Latest news with #nuclearNegotiations
Reuters
23-05-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Iran says nuclear talks show potential following proposals by Oman
May 23 (Reuters) - Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on Friday there was potential for progess in nuclear negotiations with the U.S. after mediator Oman made several proposals, adding that the talks were complicated and more discussions were needed. "We've just completed one of the most professional rounds of negotiations," Araqchi said after the fifth round of talks concluded between the U.S. and Iran.
Al Arabiya
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Al Arabiya
Time is running out: The Iran-US nuclear standoff reaches a critical juncture
Tensions between the United States and Iran have escalated in recent days and the rhetoric has reached a new peak as Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei publicly accused former US President Donald Trump of being a liar and someone not truly committed to peace. The statement came during a rare public address in which Khamenei denounced ongoing diplomatic efforts as a facade, casting doubt on the sincerity of the US position. Meanwhile, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian offered a markedly different tone, asserting that nuclear negotiations with the United States would persist and could still yield a breakthrough. This apparent contradiction in Iran's political messaging has caused confusion among analysts and diplomats alike. But this underscores a pattern familiar to those who followed earlier rounds of negotiations, particularly during the era of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), when Iranian leaders often sent mixed signals to both domestic and international audiences. This dual messaging – public condemnation from the Supreme Leader paired with diplomatic engagement by the President and Iran's nuclear negotiating team – has long been a fixture of Iran's approach to the United States. During the Obama administration's efforts to secure the JCPOA, Khamenei repeatedly expressed doubts about American reliability. Yet, those expressions of mistrust occurred even as Iranian negotiators, operating with the quiet backing of Khamenei himself, sat across from American diplomats in Geneva and Vienna. This strategy appears to serve multiple strategic purposes for the Supreme Leader. On the one hand, it allows him to appease hardline factions within Iran, particularly among the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and ultra-conservative clerics who view the United States as the major rival. On the other hand, this tactic enables Khamenei to distance himself from any potential failure. If talks collapse or lead to an unpopular agreement, he can say he warned the nation all along that the US could not be trusted. What's essential to understand is that, despite these public denunciations, Iran's foreign policy – particularly its nuclear policy – ultimately falls under the Supreme Leader's domain. The President of Iran, while officially elected and head of government, does not possess the autonomy to chart an independent course when it comes to matters as critical and sensitive as Iran's nuclear program. The President's statements, especially those promoting engagement with the US, must be interpreted within this hierarchical structure. This duality allows the regime to project both revolutionary resolve and pragmatic flexibility, depending on the audience and context. It is a careful balancing act designed to maintain domestic legitimacy and international leverage simultaneously. Yet despite this choreography, the reality is that negotiations have stalled and seem to be stuck in a deadlock with no clear path forward. The positions of the two countries remain fundamentally at odds. Iran seeks an agreement similar to the JCPOA, which would allow it to maintain a limited capacity to enrich uranium while receiving significant relief from crippling economic sanctions. This is viewed within Iran not just as a fair bargain, but as a sovereign right under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The Islamic Republic argues that its nuclear ambitions are peaceful and that its demands for enrichment capabilities are based on legal and scientific grounds. For Tehran, agreeing to anything that resembles full dismantlement of its nuclear infrastructure would amount to surrender – an unacceptable capitulation after decades of investment, sacrifice, and international isolation. It would be, in their eyes, a repeat of the Libyan scenario, where Muammar Qaddafi abandoned his nuclear program only to be overthrown and killed in a few years later. From the US perspective, especially under a Trump-led administration, the bar for agreement is significantly higher. Trump has made it clear that his administration wants Iran's nuclear program completely dismantled – no enrichment, no advanced centrifuges, no stockpiles of uranium. The administration believes that anything short of this would leave the door open for Iran to become a nuclear threshold state. However, the political landscape Trump now navigates is fraught with obstacles. Any compromise resembling the JCPOA – the very agreement he withdrew from in 2018 while denouncing it as a 'disaster' – would open him up to severe criticism, particularly from within his own party. Influential Republican lawmakers and conservative think tanks have long opposed engagement with Iran, and they would likely condemn any deal that does not completely eliminate Iran's nuclear capacity. Additionally, Israel remains vehemently opposed to any deal that permits Iran to enrich uranium, fearing that even a limited program could eventually be expanded into a weapons-grade operation. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have publicly called for a 'Libya-style' model, which would involve full disarmament under international supervision – something Iran has repeatedly and categorically rejected. All of this means that even if Trump were inclined to show flexibility, doing so could prove politically impossible. Domestic politics and regional alliances would likely constrain any serious move toward compromise. Trump's base expects him to deliver a 'better' deal than the JCPOA, not a recycled version of it. Anything less would be perceived as a climbdown and a betrayal of his earlier stance. For Iran, the stakes are no less existential. Surrendering its nuclear program in its entirety would not only undermine decades of national effort but would also be seen as a loss of face and power. The nuclear program has become enmeshed in Iran's identity as a sovereign and defiant state; giving it up would risk weakening the regime's internal cohesion and external projection of strength. Meanwhile, time is running out. The diplomatic window is narrowing, not expanding. The longer the current impasse persists, the greater the risk that a miscalculation could ignite a broader conflict. In the final analysis, time is running out. The world is watching. And neither side appears ready to do what is necessary to break the deadlock. The prospects for a negotiated settlement are dimming. Both Iran and the US are trapped by the logic of their own political systems and ideological commitments. Without a dramatic and unexpected shift – either a change in leadership, a breakthrough facilitated by a third party, or a shock that alters the cost-benefit calculus – this standoff is likely to endure, if not deteriorate.
Reuters
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
US military replaces B-2 bombers that were sent amid Middle East tensions
WASHINGTON, May 12 (Reuters) - The U.S. military is replacing its B-2 bombers with another type of bomber at a base in the Indo-Pacific that was seen as being in an ideal location to operate in the Middle East, U.S. officials told Reuters on Monday. The Pentagon deployed as many as six B-2 bombers in March to a U.S.-British military base on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, amid a U.S. bombing campaign in Yemen and mounting tensions with Iran. Experts say that this had put the B-2s, which have stealth technology and are equipped to carry the heaviest U.S. bombs and nuclear weapons, in a position to operate in the Middle East. The officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the B-2 bombers were being replaced by B-52 bombers. The Pentagon said it did not comment on force posture adjustments as a matter of policy. Fresh talks between Iranian and U.S. negotiators to resolve disputes over Tehran's nuclear program ended in Oman on Sunday, with further negotiations planned. The fourth round of talks took place ahead of President Donald Trump's planned visit to the Middle East. Trump, who has threatened military action against Iran if diplomacy fails, has restored a "maximum pressure" campaign on Tehran since returning to the White House in January. Tehran is willing to negotiate some curbs on its nuclear work in return for the lifting of sanctions, according to Iranian officials, but ending its enrichment program or surrendering its enriched uranium stockpile are among what the officials have called "Iran's red lines that could not be compromised" in the talks. Additionally, Trump announced last week that a deal had been reached to stop bombing Yemen's Houthi group. The B-2 bombers had been used to carry out strikes against the Iran-backed group.
Zawya
08-05-2025
- Business
- Zawya
Saudi Arabia sits on fence over BRICS with eye on vital ties with US
RIYADH/DUBAI - Saudi Arabia has held off formally joining the BRICS bloc of nations despite attending a meeting in Brazil last week, two sources said, finessing an issue that could upset Washington as Riyadh seeks to seal deals with its U.S. ally. The issue of BRICS membership has been diplomatically sensitive for Saudi Arabia since it was first invited to join in 2023, and remains so with President Donald Trump due to visit next week and Riyadh negotiating nuclear and technology deals. BRICS, founded as a grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa to counter Western dominance of the world order, has grown in recent years to include emerging economies such as the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Indonesia. But while the BRICS website shows Saudi Arabia - the world's largest oil exporter - as a member, it has yet to join, according to the two sources, both with direct knowledge of Saudi policy. Saudi Arabia's government communications office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Brazil's foreign ministry referred Reuters to the Saudi government when asked about the kingdom's listed status as a member on the website. Brazil is currently presiding over BRICS. Riyadh does not want to risk U.S. anger as negotiations are underway with Washington, one of the sources and a diplomat said. Saudi Arabia sent its deputy foreign minister to the April 29 meeting in Rio de Janeiro, where ministers from the fast-expanding bloc failed to agree a joint communique. The kingdom's ambivalence about BRICS membership lays bare its high-stakes balancing act between China, its biggest oil export customer, and Washington, its indispensable security and technology partner - a tightrope walk made ever more precarious by the deepening U.S.-Chinese divide. "The Saudis still see tons of value in engaging with BRICS and its member states. They will keep double-dipping – or multi-dipping – with global partnerships as long as they can," said Robert Mogielnicki, senior resident scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington. "I think the Saudi calculation is that what they may be able to get out of the U.S. outweighs what they could get from BRICS membership, at least over the short term.' In January, Trump demanded that BRICS commit to not creating a new currency or supporting another currency that would replace the U.S. dollar, or face 100% tariffs against BRICS nations. SEEKING ALLIES While the kingdom still favors its historic ally the United States, it is also seeking to nurture trade ties with China, the largest importer of Saudi crude. In February, Saudi Arabia exported goods worth 15.2 billion riyals ($4.05 billion) to China, marking a 20.6% increase from a year earlier, when trade amounted to 12.6 billion riyals, data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity show. Over the past five years, trade has grown at an annualised rate of 50.3%. Total Chinese investment and construction contracts in Saudi Arabia between 2005 and mid-2024 reached nearly $71 billion, according to the China Global Investment Tracker, reflecting Beijing's growing role in the kingdom's economic transformation. The Saudi partnership with the United States remains central to its security, investment and technology ambitions, even as it expands relations with rival powers like China and Russia. The U.S. is poised to offer Saudi Arabia an arms package worth well over $100 billion, sources told Reuters last month, saying the proposal was being lined up for announcement during Trump's visit. BRICS has sought to shift away from the dollar into other currencies. But a study by the Atlantic Council's GeoEconomics Center last year showed the greenback remains the world's primary reserve currency, and neither the euro nor the BRICS countries have managed to reduce global reliance on the dollar. "While BRICS is a useful forum for airing grievances over American behaviour, it is not yet a body coherent enough to provide public goods on key issues like currency cooperation, security, or economic integration," said Steffen Hertog, associate professor in comparative politics at the London School of Economics. "Saudi feels like they have the leverage and they are enjoying the position," said Saudi analyst Aziz Alghashian. "They see it that the United States is still the main actor, but there are others that could also provide utility," he added. ($1 = 3.7509 riyals) (Reporting by Pesha Magid in Riyad, Maha El Dahan and Manya Saini in Dubai; additional reporting by Lisandra Paraguassu in Brasilia; editing by Tom Perry and Mark Heinrich)
Asharq Al-Awsat
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Trump Says the US Will Adopt ‘Arabian Gulf' Naming
President Donald Trump plans to announce next week that the United States will now refer to the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf or the Gulf of Arabia, according to two US officials. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that two US officials familiar with the matter said Trump would announce the change while he was on the trip to the Middle East. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. That report generated a storm of outcry from Iranians of all political persuasions who said the Persian Gulf moniker was thousands of years old and an essential part of Iran's cultural and geographical history. Arab nations have long pushed for a change to the geographic name of the body of water off the southern coast of Iran, while Iran has maintained its historic ties to the gulf. Iranians both supportive and opposed to Iran's current government denounced any change. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who has been involved in three rounds of nuclear negotiations with Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff, said the change would indicate 'hostile intent' toward Iran. 'Politically motivated attempts to alter the historically established name of the Persian Gulf are indicative of hostile intent toward Iran and its people, and are firmly condemned,' he wrote on the social platform X. "Any short-sighted step in this connection will have no validity or legal or geographical effect, it will only bring the wrath of all Iranians from all walks of life and political persuasion in Iran, the US and across the world.' The usage of the 'Arabian Gulf' is official by the Arab World League and the entire Arab states in the Middle East in addition to organizations, institutions and Arab media outlets. On Google Maps in the US, the body of water does not appear as Arabian Gulf. When Trump takes his decision, Google Maps will adopt the naming officially inside the US.
