Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said on Tuesday that any agreement with Iran must lead to the full dismantling of its nuclear program, an end to its regional activities, and a halt to missile development.
“The only deal worth making with Iran is one that: 1. Fully and permanently dismantles its nuclear program. 2. Ends all export of Iranian terrorism. 3. Fully stops ballistic missile development,” Bennett wrote on X.
He praised what he called unprecedented US leverage under President Donald Trump, saying Iran and its allies are now “temporarily weaker than ever, almost defenseless.”
“It would be a historic miss to allow Iran to regroup and threaten us—the US, Israel and the rest of the world—again,” he added.
Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said on Tuesday that any agreement with Iran must lead to the full dismantling of its nuclear program, an end to its regional activities, and a halt to missile development.
“The only deal worth making with Iran is one that: 1. Fully and permanently dismantles its nuclear program. 2. Ends all export of Iranian terrorism. 3. Fully stops ballistic missile development,” Bennett wrote on X.
He praised what he called unprecedented US leverage under President Donald Trump, saying Iran and its allies are now “temporarily weaker than ever, almost defenseless.”
“It would be a historic miss to allow Iran to regroup and threaten us—the US, Israel and the rest of the world—again,” he added.
In a scathing response to an op-ed article by former US Secretary of State John Kerry, Iran's hardline Kayhan daily dismissed his assertion that Tehran is backed into a corner due to recent developments.
Kayhan’s editorial, responding to a Wall Street Journal op-ed by John Kerry and Thomas Kaplan that suggested President Donald Trump now has an opportunity for a broader nuclear deal with Iran due to Tehran’s weakened regional position, dismissed the analysis as based on false premises and a fundamental misunderstanding of Iran’s strengths.

Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp on Tuesday praised Oman’s role in facilitating nuclear talks between the United States and Iran, following a meeting in the Netherlands with his Omani counterpart, Badr al-Busaidi.
“Good to host my colleague Badr al-Busaidi and discuss Oman’s important role in the region, including facilitating the nuclear talks between the US and Iran,” Veldkamp wrote on X.
He added that they also discussed prospects for a ceasefire in Gaza and broader regional developments.
Veldkamp thanked Oman for its assistance in consular affairs and said the Omani state visit reaffirmed long-standing bilateral ties. “The state visit of Oman to the Netherlands reaffirms the strong bond between our countries, founded on a shared maritime history and 400 years of friendship,” he wrote.

A member of Iran's parliamentary economic committee said that indirect negotiations between Iran and the United States are disrupting the business of a small number of people who oppose dialogue.
Ahmad Anaraki-Mohammadi told Rouydad24 news website that the lives of 85 million Iranians should not be affected for the sake of what he described as profiteers of sanctions.
The lawmaker argued that the ongoing indirect talks are upsetting the financial interests of a small group within Iran whose "bread is being turned to brick," a local idiom signifying their livelihoods are being destroyed. "The lives of 85 million Iranians are not supposed to be sacrificed for the sake of this limited number," he asserted.
Iran’s Javan newspaper, affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards, said Tehran could reach a limited nuclear agreement with the United States without compromising its revolutionary ideals or anti-imperialist stance.
“Maybe Iran does not want the image of a 'fighter against imperialism' that has formed in the world’s mind over the past half-century to be erased — but who says that if the agreement is limited to lifting sanctions in exchange for reducing enrichment, that image will be erased?” the editorial said.
Javan also dismissed the idea that any negotiations with the US inevitably lead to normalization or surrender, calling such views exaggerated. It said a partial agreement was plausible, even if some aspects of it remained undisclosed.






