Connect with us

World News

Iran’s Nuclear Crossroads: A New Cold Front in the Making

Published

on

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : While the world is already grappling with multiple wars—Russia’s relentless campaign in Ukraine, and a raging trade war between the United States and China—a new front of confrontation is brewing, and it may prove to be the most perilous yet. That front lies in Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which has again placed the region, and perhaps the world, on the edge of catastrophic conflict.
The latest round of indirect nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States, mediated through Oman, ended in a stalemate. The U.S. demanded that Iran completely cease enrichment of uranium, alleging it has already reached 50%—a level perilously close to weapons-grade. President Donald Trump, in his characteristic bluntness, declared such enrichment “unacceptable” and reiterated that bombing Iran’s nuclear sites remains “on the table”—especially if Israel takes the lead.
In response, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei addressed a gender-segregated crowd—women dressed in black abayas, men seated apart—and rejected the U.S. proposal outright. He warned that accepting such terms would render Iran’s nuclear plants useless. “If we give up enrichment, our nuclear plants will be empty shells, reliant on the West for fuel,” he declared. “It would be the ultimate betrayal of our national interests.”
Indeed, despite crippling U.S. and EU sanctions, Iran’s nuclear program has persisted. Tehran insists it only seeks nuclear fuel for energy, not weapons. But the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report indicating enrichment levels dangerously close to weapons-grade, stirring alarms in Washington, Tel Aviv, and beyond.
Yet this time, the geopolitical dynamics are drastically different. A surprising twist emerged when President Vladimir Putin of Russia declared Russia’s intent to join the negotiations, suggesting that excluding Moscow from talks with such far-reaching implications was unacceptable. Putin’s intervention has drastically shifted the equation. What was once a two-player confrontation between Washington and Tehran may now evolve into a global standoff, especially if Moscow pledges to defend Tehran militarily or diplomatically.
If Russia indeed aligns itself with Iran, an Israeli or U.S. strike on Iranian nuclear facilities could be interpreted by Moscow as an attack on its sphere of influence—provoking an unpredictable military response. Further complicating the matter, President Trump recently held a 90-minute phone conversation with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Officially, the talk focused on trade and investment, but Trump took the unusual step of explicitly stating that Iran was “not discussed.” This denial has only fueled speculation that Beijing, too, may be stepping into the shadows of the Iranian nuclear crisis.
If China and Russia jointly back Iran, it would create an unambiguous geopolitical divide: on one side, the U.S. and Israel; on the other, Iran with the diplomatic, economic, and possibly military support of two global powers. Such polarization could render any military action against Iran unthinkable and turn what was once a manageable regional tension into a global crisis with echoes of the Cold War.
The stakes are already high. Iran’s Foreign Minister warned Israel that any attack would be met with massive retaliation, and Khamenei himself vowed that “aggression will be punished proportionally.” Tehran’s position is firm: enrichment is a sovereign right, and the Western demand to halt it—without a concurrent lifting of sanctions—is fundamentally unjust.
It is this asymmetry that lies at the heart of Iran’s frustration. Washington demands denuclearization, but offers no meaningful economic relief in return. As Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei recently put it: “We must ensure that Iran will effectively benefit economically and that its banking and trade relations with other countries will return to normal.” Without these guarantees, he said, any deal would be one-sided.
Iran now plans to present a counter-proposal, which it calls “reasonable, logical, and balanced.” But the U.S. remains skeptical. Trump told reporters, “They’re just asking for things that you can’t do. They want to keep enrichment. We can’t have enrichment.” The next round of talks is tentatively set for Muscat this Sunday, although both Iranian and American officials have expressed uncertainty over the date.
Amid these tensions, Israel remains a wildcard. It is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons, though it neither confirms nor denies their existence. Iran accuses the West of hypocrisy: turning a blind eye to Israel’s nuclear arsenal while fixating on Iran’s civilian program. Tehran has even hinted at releasing classified Israeli documents allegedly proving Western complicity in bolstering Israel’s nuclear capacity.
This double standard resonates deeply in the Muslim world. If the U.S. and its allies are truly committed to nuclear non-proliferation, why the silence on Israel? Why is Iran—an NPT signatory and a member of the United Nations—denied what others enjoy freely? Iran argues that if nuclear capability is a sovereign right for the U.S., Russia, China, India, Pakistan, France, and even Israel, then denying that right to Iran is an unjustified discrimination rooted in geopolitical favoritism, not international law.
President Trump, for his part, continues to play both hawk and dealmaker. He insists his administration is guided by “common sense,” yet his threats are often maximalist and theatrical. He’s threatened to seize the Panama Canal, annex parts of Canada, and even buy Greenland—none of which materialized. His threat to bomb Iran could be a negotiating tactic to strengthen his hand at the table. But with Iran, such brinkmanship carries a heavier cost.
Iran is not Panama or Greenland. It is a civilization-state with a proud history, stretching back to the Achaemenid Empire, rivaling Rome in antiquity and influence. Its people are fiercely nationalistic and will not capitulate easily—especially not to threats.
So what lies ahead?
The most logical path forward—if we are to avoid catastrophe—is mutual recognition of each nation’s rights and responsibilities. If the West truly wants to avoid proliferation, it must apply the same standards across the board, including Israel. Iran, too, must commit transparently to peaceful nuclear development, with rigorous international inspections.
But any one-sided approach, which demands total Iranian compliance while ignoring Israeli capabilities and refusing to lift economic sanctions, is doomed to fail.
The world today is no longer unipolar. China and Russia are no longer silent spectators. With their involvement, the U.S. no longer enjoys uncontested leverage. This emerging multipolarity means diplomacy, not domination, must guide the next phase of the Iranian nuclear talks.
For the sake of global peace, let better sense prevail. Let every nation uphold international law, act with transparency, and above all, avoid nuclear brinkmanship. Because in a nuclear conflict, there are no winners—only mutual destruction, and irreversible loss for all of humanity.

World News

‘National security is non-negotiable’: Parliamentary secretary on Afghanistan strikes

Published

on

By

ISLAMABAD: Parliamentary Secretary for Information and Broadcasting Barrister Danyal Chaudhry on Monday stressed that national security was “non-negotiable” after Pakistan carried out strikes on terrorist targets in Afghanistan, killing over 80 terrorists.

“Pakistan has always chosen the path of dialogue and peaceful coexistence. But when Afghan soil continues to be used for proxy attacks, we have no choice but to defend our homeland. National security is non-negotiable,” Chaudhry said in a statement.

The PML-N MNA affirmed that the people of Pakistan “stand firmly” with their armed forces in the fight against terrorism.

He urged the Afghan government to take “decisive action to prevent its land from being used for cross-border militancy”, warning that lasting peace in the region depended on the “complete dismantling of terrorist sanctuaries”.

Noting that the recent operation “successfully neutralised militants involved in attacks on Pakistani soil”, Chaudhry stressed: “This action was aimed solely at those responsible for violent attacks inside Pakistan. Every precaution was taken to protect innocent lives.”

He also pointed to Afghanistan’s emergence as a “sanctuary for multiple terrorist groups”. Referring to a United Nations report, he noted that militants from 21 terror outfits were operating from Afghan territory, posing a serious threat to regional stability.

He specifically called out India’s “continued support for terrorist networks”.

“India is actively funding and training these groups, equipping them to carry out cross-border attacks against Pakistan. Such elements deserve no concessions,” the parliamentary secretary asserted.

His remarks came after Pakistan carried out airstrikes on Afghanistan in a retaliatory operation targeting groups responsible for recent suicide bombings in Pakistan.

The strikes killed “more than 80 terrorists”, according to security sources.

The strikes were conducted in retaliation for a series of suicide attacks in IslamabadBajaur, and Bannu that had claimed the lives of Pakistani security personnel and civilians. Authorities described the operation as intelligence-based and proportionate, aimed solely at those responsible for the attacks.

‘Decisive struggle against terrorism’

Separately, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Governor Faisal Karim Kundi asserted that the country will “not allow our soil to be destabilised by forces operating from across the border in Afghanistan”.

In a post on X, he said: “The citizens of Pakistan, especially the resilient people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, stand firmly with our armed forces and security institutions in the defense of our homeland.”

He further said: “The sacrifices of our martyrs bind us together as one nation. In this decisive struggle against terrorism, Pakistan stands united, resolute, and unwavering.

“Our sovereignty is non-negotiable, and the people of this country stand shoulder to shoulder with the state to protect it at all costs.”

Continue Reading

World News

More than 1,500 Venezuelan political prisoners apply for amnesty

Published

on

By

A total of 1,557 Venezuelan political prisoners have applied for amnesty under a new law introduced on Thursday, the country’s National Assembly President has said.

Jorge Rodríguez, brother of Venezuelan interim President Delcy Rodríguez and an ally of former President Nicolás Maduro, also said “hundreds” of prisoners had already been released.

Among them is politician Juan Pablo Guanipa, one of several opposition voices to have criticised the law for excluding certain prisoners.

The US has urged Venezuela to speed up its release of political prisoners since US forces seized Maduro in a raid on 3 January. Venezuela’s socialist government has always denied holding political prisoners.

At a news conference on Saturday Jorge Rodríguez said 1,557 release requests were being addressed “immediately” and ultimately the legislation would extend to 11,000 prisoners.

The government first announced days after Maduro’s capture, on 8 January, that “a significant number” of prisoners would be freed as a goodwill gesture.

Opposition and human rights groups have said the government under Maduro used detentions of political prisoners to stamp out dissent and silence critics for years.

These groups have also criticised the new law. One frequently cited criticism is that it would not extend amnesty to those who called for foreign armed intervention in Venezuela, BBC Latin America specialist Luis Fajardo says.

He noted that law professor Juan Carlos Apitz, of the Central University of Venezuela, told CNN Español that that part of the amnesty law “has a name and surname”. “That paragraph is the Maria Corina Machado paragraph.”

It is not clear if the amnesty would actually cover Machado, who won last year’s Nobel Peace Prize, Fajardo said.

He added that other controversial aspects of the law include the apparent exclusion from amnesty benefits of dozens of military officers involved in rebellions against the Maduro administration over the years.

On Saturday, Rodríguez said it is “releases from Zona Seven of El Helicoide that they’re handling first”.

Those jailed at the infamous prison in Caracas would be released “over the next few hours”, he added.

Activists say some family members of those imprisoned in the facility have gone on hunger strike to demand the release of their relatives.

US President Donald Trump said that El Helicoide would be closed after Maduro’s capture.

Maduro is awaiting trial in custody in the US alongside his wife Cilia Flores and has pleaded not guilty to drugs and weapons charges, saying that he is a “prisoner of war”.

Continue Reading

World News

Iran students stage first large anti-government protests since deadly crackdown

Published

on

By

Students at several universities in Iran have staged anti-government protests – the first such rallies on this scale since last month’s deadly crackdown by the authorities.

The BBC has verified footage of demonstrators marching on the campus of the Sharif University of Technology in the capital Tehran on Saturday. Scuffles were later seen breaking out between them and government supporters.

A sit-in was held at another Tehran university, and a rally reported in the north-east. Students were honouring thousands of those killed in mass protests in January.

The US has been building up its military presence near Iran, and President Donald Trump has said he is considering a limited military strike.

The US and its European allies suspect that Iran is moving towards the development of a nuclear weapon, something Iran has always denied.

US and Iranian officials met in Switzerland on Tuesday and said progress had been made in talks aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear programme.

But despite the reported progress, Trump said afterwards that the world would find out “over the next, probably, 10 days” whether a deal would be reached with Iran or the US would take military action.

The US leader has supported protesters in the past – at one stage appearing to encourage them with a promise that “help is on its way”.

Footage verified by the BBC shows hundreds of protesters – many with national Iranian flags – peacefully marching on the campus of the Sharif University of Technology at the start of a new semester on Saturday.

The crowds chanted “death to the dictator” – a reference to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – and other anti-government slogans.

Supporters of a rival pro-government rally are seen nearby in the video. Scuffles are later seen breaking out between the two camps.

Verified photos have also emerged showing a peaceful sit-in protest at the capital’s Shahid Beheshti University.

The BBC have also verified footage from another Tehran university, Amir Kabir University of Technology, showing chanting against the government.

In Mashhad, Iran’s second-largest city in the north-east, local students reportedly chanted: “Freedom, freedom” and “Students, shout, shout for your rights”.

Sizeable demonstrations in other locations were also reported later in the day, with calls for further rallies on Sunday.

It is not immediately clear whether any demonstrators have been arrested.

Last month’s protests began over economic grievances and soon spread to become the largest since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (Hrana) said it had confirmed the killing of at least 6,159 people during that wave, including 5,804 protesters, 92 children and 214 people affiliated with the government.

Hrana also said it was investigating 17,000 more reported deaths.

Iranian authorities said late last month that more than 3,100 people had been killed – but that the majority were security personnel or bystanders attacked by “rioters”.

Saturday’s protests come as the Iranian authorities are preparing for a possible war with the US.

The exiled opposition is adamantly calling on President Trump to make good on his threats and strike, hoping for a quick downfall of the current hardline government.

But other opposition groups are opposed to outside intervention.

The opposing sides have been involved in disinformation campaigns of social media, trying to maximise their conflicting narratives of what Iranian people want.

Additional reporting by BBC Persian’s Ghoncheh Habibiazad, and BBC Verify’s Richard Irvine-Brown and Shayan Sardarizadeh.

Continue Reading

Trending