Russia willing to extend New Start nuclear treaty – Putin
22 Sept 25, https://www.rt.com/russia/625057-putin-start-treaty-initiative/
The president stressed that allowing the deal to expire would be a big mistake.
Russia is prepared to continue abiding by the New START treaty on nuclear arms for one year even after it expires next February, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said.
Speaking at a meeting with the permanent members of Russia’s Security Council on Monday, Putin said that due to the hostile and destructive steps taken by the West in recent years, the foundations of constructive relations and cooperation between nuclear-armed states have been significantly undermined.
“Step by step, the system of Soviet-American and Russian-American agreements on nuclear missile and strategic defensive arms control was almost completely dismantled,” Putin said. He stressed that the systems of agreements between Russia and the US, who possess the two largest nuclear arsenals in the world, long served as a stabilizing factor and contributed to global stability and international security.
Putin noted that the New START treaty, signed in 2010 by Russia and the US, is the last remaining bilateral agreement limiting nuclear weapons. He warned that allowing it to expire and abandoning its legacy would be “a mistaken and short-sighted step, which, in our view, would also negatively impact the goals of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.”
The president announced that in order to avoid provoking a strategic arms race and ensuring an “acceptable level of predictability and restraint,” Russia is prepared to continue adhering to the central limitations of the New START Treaty for one year after February 5, 2026.
“Based on our analysis of the situation, we will subsequently make a decision on maintaining these voluntary self-restraints,” he added.
At the same time, Putin stressed that Moscow would implement this measure only if the US “follows suit and does not take steps that undermine or disrupt the existing balance of deterrence potential.”
The president ordered Russia’s relevant agencies to continue closely monitoring US activities in regard to strategic offensive arms arsenals and any plans to expand the strategic components of the US missile defense system. If it is deemed that Washington is taking actions that undermine Moscow’s efforts to maintain the status quo on strategic offensive arms, Russia will “respond accordingly,” Putin said.
The recognition of Palestine: what it does, what it doesn’t do, and why now
rather than respond to the pleas of the public with material sanctions against Israel, European and Western states have largely opted to adopt this symbolic recognition and pro forma support for a two-state solution. Meanwhile, on the ground, Israel continues to engage in annexation measures that are meant to render these recognitions meaningless.
The recognition of Palestine as a state is more of a symbolic gesture than a meaningful act, like imposing sanctions on Israel would be. Still, it shows that even Israel’s allies have been forced to take action as Israel’s genocide in Gaza deepens.
By Qassam Muaddi September 22, 2025, https://mondoweiss.net/2025/09/the-recognition-of-palestine-what-it-does-what-it-doesnt-do-and-why-now/
The United Kingdom, Canada, Portugal, and Australia officially recognized the State of Palestine in a series of separate but coordinated statements on Sunday, September 21. Other European and Western nations, including France, Belgium, New Zealand, and several other key allies of Israel, are expected to join the chorus of recognitions at today’s UN General Assembly meeting in New York. The summit is based on a joint Saudi-French initiative to revive a two-state solution called “the New York Declaration,” which was first issued at a conference on September 12. The conference was boycotted by the U.S, which opposed the summit.
In Sunday’s initial announcements of recognition, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that “we are acting to keep alive the possibility of peace and a two-state solution,” adding that the ongoing Israeli bombardment campaign in Gaza, as well as its starvation of the Palestinian population, were “utterly intolerable.” Starmer also decried Israel’s acceleration of settlement building in the West Bank, which he said has caused the “fading” of hope in the two-state solution.In light of the wave of announcements, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel’s response would come after he meets with U.S. President Trump on September 27, adding that he has “worked for years to prevent the establishment of this state of terror in the face of enormous internal and external pressure.”
The Israeli PM said that he has “doubled Jewish settlement in the West Bank,” vowing to continue, while condemning all nations recognizing a Palestinian state after October 7 as “rewarding terrorism.”
Meanwhile, the United States derided the countries that declared their recognition of Palestine as engaging in “performative gestures.”
“Our priorities are clear,” a state department official told AFP on Sunday. “The release of the hostages, the security of Israel, and peace and prosperity for the entire region that is only possible free from Hamas.”
The recognition comes as Israel ramps up its annihilation campaign in Gaza City, which has resulted in the leveling of broad swathes of the ancient city’s eastern neighborhoods as the army sends in decommissioned armored personnel carriers rigged with explosives to destroy entire residential blocks.
Israel is also openly discussing plans for the annexation of the West Bank. One such plan, presented earlier in September by far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, would see the annexation of 82% of the West Bank, including Bethlehem. This annexation plan would leave Palestinians with nothing but six isolated enclaves that make up less than 18% of the West Bank.
Israel has also accelerated the approval of the building of ambitious settlement projects, which aim to split the West Bank in two and “bury” the prospects of a Palestinian state, as articulated by Smotrich in mid-August.
What the recognition does
What the recognition does
The recognition is a political act, and it has political implications.
Primarily, it opens the way for higher levels of diplomatic relations between Palestine and other countries that now recognize the occupied Palestinian territories as a part of Palestine’s national soil. This politically highlights the already-established illegality of Israel’s settlements in these territories.
Finally, the recognition of a Palestinian state preemptively regards Israel’s planned annexation of the West Bank as illegitimate.
What it doesn’t do
However, this recognition does not imply any additional legal obligations on the part of the recognizing states to take action to ensure the establishment of the Palestinian state or to end the occupation of its territories. Those obligations were already enshrined in the Geneva Conventions, which define the obligations of states that are signatories to them in cases of occupation.
One of those legal obligations is for states to refrain from engaging in any action that aids the annexation of occupied territory. Yet these same countries have been dealing commercially with the Israeli state’s settlement economy for years, despite their existing obligations.
Moreover, the aforementioned countries are members of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has issued arrest warrants against Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant. These states are under the obligation to aid in their arrest, whether they recognize Palestine as a state or not.
Why now?
The worldwide Palestine solidarity movement has continued to expand in the same countries that have recently recognized Palestine, reflecting a marked shift in public opinion, driven largely by Israel’s increasingly graphic and devastating genocidal assault on Gaza. Politically, it has become untenable for many Western governments to remain passive, and the pressure to signal a position that diverges from their long-standing unconditional support for Israel has become impossible to ignore.
But rather than respond to the pleas of the public with material sanctions against Israel, European and Western states have largely opted to adopt this symbolic recognition and pro forma support for a two-state solution. Meanwhile, on the ground, Israel continues to engage in annexation measures that are meant to render these recognitions meaningless.
How will Israel respond?
The immediate changes on the ground are expected to come through Israel’s response to the wave of recognitions. Palestinians now brace for intensified crackdowns, including more arrests, raids, checkpoints, and further restrictions on movement.
Yet the most anticipated Israeli step is the formal annexation of parts of the West Bank, most likely the Jordan Valley and the larger settlements, such as Maale Adumim east of Jerusalem. Such a move would bring about new layers of restrictions on Palestinians’ daily lives.
The official annexation of any part of the West Bank would likely impose new draconian restrictions on Palestinians seeking to move in and out of the annexed areas. Instead of simply being cut off from other Palestinian localities through a network of checkpoints and iron gates that are opened and closed by the Israeli army at will, they might soon be required to apply for special entry permits to move throughout the West Bank, as is currently the case for Palestinians wishing to visit Jerusalem.
Palestinians might also become subject to more intense restrictions on their freedom to build homes, access services, and work, intensifying the engineered hardship meant to push them to leave their homes altogether.
More rural communities, and possibly entire towns, could be forcibly expelled by settlers or demolished by the Israeli army.
These are scenarios Palestinians have already lived for years in areas effectively annexed — whether officially, as in East Jerusalem, or de facto, as across much of Area C. But Israel could depart from this pattern, as it has in Gaza, and push annexation to new levels, seizing as much land as possible with as few Palestinians as possible. “Maximum land, minimum Arabs,” as the old Zionist adage has it, most recently repeated by Smotrich.
Still, if any of these scenarios materialize, they will not be the direct outcome of Palestine’s recognition as a state, but rather of Western governments reducing that recognition to symbolism, while avoiding any real action that could force change on the ground.
South Korea would accept a Trump-Kim deal to freeze nuclear programme, president tells BBC
BBC, Jean Mackenzie, Seoul correspondent, 22 Sept 25
South Korea’s president has said he would agree to a deal between Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un in which North Korea agreed to freeze production of its nuclear weapons, rather than get rid of them.
Lee Jae Myung told the BBC North Korea was producing an additional 15-20 nuclear weapons a year and that a freeze – as “an interim emergency measure” – would be “a feasible, realistic alternative” to denuclearisation for now.
North Korea declared itself a nuclear power in 2022 and vowed to never relinquish its weapons.
“So long as we do not give up on the long-term goal of denuclearisation, I believe there are clear benefits to having North Korea stop its nuclear and missile development,” Lee Jae Myung said.
“The question is whether we persist with fruitless attempts towards the ultimate goal [of denuclearisation] or we set more realistic goals and achieve some of them,” Lee added.
President Lee, who entered office in June, wants to establish peaceful relations with North Korea and reduce tensions, which flared under his predecessor Yoon Suk Yeol, who was impeached for trying to impose martial law last year.
The South Korean leader has been vocal about wanting President Trump to resume nuclear talks with Kim, which broke down in 2019 during Trump’s first term, after the US asked the North to dismantle its nuclear facilities.
In a speech to parliament on Sunday, the North Korean leader suggested he would be willing to negotiate with Trump – but only if the US dropped its demand for the North to denuclearise.
Lee told the BBC that he thought it possible that Trump and Kim could come back together, given they “seem to have a degree of mutual trust”. This could benefit South Korea and contribute to global peace and security, he added.
In a speech to parliament on Sunday, the North Korean leader suggested he would be willing to negotiate with Trump – but only if the US dropped its demand for the North to denuclearise.
Lee told the BBC that he thought it possible that Trump and Kim could come back together, given they “seem to have a degree of mutual trust”. This could benefit South Korea and contribute to global peace and security, he added.
The BBC sat down with the South Korean president at his office in Seoul, ahead of his trip to the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Monday.
South Korea currently holds the presidency of the UN Security Council, but Lee would not be drawn on whether the body was failing South Korea, because for years both China and Russia have blocked attempts to impose further sanction the North over its nuclear programme.
“While it’s clear the UN is falling short when it comes to creating a truly peaceful world, I still believe it is performing many important functions,” Lee said, adding that reforming the Security Council was “not very realistic”.
Asked whether China was now enabling North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme, Lee said it was “impossible to know”, but based on his current knowledge this was not his understanding………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy91w0e1z2o
The genie of ‘Israeli First’ dominance is out of the bottle
Alastair Crooke, September 22, 2025, https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/09/22/genie-israel-first-dominance-is-out-bottle/
Netanyahu will soon find that Israel has lost America – and the rest of the world, too.
‘Gaza is on fire; the Jewish state will not relent’, Israeli Defence Minister Katz excitedly proclaims: “The IDF is striking with an Iron fist at terrorist infrastructure”. In fact, over recent weeks Israel has struck at ‘infrastructure’ in West Bank, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Tunisia – besides Gaza.
The so-called ‘Rules-Based Order’ blueprint (if it ever truly existed beyond narrative) has been ripped up in favour of violent Zionism: Genocide, sneak attacks under the guise of on-going peace negotiations, assassinations, and the de-capitation of political leaderships. It is war without limits; without rules; without law; and in complete disdain for the UN Charter. Ethical boundaries, more particularly, are dismissed as mere ‘moral relativism’.
Something profound is re-shaping Israeli foreign policy. The transformation needs be understood as a U-turn within the very core of Zionist thinking (a journey from Ben Gurion to Kahane), as Yossi Klein has written.
Israel’s strategy from past decades continues to rest on the hope of achieving some literal Chimeric transformative ‘de-radicalisation’ of both Palestinians and of the Region, writ large – a de-radicalisation that will make ‘Israel safe’. This has been the ‘holy grail’ objective for Zionists since Israel was first founded.
Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer claims that such radical mutation in consciousness will only come from the bombing of opponents into utter submission. (The lesson which he draws from WWII). One aspect – Israel’s foreign policy – then is clear: It is the ‘War of the Jungle’.
But there is another aspect; one perhaps more troubling: These norms and ethical principles that Israel openly seeks to tear apart are, in the last resort, American proclaimed norms and values. Strikingly, the U.S. has abandoned its traditional ethos when it comes to Israel. And rather than criticise or seek to limit Israel’s use of such norm-busting military actions, the Trump Administration emulates them – sneak attacks under the guise of talking peace, de-capitation attempts, and striking with missiles at unknown vessels off Venezuela, vaporising the crew.
The U.S. is doing this openly – thumbing its nose, like Israel, at international law and conventions.
It does appear that key components of the U.S. Establishment increasingly favour the military strategies of Israel and even are shifting from the moral ethos of a ‘Just War’, shall we say, to one closer to the Hebraic ethos of ‘Amalek’. It amounts to updating western moral ‘software’ with the alternative ‘justice’ of absolute war.
Does the Israel state have a future? Israel is now carrying out a second Nakba in Gaza and the West Bank, with Jewish society remaining trapped in repression and denial – just as it was back in 1948. Israeli Historian, Ilan Pappe wrote in 2006 in his seminal work on the 1948 Nakba the fundamental importance of “retrieving [the events of 1948] from oblivion”:
Once the decision was taken [on 10 March 1948], it took six months to complete the mission. When it was over, more than half of Palestine’s native population, close to 800,000 people, had been uprooted, 531 villages … destroyed, and eleven urban neighbourhoods emptied of their inhabitants. The plan … and above all its systematic implementation in the following months, was a clear-cut case of an ethnic cleansing operation, regarded under international law today as a crime against humanity …
The story of 1948 is not complicated … It is the simple but horrific story of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, a crime against humanity that Israel has wanted to deny and cause the world to forget. Retrieving it from oblivion is incumbent upon us, not just as a greatly overdue act of historiographical reconstruction or professional duty; it is … a moral decision, the very first step we must take if we ever want reconciliation to have a chance.
I wrote recently how Israeli film-maker Neta Shoshani’s controversial documentary about the 1948 Nakba showed Israeli ethical and legal boundaries to have been erased in a bout of bloodletting and rape. The absolute loss of ethos (there was no accounting or justice), Shoshani says, imperilled the then-legitimacy of the State founding project. Repeated a second time – the current war – she warns, “could be the one That Ends Israel”.
Shoshani’s comments hint at the trauma felt by secular liberal Jews at witnessing the norms and lifestyle of their largely secular-liberal society upended by the swivel towards the militaristic and eschatological objectives of the Israeli Right. Finance Minister Smotrich declared recently that the Jewish people are experiencing “the process of redemption and the return of the divine presence to Zion – as they engage in the ‘conquest of the land’”.
Many European Jews did arrive in the new Israeli state to find safety and protection, however, they also came to participate in the Zionist project in Palestine.
For now, Netanyahu states he has Trump’s “100%” support and “unlimited credit” for the maelstrom unleashed across the region. As Ben Caspit writes, quoting a senior Israeli diplomat:
“The fact that Rubio landed here just days after the [Doha] attack, and voiced almost no criticism — in fact, the opposite — gives a tailwind to Israel’s operation in Gaza … Israel has not received such a generous and long line of credit from any American administration”.
And Trump seems to be moving away from the ‘global peacemaker’ moniker to concentrate more narrowly on demonstrating American ‘exceptional greatness’ – through tariffs, sanctions or military operations – thus demonstrating a dominating, if not Great, America.
Yet the problems are all too apparent: In previous years, Israel had been largely relegated to the sidelines at the U.S. National Conservatism Conference. This time around, the Jewish state and its wars couldn’t be avoided. The latest Conservatism conference slid into ‘civil war’ between the neo-con ‘realists’ supporting Israel, and those asking: “Why are these our wars? Why are Israel’s endless problems America’s liabilities? Why should we accept [Israel as being part of] ‘America First’?”, as the editor of The American Conservative exploded: “We f***ing shouldn’t!”
The tension within the Republican Party is obvious: MAGA supporters wish to support Trump, but the big Jewish donors and commentators, such as pro-Israel hawk Max Abrahms, mocked Tucker Carlson-loving “MAGA isolationists” at the conference, who had gone “insane” in their push to disengage from the Middle East.
Trump warned Netanyahu that the genocide in Gaza is causing Israel to bleed support among Republicans, including especially among younger people. Nonetheless, Trump has not modified his unwavering support for Israel (for whatever reason), but he has taken notice of the ‘mood vibe’ amongst his base.
If Trump has indeed noticed the change, Netanyahu doesn’t care. As Amir Tibon in Haaretz reports:
“If Trump thinks his comments on Israel’s loss of ‘control over Congress’ will be a wake-up call for Netanyahu, he’s mistaken. Israelis didn’t need Trump to know that their country is losing the battle over global public opinion”.
“Netanyahu and Ron Dermer … are at peace with Israel’s loss of international support, heightened isolation, the threats of sanctions against it, and arrest warrants for its leaders (including Netanyahu himself). The two don’t seem to care, and the reason, ironically, is the very man sounding the alarm: Donald Trump”.
“From Netanyahu’s point of view, as long as he’s got Trump’s backing – none of it matters”.
Well, Israel’s wars have lost a generation of young American conservatives – and they’re not coming back. Whatever the circumstances to the killing of Charlie Kirk, his death has let loose the genie of ‘Israeli First’ dominance in Republican politics to escape from the bottle.
When Netanyahu does peer out, he will find that Israel has lost America (and the rest of the world, too).
“Recognizing” The Rubble Of Palestine
Caitlin Johnstone, Sep 22, 2025, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/recognizing-the-rubble-of-palestine?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=174214040&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
UK, Canada and Australia: Never fear, Palestinians! We’re here to save the day!
Palestinians: You’re going to stop the genocide?
UK, Canada and Australia: HAHAHAHAHA! No! Oh god no. Haha! No, we are going to give a great big Thumbs Up to the idea of your eventual statehood!
Palestinians: Will you at least stop sending them weapons?
UK, Canada and Australia: LOL no.
In response to the UK, Canada and Australia announcing their recognition of a Palestinian state, Benjamin Netanyahu has proclaimed that Israel will never allow such a state to exist.
“It’s not going to happen. There will be no Palestinian state to the west of the Jordan River,” Netanyahu said, adding that Israel will continue expanding settlements in the West bank.
It’s funny how Israel supporters will claim it’s a genocidal hate crime to say “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free”, but apparently it’s fine to say from the river to the sea Palestine will not be free. Even if you say it while actually committing genocide.
Israeli officials coming out saying there will never be a Palestinian state are completely discrediting all the two-state solution western liberals who’ve spent two years condemning Hamas because they didn’t pursue their liberation by going through the proper channels.
Reminds me of that Jon Stone quote you see going around sometimes, “One reason people insist that you use the proper channels to change things is because they have control of the proper channels and they’re confident it won’t work.”
Westerner: I support a two-state solution.
Israel: There will never be a Palestinian state.
Westerner: Okay then I support a one-state solution where everyone has equal rights.
Israel: You’re calling for an end to the Jewish state you monster.
Westerner: Alright then I support the Palestinian resistance.
Israel: That’s supporting terrorism. You are Hamas and we can legally murder you.
Westerner: Well can I at least support a permanent ceasefire to end the genocide?
Israel: [cocks pistol] What did I just tell you about supporting Hamas?
Westerner: Okay then, I support Palestinians living as a permanent underclass until they can be slowly salami sliced out of existence as a people.
Israel: Getting warmer.
Westerner: I support removing all Palestinians from their historic homeland via ethnic cleansing or extermination before the end of Donald Trump’s presidential term.
Israel: [puts away gun] That’s more like it.
I saw a video where two Australian doctors described how they had to deliver a baby via emergency c-section because the baby’s mother had been decapitated by an Israeli airstrike. Information like this always reminds me of that period last year when all the western politicians and media outlets were telling us that the worst people in the entire world were the university students who were protesting against this genocide.
The Global Sumud Flotilla is saying they’re seeing drones around their ships again just days out from their planned arrival to bring aid into Gaza. Earlier this month drones repeatedly dropped incendiary firebombs on the boats.
This comes as Israel’s Foreign Ministry declares that the flotilla is a Hamas ally, and as Google runs Israel-sponsored ads spinning the flotilla as a terrorist operation.
I don’t know if the Israelis are going to kill these courageous activists, but you can tell they really, really want to.
Remember that time we spent two years watching a horrific live-streamed genocide and then everyone tried to tell us we’re supposed to cry and express our deepest condolences when one of the propagandists for that genocide got shot? That was weird, right?
When Biden finally fucking dies I’m going to be much more insensitive and hostile than I ever was about Charlie Kirk, because he was objectively more murderous and destructive. And when I do, right wingers won’t be shrieking at me about how evil it is to speak ill of the dead. These people have no principles; they’re just herd-minded NPCs trying to canonize a horrible man because he has the same ideology as them.
You’re never going to believe this, but it turns out that news story everyone’s been yelling hysterically about is being used to advance many pre-existing agendas of the US empire.
Officials at the US War Department have announced that they’re considering using Charlie Kirk as a tool for military recruitment. You can add that to the list of all the other agendas they’re using Kirk’s death to advance like increased censorship and surveillance and attacks on leftist dissident groups.
This was predictable from the very beginning. Never play along with their games.
How Iran Just Proved the West Doesn’t Want a Nuclear Deal: Another War for Israel Near
Palestine Chronicle, September 20, 2025, By Robert Inlakesh
The UN Security Council’s rejection of sanctions relief for Iran marks the final collapse of the JCPOA, pushing Tehran toward confrontation and closing the door on future diplomacy.
This Friday, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) voted to reject the continuation of sanctions relief for Iran, meaning that the end result of the Obama-era nuclear deal has been an even greater economic blow to Tehran. Not only does this send the message of war, but it also eliminates any hope for future agreements and cooperation.
The UNSC vote represented a death blow to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. As a result of this vote, a major shift is about to occur that will have enormous violent reverberations.
When the JCPOA was originally negotiated back in 2015, part of the agreement was an in-built mechanism that would permit “snap-back” sanctions to be applied against Iran, should it fail to apply to its side of the agreement.
In late August, the E3 countries – Britain, France, and Germany – had initiated a 30-day process, which would lead to the imposition of these “snap-back” sanctions, unless Iran decided to meet unrealistic demands that they knew wouldn’t be met. Now, as per the UNSC vote to block sanctions relief on Iran, the Islamic Republic has been given until September 28 to reach a significant deal to block the imposition of sanctions.
In response to this, Russia, China, Algeria, and Pakistan, who had voted for the continuation of sanctions relief, condemned the move of the Security Council and even indicated they would not comply with such sanctions.
So, why is this a bombshell decision?
Some media commentators and analysts are treating this UNSC decision as a simple road to more sanctions and pressure on Tehran. As is usually the case, however, the devil is in the details, and to understand this, we must look to the knock-on effects.
To begin with, there are the implications of domestic Iranian politics. The current President of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, is from what is known as the Reformist Camp in Iranian politics. This political movement appealed to more liberal leaning Iranians and advocates opening up ties with the West, making the JCPOA one of their primary projects.
Under the former leadership of Hassan Rouhani, the Iranian negotiating team that was headed by Javad Zarif, managed to pull off the Nuclear Deal with the administration of then US President Barack Obama. At the time, it was hailed as a major deal and had even convinced many Iranians that the path of pursuing cordial relations with the West was not only possible, but favorable.
It wasn’t long, however, until the agreement began to come under greater scrutiny, due to an American-European refusal to implement their sides of the bargain. Then came the Presidency of Donald Trump, who in 2018 decided to unilaterally withdraw from the deal and impose a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign on Iran instead.
At this stage, not only did it appear that the deal had completely fallen apart, but now the sanctions that were being imposed were even more severe than they were prior to the JCPOA in 2015. Yet, there were still efforts being made between the Iranian government and its European counterparts, despite the lack of the EU nations’ willingness to disobey the United States.
Meanwhile, the sanctions against Iran were blocking vital medical supplies from entering the country and further impacting their already suffering economy. Amidst this, the US attempted to stir civil unrest inside of Iran and in 2020 launched an assassination strike against Iran’s top General, Qassem Soleimani, of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)’s Quds Forces.
When it came time for a political change inside the United States, during Joe Biden’s campaign, he had promised to revive the Iran deal. Yet, he failed to follow up on this pledge upon taking office in 2021. Instead, he continued to implement the sanctions of his predecessor…………………………………………………
Ultimately, the Biden administration stalled and failed to achieve any breakthrough, refusing to revive the deal, instead requesting all kinds of additional elements that were considered non-starters by Iran.
On May 19, 2024, tragedy struck inside Iran as its President and other prominent officials were killed in a helicopter crash. This led to a new election cycle, where the Reformists yet again gained power.
Iran’s President, Massoud Pezeshkian, has repeatedly made it clear that he seeks to open up relations with the West and, through his foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, has sought to make this happen.
When the Trump administration took power, it was clear that the Israelis and the US sought to attack Iran, not to pursue genuine dialogue. Yet, the reformist government pursued diplomacy regardless, as Oman stepped in to mediate talks between delegations headed by Abbas Araghchi and his American counterpart Steve Witkoff.
During the course of these negotiations, on June 13, the Israelis decided to launch an attack that assassinated Iranian generals and nuclear scientists, while striking Iran’s nuclear project. This led to the 12-day war, as it is now being called. The Iranian public, whom the Israelis and US had expected to rebel against their government, did the very opposite and decided instead to rally behind the flag.
The US decided to participate in the Israeli attack, even further weakening the credibility of the United States. What’s more is that Iranian military officials had accused the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, of providing the Israelis with sensitive information about Iran’s nuclear program.
As a result of this, the Iranian parliament passed a bill that barred the IAEA from the country, as various lawmakers called for pressing legislation that would lead to Tehran’s withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Instead, the reformist government decided to still desperately pursue talks with the Europeans, signed another agreement that re-invited the IAEA into their country to monitor the nuclear program, and reached out to try to pursue talks to revive the JCPOA.
This brings us to the broader implications of the UNSC vote and where this leads……………………………………………………………………………..
Either way this goes, the result is going to be conflict, and the more that the reformists attempt to desperately negotiate and are humiliated, the more aggressive the US and Israelis are likely going to be. What this UNSC vote signals is a major shift that has just occurred, from which there can be no going back………………………………………………………………
Iran has desperately tried to pursue the path of negotiations, but has been betrayed, insulted, sanctioned, and physically attacked for its efforts. It is no longer a matter of if the next Iran war will occur, but when. https://www.palestinechronicle.com/how-iran-just-proved-the-west-doesnt-want-a-nuclear-deal-another-war-for-israel-near/
Iran hits out ahead of UN vote on nuclear sanctions
Tehran says it has offered fair proposals and accuses the E3 of ‘political bias’ in seeking to revive sanctions.
By Elis Gjevori and News Agencies, 19 Sept 25, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/19/iran-hits-out-ahead-of-un-vote-on-nuclear-sanctions
Iran has hit out at European states that have threatened to revive international sanctions over the monitoring of its nuclear programme.
Tehran officials on Friday accused the European states, which have said they will reimpose international sanctions if Tehran does not meet conditions, of “political bias” and insisted that they have presented fair proposals to resolve the issue.
The complaints come ahead of a scheduled United Nations Security Council (UNSC) vote later on Friday on a resolution that would permanently lift UN sanctions.
The resolution is unlikely to get the nine votes needed to pass, diplomats told news agencies, and if it did, it would be vetoed by the United States, Britain or France.
Britain, France and Germany – known as the E3 – launched a 30-day process in late August to reimpose sanctions unless Tehran meets their demands.
Iranian officials have accused the trio of abusing the dispute mechanism contained in the 2015 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which allows for the application of sanctions under a “snapback mechanism”.
“What Europeans are doing is politically biased and politically motivated … They are wrong on different levels by trying to misuse the mechanism embedded in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA),” Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh said.
The Europeans offered to delay the snapback for up to six months if Iran restored access for UN nuclear inspectors and engaged in talks with the US.
However, French President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday that sanctions are likely to be reinstated, with European officials claiming that Iran has not engaged seriously in negotiations.
Following Macron’s statement, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had said that Tehran had presented a “reasonable and actionable plan” and insisted Iran remains committed to the NPT.
Khatibzadeh cautioned that “all options are on the table if diplomacy fails,” although he did not offer details.
“If Europeans go on this path, they are making the level of unpredictability to the highest level possible, and they are responsible for… any possible future risks,” he declared.
Dirty work
The E3 accuse Tehran of breaching the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was signed by Iran, the US, China, Russia, and the EU.
Under the deal, Iran agreed to curb its nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief. The agreement unravelled in 2018 after then-US President Donald Trump pulled out and reimposed unilateral sanctions.
Tensions escalated further earlier this summer, when Israel launched a 12-day war on Iran, with Israeli and US forces striking several nuclear facilities.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz caused anger in Tehran at the time when he declared: “This is dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.”
Iranian officials have also criticised the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), for accusing Tehran of noncompliance with its nuclear obligations ahead of the attacks.
Iran has repeatedly denied seeking a nuclear weapon, while Israel is widely believed to possess an undeclared nuclear arsenal of dozens of atomic bombs.
UN security council fails to prevent ‘snapback’ nuclear sanctions on Iran
Iranian foreign ministry urges further diplomacy and says return to pre-2015 measures are unlawful and unfounded.
William Christou, 20 Sept 25, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/20/un-security-council-fails-to-prevent-snapback-nuclear-sanctions-on-iran
Last month, France, Germany and the UK triggered the snapback provision of the deal after Iran refused to cooperate with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors, which is tasked with monitoring implementation of the deal.
Two weeks later, Iran agreed to resume cooperation with the IAEA, but it has not yet been able to carry out all of its inspection activities and the body’s ability to operate in the country has been restricted for years.
Since the initiation of the snapback mechanism, intense diplomacy has taken place between mainly European powers and Iran to reach a deal to prevent the sanctions. Talks have not been fruitful, though the UK indicated on Friday after the vote that it was still open to diplomacy.
“The United Kingdom remains committed to a diplomatic solution. We are ready for further engagements diplomatically in the next week and beyond to seek to resolve differences,” said Barbara Woodward, the British ambassador to the UN.
The Iranian foreign ministry said in a Friday statement that it had consistently kept the path of diplomacy open and that it viewed the reimposition of sanctions as “unlawful, unfounded and proactive”.
Iran is still dealing with the impact of the 12-day Iran-Israel war, when Israel launched surprise attacks that it said was a pre-emptive move against the country’s nuclear programme. Iran insists that its nuclear programme is of a civilian nature and that it does not seek to create a nuclear bomb.
Can the US, Russia and China break their nuclear talks impasse?
With a key US-Russia arms treaty due to expire in February, the world is at risk of entering a new era of strategic instability, analysts warn.
Shi Jiangtao, SCMP, 21 Sep 2025
US President Donald Trump’s summit in Alaska last month with Russian leader Vladimir Putin failed to revive long-stalled nuclear negotiations or advance efforts to preserve the last major arms control pact between Washington and Moscow, which is set to expire in February.
Trump’s subsequent push for trilateral “denuclearisation” talks involving China elicited a firm refusal from Beijing, underscoring challenges to extending the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) amid fears of a fresh nuclear arms race, analysts said.
Following the summit, Beijing, with its long-standing policy of “no first use” and a nuclear strategy rooted in self defence, spurned Trump’s proposal, with Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun calling it “neither reasonable nor realistic”…………………………(Subscribers only) https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3326243/can-us-russia-and-china-break-their-nuclear-talks-impasse?module=perpetual_scroll_0&pgtype=article
Saudi pact puts Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella into Middle East security picture
With many Arab nations feeling a rising threat from Israel, the
Saudi-Pakistan defense pact announced this week brings Pakistan – and its
nuclear umbrella – into the region’s security equation. The “Strategic
Mutual Defense Agreement” signed between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia on
Wednesday effectively marries Riyadh’s money with Pakistan’s giant
nuclear-armed military, analysts said.
Reuters 19th Sept 2025, https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/saudi-pact-puts-pakistans-nuclear-umbrella-into-middle-east-security-picture-2025-09-19/
America’s overreach: bullying allies to bury Palestine’s statehood
21 September 2025 Michael Taylor, https://theaimn.net/americas-overreach-bullying-allies-to-bury-palestines-statehood/
As the United Nations General Assembly convenes on September 22, the world watches a pivotal moment in the Israel-Palestine conflict. But instead of diplomacy, the U.S. Congress has chosen intimidation. On September 18, Republican leaders fired off a letter* to the leaders of Australia, Canada, France, and the UK, demanding they scrap plans to recognise Palestine as a state. Labeled a “reckless policy” that “empowers Hamas” and “rewards terrorism,” the missive warns of “punitive measures” if these allies dare defy Washington. This isn’t leadership – it’s overreach, a desperate bid to prop up a failing status quo amid Gaza’s humanitarian catastrophe.
Let’s be clear: This letter reeks of hypocrisy and imperial arrogance. The U.S., which has vetoed UN resolutions on Palestinian rights for decades, now lectures sovereign nations on their foreign policy. With over 64,000 Palestinian deaths since October 2023 and famine gripping Gaza, recognising Palestine isn’t a “reward” for violence – it’s a moral imperative for justice and a two-state solution. France, Canada, the UK, and Australia have signaled their intent to join 147 other nations in this recognition, conditional on ceasefires and demilitarisation. Yet here comes Congress, threatening economic retaliation and demanding crackdowns on “antisemitic activity” as if free speech were collateral damage. It’s a playbook straight out of the autocrat’s handbook: bully your “allies” into silence while ignoring the International Court of Justice’s rulings against Israel’s occupation.
The backlash has been swift and scorching, exposing the letter’s isolation. On X (formerly Twitter), users worldwide branded it “disgraceful” and “compromised,” with one Australian poster calling them “vile creatures” enabling “shredding babies with impunity.” Palestinian-American commentator Abier Khatib fired back: “Any country with self-respect… should be telling them, respectfully, to shove it.” Independent journalist Chris Menahan highlighted the veiled threats: “may invite punitive measures in response,” a line that reeks of mafia tactics. Even in Canada, voices decried it as “disgraceful interference in our sovereignty,” urging a firm condemnation. Spanish activists noted the “Zionist spokespersons” amplifying these threats online, turning social media into a battleground for outrage.
Domestically, the pushback is even more telling. Just hours after the letter, Democratic senators led by Jeff Merkley introduced the first-ever Senate resolution urging President Trump to recognise a demilitarised Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel – a direct rebuke to Republican sabre-rattling. “Settlement expansion, annexation, and rejection of Palestinian statehood are incompatible with peace,” they argued, spotlighting the Gaza crisis as a tipping point. House Democrats, over a dozen strong, echoed this in August with a letter to Trump and Secretary Rubio, insisting Palestinian self-determination is “long overdue” and essential to end the war and famine. Progressives such as Ro Khanna warned against U.S. isolation: “We cannot be isolated from the rest of the free world.” UN experts piled on, slamming U.S. visa denials for Palestinian officials as discriminatory and a violation of diplomacy ahead of the UNGA.
Of course, not everyone’s applauding the revolt. Pro-Israel hawks in Congress and on X cheer the letter as a bulwark against “Hamas’s intransigence,” with one user crowing, “The gloves are off… What now @AlboMP?” They argue unilateral recognition skips negotiations and endangers Israel. Fair point? Hardly. Hamas’s October 7 atrocities were horrific, but Israel’s response – collective punishment on steroids – has radicalised a generation and eroded global sympathy. The two-state solution isn’t dying from Palestinian bids; it’s being suffocated by endless settlements and vetoes. As the General Assembly endorses the New York Declaration for Palestinian statehood, even abstainers like Latvia affirm solidarity with civilians on both sides.
This overreach isn’t just about Palestine – it’s a symptom of America’s fraying empire. Trump’s administration, with its strongman sympathies, treats allies like vassals, demanding loyalty to a policy that’s bankrupted U.S. credibility. The backlash proves the world is waking up: From X rants to Senate floors, the chorus is clear – enough with the threats; let justice prevail.
Australia, Canada, France, and the UK: Stand firm. Recognise Palestine. And to Americans: Pressure your leaders to join the 147 nations choosing humanity over hegemony. The UNGA isn’t a stage for U.S. bullying – it’s a forum for the silenced to speak. Silence it now, and the echoes of Gaza will haunt us all.
*You can read the letter here.
Iran withdraws resolution banning attacks on nuclear sites following US pressure
Iran decided at the last minute Thursday to withdraw a resolution
prohibiting attacks on nuclear facilities that it had put forward along
with China, Russia and other countries for a vote before an annual
gathering of the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s member nations.
Western diplomats,
who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, said
the U.S. has been heavily lobbying behind the scenes to prevent the
resolution from being adopted. The U.S. has raised the possibility of
reducing funding to the International Atomic Energy Agency if the
resolution was adopted and if the body moved to curtail Israel´s rights
within the agency, the diplomats said.
Daily Mail 18th Sept 2025, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-15112913/Iran-withdraws-resolution-banning-attacks-nuclear-sites-following-US-pressure.html
Iran, allies submit draft IAEA resolution to ban attacks on nuclear sites
Sep 16, 2025, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202509162278
Iran and five other countries have submitted a draft resolution to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s annual general conference calling for a ban on any attack or threat of attack against nuclear sites under UN safeguards, Iran’s foreign ministry said on Tuesday.
Foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on X that the text, backed by China, Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Belarus, was intended “to defend the integrity of the NPT” and reaffirmed the inalienable right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
“All states must refrain from attacking or threatening to attack peaceful nuclear facilities in other countries,” Baghaei wrote. “These principles must be upheld; it is high time that the international community acted firmly to prevent the normalization of lawlessness.”
Draft resolution
The draft resolution condemns “the deliberate and unlawful attacks carried out in June 2025 against nuclear sites and facilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” calling them clear violations of the UN Charter and the IAEA Statute.
It says nuclear sites under IAEA safeguards “shall not be subject to any kind of attack or threat of attack,” adding that such actions pose serious risks to international peace and security, human health, the environment, and the credibility of the non-proliferation regime.
The document also recalls UN Security Council Resolution 487 of 1981, which condemned Israel’s bombing of Iraq’s Osirak reactor, and reaffirms previous IAEA decisions prohibiting attacks on safeguarded facilities.
It further stressed that all questions regarding nuclear programs should be resolved “exclusively through dialogue and diplomacy, as the only viable path.”
Israel launched a surprise military campaign on June 13 targeting Iranian nuclear and military sites, including senior commanders and nuclear officials in a conflict that lasted 12 days. On June 22, the United States joined the campaign, striking nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Washington brokered a ceasefire on June 24.
Iran’s nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami told the conference on Monday that Tehran’s atomic program “cannot be eliminated through military action,” accusing Israel and the United States of launching illegal strikes on Iranian sites in June.
“Despite our formal request, the agency did not condemn the attacks by the United States and Israel on the nuclear centers of the Islamic Republic,” Eslami said, calling the IAEA’s silence “a stain on the Agency’s history.”
Eslami said Tehran would use the conference to highlight what he called unlawful measures against its nuclear industry and to push for adoption of the draft.
The debate comes as Iran’s recent cooperation deal with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi awaits implementation and European powers press ahead with the UN “snapback” mechanism that could reinstate sanctions on Tehran by late September.
UN genocide report puts Starmer in the dock.
Declassified UK , 19 Sept 25.
This week, the UN commission of inquiry concluded on reasonable grounds that “the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have committed and are continuing to commit [acts] of genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip”. The acts include killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, and imposing measures intended to prevent births.UN member states are consequently urged to employ all means reasonably available to them to prevent genocide in Gaza, including the cessation of arms transfers and the facilitation of legal investigations into Israel’s actions. The commission of inquiry was set up four years ago by the UN human rights council, and is staffed by three independent experts. While it does not speak officially for the UN, it strongly reinforces the growing consensus around the genocidal nature of Israel’s war. So what are the implications for Britain? Perhaps most significantly, the commission flatly rejects the UK government’s argument that the duty to prevent genocide is only triggered when an international court has established that a genocide has taken place. “Since at least January 2024, when the International Court of Justice ordered its first provisional measures, all states… have been on notice of a serious risk that genocide was being or would be committed”, the report notes. |
The UK government, in other words, has misconstrued its obligations under the Geneva Convention to prevent and punish genocide. Indeed, how is it possible to prevent genocide if you wait until it has taken place? The report also notes how “Israeli security forces shot at and killed civilians, including children who were holding makeshift white flags”. Days before, a Dutch newspaper found that at least 114 Palestinian children had been hit with single gunshot wounds to the head or chest. The UK government is clearly aware this is occurring, but it has covered up its own evidence on Israel’s killing of minors. |
In June, the government’s lawyers refused to submit a research report to court on “Long-Range Shootings or Shootings of Minors”. Subsequent requests from MPs and the media for the report have been repeatedly refused.
And then there’s the Israeli president, Isaac Herzog, who was welcomed to London last week by prime minister Keir Starmer.
The report found that Herzog, alongside Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant, “incited the commission of genocide and that Israeli authorities… failed to take action against them to punish this incitement”.
These are serious findings, and they require a serious response from the UK government. Yet ministers, unsurprisingly, have largely shied away from talking about the report – perhaps unwilling to incriminate themselves further.
Saudi Arabia, nuclear-armed Pakistan sign mutual defence pact
Saudi Arabia and nuclear-armed Pakistan signed a formal mutual defense pact on Wednesday, in a move that significantly strengthens a decades-long
security partnership amid heightened regional tensions. The enhanced
defense ties come as Gulf Arab states grow increasingly wary about the
reliability of the United States as their longstanding security guarantor.
Israel’s attack on Qatar last week heightened those concerns.
Reuters 17th Sept 2025,
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/saudi-arabia-nuclear-armed-pakistan-sign-mutual-defence-pact-2025-09-17/
1 This Month
Website of the Week
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (118)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 