The United States and three European powers, Britain, France and Germany, oppose Iran’s decision to increase the purity of enriched uranium to 60%, the news agency said. Reuters said.

US Foreign School Antony Blinken said the decision to increase uranium enrichment was a “provocative” move and raised questions about the seriousness of Tehran with nuclear talks.

“We take their (Iran’s) provocative statement very seriously regarding their intention to start uranium enrichment at 60%. I must say that this step raises the question of the seriousness of the uranium level.” of Iran for the nuclear talks “- Mr. Blinken said.

American Foreign School Antony Blinken. Photo: US Department of Foreign Affairs

Britain, France and Germany – the three countries of the P5 + 1 group that signed the historic nuclear deal – made a joint statement, concerned about Iran’s raising uranium enrichment levels and earlier mass activation of the machine. Advanced centrifugation at the Natanz (Iran) factory. These three countries said that Tehran’s moves were “contrary to the constructive spirit and goodwill to discuss”.

“Iran’s announcements are particularly unfortunate because they come at a time when all parties are involved in the deal and the US has begun substantive discussions, with the aim of finding a diplomatic solution. quick to renew and reinstate agreement “- UK, France, Germany wrote in a joint statement.

Meanwhile, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Archbishop Ali Khamenei criticized that the United States was trying to impose terms favorable to Washington during the negotiations, while Europe was said to be “bowing to people. America and does not act independently “.

Khamenei reiterated Iran’s stance, demanding that the sanctions be lifted before Tehran can fulfill its commitments to the P5 + 1.

The decision to begin enriching uranium at 60% was announced by Iran on April 14, just three days after the Natanz nuclear plant was “under terrorist attack”.

Before Iran made this decision, Iran enriched uranium at 20%, which is 3.67% higher than as bound in the nuclear agreement but much lower than the 90% required to be usable. in nuclear weapons.

However, both the US and Iran confirmed that they would continue to pursue the dialogue. On April 14, the White House Press Secretary said the indirect negotiations between the US and Iran would be resumed from April 15.

.

According to the Russia Today report, after the sudden inspection of Russian forces stationed at the border with Ukraine on April 13, Russian Defense Minister Shoigu stated that the Russian army is ready for the worst scenario, that is is if tensions between Russia and the West escalate to the point of full-scale engagement.

Russian Defense Minister Shoigu. Source: Sina.

According to the report, after that inspection, Minister Shoigu told reporters that the soldiers had met the standards needed to respond to the situation. “The soldiers have shown that they are well prepared and fully competent to complete the task of ensuring the military security of the country,” said Mr. Shoigu.

He also added that this force is conducting an exercise in the border area.

Shoigu said the military deployment was “in response to the joint military operations that threaten Russia”. He also added, “Washington’s troops are moving from the North American continent to Europe across the Atlantic and they are crossing Europe into the Russian border. The main force is concentrated in the Black Sea area. and the Baltic Sea “.

According to the report, Mr. Shoigu also stated that the conflict between Russia and the West is forming a new front line in the Arctic: “To strengthen the defenses of the Russian Federation and protect its national interests in the North Pole. The North Pole, the Department of Defense is working systematically to improve the Northern Fleet’s Combat capabilities. “

Shoigu’s tough statement was made in the context of President Joe Biden and President Vladimir Putin held a telephone call on April 13, the two leaders discussed many regional and global issues, including the situation Ukraine, however, the two sides did not achieve any results on this issue.

The US side continued to emphasize America’s firm commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, expressed concern about Russia’s sudden military increase in Crimea and Ukraine’s borders, and urged Russia to de-escalate. straight.

With that in mind, NATO is planning to dispatch some 40,000 troops and 15,000 different weapons, including strategic aircraft, to gather near the Russian border. NATO also recently launched its biggest 30-year drills exercise called Defender Europe 2021 near Russia. According to Mr. Shoigu, NATO’s actions clearly carry “anti-Russian tendencies”.

In particular, NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said on April 13 that Russia does not have the right to interfere in Ukraine’s accession to NATO, whether or not Kiev can join is due to the decision of 30 NATO member countries.

Shortly thereafter, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken continued on April 14 to emphasize that Washington would stand side by side with Kiev in tensions with Russia. Blinken also announced that he would discuss Ukraine’s desire to join NATO, despite Moscow’s objections.

On the Ukraine side, Mr. Andriy Yermak, chief of the Ukraine Presidential Office, said in an interview with Time magazine: “Ukraine is against Russia not only for itself but also for Western countries”. Therefore, it is necessary to deploy the US Patriot air defense missile system on the territory of Ukraine.

“Where does the US deploy Patriot missiles? Most recently in Poland. They should be deployed here,” said Andriy Yermak.

According to the report, in December 2014, Ukraine amended its law to give up its non-alignment. In June 2016, Ukraine saw its accession to NATO as a foreign policy goal. In February 2019, the National Assembly of Ukraine approved a constitutional amendment, which clearly defines Ukraine’s policy on joining the European Union and NATO.

These moves show that the tense situation in eastern Ukraine is on the verge of turning into a large-scale conflict between Russia and the US and NATO. Experts say that the US and Russia are playing the “craters of war” game, the party who “goes into the water” first will be the loser.

According to Reuters, Mr. Biden decided to withdraw his troops from Afghanistan before 9/11/2021, exactly 20 years after the terrorist attack by Al-Qaeda sparked the prolonged war of the US and its NATO ally in the country. This southwest Asia.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin officially announced the decision to allies in the NATO bloc in Brussels during the meeting on April 14.

“After careful policy review, President Biden decided to withdraw the remaining number of troops in Afghanistan and eventually end the US war after 20 years,” said a State Department official.

US forces in Afghanistan.

Thus, this new decision shows that the previous withdrawal plan (May 1), which was signed by the administration of former President Donald Trump with the Taliban, could not be implemented. In response, a Taliban spokesman warned there would be consequences if the United States did not comply with the said deadline.

The Taliban are said to have been largely in compliance with their promise not to attack troops from the United States and other countries since the deal was signed, but stressed that things will change as the US pulls back from 9/11.

The Afghan peace process has already fallen to a standstill as peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban forces in the Qatar capital, Doha, stalled.

The US advocates to promote peace negotiations between the governments of Afghanistan and the Taliban before the last 2,500 troops of the country’s army must leave Afghanistan.

Washington wants the Afghan and Taliban governments to strike some power-sharing arrangements. Recently, the Taliban rejected the proposal of Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to hold elections this year.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said the process had pushed the nation on the brink of crisis. Any decisions regarding Afghanistan’s future need to be reached in bilateral negotiations.

Assessing the decision to withdraw all US forces from Afghanistan on September 11, experts said that this decision will put NATO in a difficult position.

When the US administration under President Trump decided to withdraw troops from Afghanistan by May 1 deadline, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg warned that Afghanistan was in danger of becoming a defeated IS base. Syria and Iraq.

Although admitting that NATO has been fighting in Afghanistan for too long, Stoltenberg said that it is not time to leave, while the withdrawal needs the coordination of the parties. American forces make up a small number of NATO troops in Afghanistan, but the alliance is heavily dependent on the United States for air transport, logistics and support.

The US withdrawal also raises questions about the possibility of the remaining countries pulling out. NATO began operating there in 2003, two years after the US-led coalition came to deal with the Taliban following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

But it is hard to say that NATO has fulfilled its original goal of “ensuring that it will never be a safe haven for international terrorists”. In the future, the continued stay of NATO will also face many difficulties, while withdrawal is undesirable by many parties, when the goal is not reached and the risk of terrorism will become even more haunted.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas has rejected the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan before ending talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban. Maas also criticized the early US unilateral withdrawal of troops from the South Asian country that could jeopardize peace negotiations.

Considering that peace negotiations are very complicated and cannot be ended as scheduled, Minister Heiko Maas stated: “If the US withdraws its forces while other NATO allies cannot take over security in in the short term, the situation will become extremely volatile. “

US President Joe Biden. Photo: AP

CNN said the U.S. fell into confrontation with China and Russia, negotiating a return to the 2015 nuclear deal adding to obstacles when Iran’s nuclear plant came under surprise attack, North Korea returned to test ballistic missiles. Meanwhile, President Biden plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan on September 11 but experts warn the Taliban could have an impact on weakening the government in U.S.-backed Kabul.

Mr. Biden’s handling of these situations will help shape the legacy of his term. The U.S. president has publicly said his goal is to defeat COVID-19, revive the economy, and shape foreign policy around the needs of American workers.

The U.S. Director of National Intelligence’s Office on April 13 released a report that named the four countries as Washington’s main security challenges in the coming years: China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.

On April 11, Iran declared the Natanz nuclear plant under “terrorist attack” after a power outage at the facility. Israeli media cited an unnamed source as reporting that the country’s Mossad intelligence agency was behind the attack. The New York Times also cited an unnamed source as “having an Israeli role” in the incident. Israel has not responded to the allegation.

The incident occurred at a time when U.S. and Iranian officials had indirect dialogue in Vienna (Austria) to establish a roadmap for “bilateral compliance” for the two sides to return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – the nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 Group countries (including the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany) in 2015. In the event that Tel Aviv is indeed behind the attack, President Biden could face new minor friction with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The attack on the Natanz nuclear plant is believed to have influenced U.S. negotiations back to the 2015 nuclear deal. Photo: AP

As for China, it is stepping up its military activities, in addition to making more impact through the “Belt and Road” initiative. The meeting between senior U.S. and Chinese representatives during a two-day conference in Alaska that closed on March 19 represented a clear message from Washington to Beijing that President Biden is not easily “bullied.” It was the first face-to-face meeting between American and Chinese officials since Mr Biden assumed the presidency. At the event, in front of a slew of world media cameras, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken bluntly said that China’s actions “threaten a rules-based order to maintain global stability.”

In March, U.S. President Biden also said that China has ambitions to “become a world leader, the richest country in the world, and the most powerful country in the world.” “This is not going to happen under my supervision,” the U.S. leader insisted.

Not only China, North Korea is another country in Northeast Asia that makes the U.S. keep an eye on it. At the 8th Workers’ Party of Korea Congress held in January, Pyongyang stressed its commitment to developing “strategic weapons” in preparation for a long-term confrontation with the U.S. South Korea’s intelligence agency said the new missile North Korea tested in March could carry a nuclear warhead.

Pyongyang has rejected a offer of dialogue from U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration and stressed that Washington should first eliminate hostile policy. According to experts, diplomacy and negotiations are the most practical way to solve the problem of the North Korean nuclear program. This does not mean the complete removal of sanctions but can be the application of a sustainable diplomatic process that includes high-level dialogue, step by step.

Russian President Vladimir Putin recently signed legislation facilitating his re-election. This development paves the way for the possibility of Mr. Putin continuing to lead Russia more time and achieve the goal of restoring the position the Kremlin lost after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Experts say President Biden’s decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan appears to be a foreign policy influenced by domestic affairs. The U.S. and the Taliban signed the agreement in February 2020. Under the agreement, the U.S. pledged to withdraw all forces from Afghanistan by mid-2021, while the Taliban offered security guarantees and conducted talks with the Kabul authorities.

The U.S. currently has 2,500 troops stationed in Afghanistan. The Taliban will have to abide by certain commitments before the U.S. withdraws. But many experts warn that if the U.S. removes troops from Afghanistan without a peace deal that comes with the Taliban, there is a risk that civil war will occur in the country.

A test with President Biden

For now, it’s not hard to see whether America’s adversies are trying to challenge the country’s leader, from Russia’s increased force on its border with Ukraine, China’s moves in Taiwan or North Korea’s missile tests to get President Biden’s attention.

President Biden. Photo: CNN

Mr Biden’s hopes of resuming the nuclear deal with Iran will be even harder if Tehran’s hardline followers are in charge of negotiations. Besides, if Israel is accused of carrying out an attack on Iran, President Biden will likely face a crisis with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in pending the situation. The ability to address these challenges will shape Mr Biden’s legacy.

China has been intensifying its rise over the past year and is now ready to assert military power in Asia, as well as its influence in many parts of the world. Meanwhile, Western tensions and divisions also have many problems related to Russia.

President Biden’s administration understands its enemies are probing a new White House. Bitter disagreements between U.S. and Chinese officials in Alaska last month sent a clear message from Washington to Beijing that President Biden would not be easily persuaded.

Since then, U.S. and Chinese carrier combat forces have increased their presence in the South China Sea. In addition, China sent 25 fighters to taiwan’s air defense zone as a message asking Washington not to interfere in its internal work.

Taiwan is considered the issue with the highest risk of sparking the US-China conflict. After Washington launched the USS John McCain into the Taiwan Strait last week, China warned the U.S. not to “play with fire.”

Along with its Western allies, President Biden’s administration has also put pressure on Russia over the Ukraine issue due to fears that current tensions in eastern Ukraine could lead to a full-on conflict in the sensitive region.

A senior U.S. defense official told CNN last week that the Pentagon is considering moving two ships to the Black Sea to show support for Ukraine, a move that could escalate tensions.

Tough stance

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who spoke directly to Chinese officials in Alaska, did not hesitate to give tough warnings to Russia and China.

“It would be a serious mistake if anyone tried to change the status quo by force,” Mr Blinken said on NBC on April 11.

In Europe, on April 13, during a NATO meeting to announce the U.S. increased military presence in Germany, Foreign Minister Blinken met with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleb, and said that if Russia continues to escalate tensions, as President Biden has made clear, the country will pay the price and suffer the consequences.”

These hardline statements are intended to counter the claim in both Russia and China that america’s weakening and downward decline is inevitable after two decades of war, financial terrorism, internal political discord and limited ability to cope with the pandemic.

U.S. Secretary of State Blinken’s remarks also need to be taken into account when compared to the foreign policy approach of former President Trump, who has not taken a stance too tough on Russia.

The Current White House’s position with both Russia and China is to cooperate when possible but confrontational relations still prevail, especially in the fierce economic competition with Beijing.

As CNN reported, President Biden’s climate envoy, former Secretary of State John Kerry, will make a brief visit to Beijing to seek common ground between the two countries ahead of the Climate Summit in Scotland in November. In a surprise move, President Biden on April 13 offered a third face-to-face meeting next month with Russian President Putin, just weeks after the U.S. leader endorsed what he called the Russian leader a “murderer.”

The move is said to resemble a “carrot” that Mr Biden gave Mr Putin in order to avoid any escalation of tensions in Ukraine or in connection with the poisoning of opposition figures Alexei Navalny.

Decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan

President Biden’s decision on Afghanistan appears to be a foreign policy given after calculations on domestic policies.

Republicans with hardline views argue that this decision by the American leader is a dangerous step. The power gap after years of civil war in Afghanistan will cause the Taliban to intensify operations and turn the country into a terrorist paradise for al Qaeda to stage attacks on New York and Washington.

“The hasty withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan is a disastrous mistake because the process takes place when the enemy has not gone away and is a sign that the U.S. is abandoning its leadership,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Not all Republicans, though, have criticized the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. Congressman Ted Cruz, who has always opposed most of Mr. Biden’s policies, is an example. Ted Cruz said he was not opposed to the deadline for withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan that Mr Biden set.

“Bringing our troops back should not be seen as a sign that the U.S. neglects caution in protecting the American people and our allies. We can still defend our interests without the need to maintain a long-term military presence here.”

If Mr. Biden is determined to implement his plan, he can achieve what former Presidents Obama and Trump have tried but failed to do, which is to end American interference in the endless wars that followed 9/11 abroad.