliminating Iran's nuclear programme. Iran's resilience and unexpectedly ferocious response on an overly sensitive Israeli psyche to the losses amidst their population centers is the key to shout for the patron to come to the rescue. Israel stands exposed with its civilisational inadequacies. This is Iran's great achievement. Similarly, were Trump to jump in and directly attack Iranian assets it shall not only be an act of desperation but will also puncture Trump's long held position of withdrawing from forever wars. Iraq is what he always refers to as an example. Iran will still survive despite Fordow but what carnage may ensue at the US installations in the Middle East will only expand, engorge and envelop all the Middle East which will be rendered chaotic, explosive and uncontrollable for years to come. Iraq, Libya and Syria stand as sorry examples of such ill-thought adventurism. More likely better sense will prevail despite Netanyahu's Israel.
CNA
17-06-2025
- Politics
- CNA
Commentary: Israel and Iran are both letting illusory ambitions cloud their judgment
TEL AVIV: The rapidly escalating military conflict between Israel and Iran represents a clash of ambitions. Iran seeks to become a nuclear power, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu longs to be remembered as the Israeli leader who categorically thwarted Iran's nuclear programme, which he views as an existential threat to Israel's survival. Both dreams are as misguided as they are dangerous. Iran's nuclear ambitions have always been driven primarily by the goal of securing the regime's survival, not annihilating Israel, which is far more likely to be destroyed at the end of a long war of attrition than under a mushroom cloud. But Israel cannot afford to treat Iran's threats of nuclear Armageddon as mere bloviating, particularly after Hamas' Oct 7, 2023 terrorist attack, which triggered Israel's long, brutal and ongoing offensive against the Iranian proxy in Gaza. It is not wrong to fear a nuclear Iran. THE WHITE HOUSE WANTS A NUCLEAR DEAL But Netanyahu is a key reason why Iran's nuclear programme is as far along as it is. It was over his objections that the so-called P5+1 (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States), together with the European Union, negotiated the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, freezing the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme. And it was under pressure from Netanyahu that Donald Trump withdrew the US from the JCPOA three years later, spurring Iran to renew its race for the bomb. Israel's audacious attacks on Iran surely will cause further tension between Trump and Netanyahu. Since his return to the White House, Trump has sought a new nuclear agreement with Iran. But this was never going to be an easy process – and not only because Iran has little reason to trust the US. While Trump has no qualms about touting unimpressive (or worse) deals as historic breakthroughs, he surely feels pressure to strike an agreement that is somehow better than the JCPOA that then-US President Barack Obama negotiated a decade ago. Given this, Trump probably views Israel's strikes as useful in limited doses – just enough to increase his leverage in the nuclear negotiations that were already underway. But Netanyahu is fighting for his political survival – and in that battle, no bridge is too far. While Israel initially focused its attacks on nuclear facilities and ballistic missile bases, the conflict has escalated to include targets that could draw the US into the war (such as energy facilities and residential buildings), and it is just getting started. In line with his grand Churchillian ambition – and mirroring the perspective he has brought to his war against Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon – Netanyahu is seeking 'total victory' over Iran. This would render a nuclear deal unnecessary. SO DO THE GULF STATES There is just one problem: Israel is incapable of eradicating Iran's nuclear programme. Israel has struck nuclear sites in Natanz and Isfahan, but the damage to the facilities was limited, partly because Israel recognised the need to avoid unleashing radiation across the region. And Israel does not have bombs that can penetrate Iran's Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, which is built inside a mountain. Of course, physical infrastructure is only part of the equation. That is why Israel also targeted scientists, as well as top Revolutionary Guard leaders. But Iran's nuclear programme is an expansive and deeply embedded state project. Killing a few – or even a few dozen – individuals will not paralyse it, let alone eliminate it. In any case, Israel still needs the US. And Trump has no interest in letting Israel drive up oil prices or create a rift between him and America's Gulf allies, which just agreed to funnel trillions of dollars in investment toward the US. Nor can Israel hope for the tacit complicity that the Arab states demonstrated in its war against Hamas and Hezbollah. While these countries have no love for Iran, they have a vested interest in regional stability, especially as they work to diversify their economies. A cornered Iran might even attack the Gulf states directly, hitting their oil installations or disrupting transport lanes in the Persian Gulf. These countries want a nuclear deal, not a regional conflagration. DIPLOMACY WILL REMAIN THE ONLY ANSWER Iran probably wants roughly the same. Though it withdrew from scheduled nuclear talks in Oman, its military response has been confined to Israeli targets. Notably, despite having poured billions of dollars into its regional proxies in recent years, it has refrained from activating them – however diminished they may have been rendered by Israel – against American or Arab targets. But if Iran finds itself with its back against the wall, it can force a reluctant Hezbollah and its Iraqi militias into the fight. If not now, when? It is for occasions like this that the alliances were created in the first place. Iran can also incite attacks against Israel elsewhere, such as the West Bank. Moreover, it will probably withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, opening the way for it to achieve nuclear breakout – a process that would take mere months. Iran now risks falling into the same strategic trap that drained the energies of the Sunni pan-Arabism it revolted against in 1979. By pouring its energy and resources into a war of annihilation against Israel, it would jeopardise its primary objective: regime survival. But Iran is not alone in letting illusory ambitions cloud its judgment. If Israel cannot destroy Iran's nuclear programme, it certainly cannot achieve total victory over Iran's regime. And it is not just Iran: none of Israel's security challenges can be overcome through total victory. No matter how many bombs Netanyahu drops, diplomacy will remain the only answer. Meanwhile, Israel's military hubris is becoming inadmissible to its moderate Arab allies. They wanted Israel as an equal partner in a regional peace, not as a new hegemon.
