Ukrainian officials said Wednesday that Russian forces launched 89 drones in a wave of overnight attacks that left three people injured in Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv.

Serhiy Popko, head of Kyiv’s City Military Administration, said on Telegram that falling debris from a destroyed drone damaged a building.

Ukrainian air defenses shot down 36 of the 89 drones, the country’s military said.

In addition to Kyiv, intercepts took place over the Chernihiv, Kharkiv, Khmelnytskyi, Mykolaiv, Poltava, Sumy, and Zhytomyr regions.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said Wednesday it shot down 25 Ukrainian drones over the Black Sea and Russia-occupied Crimea.

That followed another 22 drones that Russian air defenses shot down overnight, the ministry said.

Most of the drones were shot down in areas along the Russia-Ukraine border, including over the Rostov, Belgorod, Voronezh, Kursk and Bryansk regions.

There were no reports of major damage from the Ukrainian attacks.

“The only effective way to protect ourselves from this is to eliminate Russian weapons and Russian launchers directly on Russian territory,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his nightly address Tuesday.

“That is why the ability to strike Russian territory is so important to us. This is the only factor that can limit Russian terror and Russia’s capacity to wage war in general,” he added.

Countries that have given Ukraine weapons to fight Russia have been reluctant to give Ukraine permission to launch those weapons directly into Russia, but Zelenskyy said he is “grateful to all the partners who understand this and convey it to other partners.”

Some information for this report was provided by The Associated Press and Reuters
…

your ad here

Russia launched its largest drone strike on Ukraine overnight with 188 drones, Ukraine’s air force said Tuesday.   

Ukraine’s military said it shot down 76 Russian drones in the overnight attacks that targeted areas across the country and damaged critical infrastructure facilities.  

The air force said Russia also used four missiles in the aerial assault.  

“Unfortunately, there were hits to critical infrastructure facilities, and private and apartment buildings were damaged in several regions due to the massive drone attack,” according to an air force statement.  

The attack coincided with a push by Russia on the front lines in eastern Ukraine, where Russia claimed to have gained nearly 240 square kilometers in the past week, for a total of about 600 square kilometers in November, Reuters reported, citing the Russian army and other analysts. 

For its part, Ukraine reporting repelling Russian troops from Kupiansk, a logistical center in Kharkiv, for the third time, according to Reuters. 

“The only effective way to protect ourselves from this is to eliminate Russian weapons and Russian launchers directly on Russian territory,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his nightly address. 

“That is why the ability to strike Russian territory is so important to us. This is the only factor that can limit Russian terror and Russia’s capacity to wage war in general,” he added.  

Countries that have given Ukraine weapons to fight Russia have been reluctant to give Ukraine permission to launch those weapons directly into Russia, but Zelenskyy said he is “grateful to all the partners who understand this and convey it to other partners.”   

“Nearly 200 Russian drones against Ukraine in one day — that is nearly 200 proofs that Russian ambitions are utterly detached from any ideas of real peace,” Zelenskyy said. 

Ukraine’s president said rescue operations are still underway in Sumy, where Russia’s barrage of drones targeted a vehicle service station. The president said two people had been killed in Sumy and “one person is likely still trapped under the rubble.”   

Ukrainian air defenses shot down drones in the Cherkasy, Chernihiv, Chernivtsi, Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkiv, Khmelnytskyi, Kirovohrad, Mykolaiv, Odesa, Poltava, Rivne, Sumy, Ternopil, Vinnytsia, Zaporizhzhia and Zhytomyr regions. 

The power grid of Ternopil in western Ukraine, about 134 miles east of Poland was hit in the attack. 

“The consequences are bad because the facility was significantly affected and this will have impact on the power supply of the entire region for a long time,” the governor of Tenopil, Vyacheslav Nehoda, said in a televised address.  

Serhiy Lysak, governor of Dnipropetrovsk, said on Telegram that one drone hit the center of Nikopol. 

Russia’s Defense Ministry said Tuesday it shot down 39 Ukrainian aerial drones overnight. 

Most of the drones were shot down over the Rostov region, with other intercepts taking place over Bryansk, Belgorod, Kursk, Oryol, Voronezh and Russia-occupied Crimea. 

Officials in Rostov, Bryansk and Voronezh said on Telegram there were no reports of damage or casualties from the attacks. 

Some information for this report was provided by The Associated Press and Reuters. 
…

your ad here

BUCHAREST — A Romanian hard-right NATO critic and leftist Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu appeared in dead heat after the first round of presidential elections on Sunday, partial tallies showed, in a shock result threatening Romania’s staunchly pro-Ukraine stance. 

After nearly 93% of votes were counted, Calin Georgescu, 62, was at 22%, while Ciolacu had 21%, suggesting they will likely qualify to face each other in the second round, due on Dec. 8. 

A center-right contender, Elena Lasconi, was running second, behind Georgescu, among the hundreds of thousands of voters living outside Romania, with about 50% ballots cast there counted. But that margin might not be enough to win her a spot in the final race after all votes are tallied, observers said. 

Romania’s president has a semi-executive role that gives him or her control over defense spending — likely to be a difficult issue as Bucharest comes under pressure to uphold NATO spending goals during Donald Trump’s second term as U.S. president while trying to reduce a heavy fiscal deficit. 

Some opinion polls had Georgescu running at around 5% of the vote in the run-up to the election, after barely registering in earlier polls. 

Political commentator Radu Magdin said the difference between his single-digit popularity and Sunday’s result was without precedent since Romania shed communism in 1989. 

“Never in our 34 years of democracy have we seen such a surge compared to surveys,” Magdin said. 

Campaigning focused largely on the soaring cost of living, with Romania having the EU’s biggest share of people at risk of poverty. 

Ciolacu had courted voters with a promise of generous spending and no tax hikes, despite Romania running the European Union’s largest budget deficit at 8% of economic outlook, while offering a sense of security in policy stability at a time of a war next door. 

Formerly a prominent member of the hard-right Alliance for Uniting Romanians party, Georgescu has called NATO’s ballistic missile defense shield in the Romanian town of Deveselu a “shame of diplomacy.” 

He has said the North Atlantic alliance will not protect any of its members should they be attacked by Russia. 

“We are strong and brave, many of us voted, even more will do so in the second round,” Georgescu said standing alone on Sunday evening outside a residential building near capital Bucharest. 

Lasconi, a former journalist, joined the Save Romania Union (USR) in 2018 and became party head this year. She believes in raising defense spending and helping Ukraine, and surveys suggest she would beat Ciolacu in a runoff. 

Romania shares a 650-kilometer (400-mile) border with Ukraine and since Russia attacked Kyiv in 2022, it has enabled the export of millions of tons of grain through its Black Sea port of Constanta and provided military aid, including the donation of a Patriot air defense battery. 

Villages on the border with Ukraine have seen a barrage of drones breaching national airspace although no casualties have been reported. 

One political commentator said Russian meddling to give Georgescu an edge could not be ruled out in the election. 

“Based on Georgescu’s stance towards Ukraine and the discrepancy between opinion surveys and the actual result, we cannot rule (that) out,” said Sergiu Miscoiu, a political science professor at Babes-Bolyai University. 

Outgoing two-term president Klaus Iohannis, 65, had cemented Romania’s strong pro-Western stance but was accused of not doing enough to fight corruption. 

“It will be a tight run-off, with the Social Democrat leader more vulnerable to negative campaigning due to him being an incumbent PM,” Magdin said.
…

your ad here

DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES — Iran plans to hold talks about its disputed nuclear program with three European powers on Nov. 29 in Geneva, Japan’s Kyodo news agency reported on Sunday, days after the U.N. atomic watchdog passed a resolution against Tehran.

Iran reacted to the resolution, which was proposed by Britain, France, Germany and the United States, with what government officials called various measures such as activating numerous new and advanced centrifuges, machines that enrich uranium.

Kyodo said Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian’s government was seeking a solution to the nuclear impasse ahead of the inauguration in January of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump.

A senior Iranian official confirmed that the meeting would go ahead next Friday, adding that “Tehran has always believed that the nuclear issue should be resolved through diplomacy. Iran has never left the talks.”

In 2018, the then-Trump administration exited Iran’s 2015 nuclear pact with six major powers and reimposed harsh sanctions on Iran, prompting Tehran to violate the pact’s nuclear limits, with moves such as rebuilding stockpiles of enriched uranium, refining it to higher fissile purity and installing advanced centrifuges to speed up output.

Indirect talks between President Joe Biden’s administration and Tehran to try to revive the pact have failed, but Trump said in his election campaign in September that “We have to make a deal, because the consequences are impossible. We have to make a deal.”
…

your ad here

BAKU, AZERBAIJAN — United Nations climate talks adopted a deal to inject at least $300 billion annually in humanity’s fight against climate change, aimed at helping poor nations cope with the ravages of global warming in tense negotiations in the city where industry first tapped oil.

The $300 billion will go to developing countries who need the cash to wean themselves off the coal, oil and gas that causes the globe to overheat, adapt to future warming, and pay for the damage caused by climate change’s extreme weather. It’s not near the full amount of $1.3 trillion that developing countries were asking for, but it’s three times a deal of $100 billion a year from 2009 that is expiring. Some delegations said this deal is headed in the right direction, with hopes that more money flows in the future.

It was not quite the agreement by consensus that these meetings usually operate with and developing nations were livid about being ignored.

COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev gaveled the deal into acceptance before any nation had a chance to speak.

When they did, they blasted him for being unfair to them, the deal for not being enough, and the world’s rich nations for being too stingy.

“It’s a paltry sum,” India negotiator Chandni Raina said, repeatedly saying how India objected to rousing cheers. “I’m sorry to say we cannot accept it.”

She told The Associated Press that she has lost faith in the United Nations system.

Nations express discontent

A long line of nations agreed with India and piled on, with Nigeria’s Nkiruka Maduekwe, CEO of the National Council on Climate Change, calling the deal an insult and a joke.

“I’m disappointed. It’s definitely below the benchmark that we have been fighting for for so long,” said Juan Carlos Monterrey, of the Panama delegation. He noted that a few changes, including the inclusion of the words “at least” before the number $300 billion and an opportunity for revision by 2030, helped push them to the finish line.

“Our heart goes out to all those nations that feel like they were walked over,” he said.

The final package pushed through “does not speak or reflect or inspire confidence and trust that we will come out of this grave problem of climate change,” India’s Raina said.

“We absolutely object to the unfair means followed for adoption,” Raina said. “We are extremely hurt by this action by the president and the secretariat.”

Speaking for nearly 50 of the poorest nations of the world, Evans Davie Njewa of Malawi was more mild, expressing what he called reservations with the deal.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in a post on X that he hoped for a “more ambitious outcome.” But he said the agreement “provides a base on which to build.”

Some see deal as relief

There were somewhat satisfied parties, with European Union’s Wopke Hoekstra calling it a new era of climate funding, working hard to help the most vulnerable. But activists in the plenary hall could be heard coughing over Hoekstra’s speech in an attempt to disrupt it.

Eamon Ryan, Ireland’s environment minister, called the agreement “a huge relief.”

“It was not certain. This was tough,” he said. “Because it’s a time of division, of war, of (a) multilateral system having real difficulties, the fact that we could get it through in these difficult circumstances is really important.”

U.N. Climate Change’s Executive Secretary Simon Stiell called the deal an “insurance policy for humanity,” adding that like insurance, “it only works if the premiums are paid in full, and on time.”

The deal is seen as a step toward helping countries on the receiving end create more ambitious targets to limit or cut emissions of heat-trapping gases that are due early next year. It’s part of the plan to keep cutting pollution with new targets every five years, which the world agreed to at the U.N. talks in Paris in 2015.

The Paris agreement set the system of regular ratcheting up climate fighting ambition as away to keep warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The world is already at 1.3 degrees Celsius and carbon emissions keep rising.

Hope more cash will follow

Countries also anticipate that this deal will send signals that help drive funding from other sources, like multilateral development banks and private sources. That was always part of the discussion at these talks — rich countries didn’t think it was realistic to only rely on public funding sources — but poor countries worried that if the money came in loans instead of grants, it would send them sliding further backward into debt that they already struggle with.

“The $300 billion goal is not enough, but is an important down payment toward a safer, more equitable future,” said World Resources Institute President Ani Dasgupta. “This deal gets us off the starting block. Now the race is on to raise much more climate finance from a range of public and private sources, putting the whole financial system to work behind developing countries’ transitions.”

And even though it’s far from the needed $1.3 trillion, it’s more than the $250 billion that was on the table in an earlier draft of the text, which outraged many countries and led to a period of frustration and stalling over the final hours of the summit.

Other deals agreed at COP29

The several different texts adopted early Sunday morning included a vague but not specific reference to last year’s Global Stocktake approved in Dubai. Last year there was a battle about first-of-its-kind language on getting rid of the oil, coal and natural gas, but instead it called for a transition away from fossil fuels. The latest talks only referred to the Dubai deal, but did not explicitly repeat the call for a transition away from fossil fuels.

Countries also agreed on the adoption of Article 6, creating markets to trade carbon pollution rights, an idea that was set up as part of the Paris Agreement to help nations work together to reduce climate-causing pollution. Part of that was a system of carbon credits, allowing nations to put planet-warming gasses in the air if they offset emissions elsewhere. Backers said a U.N.-backed market could generate up to an additional $250 billion a year in climate financial aid.

Despite its approval, carbon markets remain a contentious plan because many experts say the new rules adopted don’t prevent misuse, don’t work and give big polluters an excuse to continue spewing emissions.

“What they’ve done essentially is undermine the mandate to try to reach 1.5,” said Tamara Gilbertson, climate justice program coordinator with the Indigenous Environmental Network. Greenpeace’s An Lambrechts, called it a “climate scam” with many loopholes.

With this deal wrapped up as crews dismantle the temporary venue, many have eyes on next year’s climate talks in Belem, Brazil.
…

your ad here

BAKU, AZERBAIJAN — As nerves frayed and the clock ticked, negotiators from rich and poor nations were huddled in one room Saturday during overtime United Nations climate talks to try to hash out an elusive deal on money for developing countries to curb and adapt to climate change.

But the rough draft of a proposal circulating in that room was getting soundly rejected, especially by African nations and small island states, according to messages relayed from inside. Then a group of negotiators from the Least Developed Countries bloc and the Alliance of Small Island States walked out because they didn’t want to engage with the rough draft.

The “current deal is unacceptable for us. We need to speak to other developing countries and decide what to do,” said Evans Njewa, chair of the LDC group. When asked if the walkout was a protest, Colombia Environment Minister Susana Mohamed told The Associated Press: “I would call this dissatisfaction, [we are] highly dissatisfied.”

With tensions high, climate activists heckled United States climate envoy John Podesta as he left the meeting room. They accused the U.S. of not paying its fair share and having “a legacy of burning up the planet.”

The last official draft on Friday pledged $250 billion annually by 2035, more than double the previous goal of $100 billion set 15 years ago but far short of the annual $1 trillion-plus that experts say is needed. The rough draft discussed on Saturday was for $300 billion in climate finance, sources told AP.

Accusations of a war of attrition

Developing countries accused the rich of trying to get their way — and a small financial aid package — via a war of attrition. And small island nations, particularly vulnerable to climate change’s worsening impacts, accused the host country presidency of ignoring them for the entire two weeks.

After bidding one of his suitcase-lugging delegation colleagues goodbye and watching the contingent of about 20 enter the meeting room for the European Union, Panama chief negotiator Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez had enough.

“Every minute that passes we are going to just keep getting weaker and weaker and weaker. They don’t have that issue. They have massive delegations,” Gomez said. “This is what they always do. They break us at the last minute. You know, they push it and push it and push it until our negotiators leave. Until we’re tired, until we’re delusional from not eating, from not sleeping.”

With developing nations’ ministers and delegation chiefs having to catch flights home, desperation sets in, according to Power Shift Africa’s Mohamed Adow. “The risk is if developing countries don’t hold the line, they will likely be forced to compromise and accept a goal that doesn’t add up to get the job done,” he said.

Teresa Anderson, the global lead on climate justice at Action Aid, said that to get a deal, “the presidency has to put something far better on the table.”

“The U.S. in particular, and rich countries, need to do far more to show that they’re willing for real money to come forward,” she said. “And if they don’t, then LDCs [Least Developed Countries] are unlikely to find that there’s anything here for them.”

Climate cash deal is still elusive

Developing nations are seeking $1.3 trillion to help adapt to droughts, floods, rising seas and extreme heat, pay for losses and damages caused by extreme weather, and transition their energy systems away from planet-warming fossil fuels and toward clean energy. Wealthy nations are obligated to pay vulnerable countries under an agreement reached at these talks in Paris in 2015.

Panama’s Monterrey Gomez said even the higher $300 billion figure that was discussed on Saturday is “still crumbs.”

“Is that even half of what we put forth?” he asked.

Monterrey Gomez said the developing world has since asked for a finance deal of $500 billion up to 2030 — a shortened timeframe than the 2035 date. “We’re still yet to hear reaction from the developed side,” he said.

On Saturday morning, Irish Environment Minister Eamon Ryan said it’s not just about the number in the final deal, but “how do you get to $1.3 trillion.”

Ryan said that any number reached at the COP will have to be supplemented with other sources of finance, for example through a market for carbon emissions where polluters would pay to offset the carbon they spew.

The amount in any deal reached at COP negotiations — often considered a “core” — will then be mobilized or leveraged for greater climate spending. But much of that means loans for countries already drowning in debt.

Anger and frustration over state of negotiations

Alden Meyer of the climate think tank E3G said it’s still up in the air whether a deal on finance will come out of Baku at all.

“It is still not out of the question that there could be an inability to close the gap on the finance issue,” he said.

Ali Mohamed, chair of the African Group of Negotiators, said the bloc is “prepared to reach agreement here in Baku … but we are not prepared to accept things that cross our red lines.”

Despite the fractures between nations, several still held out hopes for the talks. “We remain optimistic,” said Nabeel Munir of Pakistan, who chairs one of the talks’ standing negotiating committees.

The Alliance of Small Island States said in a statement that it wants to continue to engage in the talks, as long as the process is inclusive. “If this cannot be the case, it becomes very difficult for us to continue our involvement,” the statement said.
…

your ad here

WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken will travel to Italy over the weekend to attend a meeting of the Group of Seven major democracies next week, the State Department said on Friday, amid rising tensions in the war in Ukraine.

G7 leaders last Saturday reiterated a pledge to keep imposing severe costs on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine through sanctions, export controls and other measures, and vowed to support Kyiv for as long as it takes.

The State Department said Blinken would discuss issues including “conflicts in the Middle East, Russia’s war against Ukraine, Indo-Pacific security, and the ongoing crises in both Haiti and Sudan” at the gathering in Italy.

During his November 23-27 trip, Blinken also plans to meet Pope Francis at the Vatican following the G7 talks, it said in a statement.

Italy holds the 2024 rotating presidency of the G7, which also includes the United States, Canada, Japan, France, Germany and Britain.  
…

your ad here

Pentagon Deputy Press Secretary Sabrina Singh confirmed that Russia had indeed launched an experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile into Ukraine on November 21. She told reporters that Washington “was notified through nuclear threat reduction channels shortly before the launch.” 

See the full story here.
…

your ad here

London — European allies in the Baltic region are investigating how two fiber-optic data cables were severed earlier this week, with suspicion falling on a Chinese vessel in the area. Germany has said the incident was clearly sabotage. 

The Danish navy said this week it is following the Yi Peng 3, a Chinese bulk carrier, as it moves through the Baltic Sea. As of Friday, marine tracking systems showed the vessel anchored east of the Danish city of Aarhus. 

Denmark did not elaborate on why it was tracking the ship. However, there’s widespread speculation the vessel may have been involved in the severing of two fiber-optic cables on the seabed, one connecting Finland and Germany and the other running between Sweden and Lithuania. 

Speaking Tuesday, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius was adamant it was no accident. 

“I also don’t like to believe in the version that these were anchors that accidentally caused — how shall I put it — damage to these cables. So, we have to conclude, without knowing exactly who did it, that it was a hybrid action. And we also have to assume, without knowing it, of course, that it is sabotage,” Pistorius told reporters in Brussels. 

European allies in the Baltic are collaborating on an investigation, according to defense analyst Charly Salonius-Pasternak of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs. 

“There’s the camp that I would say sees hybrid operations in absolutely everything. And it is one of the things I’ve cautioned against — that if you’re in a hall of mirrors, everything looks a certain way. We don’t know that,” he told VOA. 

“But as we’ve already seen in the Baltic Sea, but [also] elsewhere, the incidents of, as it were, ‘perfect timing’ in terms of anchors dragging or other things — at some point you have to start drawing conclusions that this cannot be just an accident,” Salonius-Pasternak added. 

Several similar incidents

There have been numerous similar incidents in the Baltic Sea in recent years. In October 2023, the Balticconnector gas pipeline linking Estonia and Finland was badly damaged. 

Ten months later, China said a Hong Kong-registered vessel, the Newnew Polar Bear, had caused the damage accidentally in a storm. Finland remains skeptical of the admission, saying there were no storms in the area on the day the damage was detected.

“At least for some countries, it may be politically convenient to label them as kind of unsolved mysteries,” Salonius-Pasternak told VOA. “Because if you identify them — saying, in this case, definitely someone in the Chinese political establishment directed the captain to do this — what are you going to do then?” 

Questioned Thursday on Denmark’s tracking of the Yi Peng 3 in the Baltic, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Li Jiang denied any knowledge. 

“I do not have specific information on the Chinese vessel,” Li said. “We are willing to maintain communication with the parties concerned in accordance with international law and jointly safeguard the safety of international seabed infrastructure. At the same time, we also hope that the normal navigational rights and legitimate interests of Chinese vessels will be effectively protected.” 

Baltic needs better monitoring, says leader

Speaking on Friday, Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal said better monitoring of maritime traffic was required in the Baltic.

“What are the surveillance systems and systems acknowledging what is happening and where? Who is moving where? And, where is the fault located?” Michal asked. “Because there can be also quite natural reasons.” 

In 2022, the Nord Stream pipeline carrying gas from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea was blown up. The perpetrator is still unknown. Western nations and Russia blame each other, while others have suggested that Ukraine carried out the attack. All deny responsibility. 
…

your ad here

From digital passports to apps that announce air alerts or enable conscripts to update their information in the draft register, Ukraine is now a world leader in the drive to digitalize government services. From Kyiv, Lesia Bakalets reports on how Russia’s full-scale invasion has pushed Ukraine’s drive to digitalize.
…

your ad here

VIENNA — The United Nations atomic watchdog’s 35-nation Board of Governors passed a resolution on Thursday again ordering Iran to urgently improve cooperation with the agency and requesting a “comprehensive” report aimed at pressuring Iran into fresh nuclear talks. 

Britain, France, Germany and the United States, which proposed the resolution, dismissed as insufficient and insincere a last-minute Iranian move to cap its stock of uranium that is close to weapons-grade. Diplomats said Iran’s move was conditional on scrapping the resolution. 

Iran tends to bristle at such resolutions and has said it would respond in kind to this one. After previous criticism at the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board, it has stepped up its nuclear activities and reduced IAEA oversight. 

China, Russia and Burkina Faso voted against the text, diplomats in the meeting said. Nineteen countries voted in favor and 12 abstained. 

Standoffs

The IAEA and Iran have long been locked in standoffs on a range of issues, including Tehran’s failure to explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites, its barring last year of most of the agency’s top uranium-enrichment experts on the Iran inspection team, and its refusal to expand IAEA monitoring. 

The resolution seen by Reuters repeated wording from a November 2022 resolution that it was “essential and urgent” for Iran to explain the uranium traces and let the IAEA take samples as necessary. The resolution in June of this year did the same. 

The new text asked the IAEA to issue “a comprehensive and updated assessment on the possible presence or use of undeclared nuclear material in connection with past and present outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear program, including a full account of Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA on these issues.” 

Western powers hope that report, due by spring 2025, will pressure Iran into negotiations on fresh restrictions on its nuclear activities, albeit less far-reaching ones than in a 2015 deal with major powers that unraveled after then-President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from it in 2018. 

With Trump set to return to office in January and Iran having taken its uranium enrichment far beyond the deal’s limits, it is far from clear whether Trump would back negotiations aimed at setting new limits before those of the 2015 deal are lifted on “termination day” in October of next year. 

If no new limits are agreed before then, the report could be used to strengthen the case for so-called “snapback,” a process under the 2015 deal where the issue is sent to the U.N. Security Council and sanctions lifted under the deal can be re-imposed.  

Iranian reaction

Last week IAEA chief Rafael Grossi visited Tehran, hoping to persuade new Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who is seen as relatively moderate, to improve Iran’s cooperation with the agency.

Grossi formally reported to member states on Tuesday that “the possibility of Iran not further expanding its stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U-235 was discussed” in his meetings with Iranian officials, and that the IAEA had verified Iran had “begun implementation of preparatory measures.” 

Iran already has enough material enriched to that level — close to the roughly 90% purity that is weapons grade — for four nuclear weapons if enriched further, according to an IAEA yardstick. It has enough material enriched to lower levels for more bombs, but Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons. 

Grossi said on Wednesday he had asked Iran to cap that stock of 60% material and Iran had accepted his request.  

He said at a news conference that day that it was “a concrete step in the right direction,” suggesting that he felt a resolution could undermine that progress. 

With the resolution passed, Iran is likely to respond. 

Moments after the vote, Iranian state media cited a joint statement by the foreign ministry and the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran saying Iran’s nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami has issued orders for measures like activating various new and advanced centrifuges, machines that enrich uranium. 

“If there is a resolution, it [Iran] will either increase its activities or reduce the agency’s access,” a senior diplomat said before the vote. 
…

your ad here

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy condemned Russia’s use of a fast, powerful new missile to attack the city of Dnipro on Thursday, calling it a “nuclear adventure” and a stark escalation in the war.

The attack has ignited fears of a dangerous new phase in the war. In a nationwide address, Russian President Vladimir Putin later confirmed the use of a medium-range ballistic missile in the strike.

Zelenskyy pointed to the strike as a sign of Moscow’s broader strategy, stating, “It is obvious that Putin is using Ukraine as a testing ground for weapons that threaten the world.”

His remarks underscored the growing alarm in Kyiv over the deployment of advanced Russian missile systems against civilian targets.

In his address, Putin framed the use of the nuclear-capable Oreshnik missile as a routine test within the conflict.

“The Russian Federation tested a medium-range ballistic missile, known as Oreshnik, during its operation in Ukraine,” he said.

While he offered few technical details, analysts said the use of the missile and Putin’s acknowledgment appears intended to showcase Russia’s military capabilities to NATO and the United States.

Putin’s announcement marks the first time Russia has openly acknowledged using such a missile during the war.

In Washington, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh said the missile used was based on Russia’s RS 26 rubes intercontinental ballistic missile model.” In terms of notifications to the United States, the United States was pre notified briefly before the launch through Nuclear Risk Reduction channels,” she said.

Strategic escalation

Valeriy Chaly, Ukraine’s former ambassador to the U.S., described the attack as a “new stage” in Russia’s aggression. Speaking to VOA, he emphasized that the strike was not just a challenge to Ukraine but also to its Western allies.

“This isn’t just about Ukraine,” Chaly said. “It’s a challenge to the European security system and the United States. Moscow is signaling its readiness to escalate dramatically to influence the West.”

He said that the response to the attack “must be clear, united, and decisive — anything less risks emboldening Russia and jeopardizing global security.”

Western leaders quickly condemned the strike. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer labeled it “reckless and dangerous,” while EU foreign affairs spokesperson Peter Stano described it as a “qualitative escalation” in Russia’s tactics.

Dnipro attack

The missile targeted industrial facilities in Dnipro, injuring two people and causing significant damage. Ukrainian officials initially suggested the use of an ICBM, or intercontinental ballistic missile, citing the weapon’s speed and trajectory. Some analysts, including those in the U.S., believed it was more likely a medium- or intermediate-range ballistic missile, consistent with Putin’s confirmation.

Dnipro residents, accustomed to regular air-raid sirens and missile attacks, reported that this strike felt uniquely different.

Oleksiy Poltorazky, a local resident, recounted: “We’ve learned to recognize the sounds of different missile types. This one was different — it hit almost immediately after the siren. Many here believe it was a ballistic missile because there was no usual warning sound.”

The speed and power of the strike left many shaken.

Poltorazky, however, remained resolute. “There’s no panic, no apocalypse as everyone says. We have to live through this, raise our kids, protect our families and work. We have to fight and do everything possible for our country,” he told VOA.

George Barros, an expert on the Russia team at the Institute for the Study of War, told VOA that Ukrainians should try not to overreact to the attack.

“It seems that the Russians targeted the city with an R-26 IRBM,” Barros said, referring to a Soviet-era intermediate-range missile. “The main thing is to not panic. There’s no reason to think that Putin’s likelihood to use a nuclear weapon or a weapon of mass destruction is any higher than at other points in the war.

“This is not the first time that Russia has used nuclear-capable weapon systems against Ukraine,” he said. “Russia regularly uses Iskander nuclear-capable weapons, and this appears to be a signaling effort designed to deter further Western support for Ukraine.”

Strategic ambiguity

While Putin confirmed the missile test, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov and Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova provided limited details about the strike. Zakharova was reportedly instructed not to address the attack at all during a Thursday press conference.

The calculated reticence deepens global unease, as Moscow oscillates between overt warnings and veiled threats, said some analysts, suggesting the ambiguity is part of a broader strategy to keep Western nations uncertain about Russia’s next moves.
…

your ad here