Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1240899265-scaled

Iranian activists slam Natanz attack, call for diplomatic response

Nearly 300 Iranian artists, authors, and academics urged their government to stay on course for JCPOA reimplementation.

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

Hundreds of Iranian civility society activists have condemned the recent attack on the country’s nuclear facility, which they say was aimed at derailing talks in Vienna on reviving the Iran nuclear deal, or JCPOA.

Diplomats from Britain, China, France, Germany, Iran, and Russia are currently meeting in Vienna to reach an agreement on the necessary steps for bring the United States and Iran into compliance with the 2015 accord. A U.S. delegation is also in Vienna but not talking directly to Iranian diplomats.

In a collective statement, nearly 300 prominent Iranian academics, artists, authors, and pro-democracy activists described the recent sabotage at the country’s Natanz nuclear enrichment facility as “nuclear terrorism.”

Accusing Israel of being behind the attack, the activists say that the operation’s ultimate goal was to scuttle diplomacy between Iran and world powers on how to revive the 2015 nuclear agreement, which former President Trump unilaterally abandoned in 2018. After withdrawing from the deal, the United States reimposed stringent economic sanctions on Iran that had been lifted under the JCPOA in return for the country scaling back its nuclear program.

Many in Iran’s pro-democracy movement believe that U.S. sanctions have taken a particularly heavy toll on the country.

Both before and after the JCPOA’s finalization in July 2015, many leading Iranian dissidents, activists, and political prisoners wrote letters to former President Obama and Congress expressing their support for diplomacy and the removal of U.S. sanctions on Iran.

According to the recent civil society statement, there are strong signs that the recent attack on the Natanz facility may have been an attempt to provoke Iran into withdrawing from the talks in Vienna. The activists urged their government to exercise caution in response to the attack on the Natanz facility and to pursue the matter through the U.N. Security Council. The “most logical and powerful response” to such an attack, they insist, is progress in talks on the JCPOA’s revival. They also call on the United Nations to launch a probe in order to prevent similar attacks from taking place in the future.

Despite the support of prominent civil society groups for the lifting of sanctions and the revival of the JCPOA, proponents of hawkish policies continue to point to Iran’s human rights record and democratic deficit as justification for more sanctions on Iran.


Ali Akbar Salehi, Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (Photo: Alexandros Michailidis via shutterstock.com)
google cta
Reporting | Middle East
US missiles
Top photo credit: . DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Vince Parker, U.S. Air Force.

Trump: We have 'unlimited' weapons to fight 'forever' war

QiOSK

In a startling Truth Social post overnight on Monday, President Donald Trump defied reality and claimed that U.S. weapons were "unlimited" and the U.S. could fight "forever" with "these supplies."


keep readingShow less
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS
Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Craven Europeans give US and Israel a blank check for illegal war

Middle East

In the aftermath of the new U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, the transatlantic alliance has offered a response that confirmed what many both in the West and outside knew all along: that for London, Paris, Berlin, and Brussels, the "rules-based international order" has been reduced to a simple, brutal premise: might makes right, provided the might is Western.

The joint statement from the E3 — France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — is a master class in evasion. "We did not participate in these strikes, but are in close contact with our international partners, including the United States and Israel," they declared. The text also lists all the references and rationalizations used by Iran hawks — “nuclear program, ballistic missile program, regional destabilization and repression against its own people.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.