IsraelIran

Tehran, Iran – Iran is “not in a hurry” to resume talks with the United States over its nuclear programme, Tehran’s foreign minister has told Al Jazeera.

Iran remains prepared to engage in indirect negotiations with Washington if the US chooses to talk “from an equal position based on mutual interest”, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Al Jazeera Arabic in an interview at his office in Tehran that was broadcast on Sunday.

The official also asserted that a critical “shared understanding” regarding Israel is developing across the region.

Tehran’s top diplomat said conditions set by the US for talks to resume – which reportedly include an emphasis on direct negotiations, zero uranium enrichment, and limits on Iran’s missile stocks and its support for regional allies – are “illogical and unfair”.

That makes talks untenable, he suggested.

“It appears they are not in a hurry,” he remarked. “We are not in a hurry, either.”

Araghchi’s insistence comes despite the pressure from reimposed United Nations sanctions and other challenges facing the Iranian establishment.

Rather, the foreign minister said he believes regional dynamics are turning against Israel, the US’s closest ally in the Middle East.

“I sometimes tell my friends that Mr Netanyahu is a war criminal who has committed every atrocity, but did something positive in proving to the entire region that Israel is the main enemy, not Iran, and not any other country,” Araghchi said in reference to the Israeli prime minister.

The comments came two days after Oman’s chief diplomat, for the first time, publicly joined the chorus of disapproval aimed at Netanyahu and his hardline government.

“We have long known that Israel, not Iran, is the primary source of insecurity in the region,” Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad al-Busaidi told the audience at the IISS Manama Dialogue 2025 regional forum.

He said over the years, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) has “at best sat back and permitted the isolation of Iran”, a stance that he believes “needs to change”.

In the past 48 hours, the heinous lie that the unlawful Israeli and U.S. bombing of Iran was motivated by an imminent nuclear threat has been thoroughly debunked by

– The International Atomic Energy Agency Chief, who has explicitly stated that Iran “is not and was not”… pic.twitter.com/C2uBzBLOHD

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) November 2, 2025

Oman has for years acted as a mediator between Iran and the US in nuclear, financial, prisoner exchange and other regional issues.

Tehran and Washington were slated to sit down for a sixth round of talks in mid-June, when Israel attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities. That launched a 12-day war that killed more than 1,000 people in Iran and inflicted billions of dollars in infrastructure damage.

After media reports last week said the administration of US President Donald Trump had sent a new message to Tehran via Oman, Iran’s government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani confirmed that messages had been received.

But she did not elaborate on the content or Iran’s potential response. The White House has not publicly confirmed sending the missive.

During his interview, Araghchi said “almost all” of the about 400kg (880lb) of 60-percent enriched uranium possessed by Iran is “buried under the rubble” of nuclear facilities bombed by the US and Israel.

“We have no intention of removing them from under the rubble until conditions are ready. We have no information on how much of the 400kg is untouched and how much is destroyed, and we will have no information until we dig them out,” he said.

The Iranian foreign minister pointed out that China and Russia have formally announced they do not recognise the UN sanctions recently reimposed against Iran by the European signatories to its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.

France, the United Kingdom and Germany have signalled they want to restart talks with Tehran. However, no substantial progress has been made.

In the meantime, they have imposed sanctions and restrictions, both in relation to Iran’s alleged drone exports to Russia and its nuclear programme.

The three European powers in September announced they were suspending their bilateral air services agreements with Iran, affecting Iranian carriers like Iran Air.

Some of the flights appear to be gradually coming back, though, with Iranian state television airing footage of an Austrian Airlines flight landing in Tehran’s Imam Khomeini International Airport on Sunday night.

Germany’s Lufthansa is also scheduled to resume flights to Tehran, but the precise restart date has not been publicly announced.

Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCIP) has obtained testimony from Palestinian American teenager Mohammed Ibrahim, whose case has become a symbol for the mistreatment of minors in Israeli jails.

In an interview with a DCIP lawyer, published on Tuesday, 16-year-old Mohammed described the harsh conditions he has faced since his detention began in February, including thin mattresses, cold cells and meagre meals.

“The meals we receive are extremely insufficient,” he is quoted as saying.

“For breakfast, we are served just three tiny pieces of bread, along with a mere spoonful of labneh. At lunch, our portion is minimal, consisting of only half a small cup of undercooked, dry rice, a single sausage, and three small pieces of bread. Dinner is not provided, and we receive no fruit whatsoever.”

According to DCIP, Mohammed has lost a “considerable amount of weight” since his detention started more than eight months ago. He was 15 years old at the time.

Mohammed’s family, rights groups and US lawmakers have been pleading with the administration of United States President Donald Trump to pressure Israel to release the teenager.

The US has provided Israel with more than $21bn over the past two years.

“Not even an American passport can protect Palestinian children,” Ayed Abu Eqtaish, the accountability programme director at DCIP, said in a statement.

“Despite his family’s advocacy in Congress and involvement of the US Embassy, Mohammad remains in Israeli prison. Israel is the only country in the world that systematically prosecutes children in military court.”

After Israeli soldiers raided Mohammed’s family home in the occupied West Bank in February, they took the teenager into custody. Mohammed recalled to DCIP that the soldiers beat him with the butts of rifles as they transported him.

The teenager was originally housed in the notorious Megiddo prison – which a recently released Palestinian detainee described as a “slaughterhouse” – before being transferred to Ofer, another detention facility.

“Each prisoner receives two blankets, yet we still feel cold at night,” Mohammed told DCIP.

“There is no heating or cooling system in the rooms. The only items present are mattresses, blankets, and a single copy of the Quran in each room.”

The teenager has been charged with throwing stones at Israeli settlers, an accusation that he denies. Legal experts say that Palestinians from the occupied West Bank almost never receive fair trials in Israel’s military courts.

The abuse that freed Palestinian captives have described after the recent prisoner exchange between Hamas and Israel, as part of the Gaza ceasefire deal, spurred renewed calls for releasing Mohammed.

“Right now, Mohammed Ibrahim, a US citizen, is being held in an Israeli prison. His health is deteriorating. The circumstances are desperate,” Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley wrote on X on Sunday.

“The United States must use every avenue available to secure the release of this Palestinian American child.”

Since the start of the war on Gaza in October 2023, at least 79 Palestinian detainees have died in Israeli jails amid a lack of medical care, restrictions on food and reports of violence and torture, according to the Palestinian Prisoner Club.

Medical officials in Gaza have described signs of torture and execution on the bodies of slain Palestinian captives handed over by Israel after the ceasefire over the past week.

Earlier this year, Mohammed’s relatives told Al Jazeera that they fear for his life.

His father, Zaher Ibrahim, said that the Trump administration could use its leverage to free his son with a single phone call. “But we’re nothing to them,” he told Al Jazeera.

Since 2022, Israeli forces and settlers have killed at least 10 US citizens, including two in the West Bank in July.

In a realist world, power is rarely exercised alone. It takes coordination, sustained support, and mutual loyalty to project strength. That is the foundation of any enduring alliance. Since the Cold War, Western powers have built a sophisticated web of strategic alliances, sometimes tested but still intact. Even amid nationalist disruptions under figures like Donald Trump or Viktor Orbán, the Western alliance remains functional and coherent. But what about the non-Western bloc, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and others?

The truth is that non-Western alliances remain weak, fragmented, and often symbolic. Lacking geographic proximity, institutional architecture, or political cohesion, these alliances fail to act in unison, especially in moments of crisis. Military cooperation, defense technology sharing, and strategic communication remain alarmingly underdeveloped.

The recent Israeli attack on Iran exposed this blatantly. Reportedly Isreal forces used the Jordanian and Iraqi airspace, struck Iranian nuclear and military facilities, killing multiple top officials. While rumors circulated about an imminent war, Iran’s response was surprisingly feeble. It’s defense systems failed to intercept the attacks, and its military preparedness appeared outdated from the start. But recent retaliation followed a little bit of promise.

The United States denied direct involvement. Yet Washington, alongside the European allies, refrained from condemning the strike. Germany, France, and the United Kingdom stood silent, indirectly backing Israel through intelligence sharing, military cooperation, and diplomatic support. Their strategic coordination remains strong, despite tensions over Iran’s nuclear program.

What about Iran’s Non-Western allies?

Russia, arguably Iran’s closest partner, is deeply engaged in its own war in Ukraine. Yet strategic alliances are tested precisely in such moments. Iran and Russia have long shared regional interests in Syria and other part of the Middle East. Now, that cooperation seems one-sided. While Russia uses Iranian drones in Ukraine, Tehran receives little in return. No warning, no defense coordination, and certainly no technological assistance ahead of Israel’s strike.

Why hasn’t Russia helped accelerate Iran’s nuclear program as Western powers once did for Israel? Where was the intelligence sharing, the strategic dialogue? These absences raise serious questions about Russia’s role in the non-Western alliance framework: Is it simply a transactional partner or something more?

China is a different story. With an advanced defense industry and growing geopolitical clout, Beijing has demonstrated capability. The recent deployment of Chinese J-10C jets to Pakistan, for example, during tensions with India, signaled a serious technological and symbolic counterweight to Western influence. China even provided real-time intelligence to Pakistan. But where was this level of support for Iran? Through recent rumor said, there are couple of military assistance provided to Iran but still not like ally.

A newly inaugurated Iran-China railroad project suggests growing economic ties, but modern alliances require more than trade. Strategic defense coordination is fundamental. Despite Iran’s geopolitical relevance, Beijing remains largely absent in Iran’s security calculus.

Then there is Iran’s own regional network, its so-called “axis of resistance.” Historically, Iran projected strength through proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. But this too is unraveling. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh were both reportedly killed by Israeli operations, Haniyeh during an official visit in Tehran itself. These assassinations not only reflect Tehran’s inability to protect its partners but also signal a crisis of credibility. No meaningful retaliation followed. This absence of action weakens Iran’s reputation as a guarantor of its proxies’ survival.

The broader picture is troubling. Non-Western powers often operate like solo actors in a system that punishes isolation. The world is a dark forest; walk alone, and sooner or later, the wolves will find you. This is the lesson non-Western allies must internalize. Shared struggle requires shared commitment. Each country will always have its own domestic priorities, but alliances demand sacrifice, coordination, and strategic depth.

It seems like their trust-building process is yet to work. Or are they afraid to confront Western allies’ wrath over sanctions? China and Russia have been conducting business and various forms of economic cooperation with most of the Western blocs, despite sanctions threats and targeted regulations. These two nations need to step up and anchor the non-Western bloc. A multipolar world needs a table where bipolar allies can collaborate and pave the path for a democratic alliance for the world. Trump’s approach to Europe and other Western countries is not seen as a sign of alliance. So at this moment, non-Western countries can show unity. This not only gives the world new hope for cooperative living ideas but also threatens Trump’s leadership position on global order.

China has the defense capacity to empower allies but remains hesitant. Russia, once a superpower, is now locked in a war that undermines its influence and exposes its limits. In today’s geopolitical landscape, superpowers act more like coaches than players. Mediation, defense sharing, and regional stabilization efforts, rather than confrontation, are what build strategic resilience.

For the non-Western bloc, the Israel-Iran crisis must serve as a wake-up call. Without solidarity, without trust, and without strategy, they risk becoming a coalition of convenience. This also reflects unity in rhetoric but division and defeat in reality.

Iran is facing new pressure due to its nuclear programme.

European powers have re-imposed sanctions that were lifted as part of a landmark 2015 nuclear agreement.

They target Iran’s banking, oil, and other crucial sectors. There is also an embargo on arms imports.

Western allies say Iran has not been cooperating with the United Nations nuclear watchdog, and that its nuclear programme poses a threat to international security.

Tehran has always maintained that its nuclear programme is for civilian use, and says it is ready to weather the storm.

So, is there still room for diplomacy?

Presenter: Nick Clark

Guests:

Ellie Geranmayeh – senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, and a specialist in Europe-Iran relations

Mark Fitzpatrick – former US diplomat, and associate fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies

Marzie Khalilian – Iranian political analyst and researcher at Carleton University, focusing on US-Middle East relations.

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s authorities are discussing what comes next following an agreement with the global nuclear watchdog, as they urge the region to go beyond issuing statements in reaction to Israel’s attack on Qatar.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is heading to an emergency meeting of the parliament’s national security commission on Saturday evening, with hardline lawmakers looking for answers as to whether the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will be allowed to access nuclear sites bombed by the United States and Israel in June.

He is expected to reassure the hardline-dominated parliament that no access will be given to the IAEA without strict permission from the top echelon.

Araghchi had reached an agreement with the IAEA in Cairo, Egypt, on Tuesday, to try to resume cooperation that had been suspended after Tehran accused the nuclear watchdog and its chief, Rafael Grossi, of having paved the way for the strikes.

Grossi told the IAEA Board of Governors on Wednesday that the technical agreement includes “all facilities and installations in Iran” and “contemplates the required reporting on all the attacked facilities, including the nuclear material present”.

But Araghchi told Iranian state television that agency inspectors have no access to Iranian nuclear sites beyond the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant.

He said case-by-case permission would have to be granted by the country’s Supreme National Security Council, which includes the president, parliament and judiciary chiefs, several ministers, military commanders and those appointed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Araghchi also confirmed that Iran’s high-enriched uranium is “under the rubble of bombed facilities”, and said the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran is investigating and assessing whether the sites are accessible or contaminated.

Europe’s ‘snapback’ and Iranian threats

Amir Hayat Moghadam, a hardline member of the parliament’s national security commission, claimed that Araghchi said Iran will leave the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if United Nations sanctions are reinstated against the country, according to the state-linked Tabnak news website, ahead of the meeting on Saturday.

Araghchi and the foreign ministry have confirmed that legislation is in motion aimed at abandoning the global non-proliferation pact, but that finalising such a move would only potentially come if the “snapback” mechanism of Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers is abused by European countries.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom triggered the snapback mechanism in late August and were slammed by China and Russia, the other signatories to the landmark nuclear accord that the US unilaterally abandoned in 2018.

The European countries, known as the E3, gave Iran one month to reach a new agreement over its nuclear programme or face international sanctions.

Iran maintains that the three would lose legitimacy if they go through with the threat, and will “empower the US and marginalise Europe in future diplomatic engagements”.

Despite the rising tensions, Araghchi announced on Thursday that Iran and France are close to agreeing on a prisoner swap and expressed hope that an exchange would happen “in the coming days”.

Iran’s top diplomat did not detail which French prisoners held in Iran would be released, but said the exchange would include Mahdieh Esfandiari, an Iranian woman arrested in France over posts about Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Esfandiari, a translator living in the French city of Lyon since 2018, was arrested in February, with French authorities accusing her of incitement to and glorification of “terrorism” and “hate speech” against Jewish people over posts on Telegram.

Tehran calls her a “hostage”, employing the word used by France and other European countries that have accused Iran for decades of holding foreign and dual-national citizens in relation to espionage charges.

‘Joint operation room against Israeli madness’

Fighting off surging pressure from the US and its allies, Iranian authorities have tried to warm ties with China and Russia, and to find common ground with regional players, particularly Arab neighbours, over Israel’s aggressions.

After Israel attacked Qatar for the first time this week in a failed attempt to assassinate the top leadership of Hamas, Iran joined the chorus of regional and international condemnation.

Ali Larijani, who was appointed Iran’s security chief last month, went further on Saturday and issued what he called a “warning to Islamic governments”.

“Holding a conference of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation filled with speeches without any practical outcome (as happens in UN Security Council meetings) in truth amounts to issuing a new order of aggression in favour of the Zionist entity!”, he wrote on X in Arabic, in reference to Israel.

“At the very least, form a ‘joint operations room’ against the madness of this entity,” Larijani said, adding that “you have done nothing for the hungry and oppressed Muslims in Palestine, at least take a modest decision to avert your own annihilation”.

Qatar announced on Saturday that it will host an emergency Arab-Islamic summit on Monday in Doha, preceded by a preparatory meeting of foreign ministers on Sunday.

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed bin Mohammed al-Ansari said in a statement that “the summit will discuss a draft statement” on the Israeli attack.

Iran said President Masoud Pezeshkian will represent the country in the summit.

Head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, says he hopes for a ‘successful conclusion’ in the coming days.

Talks on resuming International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections of Iran’s nuclear sites have made progress, but its chief warned that there was “not much” time remaining.

On Monday, the director general of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, told the 35-nation IAEA Board of Governors in Vienna, Austria, that “Progress has been made”.

“It is my sincere hope that within the next few days it will be possible to come to a successful conclusion of these discussions,” Grossi said, adding: “There is still time, but not much.”

He did not elaborate on what the timeframe meant exactly.

While Tehran allowed inspectors from the IAEA into Iran at the end of August, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said no agreement had been reached on the resumption of full cooperation with the watchdog.

Following a 12-day war, which saw Israel and the United States bomb cities across Iran, as well as Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear facilities, in June, Tehran decided to change its cooperation with the IAEA.

Iran expressed anger at the IAEA for paving the way for Israel’s attack by censuring the country the day before Israel struck with a damning report in May that declared that Tehran was in breach of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

Fury then followed when the watchdog did not condemn Israeli or US attacks. In July, Iran passed a law suspending cooperation with the agency.

Within the law, any future inspection of its nuclear sites needs approval by Iran’s Supreme National Security Council.

However, last week, Grossi told the Reuters news agency in an interview that the board was pushing for a deal to inspect Iranian sites, including those targeted by Israel and the US.

Grossi confirmed that the IAEA had no information from Iran on the status or whereabouts of its stock of highly enriched uranium since Israel’s attacks on June 13.

“I believe there is a general understanding that by and large, the material is still there. But, of course, it needs to be verified. Some could have been lost,” he said.

“We don’t have indications that would lead us to believe that there has been major movement of material,” Grossi added.

Late last month, France, Germany and the United Kingdom triggered a mechanism to reimpose sanctions on Iran after a series of meetings failed to reach an agreement on the Iranian nuclear programme.

The three European countries, known as the E3, had been warning Tehran for weeks that UN sanctions could be reimposed by October when a 2015 nuclear agreement between Tehran and major powers expires.

Revolutionary guards say suspects apprehended in northeastern Iran as materials for making weapons are also seized.

Iran has arrested eight people suspected of attempting to transmit the coordinates of sensitive sites and details about senior military figures during the country’s 12-day war with Israel and the United States to the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, according to its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The IRGC released a statement on Saturday alleging that the suspects had received specialised training from Mossad via online platforms.

It said they were apprehended in northeastern Iran before carrying out their plans, and that materials for making launchers, bombs, explosives and booby traps had been seized.

The news comes as state media reported earlier this month that Iranian police had arrested as many as 21,000 “suspects” during the June conflict, though they did not say what these people had been suspected of doing.

Following an Israeli military bombardment that began on June 13, killing top military officials and scientists as well as hundreds of civilians, Iran retaliated with barrages of missiles on Israeli military sites, infrastructure and cities.

The US also carried out extensive strikes on Israel’s behalf on Iranian nuclear sites during the conflict, the worst blow to the Islamic republic since its 1980s war with Iraq.

During the 12-day war, Iranian security forces began a campaign of widespread arrests accompanied by an intensified street presence based around checkpoints and “public reports”.

Iranian citizens were called upon to report on any individuals they thought were acting suspiciously during the war that ended in a US and Qatar-brokered ceasefire.

Iran has executed at least eight people in recent months, including nuclear scientist Rouzbeh Vadi, hanged on August 9 for passing information to Israel about another scientist who was killed in Israeli air strikes.

Human rights groups say Iran uses espionage charges and fast-tracked executions as tools for broader political repression.

The Israel-US-Iran conflict has also led to an accelerated rate of deportations for Afghan refugees and migrants believed to be illegally in Iran, with aid agencies reporting that local authorities have also accused some Afghan nationals of spying for Israel.

“Law enforcement rounded up 2,774 illegal migrants and discovered 30 special security cases by examining their phones. [A total of] 261 suspects of espionage and 172 people accused of unauthorised filming were also arrested,” police spokesperson Saeed Montazerolmahdi said earlier this month.

Montazerolmahdi did not specify how many of those arrested had since been released.

He added that Iran’s police handled more than 5,700 cases of cybercrimes such as online fraud and unauthorised withdrawals during the war, which he said had turned “cyberspace into an important battlefront”.

On July 27, two brigades from the mostly Shia Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) stormed the Iraqi Ministry of Agriculture, clashing with police.

While the incident could be seen as a power struggle for position, it also indicates a certain degree of daring on the part of the brigades, which ended up killing a police officer.

The brigades were called in by Ayad Kadhim Ali after he was dismissed as the head of the ministry’s office in Baghdad’s Karkh district, according to Mehmet Alaca, an expert on Iraq’s Shia militias. Ali is affiliated with Kataib Hezbollah, as are the brigades that attacked the ministry, analysts told Al Jazeera.

The incident is seen as a litmus test of whether the Iraqi state can hold PMF factions accountable for breaking the law.

Iraq’s government argues that passing a new legislation – which would fully integrate the PMF into the state – would help them do so. Proponents of the bill argue it would incentivise the PMF to act within the confines of the law, but detractors fear it would give legal cover to militias, which are already too strong.

The PMF

The PMF, also known as al-Hashd al-Shaabi, is an umbrella organisation of mostly Shia armed groups, some of whom have close ties to neighbouring Iran. A few of these groups first emerged during the Iraqi resistance to US occupation.

Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, for instance, split from Jaish al-Mahdi, formerly the dominant arm of the Shia rebellion, in 2007. The group received Iranian support to become a major powerbroker in Iraq and later intervened in Syria’s civil war to support then-President Bashar al-Assad as he tried to crush a popular rebellion.

Kataib Imam Ali is another, albeit smaller, group in the PMF that reportedly received training from the Lebanese group Hezbollah in Iran and also dispatched fighters to Syria during the height of its war.

Like Kataib Imam Ali, most PMF factions were formed after Iraqi Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani issued a fatwa in 2014, urging all able-bodied men to join the state to defend Iraq from ISIL (ISIS).

At the time, ISIL controlled large swaths of territory across Syria and Iraq, equivalent to the size of England. ISIL even captured the Iraqi city of Mosul and declared a “caliphate” from there.

By 2016, Iraq’s parliament had passed a law that recognised the PMF as a component of the state’s national security.

But the law lacks clarity around command and control and budgetary oversight, and it has failed to prevent some groups from taking unilateral action to attack United States assets and soldiers stationed in the country.

In 2024, for instance, the PMF was awarded a budget of $3.4bn, which exceeded the total budget of Lebanon.

While the figure is small relative to the $21.1bn allocated to Iraq’s Ministry of Defence that same year, it is a sizeable amount that the state allocated to a body that it did not even have an accurate membership list for.

Each registered PMF faction submits a list of names to be paid, and these lists are then reviewed by the Ministry of Finance. However, PMF leaders often intervene to push payments through unchallenged, according to a 2021 report by the Chatham House think tank.

Estimates suggested there are 238,000 PMF fighters.

Receiving a share of the state budget has helped the PMF in its quest to brand itself as a legitimate entity in Iraq.

“From the beginning, the PMF was adamant that it was part of the state and not a militia,” said Renad Mansour, an expert on Iraq with Chatham House.

Over the past 10 years, PMF factions have created political wings, run in parliamentary elections and gained access to lucrative state money after securing important administrative positions in key ministries.

Yet as they accrued power, some used their arms against the state to safeguard their patronage networks and influence over key ministries.

In 2021, PMF groups linked to Iran launched a drone at the home of then-Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, reportedly an attempt to upend the government after losing many parliamentary seats and thus access to state money in the recent elections, said Alaca, the expert on Iraqi Shia militias.

The new law

The Iraqi government drafted the new law in March. It would give all PMF factions official, stable employment and bring them under the control of Prime Minister Mohamed Shia al-Sudani as commander-in-chief

Proponents of the draft law mainly include a bloc of five Shia parties known as the Coordination Framework.

“The argument pushed by those advocating for the law is that by offering an institutional safe haven for armed factions under a reformed PMF, it would incentivise those to comply with the national chain of command – thereby diminishing their appetite to take action outside the state,” explained Inna Rudolf, an expert on the PMF and a senior research fellow at the Centre for Statecraft & National Security at King’s College London.

Most importantly to the PMF, the law offers it much-needed legal cover at a time when the US and Israel are threatening to target groups they consider Iranian proxies.

It would grant PMF members full access to intelligence, which some argue is a risky proposition because the intelligence could be passed to Iran.

Analysts have said, however, that many PMF factions would be more concerned about their power base and assets than about following Iranian interests.

During the 12-day Israel-Iran war in June, PMF groups did not attack US assets or personnel, likely out of fear of giving Israel a pretext to attack their command structure and resources as Israel did against Hezbollah, according to a report by the Royal United Services Institute.

“I would say that the stronger and more embedded PMF groups are the ones who have been practising restraint and telling the smaller [pro-Iran] factions not to get involved in the regional conflict [between Iran and Israel],” Mansour said.

The follow-up on the Ministry of Agriculture incident will test the willingness of PMF commanders to cooperate with the state to hold their own members accountable, as well as the state’s seriousness in holding PMF members accountable, according to Rudolf.

She said al-Sudani has shown “strong will” by referring all those involved in the raid to the judiciary and calling for the formation of a review committee to investigate “negligence in leadership and control duties” within the PMF.

“Sudani’s administration wants to demonstrate power over the PMF and [to prove] that everyone affiliated with it not only has the same privileges as members of the security forces but has to abide by the same code of conduct,” Rudolf told Al Jazeera.

Pressures against the new law

Not everybody in Iraq supports the PMF’s integration, said Zeidon al-Kinani, an expert on Iraq and adjunct instructor at Georgetown University in Qatar.

He said many PMF factions harmed and even killed hundreds of young protesters who were demonstrating against what they considered a corrupt political elite in 2019.

As a result, civil society is wary of seeing all PMF factions given the same privileges as Iraq’s army and police and would prefer the government absorb only those that do not have close ties with Iran, al-Kinani said.

US officials are also pressuring Iraq not to pass the law with Secretary of State Marco Rubio reportedly telling al-Sudani the law would “institutionalise Iranian influence and armed terrorist groups undermining Iraq’s sovereignty”.

Former and current Iraqi officials argued that the state cannot disband the PMF and any attempt to do so could trigger sectarian violence.

Al-Kinani warned that the US could trigger a conflict by making unreasonable demands without supporting Iraq to carry them out.

“When it comes to Iraq, the US makes drastic demands [without] supporting the Iraqi government or civil society to ensure their protection from any repercussions,” he told Al Jazeera.

For the past few years, governments across the world have paid close attention to conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. There, it is said, we see the first glimpses of what warfare of the future will look like, not just in terms of weaponry, but also in terms of new technologies and tactics.

Most recently, the United States-Israeli attacks on Iran demonstrated not just new strategies of drone deployment and infiltration but also new vulnerabilities. During the 12-day conflict, Iran and vessels in the waters of the Gulf experienced repeated disruptions of GPS signal.

This clearly worried the Iranian authorities who, after the end of the war, began to look for alternatives.

“At times, disruptions are created on this [GPS] system by internal systems, and this very issue has pushed us toward alternative options like BeiDou,” Ehsan Chitsaz, deputy communications minister, told Iranian media in mid-July. He added that the government was developing a plan to switch transportation, agriculture and the internet from GPS to BeiDou.

Iran’s decision to explore adopting China’s navigation satellite system may appear at first glance to be merely a tactical manoeuvre. Yet, its implications are far more profound. This move is yet another indication of a major global realignment.

For decades, the West, and the US in particular, have dominated the world’s technological infrastructure from computer operating systems and the internet to telecommunications and satellite networks.

This has left much of the world dependent on an infrastructure it cannot match or challenge. This dependency can easily become vulnerability. Since 2013, whistleblowers and media investigations have revealed how various Western technologies and schemes have enabled illicit surveillance and data gathering on a global scale – something that has worried governments around the world.

Iran’s possible shift to BeiDou sends a clear message to other nations grappling with the delicate balance between technological convenience and strategic self-defence: The era of blind, naive dependence on US-controlled infrastructure is rapidly coming to an end. Nations can no longer afford to have their military capabilities and vital digital sovereignty tied to the satellite grid of a superpower they cannot trust.

This sentiment is one of the driving forces behind the creation of national or regional satellite navigation systems, from Europe’s Galileo to Russia’s GLONASS, each vying for a share of the global positioning market and offering a perceived guarantee of sovereign control.

GPS was not the only vulnerability Iran encountered during the US-Israeli attacks. The Israeli army was able to assassinate a number of nuclear scientists and senior commanders in the Iranian security and military forces. The fact that Israel was able to obtain their exact locations raised fears that it was able to infiltrate telecommunications and trace people via their phones.

On June 17 as the conflict was still raging, the Iranian authorities urged the Iranian people to stop using the messaging app WhatsApp and delete it from their phones, saying it was gathering user information to send to Israel. Whether this appeal was linked to the assassinations of the senior officials is unclear, but Iranian mistrust of the app run by US-based corporation Meta is not without merit.

Cybersecurity experts have long been sceptical about the security of the app. Recently, media reports have revealed that the artificial intelligence software Israel uses to target Palestinians in Gaza is reportedly fed data from social media. Furthermore, shortly after the end of the attacks on Iran, the US House of Representatives moved to ban WhatsApp from official devices.

For Iran and other countries around the world, the implications are clear: Western platforms can no longer be trusted as mere conduits for communication; they are now seen as tools in a broader digital intelligence war.

Tehran has already been developing its own intranet system, the National Information Network, which gives more control over internet use to state authorities. Moving forward, Iran will likely expand this process and possibly try to emulate China’s Great Firewall.

By seeking to break with Western-dominated infrastructure, Tehran is definitively aligning itself with a growing sphere of influence that fundamentally challenges Western dominance. This partnership transcends simple transactional exchanges as China offers Iran tools essential for genuine digital and strategic independence.

The broader context for this is China’s colossal Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). While often framed as an infrastructure and trade project, BRI has always been about much more than roads and ports. It is an ambitious blueprint for building an alternative global order. Iran – strategically positioned and a key energy supplier – is becoming an increasingly important partner in this expansive vision.

What we are witnessing is the emergence of a new powerful tech bloc – one that inextricably unites digital infrastructure with a shared sense of political defiance. Countries weary of the West’s double standards, unilateral sanctions and overwhelming digital hegemony will increasingly find both comfort and significant leverage in Beijing’s expanding clout.

This accelerating shift heralds the dawn of a new “tech cold war”, a low-temperature confrontation in which nations will increasingly choose their critical infrastructure, from navigation and communications to data flows and financial payment systems, not primarily based on technological superiority or comprehensive global coverage but increasingly on political allegiance and perceived security.

As more and more countries follow suit, the Western technological advantage will begin to shrink in real time, resulting in redesigned international power dynamics.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Iranian diplomats are meeting their counterparts from Germany, the United Kingdom and France for renewed nuclear talks, amid warnings that the three European powers could trigger “snapback” United Nations sanctions outlined under a previous 2015 deal.

The meeting, which is under way in Turkiye’s Istanbul on Friday morning, is the first since Israel’s mid-June attack on Iran, which led to an intensive 12-day conflict, with the United States militarily intervening on Israel’s behalf and attacking key Iranian nuclear sites.

Israel’s offensive – which killed top commanders, nuclear scientists and hundreds of civilians, as residential areas were struck, as well – also derailed US-Iran nuclear talks that began in April.

Iran said on Friday that the meeting is an opportunity for the so-called E3 group of Germany, UK and France to correct their positions on Iran’s nuclear issue. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said in an interview with state news agency IRNA that Iran considers the talk of extending UN Security Council Resolution 2231 to be doubly “meaningless and baseless”.

The resolution, which cemented the 2015 deal Iran reached with world powers, under which it curbed enrichment in return for much-needed sanctions relief, is due to expire in October. It enshrines the big powers’ prerogative to restore UN sanctions.

Since then, the E3 have threatened to trigger the “snapback mechanism”, which would reinstate the sanctions on Iran by the end of August, under the moribund 2015 nuclear deal which US President Donald Trump unilaterally torpedoed in 2018 during his first term.

The option to trigger the snapback expires in October, and Tehran has warned of consequences should the E3 opt to activate it.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who is attending the talks Friday, alongside senior Iranian diplomat Majid Takht-Ravanchi, warned this week that triggering sanctions “is completely illegal”.

He also accused European powers of “halting their commitments” to the deal after the US withdrew from it.

“We have warned them of the risks, but we are still seeking common ground to manage the situation,” said Gharibabadi.

Warning from Tehran

Iranian diplomats have previously warned that Tehran could withdraw from the global nuclear non-proliferation treaty if UN sanctions are reimposed.

Restoring sanctions would deepen Iran’s international isolation and place further pressure on its already strained economy.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has urged European powers to trigger the mechanism. Israel’s June 13 attack on Iran came two days before Tehran and Washington were scheduled to meet for a sixth round of nuclear negotiations.

On June 22, the US struck Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz.

Before the conflict, Washington and Tehran were divided over uranium enrichment, which Iran has described as a “non-negotiable” right for civilian purposes, while the US called it a “red line”.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says Iran is enriching uranium to 60 percent purity – far above the 3.67 percent cap under the 2015 deal, but well below the 90 percent needed for weapons-grade levels.

Tehran has said it is open to discussing the rate and level of enrichment, but not the right to enrich uranium.

A year after the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal, Iran reportedly began rolling back its commitments, which had placed restrictions on its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.

Israel and Western powers accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons – a charge Tehran has consistently denied. Both US intelligence and the IAEA said they had seen no evidence of Iran pursuing a nuclear weapon in the build-up to the June conflict.

Enrichment is ‘stopped’

Iran insists it will not abandon its nuclear programme, which Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called a source of “national pride”.

The full extent of the damage sustained in the US bombing remains unclear. Trump has claimed the sites were “completely destroyed”, but US media reports have cast doubt over the scale of destruction.

Araghchi has noted that enrichment is currently “stopped” due to “serious and severe” damage to nuclear sites caused by US and Israeli attacks.

In an interview with Al Jazeera that aired on Wednesday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Iran is prepared for another war and reiterated that its nuclear programme will continue within the framework of international law, adding the country had no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons.

Since the 12-day conflict, Iran has suspended cooperation with the IAEA, accusing it of bias and of failing to condemn the attacks.

Inspectors have since left the country, but a technical team is expected to return in the coming weeks, after Iran said future cooperation would take a “new form”.

Israel has warned it may resume attacks if Iran rebuilds facilities or moves towards weapons capability. Iran has pledged a “harsh response” to any future attacks.

Israel’s leadership views its 12-day war with Iran last month as a success – several Iranian military leaders were killed, Iran’s defensive military capabilities were weakened, and the United States was convinced to take part in a raid on the Iranian nuclear site at Fordow.

But while Israeli leaders were quick to claim victory, they emphasised that they were ready to attack again if necessary, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying he had “no intention of easing off the gas pedal”.

And Israel is already looking for the next opportunity to wage another devastating conflict aimed at bringing down the Islamic Republic in Iran, analysts told Al Jazeera.

However, to do so, it would require the ‘permission’ of the US, which may not be willing to give it.

Back in mid-June, a surprise Israeli attack led to the war, in which more than 1,000 Iranians and 29 Israelis were killed.

Israel justified the war by claiming that it was acting preemptively and in “self-defence” to take out Iran’s nuclear programme, which Tehran has long said is for civilian purposes.

Speaking to Al Jazeera earlier this week, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian expressed doubt over how long the current ceasefire will remain in place.

“We are fully prepared for any new Israeli military move, and our armed forces are ready to strike deep inside Israel again,” he said.

Cause for war

Despite Israel’s emphasis that it was targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, it mainly assassinated high-ranking government and military officials, indicating a clear attempt to weaken and possibly bring down the regime.

Trita Parsi, an expert on Iran and the cofounder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute, a left-wing US think tank, believes Netanyahu is looking for an opportunity to resume that mission.

“The reason the Israelis want to attack again … is because they want to make sure they turn Iran into the next Syria or Lebanon – countries Israel can attack anytime with impunity,” he told Al Jazeera.

Israel’s next opportunity to muster up a pretext for a war could come after European countries reimpose debilitating sanctions on Iran.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is reported to have held a call with his counterparts from Germany, France and the United Kingdom earlier in July, in which they agreed that United Nations Security Council sanctions would be reimposed if a new nuclear deal was not agreed upon by the end of August.

The sanctions had been lifted when Iran and several Western countries agreed on a nuclear deal in 2015.

The US pulled out of that deal two years into President Donald Trump’s first term in 2018 and restored sanctions as part of a maximum pressure campaign. Now, European parties to the deal could do the same, and that could prompt Iran to walk out of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, warned Parsi.

“That would provide [Israel] with a political window to [attack again],” he told Al Jazeera.

Meir Javedanfar, Iran lecturer at Israel’s Reichman University, added that Israel would nevertheless have to muster up or present credible intelligence that suggests Iran is rebuilding or repairing its nuclear programme.

He warned that, “to launch such an attack, Israel would need the agreement of the United States and its President Trump”, permission he regarded as less likely in light of US concern over Israeli attacks on Syria.

Israeli operations

While Israeli strikes on Iran may not be imminent, a report in The New York Times on Wednesday suggests that it is carrying out covert operations responsible for sudden explosions and fires across the country.

The paper cited three informed officials and a European diplomat who attributed the apparently random fires and explosions at apartment complexes, oil refineries, near an airport and a shoe factory, to acts of sabotage likely carried out by Israel.

“I think Benjamin Netanyahu has found a formula where it is able to attack Iran with impunity despite pushback from Donald Trump,” said Negar Mortazavi, an expert on Iran with the Center for International Policy (CIP), a think tank based in Washington, DC.

Any ongoing covert operations are a result of Israel’s extensive infiltration of Iranian security and infrastructure that became apparent during the early stages of the June conflict, with individuals targeted through what was presumed to be teams of local intelligence operatives and drones launched against Iranian targets from within Iranian territory.

There was no evidence to suggest that Israel’s network within Iran had ended with the war, analyst and Iran expert Ori Goldberg said.

“Israel has built a robust [security] system within Iran and, like all such systems, its muscles need flexing occasionally,” he said from Tel Aviv. “Sometimes this isn’t for strategic reasons, so much as tactical ones. As soon as you have infrastructure or people in place within another country, you have a limited time to use them, so if that’s setting fires or setting detonations, it’s a way of keeping them active and letting Iran know they’re there.”

Likelihood of new war

Few could have predicted the complete absence of restraint with which Netanyahu, previously a figure considered to be somewhat averse to conflict, has attacked neighbouring states, Syria and Lebanon, as well as regional actors, such as Yemen and Iran, while maintaining his brutal assault upon Gaza.

But while a renewed offensive upon Israel’s historical bogeyman, Iran, might prove popular in the face of growing internal division over Israel’s war on Gaza, how well received it might be by his principal ally remains to be seen.

“Trump is a concern and Israel will want to keep on the right side of whatever line he’s drawn [on its actions],” Goldberg said. “But Iran is a consensus issue within Israel. People might argue about Gaza, but never Iran. If Netanyahu feels himself under threat, he’s going to want to crack the Iranian whip and unify people behind him.”

Iran, for its part, won’t be caught flat-footed a second time, say analysts.

Mortazavi told Al Jazeera that Iran is expecting Israel to continue its aggression, even as it still holds out hope to reach a deal on its nuclear programme through diplomacy.

“I think they know that a deal will reduce the chances of an Israeli attack,” she said.

Tehran, Iran – The wave of Afghan refugees and migrants being sent back from Iran has not stopped, with more than 410,000 being pushed out since the end of the 12-day war with Israel on June 24.

More than 1.5 million Afghan refugees and migrants have been sent back in 2025, according to the United Nations’ International Organization for Migration (IOM), while the Red Cross says more than one million people more could be sent back by the end of the year.

Iran has been hosting Afghans for decades. While it has periodically expelled irregular arrivals, it has now taken its efforts to unprecedented levels after the war with Israel that killed more than 1,000 people in Iran, many of them civilians.

Iran has also been building a wall along its massive eastern borders with Afghanistan and Pakistan to stem the flow of irregular migration, and smuggled drugs and fuel.

The parliament is also planning for a national migration organisation that would take over its efforts to crack down on irregular migration.

‘I’m afraid’

“I feel like we’re being singled out because we’re easy targets and don’t have many options,” said Ahmad*, a 27-year-old undocumented Afghan migrant who came to Iran four years ago.

Like others, he had to work construction and manual labour jobs before managing to get hired as the custodian of an old residential building in the western part of the capital, Tehran.

At the current rate of Iran’s heavily devalued currency, he gets paid the equivalent of about $80 a month, which is wired to the bank card of an Iranian citizen because he cannot have an account in his name.

He has a small spot where he can sleep in the building and tries to send money to his family in Afghanistan whenever possible.

“I don’t really leave the building that much because I’m afraid I’ll be sent back. I don’t know how much longer I can live like this,” he told Al Jazeera.

Vahid Golikani, who heads the foreign nationals’ department of the governor’s office in Tehran, told state media last week that undocumented migrants must not be employed to protect local labour.

Daily returns, which include expulsions and voluntary returns, climbed steeply after the start of the war, with average daily returns exceeding 29,600 in the week starting July 10, said Mai Sato, UN special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran.

She was among four special rapporteurs who decried the mass returns on Thursday, adding their voice to rights organisations such as Amnesty International.

“Afghanistan remains unsafe under Taliban rule. These mass returns violate international law and put vulnerable people, especially women, children, and minorities, at severe risk of persecution and violence,” Sato said.

Alleged security risks

Authorities and state media have said undocumented immigrants may pose a security risk, alleging that some of them were paid by Israel to carry out tasks inside Iran.

While state television has aired confessions from a handful of unidentified imprisoned Afghans, but their numbers do not seem to match the scale of the expulsions.

The televised confessions featured men with covered eyes and blurred-out faces saying they had sent photographs and information online to anonymous handlers linked with Mossad.

Hundreds of Iranians have also been arrested on suspicion of working for Israel, and several Iranians have been executed over the past weeks as the government works to increase legal punishments for spying.

Mohammad Mannan Raeesi, a member of parliament from the ultraconservative city of Qom, said during a state television interview last week, “We don’t have a single migrant from Afghanistan among the Israeli spies.”

He pointed out that some Afghans have fought and died for Iran, and that attempts to expel irregular arrivals should avoid xenophobia.

Economic pressures

Before the latest wave of forced returns, Iranian authorities reported the official number of Afghan refugees and migrants at a whopping 6.1 million, with many speculating the real number was much higher.

Only about 780,000 have been given official refugee status by the government.

Supporting millions of refugees and migrants, regular and irregular, takes a toll on a government that spends billions annually on hidden subsidies on essentials like fuel, electricity and bread for everyone in the country.

Since 2021, there have been complaints among some Iranians about the economic impact of hosting millions who poured into Iran unchecked in the aftermath of the Taliban’s chaotic takeover of Afghanistan.

Amid increasing hostility towards the Afghan arrivals over the past years, local newspapers and social media have increasingly highlighted reports of crimes like theft and rape allegedly committed by Afghan migrants. However, no official statistics on such crimes have been released.

That has not stopped some Iranians, along with a large number of anonymous accounts online, from cheering on the mass returns, with popular hashtags in Farsi on X and other social media portraying the returns as a “national demand”.

Again, there are no reliable statistics or surveys that show what portion of the Iranian population backs the move, or under what conditions.

Some tearful migrants told Afghan media after being returned from Iran that security forces beat or humiliated them while putting them on buses to the border.

Others said they were abruptly deported with only the clothes on their back, and were unable to get their last paycheques, savings, or downpayments made for their rented homes.

Some of those with legal documentation have not been spared, as reports emerged in recent weeks of Afghan refugees and migrants being deported after having their documents shredded by police.

Government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani and Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni have separately said the government is only seeking undocumented migrants.

“In cases where legal residents have been deported, those instances have been investigated,” Momeni said last week, adding that over 70 percent of those returned came forward voluntarily after the government set a deadline to leave for early July.

‘I sense a lot of anger among the people’

For those Afghans who remain in Iran, a host of other restrictions make life difficult.

They are barred from entering dozens of Iranian cities. Their work permits may not be renewed every year, or the renewal fees could be hiked suddenly. They are unable to buy property, cars or even SIM cards for their mobile phones.

They are seldom given citizenship and face difficulties in getting their children into Iranian schools.

Zahra Aazim, a 22-year-old teacher and video editor of Afghan origin based in Tehran, said she did not truly feel the extent of the restrictions associated with living in Iran for Afghans until a few years ago.

Her family migrated to Iran about 45 years ago, shortly after Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution that brought the incumbent theocratic establishment to power.

“What really bugs me is the fact that I was born in Iran, and my family has been living here for over four decades, but I’m still unable to get something as basic as a driver’s licence.

“That’s not to mention fundamental documents like a national ID card or an Iran-issued birth certificate,” she told Al Jazeera.

By law, those documents are reserved for Iranian nationals. Afghan-origin people can apply if their mother is Iranian or if they are a woman married to an Iranian man.

Aazim said Iran’s rules have only gotten stricter over the years. But things took a sharp turn after the war, and she has received hundreds of threatening or insulting messages online since.

“I’ve been hearing from other Afghan-origin friends in Iran … that this is no longer a place where we can live,” she said.

“A friend called me with the same message after the war. I thought she meant she’s thinking about moving to another country or going back to Afghanistan. I never thought her last resort would be [taking her own life].”

Aazim also said her 23-year-old brother was taken by police from a Tehran cafe – and later released – on suspicion of espionage.

The incident, along with videos of violence against Afghans that are circulating on social media, has made her feel unsafe.

“I sense a lot of anger among the Iranian people, even in some of my Iranian friends. When you can’t lash out against those in power above, you start to look for people at lower levels to blame,” she said.

“I’m not saying don’t take any action if you have security concerns about Afghan migrants … I just wish they would treat us respectfully.

“Respect has nothing to do with nationality, ethnicity or geography.”

*Name has been changed for the individual’s protection.

Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi has said that Tehran cannot give up on its uranium enrichment programme, which was severely damaged by waves of US and Israeli air strikes last month.

“It is now stopped because, yes, damages are serious and severe, but obviously, we cannot give up our enrichment because it is an achievement of our own scientists, and now, more than that, it is a question of national pride,” Araghchi told the US broadcaster Fox News in an interview aired on Monday.

Araghchi said at the beginning of the interview that Iran is “open to talks” with the United States, but that they would not be direct talks “for the time being”.

“If they [the US] are coming for a win-win solution, I am ready to engage with them,” he said.

“We are ready to do any confidence-building measure needed to prove that Iran’s nuclear programme is peaceful and would remain peaceful forever, and Iran would never go for nuclear weapons, and in return, we expect them to lift their sanctions,” the foreign minister added.

“So, my message to the United States is that let’s go for a negotiated solution for Iran’s nuclear programme.”

Araghchi’s comments were part of a 16-minute interview aired on Fox News, a broadcaster known to be closely watched by US President Donald Trump.

“There is a negotiated solution for our nuclear programme. We have done it once in the past. We are ready to do it once again,” Araghchi said.

Tehran and Washington had been holding talks on the nuclear programme earlier this year, seven years after Trump pulled the US out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Tehran signed with several world powers in 2015. Under the pact, Iran opened the country’s nuclear sites to comprehensive international inspection in return for the lifting of sanctions.

Trump’s decision to pull the US out of the deal came after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Iran of pursuing a “secret nuclear programme“.

Iran has long maintained that its nuclear enrichment programme is strictly for civilian purposes.

The US and Iran engaged in talks as recently as May to reach a new deal, but those negotiations broke down when Israel launched surprise bombing raids across Iran on June 13, targeting military and nuclear sites.

More than 900 people were killed in Iran, and at least 28 people were killed in Israel before a ceasefire took hold on June 24.

The US also joined Israel in attacking Iranian nuclear facilities, with the Pentagon later claiming it had set back the country’s nuclear programme by one to two years.

Araghchi said on Monday that Iran’s Atomic Energy Organisation is still evaluating how the attacks had affected Iran’s enriched material, adding that they will “soon inform” the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of its findings.

He said any request for the IAEA to send inspectors would be “carefully considered”.

“We have not stopped our cooperation with the agency,” he claimed.

IAEA inspectors left Iran after Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a law suspending cooperation with the IAEA earlier this month.

Tehran had sharply criticised the IAEA and its chief, Rafael Grossi, over a June 12 resolution passed by the IAEA board accusing Tehran of non-compliance with its nuclear obligations.

Iranian officials said the resolution was among the “excuses” that Israel used as a pretext to launch its attacks, which began on June 13 and lasted for 12 days.

Speaking to journalists earlier on Monday, Stephane Dujarric, the spokesperson for the United Nations secretary-general, said that the UN welcomed renewed “dialogue between the Europeans and the Iranians”, referring to talks set to take place between Iran, France, Germany and the United Kingdom in Turkiye on Friday.

The three European parties to the former JCPOA agreement have said that Tehran’s failure to resume negotiations would lead to international sanctions being reimposed on Iran.

Washington, DC – New media reports in the United States, citing intelligence assessments, have cast doubt over President Donald Trump’s assertion that Washington’s military strikes last month “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear programme.

The Washington Post and NBC News reported that US officials were saying that only one of the three Iranian nuclear sites – the Fordow facility – targeted by the US has been destroyed.

The Post’s report, released on Friday, also raised questions on whether the centrifuges used to enrich uranium at the deepest level of Fordow were destroyed or moved before the attack.

“We definitely can’t say it was obliterated,” an unidentified official told the newspaper, referring to Iran’s nuclear programme.

Trump has insisted that the US strikes were a “spectacular” success, lashing out at any reports questioning the level of damage they inflicted on Iran’s nuclear programme.

An initial US intelligence assessment, leaked to several media outlets after the attack last month, said the strikes failed to destroy key components of Iran’s nuclear programme and only delayed its work by months.

But the Pentagon said earlier in July that the attacks degraded the Iranian programme by one to two years.

While the strikes on Fordow – initially thought to be the most guarded facility, buried inside a mountain – initially took centre stage, the NBC News and Washington Post reports suggested that the facilities in Natanz and Isfahan also had deep tunnels.

‘Impenetrable’

The US military did not use enormous bunker-busting bombs against the Isfahan site and targeted surface infrastructure instead.

A congressional aide familiar with intelligence briefings told the Post that the Pentagon had assessed that the underground facilities at Isfahan were “pretty much impenetrable”.

The Pentagon responded to both reports by reiterating that all three sites were “completely and totally obliterated”.

Israel, which started the war by attacking Iran without direct provocation last month, has backed the US administration’s assessment, while threatening further strikes against Tehran if it resumes its nuclear programme.

For its part, Tehran has not provided details about the state of its nuclear sites.

Some Iranian officials have said that the facilities sustained significant damage from US and Israeli attacks. But Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said after the war that Trump had “exaggerated” the impact of the strikes.

The location and state of Iran’s highly enriched uranium also remain unknown.

Iran’s nuclear agency and regulators in neighbouring states have said they did not detect a spike in radioactivity after the bombings, suggesting the strikes did not result in uranium contamination.

But Rafael Grossi, the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, did not rule out that the uranium containers may have been damaged in the attacks.

“We don’t know where this material could be or if part of it could have been under the attack during those 12 days,” Grossi told CBS News last month.

According to Grossi, Iran could resume uranium enrichment in a “matter of months”.

The war

Israel launched a massive attack against Iran on June 13, killing several top military officials, as well as nuclear scientists.

The bombing campaign targeted military sites, civilian infrastructure and residential buildings across the country, killing hundreds of civilians.

Iran responded with barrages of missiles against Israel that left widespread destruction and claimed the lives of at least 29 people.

The US joined the Israeli campaign on June 22, striking the three nuclear sites. Iran retaliated with a missile attack against an air base housing US troops in Qatar.

Initially, Trump said the Iranian attack was thwarted, but after satellite images showed damage at the base, the Pentagon acknowledged that one of the missiles was not intercepted.

“One Iranian ballistic missile impacted Al Udeid Air Base June 23 while the remainder of the missiles were intercepted by US and Qatari air defence systems,” Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell told Al Jazeera in an email last week.

“The impact did minimal damage to equipment and structures on the base. There were no injuries.”

After a ceasefire was reached to end the 12-day war, both the US and Iran expressed willingness to engage in diplomacy to resolve the nuclear file. But talks have not materialised.

Iran and the US were periodically holding nuclear talks before Israel launched its war in June.

EU-Iran talks

During his first term in 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The agreement saw Iran scale back its nuclear programme in exchange for lifting international sanctions against its economy.

In recent days, European officials have suggested that they could impose “snap-back” sanctions against Iran as part of the deal that has long been violated by the US.

Tehran, which started enriching uranium beyond the limits set by the JCPOA after the US withdrawal, insists that Washington was the party that nixed the agreement, stressing that the deal acknowledges Iran’s enrichment rights.

I had a joint teleconference with E3 FMs & EU HR last night, in which I made the following points clear:

It was the US that withdrew from a two-year negotiated deal -coordinated by EU in 2015- not Iran; and it was US that left the negotiation table in June this year and chose a… pic.twitter.com/NFQdK2HZD4

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) July 18, 2025

On Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said he held talks with the top diplomats of France, the United Kingdom and Germany – known as the E3 – as well as the European Union’s high representative.

Araghchi said Europeans should put aside “worn-out policies of threat and pressure”.

“It was the US that withdrew from a two-year negotiated deal – coordinated by EU in 2015 – not Iran; and it was US that left the negotiation table in June this year and chose a military option instead, not Iran,” the Iranian foreign minister said in a social media post.

“Any new round of talks is only possible when the other side is ready for a fair, balanced, and mutually beneficial nuclear deal.”

Tehran denies seeking a nuclear bomb. Israel, meanwhile, is widely believed to have an undeclared nuclear arsenal.

Ten years ago, Iran and world powers signed a historic nuclear deal, easing sanctions in return for limits on Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Since then, the United States pulled out, and just weeks ago, joined Israel in attacking Iran.

What’s the legacy of this deal and its collapse?

Presenter: James Bays

Guests:

Alan Eyre – Member of US nuclear deal team (2010-2015)

Abas Aslani – Senior research fellow, Center for Middle East Strategic Studies

Robert Kelley – Distinguished fellow, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

More details emerge on June assassination attempt on President Masoud Pezeshkian and other officials by Israel.

Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian suffered minor injuries in an Israeli air strike on a meeting of the Supreme National Security Council in Tehran on June 15, a senior Iranian official said.

The assassination attempt targeted the heads of the three branches of government in an effort to overthrow it, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“This attempt will not pass without Israel paying a price,” he told Al Jazeera.

The strike was carried out shortly before noon during a meeting attended by the heads of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government along with other senior officials.

The semiofficial Fars news agency also reported new details on the assassination attempt during Israel’s 12-day war with Iran, which was first announced by the Iranian president in an interview released on Monday.

The session was taking place in the lower level of a government facility in western Tehran when the attack started, Fars reported. The building’s entrances and exits were hit by six missiles to block escape routes and cut off air flow.

Electricity was severed following the explosions, but Iranian officials managed to escape through a pre-designated emergency hatch, including the president, who is said to have sustained minor leg injuries while evacuating.

The news agency said authorities launched an investigation into the possible presence of Israeli spies given the accuracy of the intelligence the “enemy” possessed.

‘They did try’

Last week, Pezeshkian said in an interview with US media figure Tucker Carlson that Israel attempted to assassinate him. “They did try, yes … but they failed,” he said.

“It was not the United States that was behind the attempt on my life. It was Israel. I was in a meeting… They tried to bombard the area in which we were holding that meeting.”

The comments come less than a month after Israel launched its unprecedented June 13 bombing campaign against Iran, killing top military commanders and nuclear scientists.

The Israeli attacks took place two days before Tehran and Washington were set to meet for a new round of nuclear talks, stalling negotiations aimed at reaching a deal over Iran’s atomic programme.

At least 1,060 people were killed in Iran during the conflict, according to Iran’s Foundation of Martyrs and Veterans Affairs.

The Israeli attacks drew waves of retaliatory drone and missile fire, killing 28 people in Israel, according to authorities.

Iran targeted Israeli military and intelligence headquarters with ballistic missiles and drones before the US brokered a ceasefire.

Israeli settlers have beaten to death a United States citizen in the occupied West Bank, the victim’s family members and rights groups have said.

Settlers attacked and killed Sayfollah Musallet – who was in his early 20s – in the town of Sinjil, north of Ramallah, on Friday, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.

Musallet, also known as Saif al-Din Musalat, had travelled from his home in Florida to visit family in Palestine, his cousin Fatmah Muhammad said in a social media post.

Another Palestinian, identified by the Health Ministry as Mohammed Shalabi, was fatally shot by settlers during the attack.

Rights advocates have documented repeated instances where Israeli settlers in the West Bank ransack Palestinian neighbourhoods and towns, burning homes and vehicles in attacks sometimes described as pogroms.

The Israeli military often protects the settlers during their rampages and has shot Palestinians who show any resistance.

The United Nations and other prominent human rights organisations consider the Israeli settlements in the West Bank violations of international law, as part of a broader strategy to displace Palestinians.

While some Western countries like France and Australia have imposed sanctions on violent settlers, attacks have increased since the outbreak of Israel’s war in Gaza in October 2023.

When Donald Trump took office earlier this year, his administration revoked sanctions on settlers imposed by his predecessor, Joe Biden.

Israeli forces have killed at least nine US citizens since 2022, including veteran Al Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Akleh.

But none of the incidents have resulted in criminal charges.

The US provides billions of dollars to Israel every year. Advocates have accused successive US administrations of failing to protect American citizens from Israeli violence in the Middle East.

On Friday, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on Washington to ensure accountability for the killing of Musallet.

“Every other murder of an American citizen has gone unpunished by the American government, which is why the Israeli government keeps wantonly killing American Palestinians and, of course, other Palestinians,” CAIR deputy director Edward Ahmed Mitchell said in a statement.

He then pointed out that Trump has repeatedly promised to prioritise American interests, as typified by his campaign slogan “America First”.

“If President Trump will not even put America first when Israel murders American citizens, then this is truly an Israel First administration,” Mitchell said.

The Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) also called for action from the US administration, noting that settlers are “lynching Palestinians more frequently – with full support from Israel’s army and government”.

“The US government has a legal and moral obligation to stop Israel’s racist violence against Palestinians. Instead, it’s still backing and funding it,” the group said in a statement.

The US Department of State did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment about the killing of Musallet.

The Palestinian group Hamas condemned the murder of Musallet, describing it as “barbaric”, and called on Palestinians across the West Bank to rise up to “confront the settlers and their terrorist attacks”.

Israel said it was “investigating” what happened in Sinjil, claiming that the violence started when Palestinians threw rocks at an Israeli vehicle.

“Shortly thereafter, violent clashes developed in the area between Palestinians and Israeli civilians, which included the destruction of Palestinian property, arson, physical confrontations, and stone-throwing,” the Israeli military said in a statement.

Israeli investigations often lead to no charges or meaningful accountability for the abuses of Israeli officers and settlers.

As settler and military violence intensifies in the West Bank, Israel has killed at least  57,762 Palestinians in Gaza in a campaign that rights groups have described as a genocide.

The 12-day war between Israel and Iran ended with a fragile ceasefire. A review of the war’s economic toll suggests that a prolonged conflict would have been economically unsustainable for both sides. For Iran, this was anticipated given the country’s decades-long exposure to sanctions, but for Israel, the war marked a test of its economic strength and resilience and exposed deeper vulnerabilities. As recently as last year, the Israeli Finance Minister had stated with striking confidence that ‘the Israeli economy is strong by all measures, capable of sustaining all war efforts, on the front line and home front, until, with God’s help, victory is achieved.’  

Israel’s direct military costs averaged USD 725 million per day – more than eight times its estimated daily defence expenditure, considering the annual allocation of approximately USD 33 billion (NIS 109.8 billion) for the Ministry of Defence in the 2025 state budget. Airstrikes on Iranian targets cost around USD 590 million in the first two days alone, while interceptions are estimated to have cost at least USD 200 million daily. Even at this tremendous cost, missile defence operations could not prevent Tehran’s retaliatory strikes following the attacks on military and civilian infrastructure across the country from causing direct damage to Israel exceeding USD 1.5 billion, including to key financial and economic centres of activity. 

The nerve centre of Israel’s financial market – the Tel Aviv stock exchange building – was directly hit. While stocks quickly erased early losses during the war, leading the Israeli Finance Minister to hail it as ‘proof of Israel’s economic resilience–even under fire,’ attacks on Research and Development (R&D) centres, considered the most dynamic part of Israel’s economic core, that is the high-tech sector, represented a loss of decades of research, development, trial and error, and investment. Particularly consequential was the strike on the Weizmann Institute, known for its links to military projects and targeted in retaliation for the assassination of several Iranian nuclear scientists, which led to the destruction of 45 laboratories. One of the labs struck, for instance, had material from 22 years’ worth of research. Any future war could push the boundaries further, with even more vital sites likely to be targeted. 

Israel’s economic growth this year is projected to decline by at least 0.2 per cent, with the government’s budget deficit likely to reach 6 per cent of GDP, surpassing the 4.9 per cent cap set by the Finance Ministry. Last month, an Israeli official had hinted at the possibility of Tel Aviv seeking additional financial support from the United States to offset the war’s costs and address urgent defence needs. 

READ: Germany’s Merz says he has ‘no doubt’ about legality of Israel’s attacks on Iran

A 12-day war causing such significant economic consequences reveals how brittle and vulnerable the Israeli economy is. 

For Iran, the financial cost has been equally significant. The missiles alone cost Iran around USD 800 million, more than its estimated 12-day defence budget, based on the USD 23.1 billion annual allocation for March 2025-26. Tehran has now reportedly planned to triple its budget in 2025, reflecting the need to replenish resources. 

Iran’s economic core – the oil and gas sector – was also severely impacted. The drop in oil exports during the war reportedly cost Iran USD 1.4 billion in lost revenue. Some of Iran’s vital oil and gas facilities, including the major South Pars gas field, were directly hit. Unlike Israel, Iran’s defence systems were not as advanced, making it less capable of preventing strikes on vital sectors of the economy. However, analysts opine that Iran demonstrated more resilience than initially thought by avoiding a total collapse, and reportedly, maintained some of its oil exports during the war through a ‘shadow fleet’ of tankers. 

The primary lesson that emerges from this is not one of ‘strengthening resilience’ to mitigate the economic consequences of future wars, but that there are limits to technological and economic strength in the face of war. In fact, states with advanced economies and sophisticated defence systems, such as Israel, can overestimate their capacity to absorb and manage the consequences of war, thereby lowering their threshold for initiating a conflict. Even if enough resilience is built that vital infrastructure and sectors remain immune during a war, military expenditures can reach levels so high that their opportunity costs (the loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen) can last for decades. 

It now falls upon Israeli and Jewish voices to ask the hard questions boldly and without fear. At what cost does Israel pursue its military adventurism? How long will taxpayers’ money be poured into the bloodshed of innocent civilians? The same questions ought to be raised by the American voices, given the United States’ direct support to and complicity in Israel’s military campaigns. The actions of political leaders arguably become unsustainable once the domestic population (in large numbers) begins to understand and categorically question the price of wars that their governments fight in their name and take pride in. 

BLOG: The UK refused to support plans to overthrow Khomeini’s revolutionary rule, one year after the outbreak of the Iraq-Iran war

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Tehran’s top diplomat Abbas Araghchi visits Saudi Arabia for the first time after Iran’s 12-day war with Israel.

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has met Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Jeddah in the first visit by a top Iranian official to the Gulf kingdom after Israel’s war with Tehran.

Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said Araghchi’s talks with Prince Mohammed and other Saudi officials on Tuesday were “fruitful”.

The visit after the 12-day intense conflict between Israel and Iran, which saw the United States bomb three Iranian nuclear facilities before mediating a ceasefire, suggests that the war did not derail the rapprochement between Tehran and Riyadh.

Saudi Arabia’s official news agency, SPA, said Araghchi and Prince Mohammed “reviewed bilateral relations and discussed the latest regional developments and the efforts being made in that regard”.

“The Crown Prince expressed the Kingdom’s aspiration that the ceasefire agreement would contribute to creating conditions that promote security and stability in the region, emphasizing the Kingdom’s stance in supporting dialogue through diplomatic means as a path to resolving disputes,” SPA said.

It added that Araghchi expressed his gratitude to the kingdom for “condemning the Israeli aggression”.

The top Iranian diplomat also met with Saudi Minister of Defence Khalid bin Salman bin Abdulaziz and Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud.

Israel launched a massive bombardment against Iran on June 13, without direct provocation, killing top military commanders and nuclear scientists as well as hundreds of civilians.

Iran retaliated with missile barrages that left widespread destruction in Israel.

After the US targeted Iran’s nuclear sites, Tehran responded with a missile launch against a US airbase in Qatar. Shortly after that attack, US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire between Iran and Israel.

While Arab countries condemned the attack as a violation of Qatar’s sovereignty, Iran appears to be pushing to repair relations with Gulf states.

Ties between Tehran and Riyadh were strained for years over disagreements around regional conflicts and mutual accusations of spreading instability.

But the two countries agreed to restore formal relations as part of a deal brokered by China in 2023, and top Saudi and Iranian officials have been in regular contact.

Before the outbreak of the recent war, Saudi Arabia had welcomed Iran’s nuclear talks with the US, saying it supported efforts to resolve regional and international disputes.

On Monday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said he believed Tehran could resolve its differences with the US through dialogue, but trust would be an issue after the attacks on his country.

In an article published by the Financial Times earlier on Tuesday, Araghchi accused Israel of preferring conflict over diplomacy.

“Iran remains interested in diplomacy, but we have good reason to have doubts about further dialogue,” he wrote. “If there is a desire to resolve this amicably, the US should show genuine readiness for an equitable accord.”

US President Donald Trump and his Middle East envoy both claimed the talks could happen next week, following the Iranian president’s comments on being open to dialogue.

Iran says it has not requested talks with the United States over its nuclear programme, as claimed by US President Donald Trump.

“No request for a meeting has been made on our side to the American side,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said on Tuesday in comments carried by the country’s Tasnim news agency.

The clarification came a day after Trump, during a dinner in the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said Iran was actively seeking negotiations on a new nuclear deal following the 12-day war with Israel last month, which the US also joined.

“We have scheduled Iran talks. They want to talk,” Trump told reporters. “They want to work something out. They are very different now than they were two weeks ago.”

Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff – also present during the dinner – had even said the meeting could take place in the next week or so.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote in an opinion piece published in the Financial Times newspaper on Tuesday that Tehran remains interested in diplomacy but “we have good reason to have doubts about further dialogue”.

Sanctions relief

On June 13, Israel launched an unprecedented bombing campaign on Iran that targeted military and nuclear sites as well as residential areas, killing senior military commanders and nuclear scientists. Iranian authorities say the Israeli strikes killed at least 1,060 people. Israel says retaliatory drone and missile fire by Iran killed at least 28 people.

The US joined the war, bombing Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz, just days before a planned meeting between Tehran and Washington, DC on reviving the nuclear talks. Trump then went on to announce a ceasefire between Israel and Iran.

The negotiations, aimed at limiting Iran’s nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief, would replace the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – a deal signed with the US, China, Russia, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the European Union – which Trump ditched during his first term in office.

Floating the prospect of more talks on Monday, Trump also dangled the prospect of lifting punitive US sanctions on Iran, imposed after the US withdrawal from JCPOA, with further restrictions piled on this year.

This month, the US issued a new wave of sanctions against Iranian oil exports, the first penalties against Tehran’s energy sector since the US-backed ceasefire ended the war between Israel and Iran.

“I would love to be able to, at the right time, take those sanctions off,” said Trump.

Towards the end of last month, Trump said he was working on “the possible removal of sanctions”, but dropped his efforts after Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei claimed “victory” in the Iran-Israel war.

Tehran’s denial regarding talks with the US came after Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told US journalist Tucker Carlson that Iran had “no problem” resuming talks so long as trust could be rebuilt between the two sides.

The interview, aired on Monday, provoked a backlash in Iran, with the critics accusing Pezeshkian of being “too soft” in the wake of last month’s attacks on the country.

“Have you forgotten that these same Americans, together with the Zionists, used the negotiations to buy time and prepare for the attack?” said an editorial in the hardline Kayhan newspaper.

The conservative Javan daily also took aim at Pezeshkian, saying his remarks appeared “a little too soft”.

In contrast, the reformist Ham Mihan newspaper praised Pezeshkian’s “positive approach”.