China and Japan Agree to Talks on Security Issues as They Seek to Mend Ties

In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, right, shakes hands with Japan's Minister for Foreign Affairs Takeshi Iwaya in Beijing, Wednesday, Dec. 25, 2024. (Li Xiang/Xinhua via AP)
In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, right, shakes hands with Japan's Minister for Foreign Affairs Takeshi Iwaya in Beijing, Wednesday, Dec. 25, 2024. (Li Xiang/Xinhua via AP)
TT

China and Japan Agree to Talks on Security Issues as They Seek to Mend Ties

In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, right, shakes hands with Japan's Minister for Foreign Affairs Takeshi Iwaya in Beijing, Wednesday, Dec. 25, 2024. (Li Xiang/Xinhua via AP)
In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, right, shakes hands with Japan's Minister for Foreign Affairs Takeshi Iwaya in Beijing, Wednesday, Dec. 25, 2024. (Li Xiang/Xinhua via AP)

China and Japan agreed Wednesday to set up talks on often contentious security issues as they seek to improve a relationship riven in recent years by a range of issues, from territorial disputes to the discharge of water from Japan's tsunami-wrecked nuclear power plant.

Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya, on his first trip to China since assuming the post in October, sounded positive after meetings with Chinese Premier Li Qiang and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, saying the talks were "very candid" and wide-ranging.

"I feel we were able to build a personal relationship that would lead to the future," he told reporters in the Chinese capital.

Wang agreed to visit Japan next year for a high-level economic dialogue including cooperation on the environment, energy conservation and health and nursing care. Japan announced an easing of visa requirements for Chinese visitors, following China's recent decision to allow Japanese to enter without a visa.

The two countries also have major differences. Iwaya raised Japan's concerns about China's military activity near a group of uninhabited islands that both countries claim, as well as China's territorial disputes with other countries in the South China Sea.

Efforts to improve ties are in their early stages following a commitment to do so made by Chinese President Xi Jinping and Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba at a meeting last month during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Peru.

"Currently China-Japan relations are at a critical period of improvement and development," Li said at the start of his meeting with Iwaya. "China is willing to work together with Japan to move toward the important direction proposed by the leaders of the two countries."

Iwaya's one-day trip came just before US President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January and the uncertainty his presidency is expected to bring to America's global relations.

Trump has threatened to hike tariffs on Chinese goods, reigniting a trade war he unleashed in his first administration. It's unclear how he will impact the US-Japan alliance, which President Joe Biden has sought to buttress during the last four years as part of his strategy to confront a rising China.

Japan has revamped its approach to defense i n response to Chinese actions in recent years, boosting military spending and shifting away from a principle of self-defense. Earlier this year, Japan protested when a Chinese military plane flew into Japan’s airspace, while in the summer, a Chinese survey ship sailed into Japanese territorial waters.

Wang agreed to Iwaya's proposal for a Japan-China security dialogue, which would try to improve communication over some of these issues.

Iwaya called for an early lifting of a ban on Japanese seafood imports that China imposed after a Japanese utility began discharging treated but still radioactive water from the former nuclear power plant in Fukushima.

The two sides agreed to keep working on the issue, and also resume talks on Japanese beef and rice exports to China.

Japan's easing of visa requirements included allowing group tours to stay for 30 days, up from 15, and increasing the validity of multiple-entry tourist visas from five to 10 years.

Both sides hope that people-to-people exchanges can help improve relations.



Iran Rejects Curbs on Its Uranium Enrichment Program

FILE - This satellite image provided by Vantor shows the Natanz nuclear complex in Iran on March 7, 2026, with no new damage seen at the facility or the tunnels. (Satellite image ©2026 Vantor via AP, file)
FILE - This satellite image provided by Vantor shows the Natanz nuclear complex in Iran on March 7, 2026, with no new damage seen at the facility or the tunnels. (Satellite image ©2026 Vantor via AP, file)
TT

Iran Rejects Curbs on Its Uranium Enrichment Program

FILE - This satellite image provided by Vantor shows the Natanz nuclear complex in Iran on March 7, 2026, with no new damage seen at the facility or the tunnels. (Satellite image ©2026 Vantor via AP, file)
FILE - This satellite image provided by Vantor shows the Natanz nuclear complex in Iran on March 7, 2026, with no new damage seen at the facility or the tunnels. (Satellite image ©2026 Vantor via AP, file)

The head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Mohammad Eslami, on Thursday ruled out accepting any restrictions on the country’s uranium enrichment program, as demanded by the United States and Israel.

In an interview with the ISNA news agency, Eslami said: “The demands and conditions set by our enemies to restrict Iran’s enrichment program are nothing but daydreams that will be buried,” AFP reported.

The remarks come as talks between Washington and Tehran are expected to be held at the end of the week under Islamabad’s auspices, as part of a ceasefire agreement brokered by Pakistan. The discussions are expected to address Tehran’s nuclear program.

Western powers accuse Iran of seeking to acquire a nuclear weapon and have worked to prevent it from doing so, while Tehran has consistently denied the allegations.

During his first term, US President Donald Trump withdrew from the landmark 2015 agreement that had placed limits on Iran’s nuclear enrichment activities in exchange for sanctions relief, a deal opposed by Israel.


Germany's Merz: We Do Not Want NATO to Split over US-Iran War

Commemorative photo of NATO leaders in The Hague in 2025 (Turkish Presidency).
Commemorative photo of NATO leaders in The Hague in 2025 (Turkish Presidency).
TT

Germany's Merz: We Do Not Want NATO to Split over US-Iran War

Commemorative photo of NATO leaders in The Hague in 2025 (Turkish Presidency).
Commemorative photo of NATO leaders in The Hague in 2025 (Turkish Presidency).

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Thursday he did not want US-Iran war to place any further strain on relations between the United States and its European NATO partners.

"We do not want – I do not want – NATO to split. NATO is a guarantor of our security, including and above all in Europe," he said, speaking to journalists.

He added he had encouraged US President Donald Trump in a call to pursue negotiations with Iran with urgency.

Germany was resuming direct talks with Iranian leadership in Tehran, Merz said in Berlin.


Pentagon Leaders Assert Destruction of Iran’s Military Capabilities, Threaten to Resume Operations

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks to members of the media during a press briefing at the Pentagon in Washington, Wednesday, April 8, 2026. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks to members of the media during a press briefing at the Pentagon in Washington, Wednesday, April 8, 2026. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
TT

Pentagon Leaders Assert Destruction of Iran’s Military Capabilities, Threaten to Resume Operations

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks to members of the media during a press briefing at the Pentagon in Washington, Wednesday, April 8, 2026. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks to members of the media during a press briefing at the Pentagon in Washington, Wednesday, April 8, 2026. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

The US war against Iran has "completely" destroyed the country's ability to build missiles or other sophisticated weaponry, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday

"We finished completely destroying Iran's defense-industrial base, a core pillar of our mission," Hegseth told reporters.

"They can no longer build missiles."

For his part, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine said: “We attacked, along with our partners, approximately 90 percent of their weapons factories,” including facilities producing Shahed-type drones, as well as facilities manufacturing guidance systems used by these drones.

Regarding the naval fleet, Caine said that it will take years before Iran can rebuild its surface combatant capabilities.

The general added that approximately 80 percent of Iran’s nuclear industrial base was targeted, significantly undermining its nuclear weapons development efforts.

He warned that US forces remain ready to resume fighting with Iran if the ceasefire ends, stating: “Let’s be clear: the ceasefire is just a temporary pause. The armed forces remain ready, if ordered, to resume combat operations with the same speed and precision demonstrated over the past 38 days.”

Statements by Dan Caine, and his warning about a possible resumption of fighting, suggest that the announcement of a suspension of the war came under US pressure, according to Michael Rubin, a researcher at the American Enterprise Institute.

As for the restoration of freedom of navigation, military officials’ statements did not indicate that it has been fully secured, instead emphasizing the need to “ensure Iran’s compliance” and the safe passage of vessels.

At the same time, there were continued indications that ships received messages from Iranian forces stating that they require permission to transit the strait, suggesting that Tehran is seeking to establish a new equation: keeping Hormuz open on the condition of recognizing a supervisory or sovereign role for itself.

If that is the case, the region and the global economy would be entering a phase that goes beyond a mere ceasefire, as the risk shifts from missiles to the rules governing transit, insurance, pricing, and maritime fees.

Statements by Pentagon leaders, followed by remarks from Donald Trump, reveal that the real dispute is not over the ceasefire itself, but over what comes after it. Washington rejects the continuation of Iranian uranium enrichment and is demanding that the stockpile of highly enriched uranium be handed over, or “taken” by force if necessary.

By contrast, narratives circulating in Iranian media about the “ten points” of the ceasefire agreement point in a completely different direction: recognition of Iran’s right to enrich, the lifting of sanctions, and no clear position on the fate of the enriched stockpile.

This is precisely where the structural contradiction lies, one that could undermine the negotiating round from its very first day, according to Michael Rubin.

The second aspect of the dispute concerns the scope of de-escalation. The United States and Israel have made clear that a ceasefire with Iran does not mean a halt to Israeli operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah, while reports continued of missile and drone attacks on Gulf states in the hours following the truce. This suggests that the region is facing a form of “selective de-escalation,” according to observers: a direct easing between Washington and Tehran, while proxy arenas and exchanges of messages remain active.

Remarks by Hegseth that Washington had been prepared, just hours earlier, to strike power stations, bridges, and oil and energy infrastructure “that Iran cannot rebuild” indicate that the decision to halt hostilities did not stem from a fully realized settlement, but rather from the suspension of a massive escalatory strike against Tehran.

Accordingly, the ceasefire appears more like a testing window: if Tehran complies with conditions related to navigation and the transfer of uranium, the truce could hold and pave the way toward a definitive end to the war. If not, the United States may return to the option of large-scale destruction of infrastructure.