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

Canada’s Carney welcomes MP who defected to the Liberals

Published

on

By

A Conservative MP’s decision to cross the floor and join the Liberal party is “exceptionally valuable”, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said on Wednesday, as he looks ahead to passing his first federal budget.

Chris d’Entremont from Nova Scotia defected to the Liberals on Tuesday shortly after Carney put forward his fiscal plan, inching the Liberal government closer to a majority.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, d’Entremont said he left because he no longer felt represented by Conservative opposition leader Pierre Poilievre.

Poilievre and his party have criticised Carney’s budget as doing little to address the cost of living while ballooning Canada’s deficit.

In a statement, the Conservative party accused d’Entremont of breaking his promises to the Canadians who elected him, and of defecting due to “personal grievances” with the party.

Nova Scotia’s d’Entremont resignation sent shockwaves through Ottawa on budget night.

In announcing his decision to leave, d’Entremont said he supported the Liberal budget and that it “hits the priorities” he has heard from people in his constituency.

“I came to a clear conclusion: there is a better path forward for our country,” he said.

At a news conference on Wednesday, he criticised Conservative leader Poilievre for what he said is his “negative” style of politics.

The MP won his riding narrowly last April in the riding of Acadie-Annapolis, coming ahead of the Liberal candidate by just one percentage point.

His decision to defect comes ahead of a scheduled leadership review for Poilievre in January and amid wider criticisms that his combative style of politics contributed to the Conservatives’ election loss earlier this year.

It also pushes Carney’s Liberals closer to a majority, as the prime minister looks to pass his government’s first budget through parliament. Failure to do so could risk another election.

On Wednesday, Carney appealed for more allies. “We’ll speak to anyone publicly or otherwise who can support us,” he said.

Carney later walked with the new Liberal MP into his first national caucus meeting, where they were greeted with applause.

A vote on the budget is expected to be held mid-November.

Carney’s government has called the fiscal plan as an “investment budget” meant to attract capital to Canada and shield it from the impact of US tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump.

It increases Canada’s deficit to C$78bn ($55.3bn; £42.47bn), the second largest in history, but also includes cuts like slashing the size of the federal workforce by 10% in the coming years.

The Conservatives and the Quebec sovereigntist party the Bloc Québécois have both indicated they will oppose it.

“This costly budget forces Canadians to spend more on debt interest than on healthcare transfers,” said Poilievre in the House of Commons on Tuesday evening.

The left-leaning New Democratic Party’s interim leader Don Davies said they still want time to study the budget before they decide. The party holds seven seats.

Mark Carney

Continue Reading

World News

Wife of abducted Malaysian pastor wins landmark lawsuit against state

Published

on

By

The wife of a Malaysian pastor abducted eight years ago has won a lawsuit against the police and the government, in a landmark case that has gripped the nation.

Raymond Koh was pulled out of his car by masked men in a suburb of the capital Kuala Lumpur in 2017. His whereabouts remain unknown – his family has long maintained he was taken by police.

On Wednesday, the high court ruled he had been forcibly disappeared, with the judge holding the government and police responsible for his abduction. It is Malaysia’s first such judgement.

The court also ruled that the state must pay more than 31m ringgit (£5.7m; $7.4m) to Mr Koh’s family, the largest sum for damages in Malaysian legal history.

In an emotional speech following the decision, his wife Susanna Liew told reporters: “We are overjoyed and thankful to God that we have a fair and honest judgement.

“Though this will not bring Pastor Raymond back, it is somewhat a vindication and closure for the family,” she said.

“We dedicate this struggle and judgement to Pastor Raymond Koh, a man of compassion and courage, and to all victims of enforced disappearances.”

The disappearance of Mr Koh, along with the abduction of activist Amri Che Mat, has long intrigued Malaysia.

Both cases took place within months of each other between the end of 2016 and early 2017, and led to heated public speculation.

Mr Koh’s case, in particular, dominated the headlines because his abduction took place in broad daylight and had been captured on a CCTV camera, and was witnessed by passers-by.

Both families had insisted that the men had been taken by the police, which the police consistently denied.

The men’s disappearances prompted two investigations, one conducted by Malaysia’s human rights commission, and another by the government.

Both investigations eventually concluded that the men had likely been abducted by the elite Special Branch of the police as they were perceived as threats to mainstream Islam in Muslim-majority Malaysia.

The government report – which was classified as secret until the families sued for access – said that “rogue cops” were responsible for the abductions, and the official who led the operation had “extreme views” against Christians and Shia Muslims.

Mr Koh had been targeted because he was suspected of proselytising to Muslims, which his family has denied. Apostasy is illegal in Malaysia.

Amri Che Mat had come under suspicion as he is a Shia Muslim. Malaysia practises a moderate form of Sunni Islam.

The wives of Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat separately sued the state for damages and to force the authorities to reveal their husbands’ whereabouts.

BBC / Tessa Wong Susanna Liew wears a blue blazer, white shirt and pink neck scarf while Norhayati wears a pink patterned hijab. Both women are smiling and Norhayati's arm is around Susanna's shoulders
Susanna Liew (left) and Norhayati (right) had separately sued the state over the abductions of their husbands

On Wednesday, the high court ruled that police officials, the Royal Malaysian Police, and the Malaysian government were liable for the abduction of Mr Koh.

Besides awarding several million ringgit to Ms Liew for emotional distress, the judge ruled that 10,000 ringgit (£1,830; $2,385) in general damages be paid for each day of Mr Koh’s disappearance, starting from when he was abducted and ending on the day his whereabouts are disclosed by the state.

The judge also ordered the state to reopen the investigation and ascertain Mr Koh’s whereabouts.

As of Wednesday, the rolling sum of the general damages works out to be more than 31.8 million ringgit. The final figure is expected to become the largest payout in Malaysian history, according to lawyers acting for Ms Liew.

The money will be deposited into a trust, to which Ms Liew and her children will likely be named as beneficiaries.

The high court judge also found the government and police liable for Amri Che Mat’s abduction. His wife Norhayati, who sued for lesser offences compared to Ms Liew’s lawsuit, was awarded about three million ringgit.

“The feeling of sadness remains because questions about Amri’s whereabouts, whether he is alive, dead, or in good health, are all still unanswered,” Norhayati told reporters.

“We sincerely hope that those responsible will be held accountable for what they have done.”

Continue Reading

World News

How Kentucky UPS plane crash unfolded and what could have caused it

Published

on

By

At least nine people have died and 11 left injured after a UPS cargo plane crashed while taking off from an international airport in Louisville, Kentucky, on Tuesday evening.

Aviation experts who spoke to BBC Verify believe the plane crashed after one engine failed and another appeared to be damaged during take-off.

It is unclear what caused the plane to crash, prompting a massive fireball to erupt after it failed to take-off from the runway. Footage showed fire had already engulfed one wing of the aircraft while it was attempting to take off, which may have spread through the plane and caused the explosion, or the jet could have caught fire after colliding with an object on the ground.

What is apparent is that the 38,000 gallons (144,000 litres) of fuel on board the MD-11 jet needed for the flight likely escalated the blaze, which quickly spread to several buildings beyond the runway and burned for hours.

BBC Verify has been analysing footage that emerged overnight to piece together how the crash unfolded.

How did it start?

UPS uses Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport as a distribution hub for its global operations and its Flight 2976 was at the start of a 4,300 mile journey to Honolulu in Hawaii when the cargo plane attempted to take off.

Data from tracking website FlightRadar24 shows the plane began to taxi along the 17R runway at around 17:15 local time (22:15 GMT) and managed to reach a top speed of 214mph (344km/h).

But verified footage shows that by the time the plane reached this speed a fire had completely engulfed its left wing and the aircraft struggled to climb away from the runway before the explosion.

Officials issued a shelter-in-place order to local residents and scrambled hundreds of firefighters to the scene.

Governor Andy Beshear confirmed details seen in CCTV footage that shows the aircraft flying just metres off the ground before a bright flash engulfed the plane. It is then seen slamming into the ground as a huge fireball erupts around it about a minute into its journey.

A verified clip taken by a motorists on a nearby highway showed the flames erupting into the skyline while later videos showed smoke billowing from the scene.

Aerial images broadcast by local media showed debris showering the runway and landing on the roofs of at least two local businesses.

What could have caused the crash?

Air traffic control communications reviewed by BBC Verify are largely garbled and full of interference so no meaningful conversation can be heard about the crash as it unfolded.

But analysts who spoke to BBC Verify suggested that a dramatic failure of two of the engines may have been responsible for the disaster.

The MD-11 transport plane uses three engines. Two are mounted under the wings, and a third is built into the tail at the base of the vertical stabilizer.

A BBC graphic showing the locations of the engines on an MD-11 jet.

Footage confirmed by BBC Verify showed a blaze engulfing the left wing of the plane, which then tilted to the left as it attempted to gain lift and take-off.

Two experts independently suggested the left engine may have detached from the plane after suffering from a mechanical or structural failure.

Separate images taken after the crash showed a charred engine sitting on the grass next to the runway at Louisville International Airport.

Terry Tozer, a retired airline pilot and aviation safety expert, told BBC Verify that it was “almost unheard of” for an engine to detach in flight.

The smoking remains of an engine sitting on the grass next to the runway at Louisville International Airport.

He referenced the 1979 American Airlines Flight 191 disaster, in which 273 people were killed after the plane’s engine detached as it took off at O’Hare International Airport in Chicago. Parts of the engine had been damaged when it was replaced on the plane, but Mr Tozer said it was too early to say whether a similar fault caused the engine to detach on the MD-11.

Mr Tozer said the cargo plane would have been able to fly with just two engines but the damage caused by the fire on the left wing was likely so great it caused the plane’s engine built into the tail to lose thrust.

“With such a catastrophic event we cannot know what other damage was done when the engine came adrift,” he said.

Marco Chan, a senior lecturer in aviation operations at Buckinghamshire New University, said the footage appeared to show the third engine had been damaged because it expelled a burst of smoke. The damage could have happened while it was pelted with debris from the fire and the engine detaching.

“The upper engine that expelled a puff of smoke appears to wind down almost immediately afterwards,” Mr Chan said. “That left only the right engine producing thrust, creating a severe power imbalance and leaving the aircraft unable to gain height.

“Losing two engines during take-off leaves the aircraft with only a third of its power and little chance of maintaining flight, especially at maximum take-off weight,” Mr Chan added.

Why did the crash cause such damage?

Footage from the aftermath of the crash showed a scene of complete chaos with multiple fires blazing across a large swathe of the site and smoke billowing into the sky.

The plane, which was 34 years old and had been used as a passenger plane until 2006, had already completed one return journey from Louisville on Tuesday to Baltimore in Maryland.

It has not been confirmed what cargo was on board the flight bound for Hawaii, though officials said the plane was not carrying anything that would create a heightened risk of contamination.

“This was a long-haul cargo flight from Louisville to Honolulu, so the MD-11 was carrying a lot of jet fuel,” Mr Chan said. “That heavy fuel load not only reduced performance but also explains the large fireball seen after the crash.”

Officials told reporters that the aircraft was carrying 38,000 gallons (144,000 litres) of fuel for the long journey when it crashed. The blaze was likely amplified on the ground because the aircraft slammed into a fuel recycling business next to the airport.

Mr Chan said investigators will now focus on how the initial fire began, and “whether debris struck the centre engine, and whether earlier maintenance on the left engine played a role”. He added: “Weather conditions were calm and clear, so environmental factors are unlikely.”

The National Transportation Safety Board (NSTB) has sent a team to the site and will now lead the investigation into the causes of the crash, though this can take up to two years to complete.

Additional reporting by Emma Pengelly, Kayleen Devlin and Paul Brown.

Continue Reading

Trending