SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
nuclear weapons
Trump Urged to Oppose Israeli Prep for 'Disastrous' Strike on Iran Nuclear Facilities
"Trump must take action to course-correct on negotiations aimed at preventing war and Iranian proliferation," the National Iranian American Council.
May 21, 2025
Tuesday night reporting on intelligence that Israel is preparing to possibly strike Iranian nuclear facilities, as U.S. President Donald Trump's administration pursues a diplomatic deal with Tehran, sparked calls for the United States to oppose any such attack.
CNNreported on Israel's preparation for a potential strike, citing multiple unnamed U.S. officials who are familiar with the latest intelligence but also "caution it's not clear that Israeli leaders have made a final decision, and that in fact, there is deep disagreement within the U.S. government about the likelihood that Israel will ultimately act."
In a signal of how seriously the international community is taking CNN's reporting, oil prices jumped on Wednesday. According toBarron's: "Brent crude, the global standard, was up 0.9% at $65.95 a barrel. West Texas Intermediate crude gained 1% to $62.63 a barrel. Prices were paring their gains, after initially rising as much as 3%."
While the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. did not comment and CNN is awaiting a response from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office and the U.S. National Security Council, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) weighed in with a Wednesday statement.
"This is not the first time that Israel is threatening to attack Iran—unilaterally and without justification, to disastrous consequence," said NIAC. "What is of critical importance is ascertaining why Israel's government is making this threat now. More likely than not, the radical Benjamin Netanyahu government sees an opportunity to press the Trump administration to take a hardline position in the Iran nuclear talks that will ensure their collapse and America's movement toward a preventable and disastrous war."
"It should also sharpen choices for the Trump administration," the group continued. "President Trump must take action to course-correct on negotiations aimed at preventing war and Iranian proliferation. The entrenching stalemate has largely been driven by far-reaching American demands that ignore strong alternatives that could weather Iran's own fierce domestic politics."
NIAC stressed that "there is a path to avoiding war, but it will require compromise and making sure that Israel is not leading America into a war that would have disastrous and generational consequences for the U.S. and Middle East as a whole."
Since October 2023, Israel's U.S.-backed assault on the Gaza Strip—the subject of an International Court of Justice genocide case—and American strikes on Yemen have escalated fears of the United States participating more directly in a regional war.
Despite Trump ditching a previous Iran nuclear deal during his first term, his second administration now claims it is aiming to work out a deal. However, whether the two sides can come to a new agreement remains to be seen.
Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, toldABC News' "This Week" on Sunday that the president "wants to solve this conflict diplomatically and with dialogue, but "we have one very, very clear red line, and that is enrichment. We cannot allow even 1% of an enrichment capability. We've delivered a proposal to the Iranians that we think addresses some of this without disrespecting them."
As CNNdetailed Tuesday, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said he does not expect nuclear talks with the United States to "reach a conclusion" and calledthe U.S. demand that Iran not enrich uranium a "big mistake." Still, according to Witkoff, there may be another round of negotiations in Europe this week.
Michael Hall, communications manager at the D.C.-based think tank Defense Priorities, suggested that the U.S. government should negotiate directly with Tehran, pointing to contact with the Kremlin, which has included calls between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Witkoff's meeting with Russia's leader—who launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
"The U.S. should make clear we are committed to avoiding a war and will not assist in any strike on Iran," Hall said on social media Tuesday. "If Trump can send Witkoff to Moscow, he can send Witkoff to Tehran. If Trump can call Putin, he can call the ayatollah. A good chance to prove American commitment to diplomacy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
India, Pakistan Accuse Each Other of Violating New Cease-Fire
Leaders around the world have urged de-escalation between the nuclear-armed nations since the massacre in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
May 10, 2025
India and Pakistan accused each other of violating a cease-fire that had been announced Saturday by officials from both countries and U.S. President Donald Trump amid global fears of escalating tit-for-tat strikes between the nuclear-armed neighbors in the wake of last month's Pahalgam massacre in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
"Within hours, blasts were reported from the main cities of Indian Kashmir, the center of four days of fighting," Reutersreported, citing authorities, residents, and witnesses. "Blasts were heard in Srinagar and Jammu, and projectiles and flashes were seen in the night sky over Jammu, similar to the events of the previous evening."
Drop Site News noted that Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri accused Pakistan of "repeated violations" of the deal.
However, Pakistan's information minister, Ataullah Tarar, toldGeo News, that "violation of cease-fire agreement from our side is out of question."
The Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs later released a statement saying that it "remains committed to faithful implementation" of the deal, accusing India of committing violations, and stressing that troops on the ground "should also exercise restraint."
Earlier Saturday, the Indian minister, Misri, had confirmed the cease-fire agreement, saying that "it was agreed that both sides would stop all firing and military action on land and in the air and sea."
Indian officials have not publicly credited the United States for the deal, while Pakistani leaders have. Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar "specifically acknowledged the role played by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in the process," according toGeo News.
Shehbaz Sharif, Pakistan's prime minister, said on social media that "we thank President Trump for his leadership and proactive role for peace in the region."
The U.S. president had said on his Truth Social platform: "After a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a FULL AND IMMEDIATE CEASE-FIRE. Congratulations to both Countries on using Common Sense and Great Intelligence. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
Leaders around the world, including United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, have urged diplomacy and restraint since militants attacked Hindu tourists and killed 26 people in Kashmir last month.
After Saturday's cease-fire announcement, Farhan Haq, deputy spokesperson for the U.N. chief, toldPTI that "we are monitoring but we welcome all efforts to de-escalate the conflict."
Sources from India and Pakistan's governments toldReuters that the Indus Waters Treaty was not part of the deal. India withdrew from the decades-old water-sharing pact after the April attack in Kashmir.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hope Is Not a Strategy: The Urgent Need for India and Pakistan to De-escalate
May 10, 2025
The heinous terrorist attack near Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir on April 22 and the retaliatory May 6 missile and drone attacks by India, including on targets in Pakistani territory, have created the conditions for a dangerous escalation of hostilities between these two nuclear-armed states.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, as well as leaders from other key countries, including China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and the United States, have called for urgent, direct dialogue leading to immediate de-escalation between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan. Nevertheless, the danger of a wider war has not yet been abated.
So far, President Trump has apparently only offered vague words of hope that a more serious crisis can be averted. "They've gone tit-for-tat, so hopefully they can stop now," Trump said at the White House on May 7, adding he knew both sides "very well" and wanted "to see them work it out." He added: "And if I can do anything to help, I will be there."
But given what is at stake, hope is not enough.
India has accused Pakistan of direct involvement in the terrorist attack through Islamist militant organizations it says have the backing of Islamabad. Pakistan has denied involvement and condemned the terror attack. But, following India’s missile volley, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said India must “suffer the consequences” for the attack and authorized “corresponding action,” which could trigger a chain reaction of strikes and counterstrikes against important military and political targets on each side.
With approximately 170 nuclear warheads each, India and Pakistan have enough nuclear firepower to obliterate the other; Pakistan retains the option to use nuclear weapons first against non-nuclear military threats. In recent days, Pakistan has continued to issue inflammatory statements hinting at potential nuclear use.
Following India's April 24 announcement regarding the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, Pakistan declared that it would react with "full force across the complete spectrum of national power," which is a not-so-veiled reference to the possible use of nuclear weapons.
Speaking to Pakistani TV channel Geo News Wednesday, Pakistan's Defense Minister Khawaja Asif said: "If they [India] impose an all-out war on the region and if such dangers arise in which there is a stand-off, then at any time a nuclear war can break out."
Any use of nuclear weapons in a conflict involving nuclear-armed states will likely lead to a wider nuclear war. Such a catastrophe in South Asia, one of the most populous areas of the world, would produce a catastrophe with regional and global effects beyond imagination.
A 2019 study published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists estimates tens of millions of people would be killed, "many major cities largely destroyed and uninhabitable, millions of injured people needing care, and power, transportation, and financial infrastructure in ruins," and the soot that would be ejected into the atmosphere by an India-Pakistan nuclear war would adversely affect the global climate.
The unfolding crisis highlights the reality that the possession and buildup of nuclear arsenals, the perpetuation of nuclear deterrence strategies, and threat of use of nuclear weapons by any state -- whether considered a friend or foe -- is an existential danger to international peace and security.
Senior U.S. leaders, including some presidents, have played an important and sometimes direct role in defusing earlier crises that could have led to nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
On Thursday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio reportedly “emphasized the need for immediate de-escalation” in separate calls with Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif and India’s external affairs minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. These efforts are encouraging but not likely sufficient to avoid a spiraling, out-of-control crisis, which continues to worsen.
The most senior officials in the Trump administration, as well as Chinese leaders who have greater influence with Pakistan, will need to more actively and directly press both sides to refrain from issuing further threats or engaging in further military strikes against civilian or military targets -- whether that be in the form of ballistic missile attacks, drone attacks, or artillery bombardments across the line of control -- which could lead to disaster.
In addition, a second UN Security Council meeting this month on the topic should be scheduled to foster a serious dialogue on off-ramps, to increase the pressure on India and Pakistan to avoid further hostilities, and to explore options for longer-terms exchanges of views on how to reduce the role of nuclear weapons and the risk of nuclear war in the region.
Since the Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests of 1998, India continues to steadily develop more advanced nuclear weapons delivery systems while Pakistan produces more fissile material and new and longer-range missile capabilities in the name of “full spectrum deterrence” against India.
If and when this latest and immediate risk of escalation between India and Pakistan is averted, responsible global leaders need to implement a more comprehensive, balanced, and pro-active strategy to reduce nuclear risks in South Asia and bring India and Pakistan into the global nuclear disarmament enterprise.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular