Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Ticker Views

Iran is under pressure from Australia at a pivotal moment

Published

on

Iran is under pressure from Australia at a pivotal moment – time is running out to strike a nuclear deal

Ali Mamouri, Deakin University

In an extraordinary announcement, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says Iran directed at least two antisemitic attacks in Australia, including the firebombing of a synagogue, in an attempt to sow discord and undermine social cohesion in the country.

Iran’s ambassador has been expelled, and Australia said it would suspend operations of its embassy in Tehran.

Australia will also list Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organisation, as have the United States and Canada.

What is the IRGC?

The IRGC is a branch of Iran’s armed forces, operating under Article 150 of the Iranian constitution. Established in the aftermath of the 1979 revolution and prior to the Iran-Iraq War (1980–88), the IRGC played a central role in defending Iran during the eight-year conflict with its neighbour.

Today, the IRGC comprises five main branches: the ground forces, aerospace force, navy, Basij (a paramilitary group) and Quds Force.

The Quds Force, which enjoys a high degree of autonomy, is tasked with coordinating Tehran’s support for allied groups across the Middle East. These include Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Popular Mobilisation Forces in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hamas in Gaza.

Western intelligence agencies have also accused the IRGC and its affiliates of involvement in covert or destabilising activities abroad.

The UK’s security minister, Dan Jarvis, said in March that British authorities had foiled 20 Iranian-linked plots since 2022, many directed through IRGC-controlled intelligence networks using local proxies in the UK.

IRGC allies, such as Hezbollah, have also been accused of undertaking terrorist attacks in the past.

One such attack was the bombing of the Argentinian Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA), a Jewish community centre, in Buenos Aires in 1994. The attack killed 85 people.

Argentina’s highest criminal court said last year the bombing was designed by Iran in retaliation for Argentina reneging on a nuclear cooperation deal. Iran has denied any involvement.

The United States and Canada have designated the IRGC as a terrorist organisation, with Australia now appearing set to follow suit. Other Western countries may soon adopt similar measures.

Impact on Iran-Australia relations

Despite Tehran’s strained ties with other Western powers, Australia had historically managed to maintain relatively stable diplomatic relations with Iran. Australia has had a diplomatic presence in Iran since 1968, while Iran has had an embassy in Canberra since 1971.

The decision to cut ties with Tehran and expel its ambassador is an unprecedented step. As Australian officials noted, this is the first time since the second world war Canberra has expelled an ambassador.

Tehran is expected to firmly reject the allegations, dismissing them as baseless and politically motivated. It is also likely to denounce Australia’s actions as hostile and harmful to bilateral relations.

Iran’s motivations for instigating antisemitic attacks of this nature in Australia remain unclear.

Tehran has not previously been accused of carrying out terrorist operations on Australian soil, though security agencies said they disrupted a plot in 2023 allegedly targeting an Iranian-Australian critic of the regime. At the time, Iran’s embassy in Canberra vehemently rejected the accusations.

Albanese said the Iranian operations were aimed at undermining social cohesion in Australia. “They put lives at risk, they terrified the community and they tore at our social fabric,” he said. “Iran and its proxies literally and figuratively lit the matches and fanned the flames.”

Iran has previously been accused of attempting to sow discord in other Western countries, most notably the United States on the eve of the 2024 presidential election.

However, it remains unclear how Iran would stand to benefit from targeting Australia’s social fabric, particularly at this moment, with a reformist government in power in Tehran that has proclaimed wanting to reduce tensions with the West over its nuclear program.

Pressure ramping up on Tehran

This is a pivotal time for Iran and its nuclear program. This week, the Iranian Foreign Ministry reiterated its readiness to engage in talks with European partners “to reach the best solution” over its controversial program. Geneva is also set to host a new round of nuclear discussions between Iran and the UK, France and Germany.

Washington and its allies are demanding Iran halt all uranium enrichment activities, while Tehran insists it has a right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes.

After five rounds of negotiations earlier this year, tensions escalated in June when the United States launched airstrikes on two Iranian nuclear facilities —operations publicly supported by Australia.

At the same time, European powers are preparing to reimpose UN-mandated sanctions on Iran that were lifted a decade ago if it doesn’t meet several conditions, including resuming negotiations with the US over its nuclear program.

In addition, there are growing signs Israel is preparing for another military confrontation with Iran.

With tensions mounting, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has sounded defiant. He rejected calls for Iran to reform its foreign policy, blaming the West instead for seeking to “create discord” within Iran.

Against this backdrop, Australia’s announcement will likely add momentum to the push for broader Western alignment against Iran, further isolating Tehran in the international arena.The Conversation

Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Ticker Views

Lunar Gateway faces delays and funding debate amid Artemis ambitions

Published

on

What’s the point of a space station around the Moon?

Berna Akcali Gur, Queen Mary University of London

The Lunar Gateway is planned space station that will orbit the Moon. It is part of the Nasa‑led Artemis programme. Artemis aims to return humans to the Moon, establishing a sustainable presence there for scientific and commercial purposes, and eventually reach Mars.

However, the modular space station now faces delays, cost concerns and potential US funding cuts. This raises a fundamental question: is an orbiting space station necessary to achieve lunar objectives, including scientific ones?

The president’s proposed 2026 budget for Nasa sought to cancel Gateway. Ultimately, push back from within the Senate led to continued funding for the lunar outpost. But debate continues among policymakers as to its value and necessity within the Artemis programme.

Cancelling Gateway would also raise deeper questions about the future of US commitment to international cooperation within Artemis. It would therefore risk eroding US influence over global partnerships that will define the future of deep space exploration.

Gateway was designed to support these ambitions by acting as a staging point for crewed and robotic missions (such as lunar rovers), as a platform for scientific research and as a testbed for technologies crucial to landing humans on Mars.

It is a multinational endeavour. Nasa is joined by four international partners, the Canadian Space Agency, the European Space Agency (Esa), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency and the United Arab Emirates’ Mohammed Bin Rashid Space Centre.

Schematic of the Lunar Gateway.
The Lunar Gateway.
Nasa

Most components contributed by these partners have already been produced and delivered to the US for integration and testing. But the project has been beset by rising costs and persistent debates over its value.

If cancelled, the US abandonment of the most multinational component of the Artemis programme, at a time when trust in such alliances is under unprecedented strain, could be far reaching.

It will be assembled module by module, with each partner contributing components and with the possibility of additional partners joining over time.

Strategic aims

Gateway reflects a broader strategic aim of Artemis, to pursue lunar exploration through partnerships with industry and other nations, helping spread the financial cost – rather than as a sole US venture. This is particularly important amid intensifying competition – primarily with China.

China and Russia are pursuing their own multinational lunar project, a surface base called the International Lunar Research Station. Gateway could act as an important counterweight, helping reinforce US leadership at the Moon.

In its quarter-century of operation, the ISS has hosted more than 290 people from 26 countries, alongside its five international partners, including Russia. More than 4,000 experiments have been conducted in this unique laboratory.

In 2030, the ISS is due to be succeeded by separate private and national space stations in low Earth orbit. As such, Lunar Gateway could repeat the strategic, stabilising role among different nations that the ISS has played for decades.

However, it is essential to examine carefully whether Gateway’s strategic value is truly matched by its operational and financial feasibility.

It could be argued that the rest of the Artemis programme is not dependant on the lunar space station, making its rationales increasingly difficult to defend.

Some critics focus on technical issues, others say the Gateway’s original purpose has faded, while others argue that lunar missions can proceed without an orbital outpost.

Sustainable exploration

Supporters counter that the Lunar Gateway offers a critical platform for testing technology in deep space, enabling sustainable lunar exploration, fostering international cooperation and laying the groundwork for a long term human presence and economy at the Moon. The debate now centres on whether there are more effective ways to achieve these goals.

Despite uncertainties, commercial and national partners remain dedicated to delivering their commitments. Esa is supplying the International Habitation Module (IHAB) alongside refuelling and communications systems. Canada is building Gateway’s robotic arm, Canadarm3, the UAE is producing an airlock module and Japan is contributing life support systems and habitation components.

Gateway’s Halo module at a facility in Arizona operated by aerospace company Northrop Grumman.
Nasa / Josh Valcarcel

US company Northrop Grumman is responsible for developing the Habitat and Logistics Outpost (Halo), and American firm Maxar is to build the power and propulsion element (PPE). A substantial portion of this hardware has already been delivered and is undergoing integration and testing.

If the Gateway project ends, the most responsible path forward to avoid discouraging future contributors to Artemis projects would be to establish a clear plan to repurpose the hardware for other missions.

Cancellation without such a strategy risks creating a vacuum that rival coalitions, could exploit. But it could also open the door to new alternatives, potentially including one led by Esa.

Esa has reaffirmed its commitment to Gateway even if the US ultimately reconsiders its own role. For emerging space nations, access to such an outpost would help develop their capabilities in exploration. That access translates directly into geopolitical influence.

Space endeavours are expensive, risky and often difficult to justify to the public. Yet sustainable exploration beyond Earth’s orbit will require a long-term, collaborative approach rather than a series of isolated missions.

If the Gateway no longer makes technical or operational sense for the US, its benefits could still be achieved through another project.

This could be located on the lunar surface, integrated into a Mars mission or could take an entirely new form. But if the US dismisses Gateway’s value as a long term outpost without ensuring that its broader benefits are preserved, it risks missing an opportunity that will shape its long term influence in international trust, leadership and the future shape of space cooperation.The Conversation

Berna Akcali Gur, Lecturer in Outer Space Law, Queen Mary University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

South Korea introduces AI job protection legislation

South Korea is proposing laws to protect jobs from AI, balancing innovation with workers’ rights amid rising automation.

Published

on

South Korea is proposing laws to protect jobs from AI, balancing innovation with workers’ rights amid rising automation.


South Korean lawmakers are taking bold steps to protect workers from the growing impact of AI on employment. The proposed legislation aims to safeguard jobs and support workers transitioning into new roles as machines increasingly enter the workforce.

Professor Karen Sutherland of Uni SC joins Ticker to break down what these changes mean for employees and industries alike. She explains how the laws are designed to balance technological innovation with workers’ rights, and why proactive measures are crucial as AI adoption accelerates.

With major companies like Hyundai Motor introducing advanced robots, labour unions have raised concerns about fair treatment and the future of human labour. Experts say South Korea’s approach is faster and more comprehensive than similar initiatives in the United States and European Union, aiming to secure livelihoods while improving the quality of life for displaced workers.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#AIJobs #SouthKorea #FutureOfWork #Automation #TechPolicy #LaborRights #WorkforceInnovation #Ticker


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

U.S. ambassador responds to NATO criticism at Munich Security Conference

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.

Published

on

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.


At the Munich Security Conference, the U.S. ambassador to NATO faced tough questions on global order as European allies explored greater defense autonomy amid rising geopolitical tensions. The discussion highlighted the challenges NATO faces in maintaining unity while responding to evolving threats.

The ambassador addressed criticisms directly, emphasizing the importance of transatlantic cooperation and NATO’s role in ensuring international security. European nations voiced concerns about independent defense capabilities and the impact of hybrid warfare from Russia on regional stability.

Oz Sultan from Sultan Interactive Group provides analysis.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#MunichSecurityConference #NATO #GlobalSecurity #DefenseAutonomy #Geopolitics #TransatlanticAlliance #HybridWarfare #USForeignPolicy


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Trending Now