Europe’s answer to the Suez Canal

Work is finally underway on France’s Seine-Nord Europe Canal (SNEC), a major new European trading route that promises to boost the bloc’s economic fortunes.

When it is completed in 2030, the massive 107km infrastructure project will significantly increase the capacity for cheaper, faster and less polluting river trade between France, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

As it stands, the smooth flow of commerce between the three nations is being frustrated by the limited capacity of the narrower Canal du Nord.

The antiquated river system struggles to cope with the new generation of super-sized cargo ships powering international trade.

Shipping mishaps and the sheer weight of traffic attempting to navigate a path through the canal create frustrating bottlenecks, costing European businesses valuable time and money.

Despite the urgent need for a new trading route and the canal project securing the green light in 2003, decades of political wrangling and disagreements around funding and the canal’s final route stalled progress, until now.

The SNEC is a €5.1 billion investment by the French government, local authorities, and the EU, in the region’s economic and environmental future.

Analysts suggest the new route could remove as many as a million heavy goods vehicles from France’s roads each year.

The size of the undertaking is staggering, involving as many as sixty bridges, three canal bridges, seven locks, and 700 hectares of environmental plantation.

Nicolas Ledoux, CEO of Arcadis France, which is leading the project said, “The Seine-Nord Europe Canal will not only enable a modal shift from the roadway to the river but will also create added economic, logistical, agricultural, and climatic value for the territories it crosses through.

“We are very proud to help promote river transport, a high-performing, environmentally friendly, and economical mode of transport that responds to the challenge of energy transition.”

The new 54-metre-wide canal will occupy a section of the Seine-Escaut waterway and create Europe’s first river network with the capacity to accommodate large ships.

It will connect the Seine basin to the main waterways of northern France and Europe.

Arcadis France believes the canal’s development will not only boost national economies but also stimulate growth in the local economies of the areas it passes through.

Green jobs will be created as the canal snakes through protected areas and the natural habitats of a range of species, requiring the construction of wildlife corridors and the planting of extensive environmental plantations.

 

Europe planning Abraham Accords II

According to the Tehran Times, France, Germany, and Britain intend to join the 146 countries recognizing Palestine as a state, contingent upon significant concessions from Iran, including its recognition of Israel and a halt to support for resistance groups in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria.

The initiative proposed by France and endorsed by Britain and Germany aims to offer additional protections for Israel but does not establish any conditions to safeguard Palestinians against Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied territories, its massacres in Gaza, the abuse of Palestinian prisoners, or the growing number of illegal settlements in the West Bank.

If the initiative is implemented, the European trio will align with their counterparts in Norway, Ireland, and Spain, who became the latest group of European countries to recognize Palestine as a state earlier this year. While the May decision drew fury from the Israeli regime, it failed to stop the ongoing suffering of Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories.

According to information gathered by the Tehran Times, White House officials have expressed their support for the European plan as they view it as a continuation of the 2020 Abraham Accords, which led to recognition of Israel's sovereignty over Palestinian territories by some Arab and African nations, including the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan.

Saudi Arabia was on the verge of joining the accords before the outbreak of the latest round of Israeli onslaughts in Gaza. 

Some critics in Europe and the US have warned that even if Iran were to acknowledge Israel and distance itself from the resistance, Israel would not be granted the security it desires. Rather, the move would reinforce the regime's unlawful practices and hinder any prospects for a genuine peace process. They highlight that the Abraham Accords did not stop the successful Hamas operation on October 7, when Palestinian fighters seized control of several Israeli settlements for hours and took some Israelis to Gaza.

Sources have told the Tehran Times that voices averse to the initiative believe Western leaders should recognize and respect Palestinians’ rights, instead of turning to regional countries to strengthen Israel’s hand. 

The Tehran Times understands that besides the perceived impracticality and ineffectiveness of the initiative, some in Europe and the United States also believe that Iran is highly unlikely to acquiesce to Europe's demands.

Nevertheless, the leaders of France, Germany, and Britain intend to promote the initiative in the future as a way to vindicate themselves following months of intense criticism regarding their support for Israel’s devastating campaign in Gaza. 

Europe intends to throw the ball in Iran’s court and blame it for the crisis in Gaza after Tehran rejects the initiative, the Tehran Times was informed. Rather than a genuine attempt at peace, Europe’s proposed recognition of Palestine is a calculated move to shift blame onto Iran. 

In the past 10 months, over 40,000 Palestinians have lost their lives as a direct result of Israeli attacks on the besieged enclave. War experts say at least 100,000 more people will end up losing their lives, due to the complete decimation of medical centers in Gaza, as well as an acute shortage of food, clean water, and medicine.

 

Iran Oil Show 2024 opens today

Despite all the propaganda against Iran oil industry's international successes and its energy diplomacy approach, the growing number of foreign oil companies’ presence at the 28th Oil Show is a clear sign of rising trust in Iran’s oil industry.

Director of the 28th Iran International Oil, Gas, Refining and Petrochemical Exhibition, known as Iran’s Oil Show 2024, Gholamreza Jamali, made the remarks during a press conference on May 06 in Tehran adding the exhibition opens its doors to the public on May 08.

Jamali said that 1750 oil industry related companies, including 250 foreign companies from 12 countries including Russia, China, Germany, France, Japan, Belarus, India, Canada, Italy, Turkey, Austria and Argentina shows that Iran’s oil show is not only one of the largest oil exhibitions at home but also in the West Asia region.

The great achievements of Iran’s oil industry over the last two years, is due to the support of the Minister of Petroleum, Jamali said at the press conference.

A number of companies failed to take part in this year’s oil exhibition mainly due to lack of appropriate infrastructures expressing hope improvement in the facilities to provide proper conditions for participation of all companies in the next rounds of oil exhibitions.

Elsewhere in his remarks he said, a number of world high-ranking officials have been invited to participate at the opening ceremony of the exhibition.

According to him, while during last year’s oil exhibition, just 2 thousand square meters had been allocated to accommodate foreign companies, this space has been expanded this year so that the foreign companies’ exclusive space reaches 5 thousand square meters.

 As far as it concerns allocating spaces, the organizers have decided to pay attention to the arrangement based on upstream, midstream and downstream activities and the halls and booths locations are somehow related to the subject of value chain in the oil industry

In order to support the technological innovations in the oil industry, an especial space has been allocated to the knowledge-based companies, technological companies, universities and start-ups, he also said.

Pointing out that numerous side events that will be held on the sidelines of the exhibition, the director of the Tehran Oil Show 2024 announced that many of these events would lead to the signing of contracts and memorandums of understanding in the oil industry, resulting in boosting production with economic results.

Jamali noted that providing appropriate conditions for direct connection between private and public sector activists is one of the main functions of the oil exhibition every year, which often faces some obstacles over the year due to the existence of administrative bureaucracy.

Announcing the slogan of this year's oil exhibition as "Oil industry, production leap, technological optimization", he said, "At this year’s exhibition we will reveal some equipment for the first time which is very important in view of meeting domestic needs and exporting to other countries."

The International Oil, Gas, Refining and Petrochemical Exhibition as the main and most important oil event in Iran is held annually by the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) with the support of the Petroleum Ministry.

The Petroleum Ministry’s subsidiaries including the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), the National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC), the National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company (NIORDC) and the National Petrochemical Company (NPC) have an active presence in the event.

Iran Oil Show 2024 is being held from May 08 to May 11 at Tehran International Permanent Fairground.

US allies reluctant to join Red Sea task force

The response to the mantra of US President Joe Biden regarding formation of response force to Yemen's Houthi attacks on ships passing through Red Sea is disappointing. It seems many allies don't want to be associated with it, publicly, or at all.

Two of America's European allies who were listed as contributors to Operation Prosperity Guardian - Italy and Spain - issued statements appearing to distance themselves from the maritime force.

The Pentagon says the force is a defensive coalition of more than 20 nations to ensure billions of dollars' worth of commerce can flow freely through a vital shipping chokepoint in Red Sea waters off Yemen.

Nearly half of those countries have so far not come forward to acknowledge their contributions or allowed the US to do so. Those contributions can range from dispatching warships to merely sending a staff officer.

The reluctance of some US allies to link themselves to the effort partly reflects the fissures created by the conflict in Gaza, which has seen Biden maintain firm support for Israel even as international criticism rises over its offensive, which Gaza's health ministry says has killed more than 21,000 Palestinians.

"European governments are very worried that part of their potential electorate will turn against them," said David Hernandez, a professor of international relations at the Complutense University of Madrid, noting that the European public is increasingly critical of Israel and wary of being drawn into a conflict.

Reportedly, Houthis have been alleged for attacking or seizing a dozen ships with missiles and drones since November 19.

The navies of the United States, Britain and France have each shot down Houthi-launched drones or missiles.

The US believes escalating Houthi attacks call for an international response separate from the conflict raging in Gaza.

However, this kind of propaganda is being highlighted in US sponsored/ supported media. It may be recalled that Hothis has announced to target Israeli ships of vessels carrying to and from Israel.

Denmark's giant container firm Maersk said on Saturday it would resume shipping operations in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. But Germany's Hapag Lloyd said on Wednesday it still believes the Red Sea is too dangerous and will continue to send ships around the Cape of Good Hope.

While the US says 20 countries have signed up for its maritime task force, it has announced the names of only 12.

Although Britain, Greece and others have publicly embraced the US operation, several mentioned in the US announcement were quick to say they are not directly involved.

Italy's defense ministry said that it would send a ship to the Red Sea following requests from Italian ship owners and not as part of the US operation.

France said it supports efforts to secure freedom of navigation in the Red Sea but that its ships would remain under French command.

Spain has said it will not join Operation Prosperity Guardian and opposes using an existing EU anti-piracy mission, Atalanta, to protect Red Sea shipping.

But on Wednesday, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said he was willing to consider the creation of a different mission to tackle the problem.

Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates earlier proclaimed no interest in the venture.

There is also the risk that participating countries become subject to Houthi retaliation. The person familiar with the US administration's thinking says that it is this risk - rather disagreements over Gaza - driving some countries to steer clear of the effort.

That appears to be the case for India, which is unlikely to join the US operation, according to a senior Indian military official. An Indian government official said the government worries that aligning itself with the US could make it more of a target.

In reality, many European and Gulf countries already participate in one of several US-led military groups in the Middle East, including the 39-nation Combined Maritime Forces (CMF).

The EU's Atalanta operation already cooperates in a reciprocal relationship with CMF, according to a spokesperson for the group.

That means that some countries not formally joining the Red Sea maritime task force could still coordinate patrols with the US Navy.

If ECOWAS takes military action against Niger

The West African regional bloc says it has agreed on a "D-Day" for military intervention in Niger to restore the deposed President Mohamed Bazoum.

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) made the declaration at the end of a two-day meeting of West African army chiefs in Ghana's capital Accra, where they have been carefully discussing the logistics and strategy for a possible use of force in Niger.

ECOWAS has not disclosed a date for when a military intervention will take place, saying it will resort to the use of force if diplomatic efforts fail. The 15-member bloc has insisted that it will not be holding endless talks with the military rulers. The bloc did, however, say that any military action would be considered as a last resort.

"We are ready to go anytime the order is given," ECOWAS Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security Abdel-Fatau Musah said during the closing ceremony. 

"The D-Day is also decided, which we are not going to disclose."

Musah has said that a peaceful resolution remains the bloc's preferred option in the path ahead. 

"As we speak we are still readying (a) mediation mission into the country, so we have not shut any door... (but) we are not going to engage in endless dialogue."

There was no immediate response from the defiant military rulers in Niger, who have insisted they will defend their country against any foreign aggression. 

Critics have accused the United States and France of fueling the prospects of war to maintain their military presence in Niger. They also accuse the US of driving a wedge between Niger and its neighbor Nigeria. 

Niger’s military officers deposed President Bazoum on July 26 and have strongly defied calls from ECOWAS and Western leaders, in particular the United States and former colonial power France, to reinstate Bazoum, prompting ECOWAS to order a standby force to be assembled.

The military in Niger has said they have gained enough evidence to prosecute Bazoum for high treason and undermining the security of the country. 

“The Nigerian government has so far gathered enough evidence to prosecute the deposed President and his local and foreign accomplices before the competent national and international bodies for high treason and undermining the internal and external security of Niger,” a Colonel-Major said on state TV. 

The new military leaders have formed a new government with a civilian prime minister. 

They have also slammed former colonial power France for meddling in their country’s domestic affairs and fueling instability while demanding all French forces leave their country immediately. 

Critics have accused the United States of using the pretext of fighting extremist militants to plunder Niger’s natural resources, such as its vast uranium, which is used for nuclear energy and amounts to around seven percent of the world reserves, as well as the country’s oil reserves. 

The military leaders have accused the United States and France, both of whom have military bases stationed in Niger – in an agreement with deposed President Bazoum – of increasing insecurity and stability in their country. 

There have been demonstrations in support of the military, with protesters holding up signs against France and ECOWAS; but the African bloc has refused to take the use of force off the table. 

"We've already agreed and fine-tuned what will be required for the intervention," Musah said, declining to share how many troops would be deployed, which states will contribute and other strategic information.

According to ECOWAS, most of its 15 member states are prepared to contribute to the joint force with the exception of those already under military rule such as Mali and Burkina Faso as well as Guinea and Cape Verde.

In a sign of how fragile the situation could become, Mali and Burkina Faso have stated that any military intervention in Niger would be considered a “declaration of war” against their nations. This could see a military coalition between the three nations that could drag any ECOWAS military intervention beyond Niger’s borders. 

Neighboring state Algeria has also expressed its opposition to the use of force. Russia has taken a similar position. 

Some analysts have pointed out that ECOWAS’s credibility is at stake because it had warned that it would not tolerate any further coups in West Africa. 

"The decision is that the coup in Niger is one coup too many for the region, and we are putting a stop to it at this time, we are drawing the line in the sand," Musah said.

Any armed intervention would spell further turmoil for West Africa's impoverished Sahel region, which is already battling a decade-old militancy and a deepening hunger crisis.

Meanwhile, diplomatic efforts continue. 

An Islamic delegation from Nigeria met with Niger’s military last week, in a move that was warmly welcomed by peace advocates. 

The United Nations special envoy for West Africa and the Sahel, Leonardo Santos Simao, held talks with the military’s new civilian prime minister Ali Mahamane Lamine Zeine on Friday. 

Simao said in comments broadcast on Niger's state television that he wanted to listen to the coup leader’s point of view "to study together a way for the country to return as quickly as possible to constitutional normality and legality too. We are convinced that it is always possible with dialogue."

The prospects of another conflict erupting in West Africa, this time between African states, could make the volatile region very vulnerable. 

Regional nations are already battling extremist militants with links to Daesh and al-Qaeda terrorist groups in the Sahel. 

Experts say the regional states themselves should take the leading role in defeating these terrorists, who have not only wreaked havoc and insecurity but also brought about a humanitarian crisis. 

Mali and Burkina Faso have already kicked out the armed forces of former French colonial power, saying the presence of the foreign forces only increased instability on their land. 

Analysts have pointed to the evidence so far that the presence of Western powers such as the United States and France has done little to bring security to the region. 

They also argue that France and the US are seeking to drive a wedge between Niger and its neighbors, especially the African powerhouse Nigeria.  

A point of view is also shared by the local population who have taken to the streets in large numbers in support of the military officers in Niger. 

There are also widespread fears that any military intervention would spell a wider humanitarian and refugee crisis, with many experts arguing that the last thing West Africa needs right now is another fresh armed conflict.

 

Canada slaps fresh sanctions on Iran

Canada has slapped new sanctions on Iran, accusing it of destabilizing the region and backing Russia’s conflict in Ukraine, and also targeting the drone and aviation sectors of the nation.

In a statement released on Tuesday, Global Affairs Canada said seven additional individuals had been added to the federal government’s growing list of sanctions aimed against the Iranian nation. It was the 13th round of measures to be presented since October 2022.

“Today’s sanctions list 7 individuals involved in activities that gravely threaten international peace and security or that constitute gross and systemic violations of human rights in Iran,” the GAC statement read.

Ali Akbar Ahmadian, who was appointed Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council in May, is on the list. He is a former commander of the navy division of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC).

Two representatives of the Iranian company Imen Sanat Zaman Fara, which produces equipment for the nation’s Law Enforcement Command, are also sanctioned.

Four executives of aviation companies that manufacture drones are among the other individuals targeted by new Canadian penalties.

GAC purportedly said, “The sanctions build on Canada’s efforts to press Iran to address the legitimate grievances and interests of its citizens and impose costs for its destabilizing behavior abroad.”

These people are prohibited from entering Canada and any assets they may have in the country will be frozen as a result of the penalties.

The additional sanctions, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly claimed, “Send a clear message to Iran that Canada will not tolerate any violations of human rights.”

So far, Ottawa has sanctioned 170 Iranian individuals and 192 Iranian entities, according to its federal government.

Back in July, Nasser Kanaani, the spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, said that Iran had reacted to the recent European Union sanctions against Tehran over the alleged provision of drones to Russia, underlining that it did not provide Russia with drones for use in the Ukraine war.

Kanaani also noted, “It has been officially announced many times, the allegation that Iran exported drones to Russia in order to use them against Ukraine is a baseless accusation.”

He added, “Any attempt to link the war in Ukraine to the bilateral cooperation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia is an act with purely political goals.”

Referring to the clear and frequent opposition of the Islamic Republic to the war in Ukraine, Kanaani emphasized the need to speed up efforts to stop the war through diplomatic means.

“Unfortunately, the West, with political motivations and resorting to false and unproven claims, is trying to continue using the ineffective and failed policy of imposing sanctions against the Iranian nation,” he added.

Kanani stressed that Iran reserves the right to take countermeasures against the sanctions of the European Union and its members.

Additionally, he asserted that the United States and its European allies have frequently used unilateral sanctions as “an illegal tool” against the Iranian nation.

“Resorting to sanctions is illegal, is a violation of the legal rights of the Iranian nation, and is a violation of human rights,” he said.

Kanaani was referring to the sanctions that have been put in place against Iran over the years by the United States and its European allies - France, Britain, and Germany - particularly after the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and launched a “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran.

“We believe that three European countries failed to honor the JCPOA obligations as much as the United States did and should be held accountable,” he added.

He stated that after breaking the terms of the deal, they continue to level false allegations against Iran and impose unjustified sanctions on the nation.

“Iran reserves the right to show a proportionate, balanced, and serious response,” he noted.

  

United States on top in violating women rights, says Iranian Vice President

Ensiyeh Khazali, the vice president of Iran for women and family affairs, has said that the United States at the top of the list of countries violating the rights of women. She said the US and other Western countries are using democracy as a disguise to cover up their problems. 

“With the mask of democracy, defense of human rights, and defense of freedom, the US has been able to cover up many of its problems and introduce itself as a claimant for the defense of human rights in the international community,” Khazali said, according to IRIB News. 

She added, “United States is the main accused and we must show the real face of United States.”

Khazali also said that America does not have a good record domestically on many issues related to women's rights. It allows double oppression of women in many issues related to women's affairs both with the rules it implements internally and with the procedures and functions it has,” Khazali stated. 

The vice president also mentioned some cases of human rights violations in the United States saying, “Women in prison, people who are killed by the police in this country, especially black women, as well as people who are the targets of rape and abuse in the work and office environments and at home, are among these cases, something that if revealed and expressed well, United States ranks first in many crimes and violations of women's rights.”

She continued, “By covering up its crimes, United States becomes a claimant and accuses countries like Iran where women have made significant progress. It oppresses women with a political and illegal move.”

She also referred to the recent developments in France, underlining that the scenes that were seen in France were full of violence and harsh encounters, which cannot be justified under any circumstances.

According to Khazali, the media war they have launched against Iran is absent in these cases and do not reflect many events in France.

She also pointed to the September 2022 unrest in Iran which broke out in the wake of the death of Mahsa Amini, saying, “Western countries started disseminating propaganda during last year's riots in Iran. We need to know the real face of these countries so that everyone can see how the claimant countries would react if one of the things that happened in France happened in Iran.” 

 

Has France gathered gold by ripping off Mali?

France, with its fourth largest gold reserves of 2,436 tons, doesn't even have a single gold mine within its borders. As against this, Mali a country once French colony doesn't hold any gold reserves in its banks, despite having a staggering 860 gold mines and an annual production of 50 tons.

This stark contrast raises important questions about historical injustices and the economic disparities that even persist today. The colonial past of France and its exploitation of resources in its former colonies have left a lasting impact. While France benefits from its gold reserves, countries like Mali, with abundant natural resources, struggle to reap the rewards.

These disparities in wealth and resources contribute to social unrest and inequality, as we've witnessed in recent riots in France. The frustration and anger of marginalized communities, including immigrants and descendants of former colonies, are rooted in these historical injustices.

As the world grapples with the complexities of immigration and social justice, it is crucial to address the systemic issues that perpetuate these disparities. It's not enough to simply acknowledge the past; concrete actions are needed to rectify the imbalances and ensure a more equitable future.

By fostering dialogue, promoting fair trade practices, and supporting sustainable development in countries affected by historical injustices, we can strive towards a world where resources are shared more equitably and opportunities are accessible to all.

Let the countries work together to create a future where countries like Mali can benefit from their own resources and where the impact of historical injustices is acknowledged and redressed.

Rubio responds to Macron’s call to break away from United States

Sen. Marco Rubio has condemned French President Emanuel Macron for appearing to advocate that Europe should distance itself from the United States over a possible Chinese military aggression against Taiwan.

In a roughly two-minute video posted on Twitter Sunday, Rubio asked whether Macron speaks for all of Europe when he suggested that the EU should not pick sides between the United States and China over Taiwan.

Further arguing European nations should break away from the United States and avoid getting involved in crises that are not ours to build Europe’s strategic autonomy concept.

While returning from a three-day state visit to China after meeting with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping, Macron told Politico during an interview that the EU needs to reduce its US reliance and avoid becoming America’s followers.

Responding to Macron’s interview, Rubio said that Europe—particularly France—has relied heavily on the United States for decades for their defense.

“This is a good moment for us to ask Europe Does Macron speak for all of Europe, is Macron now the head of Europe, is he now the most powerful leader in Europe? Rubio questioned, then noting if that were the case, “There are some things that have to change.”

“In fact, when Macron tried to play global superpower and sent troops to North Africa to fight terrorists, he couldn’t even get his own troops there,” he added. “We had to fly them there, and we had to fly them back; he couldn’t even get his own troops there.”

“So, if they’re gonna break off on their own and follow Macron’s lead, that’s going to save us a lot of money,” the Florida lawmaker continued.

Rubio also addressed the United States military assistance to Ukraine, saying Americans have spent a lot of our taxpayer money on the European conflict.

He also stressed that he supports the cause because he believes it’s in the national interests of the United States to be allies to our allies.

“But, if our allies’ position—if, in fact, Macron speaks for all of Europe, and their position now is they’re not gonna pick sides between the US and China over Taiwan—maybe we shouldn’t be picking sides either. Maybe we should basically say we’re gonna focus on Taiwan and the threats China poses, and you guys handle Ukraine and Europe,” Rubio said.

“So, we need to find out, does Macron speak for Macron, or does Macron speak for Europe?” he added. “And we need to get the answer to that pretty quickly because China is very excited about what he said.”

 

French approach towards China not in line with the United States

High-profile diplomatic meetings on opposite sides of the world are underscoring growing tensions between the United States and Europe in how to engage with China.

French President Emmanuel Macron, on a three-day trip to China, is billing his outreach as an effort to recruit Chinese President Xi Jinping to play a major role in building peace between Ukraine and Russia, with an eye on reining in Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The summit comes as Chinese officials have warned of consequences and retaliation in response to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy hosting Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen in California.

McCarthy, speaking to reporters following his meeting with Tsai, said he hoped Macron asked Xi not to fund Russia’s war in Ukraine and reiterated that democracy makes the world safer and stronger.

“I hope he delivers a message that Americans meeting with President Tsai is positive for the same aspect that he is meeting with President Xi,” he said. 

The dueling diplomatic summits highlight the gap between the United States and Europe over how to deal with China.

While the Biden administration and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle describe Xi as working to reshape the world in the view of China’s authoritarian model, European leaders are less unified on the risks versus rewards of close ties with Beijing.

The Élysée Palace said Macron and President Biden, in a call ahead of the French leader’s trip, discussed a common desire to engage China to accelerate the end of the war in Ukraine and to participate in building a lasting peace in the region.

The administration was more reserved in its description of the conversation. Two-line readout from the White House simply stated that Biden and Macron talked about the French president’s upcoming travel and reiterated support for Ukraine. 

Macron’s visit, accompanied by dozens of business officials, highlights France’s focus on maintaining, if not strengthening, economic ties to China, even as the US has for months warned that Beijing is considering sending weapons to Russia for use in its war in Ukraine.

“I am convinced that China has a major role to play in building peace. This is what I have come to discuss, to move forward on,” Macron tweeted on Thursday. “With President Xi Jinping, we will also talk about our businesses, the climate and biodiversity, and food security.”

Xi has sought to portray himself as a global peacemaker. Alongside Macron on Thursday in Beijing, he said China is committed to facilitating peace talks and a settlement on the Ukraine crisis, affirmed that a nuclear war should never be fought, and that legitimate security concerns of all parties should be taken into account.

French officials say they do not see a conflict of interest between maintaining trade ties with China while trying to engage Xi to act more responsibly.

“Talking with China and having direct engaging discussions doesn’t mean you erase the economic ties,” one French diplomat told The Hill.

“Personal engagement is even more important with China, after three years of pandemic, and considering the nature of the regime,” the diplomat continued, a reference to Xi’s near total power over the state. 

How Europe, US differ on China

But critics say that Macron’s coterie of business executives undermines any effort to push Xi to get tough on Russia. 

“In a situation where we’re trying to talk strategy with the Chinese, trying to get them to commit not to deliver weapons to Russia, bringing along so many business people with all deals in their minds, and Euro signs in their pupils, is the wrong signal,” said Roland Freudenstein, vice president and head of GLOBSEC Brussels, a think tank based in Slovakia. “It means that you come with a carrot, but you don’t come with a stick, and any talk of the stick is not valid at that moment.” 

Other experts though said that Macron should not be made into a boogeyman from this visit to China, considering that Europe has business interests to maintain in China.

“Both the U.S. and Europe have this new sort of idea that China is a rival, a partner, and a competitor. For the U.S., the ordering is probably rival first, then competitor, then partner. For Europe, that used to be the other way around,” said Matthias Matthijs, European expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

“The Europeans are slowly moving closer to the American line on China, but the US has also moved very aggressively in a different direction than, say, it was during the Obama administration, and the Europeans aren’t quite there yet because they have no reason to be,” added Matthijs, also a professor of international political economy at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.

Biden and Xi have not spoken since they met in Bali, Indonesia, on the sidelines of the Group of 20 Summit in November 2022, but Biden said he would talk to Xi in the wake of the Chinese spy balloon traversing the United States in February. 

When asked about the phone call between Biden and Macron, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby on Wednesday declined to provide further details but said the president was “grateful” that Macron called him before his trip to Beijing.

World powers oppose Israeli settlement authorization

Foreign ministers of four European countries and Canada joined Washington on Tuesday in opposing a decision by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government to authorize nine Jewish settler outposts in the occupied West Bank.

The foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany, Italy and the United States issued a joint statement voicing concern over the plans announced by Israel on Sunday.

"We strongly oppose unilateral actions which will only serve to exacerbate tensions between Israelis and Palestinians and undermine efforts to achieve a negotiated two-state solution," they said.

Later, Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly said Ottawa also strongly opposed the expansion of settlements and added that such unilateral actions jeopardize efforts to achieve comprehensive, just and lasting peace.

On Sunday, Israel granted retroactive authorization to nine settler outposts in the West Bank and announced mass construction of new homes in established settlements, prompting US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to say he was deeply troubled.

Israel's foreign ministry had no immediate comment but Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, from the hardliner religious nationalist bloc in Netanyahu's government, said he wanted to go further.

"This is our mission. This is our doctrine," Ben-Gvir said. "Nine settlements are nice but it's still not enough. We want much more," he said in a video message.

Most world powers view as illegal the settlements Israel has built on land it captured in a 1967 war with Arab powers.

Israel disputes that and cites biblical, historical and political links to the West Bank, as well as security interests.

Since the 1967 war, it has established 132 settlements on land Palestinians see as the core of a future state, according to the Peace Now watchdog group.

Besides the authorized settlements, groups of settlers have built scores of outposts without government permission. Some have been razed by police, others authorized retroactively. The nine granted approval on Sunday is the first for this Netanyahu government.

Hussein al-Sheikh, a senior Palestinian official, welcomed the joint statement but added, "We demand that words be turned to deeds."

With tensions in the West Bank already high, the move has alarmed world powers which fear an even greater escalation of violence. Israeli forces have conducted near daily raids in the West Bank, pursuing a crackdown begun last year in the wake of a spate of deadly Palestinian attacks.

This year more than 40 Palestinians, including both militant fighters and civilians, have been killed by Israeli forces. At the same time, 10 people have been killed in Israel in two attacks by Palestinians.

 

France: strong sugar prices help Tereos offset high production costs

French sugar group Tereos reported strong first-half results on Tuesday, including a net profit and a sharp rise in earnings, as high sugar and ethanol prices helped offset an increase in production costs.

Tereos, the world's second largest sugar maker by volume, posted a net profit of 133 million euros in the year ended September 30, 2022 as compared to with a year-earlier loss of 50 million euros, helped by higher prices that compensated for a sharp rise in energy and raw materials costs.

Over the same period, adjusted earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) rose 132% to 464 million euros.

In a presentation to bond holders the group said it expected strong results at its sugar Europe branch to continue in the second half due to higher selling prices reached in its annual fixed-price contracts for B2B sales.

In Brazil, where Tereos is among the largest sugar and ethanol producers, the group should benefit from expected high prices and a higher sugarcane crushing volume, at 17.3 million tons, up from 15.6 million tons in 2021.

Tereos's decision to hibernate a plant in Brazil to maximize its margins amid lower yields led to a fall in daily production capacity but full year 2022/23 output and sales volumes were still expected to rise above 2021/22, it said.

The group's net debt fell 128 million euros from a year earlier and 131 million euros from the end of the first quarter on June 30 to 2.24 billion euros.

However, Tereos expects its net debt at March 31, 2023 to be higher than at March 31, 2022 as higher costs led to a rise in working capital.

Tereos said in October it would raise the price at which it will buy sugar beet from its members by 40% from last year.

The group anticipated its sugar processing season by about a week ahead of possible energy restrictions this winter if Russia cuts off gas supplies.

Tereos did not announce the name of a new managing director following the departure of Ludwig de Mot late September this year, the third chief executive to leave the group in two years. Pending recruitment, Gerard Clay will continue to perform the role in his capacity as Chairman of the Board of Directors, it said.

 

French call for NATO exit

Thousands of angry French protesters have gathered in the French capital to call for the country’s withdrawal from the US-led NATO military alliance. The protesters have also called for the resignation of the country’s President Emmanuel Macron.

The demonstration reflects similar rallies being held across Europe in opposition to their respective government’s support for the war in Ukraine. The constant supply of arms by mainly NATO members has prolonged the conflict in Eastern Europe, leading to the suffering of civilians caught up in the cross fire.

When Russia expressed legitimate concerns about the NATO military’s eastward expansion toward its border, it opened the door to discussion, negotiation and proposals on security guarantees. However, these were ignored which many critics said, at the time, will lead to a military confrontation that will hurt ordinary Europeans. In this case, Ukrainian civilians are suffering from the human cost and ordinary civilians are falling into poverty.

Russia’s sense of insecurity in the face of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization seemed quite genuine, but critics say the media coverage has dismissed Moscow's initial concerns.

Opposition to NATO has been strong in Europe. The military alliance’s summits are always met with anti-war demonstrations. In June this year, protesters marched during an anti-NATO rally ahead of the summit that was held in Madrid. The organizers said the American-led military alliance is not the solution to the war in Ukraine. US arms manufacturers have made lucrative profits from the war.

Last month, an estimated 70,000 people protested in Prague against the Czech government, calling on the ruling coalition to do more to control soaring energy prices and voicing opposition to the European Union and NATO.

For many years, the Kremlin has made it clear that if NATO continued to mass troops and weapons on the Russian border, the expansion would likely be met with serious resistance by the Russians, even with military action. That view was not just limited to Russian officials. Even some prominent American foreign policy experts backing the same possible scenario. The current director of the CIA, William Burns, has been warning about the provocation and consequences of NATO’s expansion on Russia for more than 20 years now.  

On the other hand, Europe’s decision to cave into American pressure and impose unprecedented sanctions on Moscow has heavily restricted the gas supplies to the continent which have instead pushed energy prices up, leaving many in poverty. Europe relied on 40% of Russian gas before the conflict erupted.

The shortage of energy on the continent and rising prices for the fuel has been met with angry voters bringing down governments at the polling stations.

A recent poll by Elabe reveals that support for anti-Russian sanctions is on the decline across France. The survey shows only 40% of the French population are in favor of the anti-Russian sanctions. The poll also reveals that 32% of French people think the anti-Russia sanctions must be restricted to diminish their effect on the livelihoods of the French people.

The opposition French Patriots party again called for the demonstrations after the initial protests that took place on September 3rd. The protesters want Macron to leave office and withdraw from both NATO and the European Union.

The French government, like others in Europe, is adopting or considering various emergency measures ahead of the winter, such as the possibility of three-hour power outages in the United Kingdom.

As inflation levels are biting, a group of French intellectuals, including Nobel literature prize winner Annie Ernaux, have urged people to join the protests being organized by the left for next week. They accuse President Macron of not doing enough to help the poor cope with high prices while the profits of some companies are spiking.

The group of 69 signatories, including writers, film directors and university teachers, said in a text published in the Journal Du Dimanche that "Emmanuel Macron is using inflation to widen the wealth gap, to boost capital income at the expense of the rest." 

"It is all a matter of political will," said the text, co-signed by Ernaux, who on Thursday became the first French woman to win the Nobel Prize for Literature.

The statement also said the government has not done enough to fight the skyrocketing energy prices and declined to raise taxes on companies making enormous profits as a result of high inflation.

The signatories have also urged the public to join the protest march planned for October 16, which is being organized by the political movement of the France Unbowed party, which this year struck an alliance with more moderate leftwing parties to form France's largest opposition bloc.

Next week’s protest is being promoted as "against the high cost of living and climate inaction". It comes as Macron faces stiff resistance from unions over a planned pensions reform and as strikes by workers demanding a pay rise from retail to refineries have disrupted parts of the economy.

There is more misery for the French government as a number of fuel service stations are grappling with supply problems amid strike action at refineries run by major oil companies TotalEnergies and ExxonMobil. The walkout by members of the national trade union center CGT mainly over pay has disrupted operations at refineries and storage facilities. The industrial action has forced the government to tap into the country’s strategic reserves.

Environment Minister Christophe Bechu earlier told French media the government will, for the time being, not be rationing petrol for drivers or restrict the use of service stations in response to supply problems. "We haven't reached this point yet," Bechu said when asked if the government would impose any national measures beyond the bans already in place in some regions on filling large flat-sided metal containers for storing or transporting petrol.

The strikes at the refineries of ExxonMobil and TotalEnergies will continue, union officials at both companies have said. “It is continuing everywhere,” a CGT representative said, adding that there had been no contact from TotalEnergies since Saturday’s call by the union for the company’s managers to begin talks on pay.

In some areas, the share of affected petrol stations is much higher than the national average. An interactive map compiled by the website mon-essence.fr, where more than 100,000 users have reported outages in recent days, shows a large majority of petrol stations in and around Paris were marked out of service.

Across France, long queues have been seen outside fuel stations. "The waiting line will take you at least one-and-a-half hours or two", motorist Jean Galibert said as he entered the last stretch of a 700-metre tailback in front of a Paris service station. Another motorist, Franck Chang, said, "This situation right behind me reflects the state of France. We're struggling."

Reports say the strikes have reduced France's total refinery output by more than 60% which will be seen as another blow to the French government. On Sunday, TotalEnergies claimed to have offered to bring forward wage talks, in response to union demands, as it strongly seeks to end the industrial action that has disrupted supplies to almost a third of French petrol stations.

Amid warnings that energy shortages and rising inflation are set to extend in coming winter, further protests and anger at governments’ economic policies across Europe are expected to expand.

 

Saudi Arabia-United States-France call for forming a capable Lebanese government

Saudi Arabia, United States and France called for the formation of a government capable of implementing the structural and economic reforms urgently needed to address Lebanon’s political and economic crises, specifically those reforms needed to reach an agreement with the International Monetary Fund.

Representatives from the United States, France, and Saudi Arabia met on Wednesday to discuss Lebanon on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.

"Our three countries expressed their continuing support for Lebanon’s sovereignty, security, and stability. As Lebanon’s Parliament prepares to elect a new President, we stress the importance of timely elections in compliance with the constitution," the statement issued after the meeting read.

"It is critical to elect a President who can unite the Lebanese people and work with regional and international actors to overcome the current crisis.

"We are willing to work jointly with Lebanon to support the implementation of these fundamental reform measures, which are critical to the country’s future prosperity, stability, and security."

They acknowledged the critical role the Lebanese Armed Forces and the Internal Security Forces – as the legitimate defenders of Lebanon’s sovereignty and internal stability – continue to play in protecting the Lebanese people at a time of unprecedented crisis.

The three countries affirmed the need for the Lebanese government to implement the provisions of UN Security Council resolutions 1559, 1701, 1680, 2650 and other relevant international resolutions, including those issued by the Arab League, and commit to the Taif Agreement, which enables the preservation of national unity and civil peace in Lebanon.

US arms manufacturers making fortune from Ukraine war

Since the Ukraine war on February 24, Western governments have been shipping large quantities of weapons to the country, making the arms supply an extremely lucrative trade for dealers. 

The US administration under President Joe Biden has been announcing fresh military packages on a regular basis. Weapons being sent to Ukraine that will keep the US military complexes busy for a long time to come. 

The aggregate US military aid totals at least US$25 billion committed since late February until August 03, 2022 according to the Ukraine Support Tracker.

On Thursday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced another US$2.2 billion military package for Ukraine and neighboring countries. Earlier President Biden had also approved a separate US$675 million in weapons to Ukraine, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced. 

There is no sign the US is willing to end war; on Friday the White House said Biden will request a further US$11.7 billion in emergency funding from Congress to provide lethal aid and budget support.

The five largest companies in the world that manufacture weapons are all American namely: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics. In fact, half of the top 100 producers of arms are based in the United States, while twenty are located in Europe. 

In the aftermath of the Ukraine conflict, these five American firms saw their stock prices soar in a sign that investors believed profitable days were ahead.

At a time when the broader stock market as measured by the S&P 500 had slumped by about 4%; Lockheed Martin’s stock price was up over 12% – with most of the gains occurring in its immediate aftermath. Northrop Grumman has jumped by 20%. 

It’s not just the dealers making profit, over the past months; reports have emerged showing how members of Congress stand to personally profit from the war with lawmakers or their spouses holding stock in arms dealers such as Lockheed Martin or Raytheon Technologies. 

Likewise, politicians in Britain such as members of the House of Lords made tens of thousands of pounds by owning shares in the largest British weapons manufacturer and sixth in the world, BAE Systems. The arms dealers’ share price rose by 23% following the outbreak of war in Ukraine. 

It’s not just politicians who benefit from the vast arms supplies to Eastern Europe; weapons dealers have many people on their payroll as well. These include the many pundits on the face of American mainstream media who discuss the war in Ukraine while having strong links with the US arms manufacturers.

It makes the job of the Biden administration much easier when trying to sell to the public the reasons to send more weapons and making announcements about new military packages. 

The US has shipped at least 5,500 Javelin anti-tank missiles manufactured jointly by Raytheon Technologies and Lockheed Martin. The two firms will be paid to replenish American stocks with the money coming from a US$40 billion package signed by Biden. 

The other weapons America has been sending include longer range missile systems, anti-ship missiles, anti-tank missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, helicopters, rockets, launchers, howitzers, radar systems, drones, aerial systems, armored vehicles, small arms, artillery and other arms. Washington has also put aside money for training, maintenance and sustainment. 

That’s a lot of arms being shipped over by the US, which is leading the Western war effort in Eastern Europe against Russia which has long blamed the US and NATO for triggering the conflict.

Moscow requested an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council on Thursday to discuss Western arms supplies to Ukraine. 

The Russian Ambassador, Vasily Nebenzya, told the council it was a fantasy to believe that Western powers can determine the outcome of the conflict with their weapons supplies.

A significant proportion of these weapons find itself in the hands of smugglers right from the warehouses. In the darknet, one can find all kinds of offers to buy these weapons. We’ve already seen similar situations in the Balkans and the Middle East where Western military arsenals were then re-exported to Europe and then used by criminal groups on European territory or found their way into the hands of terrorists. 

The UN disarmament chief, Izumi Nakamitsu, has also warned that the flood of weapons being sent to conflict areas such as Ukraine raises many concerns including the potential for diversion.

Campaigners have also been speaking out about the consequences of where the vast number of weapons may end up. Kristen Bayes, a spokesperson for the Campaign Against the Arms Trade, says the provision of weapons to Ukraine is not problem free. "You might think you're handing over weapons to people you know and like, but then they get sold on to people you absolutely don't”.

Campaigners say the risk of advanced and sophisticated weapons delivered to Ukraine ending up in the black market is high because authorities are not in full control of all territory. They argue it is also difficult to keep track of the arms when they have been sent so quickly.

In July, the Financial Times quoted Western officials with knowledge about talks between several NATO members and Kyiv to explore a tracking system or detailed inventory lists for weapons highlighting Western fears about missing weapons. 

“All these weapons land in southern Poland, get shipped to the border and then are just divided up into vehicles to cross in trucks, vans, sometimes private cars,” said one of the Western officials. “And from that moment we go blank on their location and we have no idea where they go, where they are used or even if they stay in the country.”

It’s not just the US; Britain has also committed at least £2.3 billion in military assistance.  Following the Britain are: Poland, Germany, Canada, the Czech Republic, Australia and France. Out of the 28 countries sending weapons, 25 are NATO members. 

Many European countries used the Ukraine conflict to announce plans for increased military spending. The additional commitments are worth at least €200 billion according to the EU.

Germany committed an extra €100 billion in the coming years, with Chancellor Olaf Scholz saying defense would make up two percent of his country’s GDP from now on. As a result of the news, German arms manufacturers can expect to see their sales grow significantly. Berlin has already announced it will be purchasing 35 American F-35 war planes, which are produced by Lockheed Martin and have an estimated lifetime cost of US$1.6 trillion. 

The French President Emmanuel Macron has pledged to expand his country's defence budget, while the British government had already planned increased spending before the conflict broke out but faces pressure from Labour to spend even more. 

Poland said that it had requested 500 HIMARS launchers and ammunition from Lockheed Martin. Estonia confirmed it has been in touch with the American manufacturer also to buy launchers and ammunition worth. Latvia and Lithuania are expected to follow suit.

Campaigners say with so much profit being made from the war, it’s not surprising that peace is not being pursued.

United States not keen in reviving Iran nuclear deal

The chances of reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal are worse after indirect United States-Iranian talks in Doha that ended without progress, a senior US official told Reuters.

"The prospects for a deal after Doha are worse than they were before Doha and they will be getting worse by the day," said the official on condition of anonymity.

"You could describe Doha at best as treading water, at worst as moving backwards. But at this point treading water is for all practical purposes moving backwards," he added.

The official would not go into the details of the Doha talks, during which European Union officials shuttled between the two sides trying to revive the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement under which Iran had limited its nuclear program in return for relief from economic sanctions.

Then US President Donald Trump reneged on the agreement in 2018 and restored harsh US sanctions on Iran, prompting Tehran to start violating its nuclear restrictions about a year later.

"Their vague demands, reopening of settled issues, and requests clearly unrelated to the JCPOA all suggests to us ... that the real discussion that has to take place is (not) between Iran and the US to resolve remaining differences. It is between Iran and Iran to resolve the fundamental question about whether they are interested in a mutual return to the JCPOA," the senior US official said.

"At this point, we are not sure if they (the Iranians) know what more they want. They didn’t come to Doha with many specifics," he added. "Most of what they raised they either knew - or should have known - was outside the scope of the JCPOA and thus completely unsellable to us and to the Europeans, or were issues that had been thoroughly debated and resolved in Vienna and that we were clearly not going to reopen."

Speaking at the UN Security Council, US, British and French diplomats all placed the onus on Iran for the failure to revive the agreement after more than a year of negotiations.

Iran, however, characterized the Doha talks as positive and blamed the United States for failing to provide guarantees that a new US administration would not again abandon the deal as Trump had done.

"Iran has demanded verifiable and objective guarantees from the US that JCPOA will not be torpedoed again, that the US will not violate its obligations again, and that sanctions will not be re-imposed under other pretexts or designations," Iran's UN Ambassador Majid Takht Ravanchi told the council.

The senior US official said Washington had made clear since the talks began in April 2021 that it could not give Iran legal guarantees that a future US administration would stick to the deal.

"We said there is no legal way we can bind a future administration, and so we looked for other ways to give some form of comfort to Iran and … we - along with all of the other P5+1 (nations) and the EU coordinator - thought that file had been closed," the senior US official added.

Iran struck the original deal with Britain, China, France, Russia, the United States and Germany, a group called the P5+1.

The senior US official disputed Tehran's argument that Washington was to blame for the lack of progress, saying the United States had responded positively to proposed EU changes to the draft text of an agreement reached during wider talks in March while Iran had failed to respond to those proposals.

If the deal is not revived, he said "the Iranian leadership would need to explain why it turned its back on the benefits of the deal for the sake of issues that wouldn't make a positive difference in the life of a single ordinary Iranian."

The US official did not detail those issues. Restoring the deal would allow Iran to legally export its oil - the life blood of its economy.

Joe Biden to ask G7 nations to ban import of Russian gold

US President, Joe Biden said Sunday that the Group of Seven (G7) nations will ban Russian gold imports to further impose financial costs on Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine.  

“The United States has imposed unprecedented costs on Putin to deny him the revenue he needs to fund his war against Ukraine,” Biden tweeted on Sunday. “Together, the G7 will announce that we will ban the import of Russian gold, a major export that rakes in tens of billions of dollars for Russia.” 

Biden’s announcement came on the first day of a G7 meeting in Germany; a formal announcement is expected later on during the summit.  

While it does not bring in as much money as energy, gold is a major source of revenue for the Russian economy. Restricting exports to G7 economies will cause more financial strain to Russia as it wages the war in Ukraine.  

The G7 includes the United States, France, Canada, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and Italy.  

The US and its allies have been searching for more ways to punish Russia for the bloody war that recently entered its fifth month. Biden has announced waves of penalties coordinated with allies that range from sanctions on Russian officials and oligarchs to export controls to sanctions on major Russian banks.  

Still, Europeans are limited in what they can do because of their dependence on Russian energy imports. European countries have vowed to phase out Russian oil but have not taken steps like the US to do so immediately.  

Biden administration officials teased new announcements to squeeze Russia ahead of Biden’s trip to Europe and it is possible there will be more announcements beyond the plan to ban Russian gold imports.  

Biden embarked on the trip to Europe for the G7 meeting and, later, a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit with the goal of demonstrating unity with allies on keeping up pressure on Russia even as the war roils the global economy. 

Biden spent Sunday morning meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and later participated in a working lunch with other leaders.  

A White House readout of Biden’s meeting with Scholz indicated Ukraine was a main topic of conversation.  

“The leaders underlined their commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as their continued provision of military, economic, humanitarian, and diplomatic support to help Ukraine defend its democracy against Russian aggression,” the White House readout said. “The leaders also discussed efforts to alleviate the impacts of Russia’s war in Ukraine on global food and energy security.” 

Biden also thanked Scholz for committing to boosting Germany’s defense spending above NATO’s 2% of gross domestic product target.  

A White House official characterized the meeting as “very warm and friendly” and said there was “very broad alignment on all of the issues that they discussed and all the common challenges that our countries are working on together.”

 

Iran likely to turn off all cameras beyond Safeguards agreement

Chief of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) announced on Thursday night that Iran has turned off a number of IAEA cameras which were monitoring Iran’s nuclear activities beyond the Safeguards agreement and plans to turn off the rest soon.

“We ended the activities of a number of these cameras and we will do the rest tonight and tomorrow,” Mohammad Eslami told the national TV.

The cameras that have been removed or are being removed were installed voluntarily. Their activity fell outside the scope of the Safeguards agreement of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Iran embarked on removing such cameras in response to a resolution by the IAEA Board of Governors against Iran late on Wednesday.

The resolution, proposed by the United States and the European trio ‑ Germany, France and Britain ‑  was approved by the IAEA’s 35-nation board with 30 votes in favor, two against and three abstentions. Russia and China voted against the resolution and India, Libya and Pakistan abstained.

The resolution was drafted on the basis of a report by IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi in which it was claimed Iran had refused to provide answers to traces of uranium enrichment found at three undeclared sites. This is while Iran had provided answers to the IAEA about these alleged sites, which finally led to the conclusion of the 2015 nuclear agreement, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Questions about the alleged nuclear sites, which were referred to as possible military dimensions (PMD), were answered and the issue closed.

“You closed all these allegations and charges within the PMD…. And now you have come and say you want to return to the JCPOA. Okay, return to the JCPOA but why do you reopen the closed package which form the essence of the JCPOA?” Eslami asked.

Prior to the debate on Iran’s nuclear program at the IAEA board, Grossi had visited Tel Aviv for talks with Israeli officials, a move which put in serious question Grossi’s neutrality and professionalism by the Agency under his leadership.

Eslami went on to say that the IAEA, based on its articles 2 and 3, is tasked to transfer nuclear technology to NPT signatories for civilian uses but the reality is that the IAEA is “a pawn of the Zionists”.

It is widely believed that these alleged nuclear sites have been raised by Israel through bogus documents.

“It is regretful that an international institution is exploited in such a way by a fake regime and puts its credibility in question,” the AEOI chief lamented.

Israel, which has been launching an intensive campaign against Iran’s nuclear program for about two decades, has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has about 90 nuclear weapons. It also played a key role in provoking the Trump administration to quit the JCPOA, which was the product of 12 years of negotiations.

The nuclear chief went on to say that all the commitments made by Iran under the JCPOA was beyond the Safeguards agreement and were chiefly intended to create confidence about Tehran’s nuclear activities.

“Why has the Islamic Republic accepted to limit itself and be under more intensive surveillance and control by the Agency for a rather long term? It was just because it wanted to get rid of these accusations and build trust,” he explained.

However, Eslami added, this good intention which was shown in the negotiations and the JCPOA is not being considered at all by the IAEA, including its Director Grossi.

There is no will by Grossi to become convinced of Iran’s answers and this shows that he is a hostage to Israelis and that he has adopted a political behavior toward Iran.

 

United States urged to restore Iran nuclear deal

More than 40 former government officials and leading nuclear non-proliferation experts have expressed strong support for an agreement that returns Iran and the United States to comply with the 2015 nuclear deal.

The accord between Iran and the major world powers, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was unanimously endorsed by the UN Security Council through Resolution 2231.

The major world powers are P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States—plus Germany) together with the European Union.

The joint statement points out that if President of United States, Joe Biden fails to bring negotiations with Iran to a prompt and successful conclusion it would perpetuate the failed strategy pursued by the Trump administration and allow Iran to further improve its capacity to produce weapons-grade nuclear material. The result, the nuclear nonproliferation experts write, “would increase the danger that Iran would become a threshold nuclear-weapon state”.

Signatories of the letter include a former special representative to the president of the United States on non-proliferation, former US State Department officials, the United States’ former Ambassador to Israel, Russia, and the United Nations, and leading nuclear non-proliferation experts based in the United States, Europe, and Asia.

“A prompt return to mutual compliance with the JCPOA is the best available way to deny Iran the ability to quickly produce bomb-grade nuclear material,” the experts’ letters notes.

“It would reinstate full IAEA international monitoring and verification of Iran’s nuclear facilities, thus ensuring early warning if Iran were to try to acquire nuclear weapons—and possibly become the second state in the Middle East (in addition to Israel) with such an arsenal.”

Despite Iran’s compliance with the accord, former US President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA in May 2018, reimposed sanctions that had been waived as part of the agreement and embarked on a pressure campaign designed to deny Tehran any benefit of remaining in compliance with the nuclear deal.

Iran continued to meet its JCPOA obligations until May 2019, when Tehran began a series of calibrated violations of the agreement designed to pressure the remaining JCPOA parties to meet their commitments and push the United States to return to the agreement. These violations, while largely reversible, have increased the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program.

“As a result of Trump administration policies,” the experts’ statement says, “it is now estimated that the time it would take Iran to produce a significant quantity (25 kg) of bomb-grade uranium (enriched to 90 percent U-235) is down from more than a year under the JCPOA, to approximately one or two weeks today.”

“Restoring the limits on Iran’s nuclear program will significantly increase (by many months) the time it would take Iran to produce a significant quantity of bomb grade material, which provides the margin necessary for the international community to take effective action if Iran were to try to do so,” the experts say.

“Just as importantly,” the experts write, “the JCPOA mandates unprecedented International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring, verification, and transparency measures that make it very likely that any possible future effort by Iran to pursue nuclear weapons, even a clandestine program, would be detected promptly.”

Failure to bring Iran back under the limits established by the JCPOA would produce long-term adverse effects on the global non-proliferation regime, put US allies at greater risk, and create a new nuclear crisis, experts say.

Courtesy: International Press Syndicate