Iran Responds to European Nuclear Proposal: ‘Yes, but...’

Iranian permanent representative to the international organizations in Vienna, Mohsen Naziri Asl, leaves the Palais Coburg where closed-door nuclear talks take place in Vienna, Austria, Friday, Aug. 5, 2022. (AP)
Iranian permanent representative to the international organizations in Vienna, Mohsen Naziri Asl, leaves the Palais Coburg where closed-door nuclear talks take place in Vienna, Austria, Friday, Aug. 5, 2022. (AP)
TT

Iran Responds to European Nuclear Proposal: ‘Yes, but...’

Iranian permanent representative to the international organizations in Vienna, Mohsen Naziri Asl, leaves the Palais Coburg where closed-door nuclear talks take place in Vienna, Austria, Friday, Aug. 5, 2022. (AP)
Iranian permanent representative to the international organizations in Vienna, Mohsen Naziri Asl, leaves the Palais Coburg where closed-door nuclear talks take place in Vienna, Austria, Friday, Aug. 5, 2022. (AP)

Two weeks have passed since EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell presented his amended “plan” for the 2015 nuclear deal to the parties concerned. The final text, submitted on July 26 by Borrell’s deputy Enrique Mora to these parties as they were gathered in Palais Coburg, cannot be renegotiated.

The Iranians and Americans held indirect negotiations during four days of these two weeks, but on Monday, Borrell explained that “everything negotiable has been negotiated.”

Experience with the negotiations between Washington and Tehran has doubtlessly left the EU High Representative wary and cautious.

For their part, Tehran-affiliated media outlets responded to the statements and made it clear that Iran insists on conducting a “comprehensive review” of the proposal and its right to make adjustments and changes to the proposal, as its negotiator in Vienna has already stressed.

The Iranians also insist they refuse to confine themselves to a deadline because their ultimate goal is “safeguarding Iranian interests.”

As such, Iran almost immediately hit back at Mora, who had closed the doors to any suggestions, saying that what is needed is “a yes or no response. You cannot agree to the articles mentioned on page twenty and reject those on page fifty.” The proposal is twenty-five pages long.

In any case, Mora said he expects a response in “a few weeks,” and some sources from Paris have suggested the response could come this month.

“Yes… but” sums up the positions expressed by Iranian officials.

The US and EU, meanwhile, have said they are ready to sign the EU proposal. While European sources have said that they are confident Iran will sign the European proposal in the end, citing an array of reasons. They believe some minor changes will be made and that it could take some time because Iran does not want to show that it acquiesced to international pressure.

They also believe that Iran will not sign before ensuring that the interests of the country are guaranteed and that the top brass wants to show that it forced Washington and its western partners to accept better terms than those obtained by the team led by then President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif when the deal was first signed in 2015.

However, it seems that Tehran did not receive what it had demanded in terms of the Revolutionary Guards being removed from the US terror list and that only financial compensation has been agreed to as a deterrent to Washington pulling out.

According to official French sources, however, the westerners did make three significant concessions to Tehran: first, they agreed to the exclusion of any new parties in the negotiations for nuclear deals, leaving out the Gulf states despite their constant demands to be included. Second, Iran’s ballistic missile program was not part of the negotiations. Third, Iran’s destabilizing role in the region was not put on the table.

Iranian officials have said that Tehran provided “initial responses” and that, after thorough discussions of the European proposal, it will put additional proposals and adjustments forward, meaning that we could see additional rounds of negotiations, regardless of assurances to the contrary given by the Europeans and Americans.

In any case, after overcoming or eliminating some of the obstacles of the past, one issue continues to threaten to dash the hopes of those seeking a swift return to the 2015 agreement; Tehran has failed to fully cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency on its three undeclared nuclear sites where nuclear activity was detected by the UN agency between 2003 and 2004.

Strong doubts remain regarding this issue, with some observers worried these sites could be part of a military nuclear program. So far, this remains a thorn in Iran’s plans, especially since the IAEA issued a statement clarifying that Iran was not cooperating with it and that this could lead, at some point, to the issue being taken to the UN Security Council once again.

The Iranians accuse the IAEA of “politicizing” the matter and acquiescing to US and Israeli pressure. Tehran wants to resolve this matter permanently, and it believes, without a doubt, that the time is right to do so.

Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian was quick to complain about the IAEA to both Borrell and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

Tehran fears that keeping this question open will become inconvenient in the future, and it is thus betting that the westerners will eventually agree to forget about this 19-year-old issue in exchange for Iran allowing international inspectors to properly and fully fulfill their task of bringing its nuclear program, which remains largely unmonitored to this day, under control.



‘We Choose Denmark,’ Says Greenland Ahead of W. House Talks

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

‘We Choose Denmark,’ Says Greenland Ahead of W. House Talks

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)

Greenland would choose to remain Danish over a US takeover, its leader said Tuesday, ahead of crunch White House talks on the future of the Arctic island which President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened.

Trump has been talking up the idea of buying or annexing the autonomous territory for years, and further stoked tensions this week by saying the United States would take it "one way or the other".

"We are now facing a geopolitical crisis, and if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark," Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said at a press conference.

"One thing must be clear to everyone: Greenland does not want to be owned by the United States. Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States."

He was speaking alongside Danish leader Mette Frederiksen, who said it had not been easy to stand up to what she slammed as "completely unacceptable pressure from our closest ally".

"However, there are many indications that the most challenging part is ahead of us," Frederiksen said.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and his Greenlandic counterpart Vivian Motzfeldt are to meet US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday to discuss Greenland's future.

Lokke said they had requested a meeting with Rubio, and Vance had asked to take part and host it at the White House.

Vance made an uninvited visit to the island in March where he criticized Denmark for what he said was a lack of commitment to Greenland and security in the Arctic, and called it a "bad ally".

The comments enraged Copenhagen, which has been an ardent trans-Atlantic supporter and which has sent troops to fight US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

- 'Misunderstandings' -

For Nuuk and Copenhagen, Wednesday's meeting at the White House is aimed at ironing out "misunderstandings".

These relate to Greenland's defense, Chinese and Russian military presence in the Arctic, and the relationship between Greenland and Copenhagen, which together with the Faroe Islands make up the Kingdom of Denmark.

"To the uninformed American listener, the ongoing (independence) talks between Denmark and Greenland might have been construed as if Greenland's secession from Denmark was imminent," said Greenland specialist Mikaela Engell.

For these listeners, "I can understand that, in this situation, it would be better for the Americans to take hold of that strategic place", the former Danish representative on the island told AFP.

But this "discussion has been going on for years and years and it has never meant that Greenland was on its way out the door", she stressed.

Denmark's foreign minister said the reason Copenhagen and Nuuk had requested Wednesday's meeting was "to move the entire discussion... into a meeting room, where you can look each other in the eye and talk through these issues".

Greenland's location is highly strategic, lying on the shortest route for missiles between Russia and the United States. It is therefore a crucial part of the US anti-missile shield.

Washington has accused Copenhagen of doing little to protect Greenland from what it perceives as a growing Arctic threat from Russia and China, though analysts suggest Beijing is a small player in the region.

Denmark's government has rejected US claims, recalling that it has invested almost 90 billion kroner ($14 billion) to beef up its military presence in the Arctic.

The Danish prime minister on Tuesday called for stronger cooperation with the US and NATO to improve the region's security.

She also called for NATO to defend Greenland, and said that security guarantees would be "the best defense against Chinese or Russian threats in the Arctic".

Diplomats at NATO say some Alliance members have floated the idea of launching a new mission in the region, although no concrete proposals are yet on the table.

Rutte said on Monday that NATO was working on "the next steps" to bolster Arctic security.

Greenland's foreign minister and Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen are to meet NATO's Secretary General Mark Rutte on January 19 to discuss the issue.

"We are now moving forward with the whole issue of a more permanent, larger presence in Greenland from the Danish defense forces but also with the participation of other countries," Lund Poulsen told reporters.


ICJ Hears Gruesome Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar Genocide Case

A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)
A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)
TT

ICJ Hears Gruesome Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar Genocide Case

A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)
A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)

Myanmar soldiers rampaged door-to-door, systematically killing, raping, and burning Rohingya men, women and children, the International Court of Justice heard on Tuesday, on day two of a genocide hearing.

ICJ judges are hearing three weeks of testimony as they weigh accusations by The Gambia that Myanmar committed genocide against the Rohingya in a 2017 crackdown.

Tafadzwa Pasipanodya, a lawyer for The Gambia, laid out harrowing evidence of an alleged attack on a village in northern Rakhine State in Myanmar.

Soldiers decapitated old men, gang raped women and girls, threw infants into rivers.

After killing everyone in the villages, they "systematically" burned the buildings following the so-called "clearance operations", alleged Pasipanodya.

"The totality of this evidence... convincingly show that Myanmar, through its state organs, acted with the intent to destroy the Rohingya," said Pasipanodya.

Myanmar has always maintained the crackdown by its armed forces, known as the Tatmadaw, was justified to root out Rohingya insurgents after a series of attacks left a dozen security personnel dead.

The violence forced hundreds of thousands of Rohingya to flee to neighboring Bangladesh.

Today, 1.17 million Rohingya live crammed into dilapidated camps spread over 8,000 acres in Cox's Bazar in Bangladesh.

Lawyers for Myanmar will begin their response on Friday.

A final decision could take months or even years, and while the ICJ has no means of enforcing its decisions, a ruling in favor of The Gambia would heap more political pressure on Myanmar.

The Gambia is taking Myanmar to the ICJ, which rules in disputes between states, alleging breaches of the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, under which any state can haul another before the ICJ if it believes genocide is being committed.

Legal experts are watching this case as it could give clues for how the ICJ will handle similar accusations against Israel over its military campaign in Gaza, in a case brought by South Africa.


US Designates Three Muslim Brotherhood Chapters as Global Terrorists

Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)
Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

US Designates Three Muslim Brotherhood Chapters as Global Terrorists

Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)
Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)

The United States on Tuesday designated the Egyptian, Lebanese and Jordanian branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as global terrorists, citing in part what it called their support for Palestinian group Hamas.

The ‌move, which ‌Washington formally ‌set ⁠in motion ‌last November, will bring sanctions against one of the Arab world's oldest and most influential Islamist movements.

The Treasury said it ⁠was labeling the three chapters ‌as specially designated global ‍terrorists. ‍It has accused the ‍trio of supporting or encouraging violent attacks against Israel and US partners.

"Chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood purport to be legitimate civic organizations while, ⁠behind the scenes, they explicitly and enthusiastically support terrorist groups like Hamas," the Treasury Department said in a statement.

Republicans and right-wing voices have long advocated for and considered terrorist designations for ‌the Muslim Brotherhood.