The United States issued fresh sanctions targeting Iran on Wednesday, the Treasury Department said, two days after President Donald Trump announced the US planned direct talks with Tehran over its nuclear program.

The US Treasury Department in a statement said it imposed sanctions on five Iran-based entities and one person based in Iran for their support of Iran‘s nuclear program with the aim of denying Tehran a nuclear weapon.

“The Iranian regime’s reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons remains a grave threat to the United States and a menace to regional stability and global security,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in the statement.

“Treasury will continue to leverage our tools and authorities to disrupt any attempt by Iran to advance its nuclear program and its broader destabilizing agenda.”

Iran‘s mission to the United Nations in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The action comes after Trump made a surprise announcement on Monday that the United States and Iran were poised to begin direct talks on Tehran’s nuclear program, but Iran‘s foreign minister said the discussions in Oman would be indirect.

In a further sign of the difficult path to any deal between the two geopolitical foes, Trump issued a stark warning that if the talks were unsuccessful, “Iran is going to be in great danger.”

The Treasury said those targeted on Wednesday supported two previously sanctioned entities that manage and oversee the country’s nuclear program, the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) and its subordinate, the Iran Centrifuge Technology Company (TESA).

Among those targeted was a company that manufactures aluminum for TESA, an AEOI subordinate responsible for a number of nuclear reactor projects and a company tasked with developing thorium-fueled reactor technologies.

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Tuesday that Iran can expect tighter sanctions if it does not come to an agreement with Trump on its nuclear program.

Efforts to settle a dispute over Iran‘s nuclear program, which it says is purely for civilian use but which Western countries see as a precursor to an atomic bomb, have ebbed and flowed for more than 20 years without resolution.

Trump withdrew from a 2015 deal between Iran and six world powers – the US, Russia, China, France, Britain, and Germany – during his first term of office in 2017 and talks since then have stalled.

Iranian officials told Reuters on Tuesday that Tehran is approaching weekend talks with the United States over its nuclear program warily, with little confidence in progress and deep suspicions over US intentions.

The post US Issues New Sanctions on Iran as Trump Seeks Talks first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

As calls for Lebanon’s Hezbollah to disarm gain momentum, a senior Hezbollah official told Reuters the Iran-backed terrorist group is ready to hold talks with the Lebanese president about its weapons if Israel withdraws from south Lebanon and stops its strikes.

The prospect of talks aimed at securing Hezbollah‘s disarmament – unimaginable when it was at the zenith of its power just two years ago – underlines dramatic shifts in the Middle East power balance since Israel pummeled the Shi’ite Islamist group in a devastating conflict triggered by the Gaza war.

US-backed President Joseph Aoun, who vowed when he took office in January to establish a state monopoly on the control of arms, intends to open talks with Hezbollah over its arsenal soon, three Lebanese political sources said.

Hezbollah emerged severely weakened from the 2024 conflict with Israel when its top leaders and thousands of its fighters were killed and much of its rocket arsenal destroyed. The blow was compounded when its ally Bashar al-Assad was toppled from power in Syria, cutting its supply lines from Iran.

The senior Hezbollah official said the group was ready to discuss its arms in the context of a national defense strategy, but this hinged on Israel pulling out its troops from five hilltops in south Lebanon.

“Hezbollah is ready to discuss the matter of its arms if Israel withdraws from the five points, and halts its aggression against Lebanese,” the senior official told Reuters.

Hezbollah‘s position on potential discussions about its arms has not been previously reported. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity due to political sensitivities.

Hezbollah‘s media office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The presidency declined to comment.

Israel, which sent ground troops into south Lebanon during the war, has largely withdrawn but decided in February not to leave the five hilltop positions. It said it intended eventually to hand them over to Lebanese troops once it was sure the security situation allowed.

RENEWED FOCUS ON HEZBOLLAH‘S ARMS

Despite a ceasefire since November, Israeli airstrikes have kept pressure on the group while Washington has demanded Hezbollah disarm and is preparing for nuclear talks with Hezbollah‘s Iranian backers.

Hezbollah has been the most powerful of the paramilitary groups Iran has backed across the region.

Reuters reported on Monday that several Iranian-backed militia groups in Iraq are prepared to disarm for the first time to avert the threat of an escalating conflict with the Trump administration in the US.

Hezbollah has long rejected calls from its critics in Lebanon to disarm, describing its weapons as vital to defending the country from Israel. Deep differences over its arsenal spilled into a short civil war in 2008.

The group’s critics say the group has unilaterally dragged Lebanon into conflicts and the presence of its large arsenal outside of government control has undermined the state.

A US-brokered ceasefire with Israel requires the Lebanese army to dismantle all unauthorized military facilities and confiscate all arms, starting in areas south of the Litani River, which flows into the Mediterranean some 20 km (12 miles) north of the Israeli border.

Two sources familiar with Hezbollah‘s thinking said it is weighing handing to the army its most potent weapons north of the Litani, including drones and anti-tank missiles.

CALL FOR A DISARMAMENT TIMETABLE

Aoun has said Hezbollah‘s weaponry must be addressed through dialogue because any attempts to disarm the group by force would prompt conflict, the sources said.

Patriarch Bechara Boutros Al-Rai, the head of Lebanon’s Maronite church, said last week it was time for all weapons to be in state hands, but this would need time and diplomacy because “Lebanon cannot bear a new war.”

Communication channels with relevant stakeholders are being opened to “begin studying the transfer of weapons” to state control, after the army and security services had extended state authority across Lebanon, a Lebanese official said, saying this was a move to implement Aoun’s policy.

The issue was also being discussed with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, an important Hezbollah ally, who plays a key role in narrowing differences, she said.

US envoy Morgan Ortagus, who visited Beirut at the weekend, repeated Washington’s position that Hezbollah and other armed groups should be disarmed as soon as possible, and the Lebanese army was expected to do the job.

“It’s clear that Hezbollah has to be disarmed and it’s clear that Israel is not going to accept terrorists shooting at them, into their country, and that’s a position we understand,” Ortagus said in an April 6 interview with Lebanon’s LBCI television.

Several Lebanese government ministers want a disarmament timetable, said Kamal Shehadi, a minister affiliated with the anti-Hezbollah Lebanese Forces party. Shehadi told Reuters disarmament should take no more than six months, citing post-civil war militia disarmament as a precedent.

A timetable – which presumably would impose deadlines on the process – is, he said, the “only way to protect our fellow citizens from the recurring attacks that are costing lives, costing the economy and causing destruction.”

He said he and other ministers hoped the full cabinet would endorse the idea and task the minister of defense with preparing the timetable. “We’re going to keep asking for it,” he said.

The most recent conflict began when Hezbollah opened fire in support of Hamas at the start of the Gaza war in October 2023.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem in a March 29 speech said his group no longer has an armed presence south of the Litani, and had stuck to the ceasefire deal while Israel breached it “every day.” Israel has accused Hezbollah of maintaining military infrastructure in the south.

Hezbollah has put the onus on the Lebanese state to get Israel to withdraw and stop its attacks. Qassem said there was still time for diplomatic solutions. But he warned that the “resistance is present and ready” and indicated it could resort “to other options” if Israel doesn’t adhere to the deal.

The post Facing Calls to Disarm, Hezbollah Ready to Discuss Weapons if Israel Withdraws, Senior Official Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Many of us may be uncomfortable with the sweeping destruction of the Ten Plagues as we recite them at the seder — particularly the final plague, the death of the firstborn, which the Torah takes pains to make clear affected every household in Egypt.

Was it right to kill every firstborn, including children, even if the goal was to win the Israelites’ freedom?

Today, we would in fact likely term such indiscriminate violence a war crime. The Israelites would have been justified in attacking Pharaoh or his taskmasters, but the Geneva Conventions would have prohibited the deliberate targeting of Egypt’s civilian population. What do we make of the fact that something which today we would roundly condemn and perhaps even punish is celebrated in our seder liturgy?

Some of us may resolve this tension by noting the difference between current and Biblical times. The Geneva Conventions were only codified over the last century, and of course didn’t apply in ancient Egypt. So we might regard the slaying of the firstborn similar to how the Torah treats slavery or animal sacrifices — normal and even expected then, but seen very differently today. Viewed in historical context, there is nothing unusual or remarkable about the Torah allowing the keeping of slaves or commanding the ritual slaughter of goats and sheep, and so we shouldn’t be surprised by the wartime killing of innocents in the Bible either. But even so, the Rabbis’ celebration of the plagues and their centrality at the seder may still be troubling.

Some may look to the custom of spilling a drop of wine as we read the plagues to symbolically lessen our joy as adequately expressing this discomfort. But is that enough, or is it like attempting to clean one’s hands of an atrocity with after-the-fact apologies? If this plague is something that requires us to be sorry and apologize for it, why does it maintain its central place at the seder?

Some may find comfort in the fact that the Torah states clearly that the plague of the firstborn was carried out by God. Should any human have done such a thing, we would rightfully question their morality. But all-knowing God could not have harmed the innocent or done any wrong.

While this may sound appealing, here are two rebuttals to consider. First, God’s omniscience may also serve to heighten responsibility. When innocent people are harmed in war, often the explanation is lack of knowledge or lack of ability to adequately safeguard civilians while pursuing military objectives. An all-knowing and all-powerful God cannot give such an excuse.

Second, what happens when a leader comes and says that they are sure what God wants and are fighting to bring about God’s kingdom on Earth? What is to prevent them from then imitating God’s tactics in the Bible? If we accept that norms and rules do not apply to God, there is little to stop those who claim to be acting in his name.

The famous commentator Rashi explains that the plague of the first born was justified because all the Egyptians supported or benefited from the Israelites’ enslavement. Because of that they all deserved to be punished.

While this sounds appealing, such logic would certainly not be accepted under humanitarian law today. Civilians, who must be protected from attacks, are defined as those who are not members of the armed forces and do not take part in hostilities. Even if someone supports a political leader who commits atrocities or benefits from war crimes committed by their country, they retain their protected civilian status.

This is crucial, because otherwise, in nearly every conflict, there would be grounds for wholesale destruction. In times of war, populations tend to rally around their leader, and every leader must have at least some popular support to maintain their position. Allowing citizens to be targeted due to their political opinions would undo the limits on death and destruction that the laws of armed combat set out to achieve.

So how do we explain the plagues at our seder? Some of us may find some combination of the above answers satisfying, or have other explanations as well. Or we may come to believe that this section of the Passover story is in fact at odds with our values and search for a proper way to articulate that at the seder. Human rights or humanitarian principles may at times conflict with the Jewish tradition, and how we reconcile this is an important question for those of us who are committed to both.

Personally, I state clearly at my seder that the killing of the firstborn was wrong and would today be considered a war crime. But that only serves to illustrate how far we’ve come in developing the expectation of wartime restraint. The dilemma of how to fight for a just cause, such as freedom from slavery, without impermissibly violating the rights of innocent people is just as relevant and difficult today as in ancient times. The seder presents a wonderful opportunity to discuss this, and we will likely find that even among friends and family who share our core values, different opinions abound.

Shlomo Levin is the author of the Human Rights Haggadah, and he writes about legal developments related to human rights issues of interest to the Jewish community. You can find him at https://hrhaggadah.com/.

The post Celebration or Condemnation? Human Rights, Passover, and the Tenth Plague first appeared on Algemeiner.com.