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

Turkey host the COP31 after reaching compromise with Australia

Published

on

By

Belem (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY):- Australia will not hold next year’s UN climate summit, Australia will allow Türkiye to host COP31 next year but Australia will lead negotiations there.

Climate Minister Chris Bowen revealing Australia was willing to cede hosting rights to Türkiye in exchange for it handing him the reins of the negotiations and cementing a major role for the Pacific at the summit.

There had been a growing expectation that Australia would drop its bid to host COP31 in Adelaide as it struggled to convince Türkiye to pull out of the contest.

Under UN rules, if the two countries were unable to strike a deal, then the meeting location would automatically revert to Germany, which hosts the United Nations body responsible for the Paris Agreement.

This unusual arrangement has taken observers by surprise. It is normal for a COP president to be from the host country and how this new partnership will work in practice remains to be seen.

Despite this, there will be relief among countries currently meeting at COP30 in the Brazilian city of Belém that a compromise has been reached as the lack of agreement on the venue was becoming an embarrassment for the UN.
Australia has pushed hard to have the climate summit in the city of Adelaide, arguing that they would co-host the meeting with Pacific island states who are seen as among the most vulnerable to climate change and rising sea levels.
Turkey, which has proposed hosting COP31 in the city of Antalya, felt that they had a good claim to be the host country as they had stood aside in 2021 and allowed the UK to hold the meeting in Glasgow.
If neither country was willing to compromise then the meeting would have been held in the German city of Bonn, the headquarters of the UN’s climate body.
As a result of discussions at COP30, a compromise appears to have been reached.

This includes pre-COP meeting will be held on a Pacific island, while the main event is held in Turkey. 

Australian Minister believes having a COP president not from the host country will work and that he will have the considerable authority reserved for the president of these gatherings. As COP president of negotiations, I would have all the powers of the COP presidency to manage, to handle the negotiations, to appoint co-facilitators, to prepare draft text, to issue the cover decision,” he said.
He also confirmed to Turkey will also appoint a president who will run the venue, organise the meetings and schedules.

Australia’s climbdown will be embarrassing for the government of Mr Albanese, after lobbying long and hard to win support among the other nations in the Western Europe group.
The compromise will have to be ratified by more than 190 countries gathered here for COP30 in Belem, Brazil.

Photos @ Imran Y. CHOUDHRY

Continue Reading

World News

Titanic passenger’s watch expected to fetch £1m

Published

on

By

A gold pocket watch recovered from the body of one of the richest passengers on the Titanic is expected to fetch £1m at auction.

Isidor Straus and his wife Ida were among the more than 1,500 people who died when the vessel travelling from Southampton to New York sank after hitting an iceberg on 14 April 1912.

His body was recovered from the Atlantic days after the disaster and among his possessions was an 18 carat gold Jules Jurgensen pocket watch that will go under the hammer on 22 November.

Auctioneer Andrew Aldridge, of Henry Aldridge & Son in Wiltshire, told BBC Radio Wiltshire: “With the watch, we are retelling Isidor’s story. It’s a phenomenal piece of memorabilia.”

Mr Straus was a Bavarian-born American businessman, politician, and co-owner of Macy’s department store in New York.

“They were a very famous New York couple,” said Mr Aldridge.

“Everyone would know them from the end of James Cameron’s Titanic movie, when there is an elderly couple hugging as the ship is sinking – that’s Isidor and Ida.”

On the night of the sinking, it is believed his devoted wife refused a place in a lifeboat as she did not want to leave her husband and said she would rather die by his side.

Ida’s body was never found.

BNPS A golden watch engraved on the inside with February 6th 1888.
It is believed the watch was a gift from Ida to her husband in 1888

The pocket watch stopped at 02:20, the moment the Titanic disappeared beneath the waves.

It is believed to have been a gift from Ida to her husband in 1888 and is engraved with Straus’ initials.

It was returned to his family and was passed down through generations before Kenneth Hollister Straus, Isidor’s great-grandson, had the movement repaired and restored.

It will be sold alongside a rare letter Ida wrote aboard the liner describing its luxury.

She wrote: “What a ship! So huge and so magnificently appointed. Our rooms are furnished in the best of taste and most luxurious.”

The letter is postmarked “TransAtlantic 7” meaning it was franked on board in the Titanic’s post office before being taken off with other mail at Queenstown, Ireland.

Both items will be offered by Henry Aldridge & Son in Wiltshire, with the letter estimated to fetch £150,000.

The watch is set to become one of the most expensive Titanic artefacts ever sold.

The auction house said news of the sale had already generated “significant interest from clients all over the world”.

BNPS The letter from Ida, which is neatly written on and has an "on board RMS Titanic" stamp in the corner.
The letter by Ida is estimated to fetch £150,000

“Theirs was the ultimate love story – Isidor epitomised the American Dream, rising from humble immigrant to a titan of the New York establishment, owning Macy’s department store,” a spokesperson for the auction house said.

“As the ship was sinking, despite being offered a seat in a lifeboat, Ida refused to leave her husband and stated to him ‘Isidor we have been together all of these years, where you go, I go’.”

The spokesperson added: “This is the reason why collectors are interested in the Titanic story 113 years later – every man, woman and child had a story to tell and those stories now are retold through these objects.”

gold pocket watch presented to the captain of the Carpathia, the steamship which rescued more than 700 Titanic survivors, sold last year a record-breaking £1.56m.

Continue Reading

World News

Major corruption scandal engulfs top Zelensky allies

Published

on

By

Ukraine’s energy and justice ministers have resigned in the wake of a major investigation into corruption in the country’s energy sector.

President Volodymyr Zelensky called for Energy Minister Svitlana Grynchuk and Justice Minister Herman Halushchenko’s removal on Wednesday.

On Monday anti-corruption bodies accused several people of orchestrating a embezzlement scheme in the energy sector worth about $100m (£76m), including at the national nuclear operator Enerhoatom.

Some of those implicated in the scandal are – or have been – close associates of Zelensky’s.

The allegation is that Justice Minister Herman Halushchenko and other key ministers and officials received payments from contractors building fortifications against Russian attacks on energy infrastructure.

Among those alleged to be involved are former Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov and Timur Mindich – a businessman and a co-owner of Zelensky’s former TV studio Kvartal95. He has since reportedly fled the country.

Halushchenko said he would defend himself against the accusations, while Grynchuk said on social media: “Within the scope of my professional activities there were no violations of the law.”

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (Nabu) and Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (Sap) said the investigation – which was 15 months in the making and involved 1,000 hours of audio recordings – uncovered the participation of several members of the Ukrainian government.

According to Nabu, the people involved systematically collected kickbacks from Enerhoatom contractors worth between 10% and 15% of contract values.

The anti-corruption bodies also said the huge sums had been laundered in the scheme and published photographs of bags full of cash. The funds were then transferred outside Ukraine, including to Russia, Nabu said.

Prosecutors alleged that the scheme’s proceeds were laundered through an office in Kyiv linked to the family of former Ukrainian lawmaker and current Russian senator Andriy Derkach.

Nabu has been releasing new snippets of its investigation and wiretaps every day and on Tuesday it promised more would come.

The scandal is unfolding against the backdrop of escalating Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy facilities, including substations that supply electricity to nuclear power plants.

It will also shine a spotlight on corruption in Ukraine, which continues to be endemic despite work by Nabu and Sap in the 10 years since they were created.

In July, nationwide protests broke out over changes curbing the independence of Nabu and Sap. Ukrainians feared the nation could lose the coveted status of EU candidate country which it was granted on condition it mounted a credible fight against corruption.

Kyiv’s European partners also expressed severe alarm at the decision, with ambassadors from the G7 group of nations expressing the desire to discuss the issue with the Ukrainian leadership.

The backlash was the most severe to hit the Ukrainian government since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 and was only quelled by Zelensky’s decision to reinstate the freedom of the two anti-corruption bodies.

Yet for some that crisis brought into question Zelensky’s dedication to anti-corruption reforms. The latest scandal threatens to lead to more awkward questions for the Ukrainian president.

Continue Reading

Trending