News Desk

Shah’s party represents a reformist wave reshaping the Himalayan nation’s politics since last year’s youth-led uprising.

Nepal’s centrist Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) of rapper-turned-politician Balendra Shah has secured a majority in the direct parliamentary elections and is heading for a landslide, according to official results and election commission trends.

The 35-year-old’s RSP party was also leading in proportional representation vote, according to results declared until early Sunday, in the country’s first election since last year’s youth-led uprising which toppled the government.

Elections on Thursday chose a new 275-member House of Representatives, the lower house of parliament, with 165 seats chosen directly, and 110 by a proportional representation vote.

Shah’s RSP has already won nearly 100 of 165 directly elected seats and is leading in over a dozen other constituencies in the results published by Nepal’s Election Commission early on Sunday.

Shah, widely known simply as “Balen”, himself on Saturday defeated the veteran four-time Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli – whose Marxist-led government was ousted in the protests last year – in his own seat in a southeastern district, securing almost four times as many votes as Oli.

His victory over the 74-year-old Oli, and his rise from the capital Kathmandu’s mayor to potential prime minister, marks one of the most dramatic results in recent Nepali politics.

He highlighted health and education for poor Nepalis as a key focus of his campaign, which rode a wave of public anger towards traditional political parties. He said the vote reflected his refusal to take “the easy way out” and signalled a reckoning with the “problems and betrayals that have affected the country”.

Oil congratulated Shah in a post on X, wishing him a “smooth and successful” term.

[Translation: Balenu Babu, Congratulations to you for the victory! May your five-year tenure be smooth and successful—heartfelt best wishes!]

Neighbouring India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday said the successful and peaceful conduct of elections in Nepal was a “proud moment” in the country’s “democratic journey”.

“It is heartening to see my Nepali sisters and brothers exercise their democratic rights so vibrantly,” Modi wrote on X. “This historic milestone is a proud moment in Nepal’s democratic journey.”

Modi assured of working together with the new government. “As a close friend and neighbour, India remains steadfast in its commitment to working closely with the people of Nepal and their new Government to scale new heights of shared peace, progress and prosperity.”

‘Shake up the status quo’

Shah trained as a civil engineer before breaking through as one of Nepal’s most prominent rappers, releasing conscious music targeting corruption and inequality that later became anthems of the September protests.

His 2022 election as Kathmandu’s first independent mayor was also a major upset for the political establishment at the time. The RSP, his party, founded the same year, was built on a similar anti-establishment platform.

Its campaign before Thursday’s vote was highly organised, with a more-than-660-person social media operation and significant funding from the Nepali diaspora, particularly in the United States.

“The nation was fed up with the old corrupt leaders,” said Birendra Kumar Mehta, a member of RSP’s central committee.

The September protests, initially triggered by a government ban on social media platforms, rapidly escalated into a mass movement against corruption and economic stagnation. At least 77 people were killed.

Shah emerged as a figurehead of the protests, and his song Nepal Haseko, Nepal Smiling, accumulated more than 10 million YouTube views during the unrest. His victory reflects a growing generational divide in the country.

More than 40 percent of Nepal’s nearly 30 million people are under 35, yet the leadership of its established parties has remained in its 70s.

Nepalese journalist Pranaya Rana described Shah to Al Jazeera as embodying “the outsider spirit that many young Nepalis are looking for to shake up the status quo”.

Hello! I’m Mark Olsen. Welcome to another edition of your regular field guide to a world of Only Good Movies.

If you are anything like me, you felt pretty out of sorts this week, not sure how to process the news that we are suddenly, apparently, a nation again at war. It can make the movies seem frivolous — a glorious, privileged sandbox to stick your head in — but it is also times like these that make them seem most vital and necessary: a place to focus energy and anxiety and maybe figure things out.

I was particularly struck by something New York Times critic Wesley Morris said in an appearance on the podcast “The Big Picture.” He was ostensibly talking about the downside of the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger news (“These people are f— with our dreams here” is how he began) but he landed on why movies matter in their moment, crucial to “how we develop as a culture, how we come to understand ourselves as a people, what this country ought to or should look like 40 years from now.”

The week’s big new release is Maggie Gyllenhaal’s “The Bride!” a sort-of adaptation of 1935’s “Bride of Frankenstein” starring Jessie Buckley and Christian Bale that is also very much its own thing, purpose-built to drive some people up a tree and already sharply dividing critics.

Christian Bale and Jessie Buckley in the movie “The Bride!”

(Niko Tavernise / Warner Bros. Pictures)

In her largely positive review, Amy Nicholson calls the movie “an unhinged scream,” adding, “‘Every wacky second, you’re well aware how perilously close it is to falling apart at the seams. This spiritual sequel to ‘Frankenstein’ is a romantic tale of obsession, possession and fantasy — adjectives that also apply to its filmmaker, Maggie Gyllenhaal, who expends massive quantities of energy jolting it to life. She succeeds by the skin of her teeth.”

I interviewed Gyllenhaal about “The Bride!” — including the significance of that exclamation point in the title. There have been numerous reports about a back-and-forth between the filmmaker and execs at Warner Bros. and Gyllenhaal didn’t shy away from talking about it. She had specific praise for Pam Abdy, co-chair and co-chief executive of Warner Bros. Motion Picture Group.

“Something really alive was born, and I think the movie is better for the work that she and I did together,” Gyllenhaal told me. “I know that’s an unusual thing to say. I know that you have lots of people saying like, ‘Ah, the studio f— my movie up.’ That is not my experience. It’s really not.”

Louis Malle’s ‘…and the Pursuit of Happiness’

A scene from Louis Malle’s documentary “…and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

(Janus Films)

On Saturday, in a co-presentation of 7th House at the Philosophical Research Society and El Cine, the will be a 16mm screening of director Louis Malle’s 1986 “…and the Pursuit of Happiness,” a documentary made for television that explores the immigrant experience in America. The French-born filmmaker traveled across the U.S. interviewing recent arrivals from all walks of life.

Writing about the film in 1988, The Times’ Kevin Thomas called it “an often amusing and always insightful survey of the contemporary emigre experience. … an irresistible array of vignettes depicting cultural accommodation and assimilation in all its variety.”

I got on a video call this week with 7th House programmer Alex McDonald and El Cine founder Mariana Da Silva to talk about why this movie matters now.

The movie is streaming on the Criterion Channel right now. Why was it important to also put this movie in front of audiences right now?

Alex McDonald: I think Mariana and I are on the same page with this. I never let streaming or home video availability deter programming. Growing up, the theater was a holy place, a cathedral of congregation. I feel like these films are meant to be seen with an audience. And thankfully, I feel like our audience recognizes that as well, even if the film is out there. Particularly in our current moment, it’s a very prescient film and it’s one that will be all the more powerful within community.

Mariana Da Silva: I agree fully. One of the biggest things within our program is the communal aspects — just seeing the same people come back, that trust that develops with the audience. The best part I love about going to movie theaters is standing outside with people I maybe would never speak to and having a conversation about a film.

A scene from Louis Malle’s documentary “…and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

(Janus Films)

Do you respond to a movie like this as a sort of time capsule of how things were, or is it important to you that it is saying something about what’s happening right now?

McDonald: That’s something I’m very conscious of when I program repertory titles. When I program social, politically minded films, a lot of what I’m trying to do is to show that the issues within these things have not really changed — the ways in which things have progressed, the way in which we have regressed. Malle has such a humane view on all of these people in the film. He narrates but he doesn’t really editorialize. He just sort of observes, and in doing so, he’s making the most compelling argument for the richness of diversity and everything that these people contribute to this country, what they lose in assimilation, what they have to give up and what they bring. There’s a complexity to it. There are certainly dissenting voices in it and those resonate differently now.

It wasn’t perfect then. Obviously, there’s always been conflict, but I think there was an open-heartedness that has really shifted. And this is kind of a poignant reminder of what we need to try to get back to and recognize.

Da Silva: If we were able to have these conversations more openly, it would put us all on an even playing field. Humans are flawed. There’s been a lot of miseducation. In this moment, especially for me as somebody who is an immigrant, I feel like there’s so many people who I know who are so liberal and so aware, but then they don’t really understand the experience of the immigrant. And it’s not their fault in any capacity. They just haven’t been exposed to somebody like me before.

I think we can all come together on the things we celebrate, but we also need to be very open and come together on the things that we differ on too.

Points of interest

‘Good Night, and Good Luck’ in 35mm

George Clooney, left, and David Strathairn in the 2005 movie “Good Night, and Good Luck.”

(Melinda Sue Gordon / Warner Independent Pictures)

On Sunday afternoon at the Los Feliz Theater, as part of the American Cinematheque’s ongoing “Sunday Print Edition” series, there will be a 35mm screening of George Clooney’s “Good Night, and Good Luck,” introduced by The Times’ own Rosanna Xia.

Starring David Strathairn as pioneering television journalist Edward R. Murrow at the height of the McCarthy era, the film was nominated for six Oscars, including picture, director, actor and original screenplay.

As Kenneth Turan wrote in his original review, “‘Good Night, and Good Luck’ couldn’t be more unlikely, more unfashionable — or more compelling. Everything about it — its look, its style, even its sound — stands in stark opposition to the trends of the moment. Yet by sticking to events that are half a century old, it tells a story whose implications for today are inescapable. … The son of a TV anchorman, Clooney had the nerve to believe that a drama of ideas could be as entertaining as ‘Desperate Housewives.’ He insisted that a fight for America’s soul, a clash of values over critical intellectual issues like freedom of the press and the excesses of government, had an inherent intensity that would carry everything before it. And it does.”

‘Days and Nights in the Forest’ 4K restoration

An image from Satyajit Ray’s 1970 drama “Days and Nights in the Forest.”

(Janus Films)

Now playing at the Laemmle Royal in a new 4K restoration undertaken by the Film Foundation is Satyajit Ray’s 1970 “Days and Nights in the Forest.” In this examination of masculinity and class, four male friends drive from the bustling city of Kolkata to a rural village, mixing with the locals with volatile results.

In a special video introduction, Wes Anderson, a longtime admirer of Ray, admits he lifted a scene from “Days and Nights” for one of his own films — 2023’s “Asteroid City” — and says, “Anything by Satyajit Ray must be cherished and preserved, but ‘Days and Nights in the Forest,’ I think you will agree, is one of the special gems among his many treasures.”

‘Grease 2’ returns

Michelle Pfeiffer on the set of “Grease 2” in 1981.

(Vinnie Zuffante / Getty Images)

The Cinematic Void series at the American Cinematheque will show 1982’s pastiche musical “Grease 2” on Monday. Directed by choreographer-turned-filmmaker Patricia Birch, the film is, of course, a sequel to 1978’s megahit “Grease” but it is also very much its own thing. Largely dismissed on initial release, it has found a growing following over the years thanks in large part to its extremely engaging young cast, including an on-the-rise Michelle Pfeiffer.

In his initial review (more complementary than one might expect), Kevin Thomas wrote, “There’s so much youthful talent and vitality in ‘Grease 2’ that it’s depressing to discover it is so unblushing and relentless and paean to ignorance. … This is a pity, because Birch displays an organic sense of how to make dance evolve out of the kids’ everyday activities — converging en mass at Rydell High on the first day of school or having fun at the bowling alley. But Birch has scant opportunity beyond letting us know she cares for these ignoramuses, most of who seem likable enough beneath aggressively crude exteriors.”

Anti-fascist films at UCLA

Ingrid Bergman and Charles Boyer in the 1948 drama “Arch of Triumph.”

(Enterprise-UA / Photofest)

The ongoing series at the UCLA Film and Television Archive titled “From John Doe to Lonesome Rhodes: Anti-fascism from the Archive” hits a real stride this weekend for two nights of restored rarities. On Friday comes a restored 35mm print of 1948’s “Arch of Triumph,” directed by Lewis Milestone and starring Ingrid Bergman, Charles Boyer and Charles Laughton in a romantic drama of refugees in 1938 Paris. Also playing is Arthur Ripley’s rare 1944 emigree drama “Voice in the Wind.”

Much of the press around the film at the time of its release had to do with the challenge of bringing the racier aspects of the novel by Erich Maria Remarque (“All Quiet on the Western Front”) to the screen. As producer David Lewis told The Times’ Philip K. Scheuer, “I promise you that as Joan, Ingrid Bergman will set the town on its ear. They’ll never think of her as anything but sexy again.”

Saturday brings the world premiere of the 35mm restoration of Walter Comes’ 1947 “The Burning Cross,” in which a returning veteran is recruited into the KKK. John Reinhardt’s 1948 “Open Secret,” about antisemitism, will also play in a 35mm restoration.

The series concludes next week with a 35mm screening of Elia Kazan’s 1957 “A Face in the Crowd,” starring Andy Griffith in an examination of the dark side of populist politics and media manipulation.

Israel has claimed responsibility for an assassination attempt, which killed at least four people, at a busy Beirut hotel. The Israeli military claims it targeted members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) at the Ramada Plaza. Al Jazeera’s Heidi Pett spoke to hotel guests who experienced the blast.

Flames engulfed Kuwait’s Public Institution for Social Security high-rise headquarters after it was hit by a suspected drone amid a wave of Iranian aerial strikes on the country.

CAUGHT LIVE

Harry Styles @ Co-op Live, Manchester

★★★★☆

HARRY STYLES fought back tears during his One Night Only in Manchester gig – as he broke off to make an emotional statement about our troubled world.

He shared his feelings with fans, from the stage, in between belting out songs from his brand-new album — Kiss All The Time. Disco, Occasionally.

As war in Iran rages, to add to other troubles, Harry said: “In a world like we have today that feels so chaotic it’s easy to feel so hopeless.

“But seeing this room, where there is so much hope, I encourage you to keep being the change in the world that you want to see.

“There are so many dangerous things that feel so powerful but love and kindness are powerful — go out and spread it.

PIZZA PARTY

Olivia Attwood & Pete Wicks leave hotel after he carried pizzas up to his room

FRESH FEARS

Brooklyn’s ex asked to feature in new book on family after refusing to sign NDA

“The world could use a little extra peace right now.”

I was among the 20,000 fans who were lucky enough to get £20 ballot tickets to Manchester’s Co-op Live Arena for Harry’s first concert in three years.

The former One Direction star said: “It’s a privilege to be able to perform and connect through music.

“The only reason I get to put an album out is because of all of you. I hope that one day my album might mean something to you and get you through something hard, too.”

The stripped-back set for Harry’s show, on a circular stage amid the sea of revellers, gave a nightclub vibe.

The relaxed feel was then added to by Harry’s dressed-down style on the night, in contrast to his usual flamboyant outfits including the pinstripe suit he wore for his Brits show last weekend.

His rider for the night was also anything but fancy as fitness enthusiast and marathon runner Harry requested, er, yoghurt, nuts, coffee and water.

The gig then began with Harry on keyboard before he was joined by his live band and later the House Gospel Choir — who performed with him at the Brits.

There were nods to LCD Soundsystem, Genesis and Seventies disco in the music, as standout tracks included American Girls and Ready, Steady, Go!

Harry revealed that among the audience were his family — and friends including James Coden and Apple Music’s Zane Lowe.

The gig, streaming on Netflix from tonight at 7pm, is a warm-up for his Together, Together tour later this year — when fans will be in for a treat.

Meanwhile, in Paris…

HARRY teased fans by revealing the “very special person” behind his track Clara’s Song was in the audience.

Fans have speculated that person is really his girlfriend Zoe Kravitz.

But, er, she has been busy in Paris.

Oh, we do love a riddle.

FOOTIE WILL GET ANGRY

ANGRY GINGE has revealed he is on the football pitch every weekend – as he practises for Soccer Aid.

The I’m A Celebrity winner – real name Morgan Burtwistle – will play in the charity football match at the London Stadium in May alongside England legend Wayne Rooney.

YouTuber Ginge told me at the Brit Awards last weekend: “When I have not got anything on in terms of work, I always play on Saturdays.”

Meanwhile, he revealed that he is a big fan of his Soccer Aid teammate Tom Hiddleston’s ex-love Taylor Swift.

Bit awks, that.

BURGLARS BEST NOT TRY TO JAMA A LOCK

LOVE ISLAND host Maya Jama and her Manchester City star boyfriend Ruben Dias have beefed up security at their home, after it was burgled, by paying for live-in security.

The guards will be camped out in the garden of the couple’s £4million property in leafy Alderley Edge, Cheshire, round the clock so they can keep watch on all comings and goings at whatever time of day or night.

They will even get their own mobile toilet, so they are never off duty.

Maya, and Portuguese Ruben, were left devastated in January when raiders targeted their house just weeks after they moved into it.

The raid took place while Maya was in South Africa filming Love Island and Ruben was in Turkey watching his teammates defeat Galatasaray in the Champions League, while he nursed an injury.

Cops investigating the break-in at the couple’s superpad confirmed a number of high-value items had been taken, but they are yet to make any arrests.

Now there will be no expense spared by Maya and Ruben after they called in the 24/7 watchmen.

A source said: “They were both really shocked when the burglary took place because the house already had state-of-the-art security systems.

“But they are not the first celebrities to be targeted by so-called ‘away-day’ robbers, while not at home, and they are unlikely to be the last.

“The couple asked a security firm to come in and assess the property and the suggestion was that having live-in, round- the-clock guards would act as a great deterrent. Lots of footballers have private fitness coaches, chefs and drivers – and now are adding security guards to the list.”

But following the burglary we revealed how Premier League players fear their security arrangements are being leaked by insiders who are trusted members of their inner circle.

The source added: “It’s driving some of the players mad.

“Some think they are just being targeted by criminals but others believe they are being betrayed by someone they have let into their circle of trust.”

As Cheshire Police continue to investigate the hit on Maya and Ruben’s house on January 28, a spokesperson urged anyone with information to contact them.

The Sun has previously told how valuables burgled from footballer homes often make their way to the Dublin-based Gucci gang, which has links to the infamous Kinahan drugs cartel.

Footballers whose properties have been targeted in recent times include Everton playmaker Jack Grealish and former Arsenal ace Raheem Sterling, now at Dutch side Feyenoord.

Reality TV stars Olivia Attwood and Molly Mae Hague have also had their homes broken into.

FANS’ JIG PROBLEM WITH BRITS’ A.I. USE

THE Brits has been slammed for using AI for a sketch at the ceremony last weekend.

Organisers recreated a TikTok dancefloor meme for a fun part of the event in Manchester – but they used AI performers instead of real talent.

In the sketch, Jack Whitehall was seen dancing at a Harry Styles tribute night, surrounded by computer-generated partygoers in a copy of a viral scene from Jon Hamm’s hit Apple+ show Your Friends & Neighbors.

But many fans were quick to ask why Brit awards bosses did not hire actual dancers. One said: “Seriously Brits. Why are we using AI for such a simple task for an event with your budget?!”

Another added: “The Brit School is literally in Croydon and more than capable of filming this there using students as extras.”

A source added: “The scene was based on the Jon Hamm viral meme. It is a shame the organisers didn’t use real people for this scene. The rest of the sketch featured real actors.”

This comes after last year’s ceremony saw artists including Lola Young and Myles Smith back the Make It Fair campaign to protect musicians from having their work exploited by AI.

RITA’S A BELTER

RITA ORA looked buckled up for the action at the Australian Grand Prix in this ridiculously big belt.

It almost distracted from her very low-cut black dress as she stepped out at the Formula 1 showcase in Melbourne alongside her filmmaker husband Taila Waititi.

But maybe not quite.

Footage captured a massive fire raging at the Shehran oil depot on the outskirts of northern Tehran following an Israeli attack late Saturday night. The Israeli military claimed responsibility for striking fuel storage and related sites it alleges are affiliated with the Iranian armed forces.

As expected, Iran has repeatedly targeted prized missile defense radars across the Middle East in retaliation for the joint U.S.-Israeli air campaign that is ongoing. Iran’s attacks on high-value radars that enable the region’s missile defense capabilities appear to have succeeded on multiple occasions. The irony that lower-end long-range kamikaze drones are perhaps the biggest threat to extremely advanced radars capable of providing telemetry for intercepting targets traveling at hypersonic speeds, sometimes in space, is glaring. The losses of the radars and/or damage to their facilities should finally serve as a stark wake-up call regarding the vulnerability of these critical but largely static assets.

Based on the information at hand, it appears that Iran has been able to destroy one U.S. AN/TPY-2 radar in Jordan and damage the massive American-made AN/FPS-132 phased array radar in Qatar, prompting immediate concerns about available radar coverage to help respond to further barrages. There are strong indications that a number of other similar systems have been destroyed or damaged, as well.

For over a decade, TWZ has drawn attention to the threat of drones to America’s critical military capabilities and infrastructure. And more recently, we specifically discussed the glaring vulnerability of strategic radar systems after a Ukrainian drone attack nearly two years ago on a Russian early warning radar site, as well as after being first to report drone incursions over a U.S. missile defense site on Guam back in 2019.

For some general context to start, Iran and/or its regional proxies have hit targets in a total of 12 countries since the start of the current conflict. Iranian retaliatory attacks utilizing ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as long-range kamikaze drones, have significantly declined in recent days, but are still being carried out. Countries in the region are so far claiming very high interception rates of incoming threats, but some missiles and drones are clearly making it to their targets.

Iran has attacked a wide array of different targets, military and non-military, but there has been a clear concerted effort to go after air and missile defense radars in the region as part of the retaliatory campaign. This is to be expected given that the loss of key radars, even temporarily, risks degrading further efforts to intercept Iranian missiles and drones, hence these weapons can succeed at a higher rate. Taking out missile defense radars at very high-value sites can leave those areas far more vulnerable to follow-on attacks, as well. Striking these radars also reduces their user’s general situational awareness in the region, and can even have strategic implications beyond the region, too.

It’s also worth noting that these radars are extremely expensive and take years to replace.

Iran’s attacks on radars so far

This past week, CNN obtained imagery from Planet Labs showing an AN/TPY-2 radar damaged, or even possibly destroyed, following an Iranian attack on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan. Muwaffaq Salti has long been a major regional hub for U.S. operations, and is being very actively utilized in the current conflict. It has the greatest concentration of U.S. tactical aircraft in the region, and thus is an extremely important target, where even one ballistic missile landing on an apron could destroy multiple prized fighter aircraft and take the lives of U.S. service members.

NEW: The radar for a THAAD system was struck and apparently destroyed in Jordan while two other THAAD radar systems may have been hit in the UAE, satellite images show – w/ @ThomasBordeaux7 https://t.co/qiuWVQgyda

— Gianluca Mezzofiore (@GianlucaMezzo) March 5, 2026

The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that the U.S. military was rushing to replace the AN/TPY-2 at Muwaffaq Salti, lending credence to the assessment that damage from the Iranian attack was at least substantial. There is a picture, seen below, circulating on social media that is said to show the AN/TPY-2 at Muwaffaq Salti having been clearly knocked out, but it remains unverified and, in an age of increasingly impressive AI fakes, should be treated as such.

Photos have now confirmed the destruction of a AN/TPY-2 Forward Based X-band Transportable Radar operated by the U.S. Army, following an Iranian drone attack earlier this week targeting Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan. The AN/TPY-2 is the primary ground-based air surveillance… pic.twitter.com/54QyQCxNVW

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) March 7, 2026

The active electronically-scanned array AN/TPY-2 is primarily associated with the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile system, but it also has a demonstrated ability to feed data to Patriot surface-to-air missile systems. THAAD is a key upper-tier defensive system deployed to the Middle East that is capable of swatting down Iran’s most capable missiles from the end of their midcourse stage of flight and through their terminal stage. AN/TPY-2 radars can also be deployed as standalone sensors in a larger integrated air defense network. The radar is trailer-mounted and technically road mobile, but is not designed to be used on the move or very rapidly relocated from one place to another.

CNN has reported that additional Planet Labs imagery indicates that AN/TPY-2 and their infrastructure were also at least targeted and possibly damaged in Iranian attacks on THAAD batteries belonging to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), one at Al Ruwais and another at Al Sader, and another one in Saudi Arabia near Prince Sultan Air Base. The New York Times also obtained satellite imagery showing that the site at Al Ruwais had at least come under attack. The full extent of the damage at any of these sites remains unclear.

A compound was damaged on Al Dhafra Air Base, UAE. Sat dishes were visible at the site as recently as mid-June of last year. It is unclear if they were still there when strikes occurred, but Iran struck the same area again on Monday. pic.twitter.com/nRyb7c6Kj5

— Devon Lum (@devonjlum) March 4, 2026

A satellite image taken on March 1 shows smoke rising from a radar site near the Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, where dozens of American planes are stationed.

At the site, a tent previously used to shelter a radar system for a nearby THAAD battery was badly charred and… pic.twitter.com/rSbEdtOvwf

— Gianluca Mezzofiore (@GianlucaMezzo) March 6, 2026

Satellite imagery from Planet Labs, obtained by the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, has also confirmed that the very large, fully static AN/FPS-132 radar in Qatar was damaged in an Iranian attack on the first day of the conflict. At least one of the radar’s three arrays was hit, and there are also signs of a possible fire.

Confirmed the AN/FPS-132 phased array radar in Qatar was damaged by Iran, thanks to an incredible image from our friends @planet

Debris from the damaged face has fallen on the roof of the main building and there is water runoff from the firefighting effort pic.twitter.com/AxzteEug7P

— Sam Lair (@sam_lair) March 3, 2026

There are multiple versions of the giant AN/FPS-132, all of which are fixed-site solid-state phased array radar systems primarily to provide early warning of incoming ballistic missile strikes. As noted, the one in Qatar has three faces, offering 360-degree coverage, but there are also variants with only two faces. The AN/FPS-132 is part of a larger group of broadly related strategic early warning types that are also in U.S. military service at multiple sites in the United States, as well as in Greenland. The Royal Air Force (RAF) in the United Kingdom operates another one of these radars at its RAF Fylingdales base.

Since the first day of the current conflict, claims have been circulating that Iran was able to at least damage a U.S. AN/TPS-59 active electronically-scanned array ballistic missile defense radar in Manama, Bahrain. This appears to be based on the video below, showing a kamikaze drone hitting a large spherical radome at Naval Support Activity (NSA) Bahrain, a U.S. Navy facility in the country that is home to the headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

Footage of an Iranian attack drone slamming into the headquarters of the US Navy’s 5th Fleet at Naval Support Activity (NSA) Bahrain moments ago. pic.twitter.com/wHbje3eiiy

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) February 28, 2026

However, Planet Labs imagery that The New York Times subsequently obtained has been assessed to instead show damage to what are understood to be large satellite communications terminals at NSA Bahrain. Like larger radars, these terminals also often sit inside spherical radomes. There are clear signs that communications arrays like this have been a major target of Iranian retaliation strikes on bases across the Middle East, as well.

A tent surrounded by satellite dishes was destroyed at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Some of the dishes were most likely damaged as well. Al Udeid is the regional headquarters for the US Central Command, and was similarly struck by Iran last June. pic.twitter.com/TyuqZWHUL3

— Devon Lum (@devonjlum) March 4, 2026

Yesterday, Iran’s PressTV claimed that the Iranian Navy had launched a kamikaze drone attack targeting “strategic carbon-based radar installations at the Sdot Micha facility.” While TWZ cannot independently confirm whether such an attack was launched, let alone was successful, it does highlight continued Iranian targeting of key missile defense radars. Sdot Micha Air Base in Israel hosts Arrow-series anti-ballistic missile defense systems. Elta’s Green Pine, which is analogous in some very broad respects to AN/TPY-2, is the main radar associated with these anti-missile systems.

Costly losses of key capabilities

Concerns have been raised about the immediate impacts from the loss of the AN/TPY-2 and damage to the AN/FPS-132, given that Iranian retaliatory attacks have significantly slowed, but not stopped. There are claims now, said to have originated from a report from Channel 14 in Israel, that malfunctioning and/or damaged U.S. radars have caused delays in early warning alerts about incoming Iranian missiles. TWZ has been unable to find an original source for these assertions, and they remain very much unconfirmed at this time. Regardless, it is hard not to see how losses of these systems could cause at least some degradation in total coverage, even if other land based and sea-based systems (Aegis BMD) can help with filling in some coverage.

The United States, Israel, and Gulf Arab states do have other air and missile defense radars positioned in the Middle East, or that could otherwise help fill any resulting gaps. At the same time, there are only a small number of systems that are at all equivalent to the AN/TPY-2, let alone the AN/FPS-132. Only 16 AN/TPY-2s are understood to have been produced to date, in total, for all customers. The current cost of one of those radars is generally pegged at around $250 to $300 million. When the U.S. government approved the sale of the AN/FPS-132 radar, as well as various ancillary items and services, to Qatar in 2013, that entire package had an estimated value of $1.1 billion, or just over $2.1 billion today when adjusted for inflation. Any of these systems takes years to procure.

🇺🇸 PSA: Fast Facts on AN/TPY-2 (radar system used by THAAD)

16 produced to date, 13 US Army, 2 UAE, 1 KSA, 6 more pending for KSA, none on order for US Army.

8 deployed as part of US THAAD batteries, 5 Forward Based Mode (deployed/operated by US Army in Japan [2], Israel,… pic.twitter.com/bD7gHpA3ib

— Colby Badhwar 🇨🇦🇬🇧 (@ColbyBadhwar) March 7, 2026

Furthermore, the U.S. military and its allies have spent years (and billions of dollars) building a regional missile defense shield, with AN/TPY-2s and the AN/FPS-132 in Qatar being core components thereof. Though Iran and its expanding ballistic missile arsenal have been the driving factors behind those efforts, the U.S. government also sees these assets as being a key element of its global missile defense architecture. As noted, the Qatari AN/FPS-132 provides 360-degree coverage that is not limited to scanning for threats emanating from Iran. Houthi militants in Yemen to the south, long backed by Iran, have amassed a substantial arsenal of ballistic missiles, as well as cruise missiles and long-range kamikaze drones, and have used it to attack Gulf Arab states in the past. As an aside, the UAE was the first to employ THAAD in combat back in 2022, using the system to knock down an incoming Houthi ballistic missile.

More serious ramifications

Strategic air and missile architectures, in general, exist in a world now where the threats they face are not limited to very-long-range standoff capabilities possessed only by peer or near-peer adversaries.

It used to be, generally, that you had to fire a ballistic missile or high-end cruise missile in an attempt to strike one of these systems. Now, long-range one-way-attack drones, as well as increasingly capable cruise and ballistic missiles, continue to proliferate steadily, including to smaller nation-state armed forces and even non-state actors. An attack could even come from a small drone with a C4 charge launched from a fishing trawler 10 miles away from one of these critical radar installations. The threat of these kinds of near-field attacks has largely been overlooked for years, even as the low-end drone threat has exploded and ‘democratized’ precision-guided weaponry, as they did not fit the established aerial threat matrix and the countermeasures used to repel those threats.

Though we have not seen it yet in the course of the current conflict with Iran, the threat of more localized attacks by smaller weaponized drones, in particular, is very real and only set to grow. This was definitely shown by Ukraine’s Operation Spiderweb’s unprecedented covert attacks on multiple airbases across Russia last year. Israel also employed near-field drone and missile attacks to destroy Iranian air defenses in the opening phases of the 12 Day War last June. These operations were massively successful and knocked out Iran’s most critical air defenses, allowing for long-range munitions to strike their targets unimpeded. TWZ had been calling attention to this issue for years beforehand, including back in 2019 after drones were reportedly spotted over the U.S. Army THAAD site, with its AN/TPY-2 radar, on Guam.

СБУ показала унікальні кадри спецоперації «Павутина», у результаті якої уражено 41 військовий літак стратегічної авіації рф

➡️ https://t.co/OSxqEsI9CD pic.twitter.com/aGSZNEsoX3

— СБ України (@ServiceSsu) June 4, 2025

CBS News also reported this past week that quadcopter-type drones may have been surveilling the Shuaiba port in Kuwait before all-out hostilities erupted. Six U.S. service members were killed, and more were wounded, in an Iranian retaliatory attack on a U.S. logistics operations center at Shuaiba on March 1.

Iranian intelligence utilized various means to track service members after they left the base.

➡️ In anticipation of the offensive and expected retaliation to include strikes on Camp Arifjan, the Tactical Ops Center (TOC) was moved to the same facility at the port used during… https://t.co/R8VcPGIESm

— TheIntelFrog (@TheIntelFrog) March 6, 2026

Large, high-value, static and semi-static radars are fragile, to begin with. Domes and other structures can be built around them to help protect them from the elements, but they still need to allow for signals to be sent out and received. This inherently limits options for more physical hardening. Since these radars are typically fixed in place permanently or semi-permanently, their locations are also easier to determine and then target using a set of basic map coordinates. This is highlighted by how quickly news outlets have been able to locate these sites and then assess damage to them from commercially available satellite imagery.

The fragility of large radars also means that what might seem to be minor damage to the casual observer could actually be enough for a mission kill that takes the system offline, or at least degrades its functionality greatly, for a protracted period of time. Depending on the radar, it might not take a very large munition at all to cause a sufficient degree of damage. Just a small drone packing a grenade-sized explosive can punch a hole in one of these fragile arrays, putting it out of action for a very long period of time.

As TWZ wrote back in 2019 in the context of reported drone incursions over Guam:

“With that said, America’s preeminent adversaries in the entire region would make taking out the THAAD battery on Guam a top priority during a conflict or even as part of a limited demonstration of force. Why barrage it with ballistic missiles or attempt a cruise missile launch from a forward-deployed submarine or even a clandestine commando raid when you can just fly a drone loaded with explosives into it? And no, you don’t need some high-end drone system to do this as real-world events have highlighted many times over. Drug cartels are now whacking their enemies with off-the-shelf drone-borne improvised explosive devices and even U.S. allies are actually manufacturing hobby-like drones just for this purpose. Somewhat more sophisticated types can be launched from longer distances and can even home in on radar or other RF emissions sources, like THAAD’s powerful AN/TPY-2 Radar and data-links, autonomously, beyond just striking a certain point on a map.”

“Simply put, ‘shooting the archer,’ in this case an advanced anti-ballistic missile system that protects America’s most strategic base in the entire region, via a relatively cheap drone is both an absurdly obvious and terrifyingly ironic tactic—the U.S. can shoot down ballistic missiles, but the critical systems used to do so remain extremely vulnerable to the lowliest of airborne threats—cheap drones.”

The scale and scope of Iran’s retaliatory attacks so far, while clearly threatening, pale in comparison to what one would expect to see in a major high-end fight between the United States and China in the Pacific. The overall ramifications would also be more severe.

Beyond the more immediate impacts of losing this kind of strategic radar coverage, there are far larger implications. In some cases, these radars are designed to provide critical early warning and verification of incoming nuclear strikes, or other large-scale attacks by a major adversary, targeting a nation’s home soil. They are critical parts of the nuclear deterrent. As such, losing these sensors can have major downstream impacts on strategic decision-making cycles based on concerns about what suddenly is not being seen. Fewer radars also means fewer ways to double-check that a track is not a false positive in a scenario where the total available decision-making time could be seriously truncated, to begin with. These are concerns TWZ explicitly highlighted after Ukraine’s attack on the Armavir Radar Station in Russia in 2024.

A need for deeply layered defenses

It should be clear at this point that threats to strategic radar systems that Iran’s attacks in the past week have thrust into the public eye are not new. Similarly, this highlights how the United States, and others globally, remain behind the curve when it comes to establishing deeper, layered defenses to better protect these prized assets. This was already evidenced by Ukraine’s attack on the Armavir Radar Station in Russia in 2024.

A notable exception is Taiwan’s Leshan radar station, which houses an AN/FPS-115 Pave Paws phased array early warning radar that would be a top target for Chinese forces during any cross-strait conflict. It is protected by an array of defensive capabilities, including a ground-based Phalanx Close-in Weapon System (CIWS), which is more typically found on warships. Even so, Iran’s attacks on radars this past week have still notably resonated in Taiwan.

Even a layered defense posture might not be enough, especially in the face of a large volume and/or complex attack involving multiple types of missiles and/or drones. Those threats could also be coming from very different vectors at once, and fired from very disparate launch points on land, at sea, or in the air. Achieving overmatch against fixed defenses is also a glaring vulnerability. An enemy can calculate how many munitions, and what mix of munitions, are required to overwhelm known defenses at a key location. This is especially true for largely static defensive arrangements. Once critical terrestrial sensors are taken out, attacking other targets that were under the defensive umbrella they helped enable can become far easier.

New eyes in space

Perhaps the biggest takeaway here is that the combat actions by Iran this week provide heft to the arguments for migrating missile tracking capabilities outside of the atmosphere. While advanced and resilient missile tracking layers in space may not replace all their terrestrial counterparts, they would provide much-needed redundancy and augmentation of their capabilities.

The U.S. military does have space-based early warning sensors that are integrated into its existing ballistic missile defense architecture, and have been for decades. But these warn of launches, they don’t track a weapon throughout its flight cycle. For some years now, work has been underway to substantially expand on those capabilities, to include the start of the fielding of a new satellite constellation to help track ballistic missiles, as well as hypersonic boost-glide vehicles and other threats, during the mid-course portion of their flights.

The U.S. Air Force and U.S. Space Force are also very eager to move most, if not all, of the airborne target warning sensor layer into orbit, and to do the same when it comes to persistent tracking of targets on the ground and at sea. Relevant space-based capabilities are still years away from becoming a reality, at least at the required scale.

Shifting the focus to sensors in orbit is not without its own risks, either. U.S. officials regularly highlight ever-growing threats to assets in space, and are now openly talking about the need for satellites to be able to fight back, as you can read more about here. As part of its work on new space-based sensor infrastructure, the U.S. military has been investing heavily in new distributed constellations with large numbers of smaller satellites to increase resiliency to attacks.

Regardless, the Pentagon is very bullish in moving missile tracking into orbit, and doing so with more resilient constellations than with a handful of traditional satellites. Work is deeply underway in proving out this technology, which would enable the entire missile defense architecture globally. President Trump’s Golden Dome initiative will need this capability in order to accomplish its lofty goals. But accelerating the development and deployment of this kind of capability is very costly and we may see a major boost in funding for it after this war ends.

Overall, more details about the scope and scale of damage to radars and other assets from Iranian retaliatory attacks are likely to continue to emerge. What we’ve already seen points to a need for a further reassessment of the vulnerabilities of critical strategic air and missile defense radars and what is needed to adequately defend them, including moving them outside of the Earth’s atmosphere.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

QUEEN of pop Madonna is Like a Virgin all over again — in a throwback to her 1984 hit video.

The megastar, 67, wore a white bridal corset and suspenders for the shoot.

Her outfit was similar to the look she had for her Eighties song clip — as she modelled and sang for Dolce & Gabbana.

Images posted online were captioned La ­Bambola — The Doll in Italian — a nod to the Patty Pravo 1968 hit Madonna recently covered.

Last week we told how Madonna was preparing to push boundaries yet again.

The 67-year-old singer will be filming her most X-rated music video to date, as she gears up to release her new album, dubbed Confessions Part 2.

Material girl

LaLiga club write letter to pop legend Madonna asking her to return shirt

MADON-NO

Madonna ‘turned down SEVEN million pound payday for just 20 minutes work’

A 200-strong team descended on a top-secret location in the UK to start work on the adventurous video, which will accompany her lead single later this summer.

This video is the first of a new campaign, which comes off the back of her signing a massive deal with Warner Records — the label she launched her career with — last year.

And as well as ramping up the sex, Madonna is preparing to push herself to the extreme physically.

A source said: “Madonna is reclaiming her throne.”

March 7 (UPI) — Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., announced he is retiring at the end of his term and put his support behind San Diego Supervisor Jim Desmond.

Issa issued a statement Friday on social media saying he will not be seeking re-election in this year’s midterm elections.

“This decision has been on my mind for a while and I didn’t make it lightly,” Issa wrote. “First, we built the right campaign infrastructure, support has been overwhelming — including from President Trump — and our polling was unmistakable: We would win this race. But after a quarter-century in Congress — and before that, a quarter-century in business — it”s the right time for a new chapter and new challenges.”

Issa offered his “enthusiastic endorsement” to San Diego Supervisor Jim Desmond, who filed to run for Issa’s seat on Friday.

The announcement comes after Gov. Gavin Newsom‘s ballot measure to redraw state congressional districts, which passed in November, transformed Issa’s district from safely Republican to an area more friendly to Democrats.

Issa had previously been rumored to be considering a run for Congress in Texas, but he told Fox News in December that the plan would not be going forward.

“I’m thrilled to set the record straight and here’s the truth: Texas House members and residents of that state did ask if I would consider running there following Gavin Newsom’s historically corrupt gerrymander,” he said at the time. “I appreciate the opportunity, but California is my home. I told them I’m going to stay in Congress, and I don’t need to go to Texas for that.”

Anna Elsasser, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, celebrated the news of Issa’s retirement in a statement.

“After over two decades of disastrous representation, Darrell Issa is once again running for the exits — and good riddance. Issa abandoning his voters now is the clearest sign yet that Republicans know he can’t win on his record of skyrocketing prices, gutting health care, and looking out for himself and wealthy special interests above all else,” Elsasser said. “Any Republican who tries to parachute into this race with the same extreme agenda will face the same fate.”

Christian Martinez, a spokesman for the National Republican Campaign Committee, praising Issa for his “decades of dedicated service” in a statement provided to Politico.

“We are optimistic that this district will continue to be represented by a Republican who will stand for common sense and reject the radical agenda and chaos that progressive Marni von Wilpert and socialist Ammar Campa-Najjar would bring,” Martinez said.

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE report more attacks despite assurance from Iran’s president that the strikes will stop.

The tumult continues at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts as the National Symphony Orchestra’s executive director, Jean Davidson, steps down from her role to become executive director and chief executive of the Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts. Davidson will assume her new position May 4, the Wallis announced Friday.

Davidson is not new to L.A., having served as the president and CEO of the Los Angeles Master Chorale at the Music Center from 2015 to 2023. She left the Master Chorale for the NSO in Washington, D.C., where she worked for two years until President Trump began his controversial takeover of the Kennedy Center, firing its board and installing himself as chairman. Major artist defections ensued, culminating with a board vote to rename the center the Trump Kennedy Center in December and February’s surprise announcement that the center would close for two years for renovations, beginning July 4.

“I’ve learned a lot in the last three years, and I think it’s no secret that it’s been a hard year,” Davidson told The Times, adding that the politicization of the Kennedy Center was a factor in her decision-making. “I had intended to stay through the [orchestra’s] 100th anniversary in 2031, but found it more and more difficult to achieve the goals that we had set out to achieve given the external forces that are at work that are just so far beyond my control.”

It seemed like “I had reached a natural ending point,” she said.

With the imminent closure of the Kennedy Center, speculation has swirled around the NSO’s future, especially in light of the Washington National Opera’s decision in January to cut ties with the storied venue, which has been its home since 1971. The Kennedy Center’s Trump-appointed leadership, however, made it clear that it intended to support the NSO in the long term, and the orchestra’s board chair assured musicians that the orchestra and its staff would remain intact.

Davidson said the NSO is in the process of identifying venues for the next two years, and that the orchestra has been told by the Kennedy Center that its financial support is not in question.

“Many venue operators in the D.C. area have been very generously reaching out to us, asking how they can help,” she said. “Of course, we plan our seasons years in advance, and so next season was already planned. We already have conductors and soloists and all of that, and so it’s a bit of a jigsaw puzzle aligning our existing programming and obligations to those artists with venues that are appropriate for those programs.”

It will take several more weeks to come up with a cohesive plan and it will probably include several venues, “but we will have a season,” Davidson said. “And we hope that everybody will come.”

In many ways, Davidson said, the NSO is stronger than it has been in quite some time. During her tenure, Davidson helped reboot the orchestra’s international and domestic touring, which includes upcoming shows at New York’s Carnegie Hall in May and at the Hollywood Bowl in August. The orchestra also extended acclaimed music director Gianandrea Noseda’s contract through 2031.

“The orchestra is just playing at such a high level and they really have never sounded so good,” said Davidson, echoing what notable critics have also been saying. “We’re still welcoming many new players after our audition process, and I think that’s all very positive for the NSO.”

Davidson knows that leaving her role will be difficult for the orchestra, but she believes it will emerge stronger.

“I care deeply about the NSO and I am so proud of everything that we’ve accomplished together. I think the world of Gianandrea, of [principal conductor] Steven Reineke, our musicians, our staff and board — it’s a great community of people,” said Davidson.

Davidson also believes that the upcoming renovations to the Kennedy Center will ultimately result in a better experience for audiences and artists. She just wishes there had been much more advance notice.

“Usually orchestras will plan for being out of their hall years in advance, and we only have months to do that, so it is causing a bit of strain,” she said. “I think the most important thing is that our audiences and donors continue to support the NSO during this transition period.”

Davidson will now embark on her own transition as she moves from D.C. to L.A., rejoining her husband who has stayed in the area as a music professor at UC Irvine.

“This is an opportunity that’s been on my bucket list of things that I want to do in my life and it seems like the right time,” said Davidson of her new role at the Wallis in Beverly Hills.

Compared with the NSO, the Wallis is practically brand new, having opened in 2013.

Davidson is excited that there is lots of room for growth, and that the Wallis has evolved into one of the region’s most exciting multidisciplinary performing arts presenters and home base to a variety of local arts groups.

“I think anytime you’re starting a new role, there’s a lot of learning that needs to occur,” Davidson said. “And I’m not somebody that is prone to walking in with a big vision that’s going to suddenly change course. I think they’ve been doing a lot of great work and so I’m looking forward to collaborating with the team that’s there — to learn and to create a shared vision for the future.”

It’s an exciting time to be in Los Angeles, Davidson said.

“The last decade or so has seen a lot of growth in the art sector, and there are so many talented artists and organizations in L.A. that need a place to perform.”

March 7 (UPI) — Tornadoes that swept through Michigan and Oklahoma on Friday killed at least six people and injured several others, authorities said.

Sheriff Frederick Blankenship of Branch County, Mich., said the tornado that touched down in Union City, about 40 miles southeast of Kalamazoo, killed at least three people and injured 12 others, with three being hospitalized for their injuries.

Blankenship warned residents to expect power outages and interruptions to Internet and cellular networks.

Cass County Sheriff Clint Roach said a 12-year-old boy was killed and multiple other people were injured in Edwardsburg, Mich. Damage was also reported to multiple large structures, with some said to be entirely destroyed.

Jeffrey Moore, emergency manager for Okmulgee County, Okla., reported at least two people were killed by a tornado near Beggs, about 30 miles south of Tulsa.

Multiple injuries and damage to homes, buildings and trees were also reported in Three Rivers, a city in Michigan’s St. Joseph County, located about 25 miles from Union City. Videos captured in the city show debris flying through the air, and photos shared Saturday morning showed a trampoline stuck on power lines.

It was not yet clear Saturday whether a single tornado was responsible for the damage in Michigan or if there were multiple touchdowns.

Meteorologists said the Union City tornado appeared to have been caused by a nearby warm front.

United States President Donald Trump has posted on social media that he does not need the United Kingdom to deploy aircraft carriers to the Middle East, amid the ongoing war with Iran.

Saturday’s post on Truth Social follows a statement from the UK’s Ministry of Defence that one of its two flagship aircraft carriers, the HMS Prince of Wales, has been placed on “high readiness”.

“The United Kingdom, our once Great Ally, maybe the Greatest of them all, is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East,” Trump wrote.

“That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember. We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!”

The post, with its reference to the UK as a “once great ally”, signals a deepening rift between the two countries that has emerged since Trump returned to office last year.

The divide appears to have deepened over the past week, as the US and Israel continue to hammer Iran as part of a war they launched on February 28.

The conflict has sparked fears across the Middle East, as retaliatory strikes from Tehran target US allies across the region.

Already, an estimated 1,332 people have been killed in Iran, and the US has confirmed the deaths of six of its service members. More deaths have been reported in countries like Lebanon, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.

The UK government has increased its involvement in the war on Iran, widely considered illegal under international law.

The UK Defence Ministry, for instance, said on Saturday that the government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer had allowed the US to use its military bases for what it termed “limited defensive purposes”.

The bases include RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and the Diego Garcia site in the Chagos Islands, located in the Indian Ocean. Initially, there had been reports that Starmer had blocked the US use of the bases.

In the immediate aftermath of the initial US-Israeli strike, Starmer appeared to blanche at the prospect of joining the war.

He and the leaders of France and Germany issued a joint statement, underscoring that any actions they might take would be defensive in nature.

“We will take steps to defend our interests and those of our allies in the region, potentially through enabling necessary and proportionate defensive action to destroy Iran’s capability to fire missiles and drones at their source,” the joint statement said.

“We have agreed to work together with the US and allies in the region on this matter.”

But Starmer has had to push back on domestic criticism both for and against joining the war.

On Monday, he told the UK Parliament, “We are not joining the US and Israeli offensive strikes”, citing the need to protect “Britain’s national interest” and “British lives”.

The war in Iran remains largely unpopular in the UK. The polling firm Survation conducted a survey over the last week of 1,045 British adults, in which 43 percent of respondents called the war not justifiable.

When asked if they supported Starmer’s initial decision not to allow the US to use UK bases, 56 percent of respondents approved. Only 27 percent said it was the wrong choice.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside the US Embassy in London on Saturday to call for an end to the ballooning conflict.

The US president, meanwhile, has upped his criticism of Starmer over the past week, further fraying relations with the UK government.

On March 3, for instance, Trump held an Oval Office meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, in which he said repeatedly he was “not happy with the UK”.

Of Starmer, Trump said, “This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with.”

Trump has long admired Churchill, and last year installed a bust of the late UK wartime leader in the Oval Office, just as he had during his first term.

By contrast, Trump has issued a flood of criticism against Starmer, particularly for his 2024 decision to transfer control of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

The transfer came after the International Court of Justice found the UK acted unlawfully in 1965 by separating the islands from Mauritius to create a separate colony.

The deal with Mauritius allows the US and the UK to maintain a military base on Diego Garcia, part of the archipelago.

However, Trump has repeatedly slammed the transfer, writing on social media that “giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY”.

Tensions between the US and UK also rose in January after Trump told Fox News that NATO allies had “stayed a little off the front lines” during the US war in Afghanistan.

Starmer had responded that he found Trump’s comments “to be insulting and frankly appalling”.

The Trump administration has signalled it is pivoting away from its traditional European allies in favour of more politically aligned countries.

At a summit on Saturday with right-wing Latin American leaders, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared to praise the attendees while casting shade on other allies.

“At a time when we have learned that, oftentimes, an ally, when you need them, maybe may not be there for you, these are countries that have been there for us,” Rubio told the summit.

POP star Taylor Swift’s ex Joe Alwyn has been getting up close and personal with a co-star during a break while filming a new movie.

The Kent-born actor, 35, was spotted with an arm around Austrian Julia Franz Richter, also 35.

The pair were shooting supernatural thriller Seance On A Wet Afternoon — based on the 1961 novel.

They were filming on Hampstead Heath, North West London.

The movie also stars Succession TV actor Matthew Macfadyen.

Joe affectionately put an arm around Julia’s neck and she reached up to touch him.

JOE’S GOTTA GO

Inside Taylor Swift and Joe Alwyn break up and the real reason for the split

NEW LOVER?

Taylor Swift fans convinced Joe Alwyn dating Kendall Jenner after ‘telling’ clue

An onlooker said: “He and Julia seemed to be more than just colleagues.”

Joe dated Taylor for six years.

The couple split in 2023.

In the film Weisz plays a self-proclaimed psychic who convinces her husband to help kidnap the son of a wealthy family.

March 7 (UPI) — The author prefers to use the lowercase “n” to challenge the Kim family regime’s legitimacy.

Calls for an end of war declaration on the Korean peninsula return with steady rhythm. Each time they appear, they promise a step toward reconciliation.

The latest proposal came when South Korea’s Unification Ministry urged a political declaration formally ending the Korean War as part of a broader effort to restart dialogue with north Korea and move toward a peace regime.

The argument is simple: A declaration would signal political will for peace and reduce tension on the peninsula.

The desire for peace is genuine. Koreans want peace. Americans want peace. Soldiers who have stood watch along the Demilitarized Zone for seventy years want peace.

The real question is not whether peace is desirable. The real question is whether a declaration contributes to peace when the military reality remains unchanged.

Paper and rhetoric do not trump steel.

The Military Reality That Has Not Changed

The Korean War ended in July 1953 with an armistice agreement, not a peace treaty. The armistice halted the fighting but preserved the underlying conflict.

The security architecture that followed rests on deterrence. It rests on the Republic of Korea-U.S. alliance, the presence of American forces in Korea, extended deterrence and the readiness of combined forces.

Across the DMZ sits the fourth largest army in the world, as north Korea fields roughly 1.2 million troops.

More than seventy percent of those forces remain deployed between Pyongyang and the Demilitarized Zone. Their posture is offensive. Their purpose has not changed since 1950.

The Republic of Korea’s forces are organized differently. They are structured for defense. They rely on alliance integration and American reinforcement in crisis. The combined posture has deterred major conflict for seven decades.

None of that changes with a declaration.

Artillery remains within range of Seoul. Ballistic missiles remain deployed. Nuclear weapons remain part of the regime’s strategy.

Words do not move artillery tubes.

The Strategic Misreading Behind the Proposal

Supporters of an end of war declaration often argue that symbolic gestures can change political dynamics in Pyongyang.

The belief is that such a declaration would demonstrate that the alliance is abandoning what the regime calls its “hostile policy.” This signal, the argument goes, might restart negotiations and encourage denuclearization.

This logic rests on a misunderstanding of the Kim family regime.

For more than seventy years the regime has pursued the same strategic objective. It seeks to dominate the Korean peninsula under its rule. The tools have changed over time, but the objective has not.

The regime uses coercion, subversion, diplomacy, and military pressure in combination. Negotiations are not an alternative to this strategy. They are part of it.

When the regime speaks about hostile policy, it does not refer to rhetoric. It refers to the structural pillars of deterrence. The regime defines hostile policy as the ROK/U.S. alliance, the presence of U.S. forces in Korea, and the nuclear umbrella that protects South Korea and Japan.

Removing these pillars is central to the regime’s long-term strategy.

How a Declaration Can Undermine Deterrence

Advocates often describe an end of war declaration as symbolic and not legally binding. That may be correct in a narrow legal sense. In strategic terms, however, symbolism matters.

Politics follows narrative.

Once the war is declared over, critics of the alliance will ask a simple question. If the war is over, why are U.S. forces still stationed in Korea?

The argument will not remain academic. Political factions in both countries will push for reductions in American troop presence. They will question combined exercises. They will challenge extended deterrence.

The declaration would not cause these debates, but it would accelerate them. It would provide rhetorical oxygen to arguments that already exist.

From Pyongyang’s perspective this outcome would be ideal. The regime has long defined the alliance and U.S. military presence as the central obstacles to its objectives. Weakening alliance cohesion through political pressure achieves what military confrontation cannot.

The Political Warfare Dimension

An end of war declaration would not occur in a vacuum. It would unfold in a contested information environment shaped by political warfare.

north Korea, China, and Russia have repeatedly used narrative and diplomacy to shape perceptions about security on the peninsula. If negotiations over a declaration stall, the narrative battlefield will shift quickly.

Pyongyang will argue that peace is blocked by American hostility. Beijing and Moscow will echo that message in international forums. The United States will be portrayed as the obstacle to reconciliation.

Sanctions policy will become the central battleground. north Korea has already signaled that meaningful progress requires sanctions relief. Yet the United Nations Security Council resolutions remain in force precisely because of the regime’s nuclear and missile programs.

If sanctions remain in place, the regime and its partners will claim that Washington refuses to embrace peace. The propaganda line will be clear. The United States talks about diplomacy while clinging to confrontation.

The goal is not persuasion alone. The goal is alignment. By shaping public debate in South Korea and internationally, these narratives seek to weaken alliance unity and pressure policymakers.

This is political warfare conducted through diplomacy, media narratives, and strategic messaging.

Diplomacy Without Illusions

None of this means the United States or South Korea should reject diplomacy. Peace on the peninsula remains the long-term objective of the alliance.

Diplomacy, however, must be grounded in reality.

An end of war declaration can only contribute to security if it is tied to concrete military measures. Negotiations would need to address conventional force deployments near the DMZ. They would need to include ballistic missile programs and nuclear weapons. Verification would be essential.

Absent those steps, a declaration would alter language while leaving the balance of power untouched.

The alliance cannot afford that illusion.

Strategic Theater Versus Strategic Stability

Political leaders understandably seek symbolic achievements that demonstrate progress toward peace.

A declaration ending the Korean War would carry powerful historical meaning. But symbolism is not strategy.

A declaration without corresponding changes in military posture risks becoming strategic theater. It produces headlines but not stability. Worse, it may erode the deterrent structure that has preserved peace for generations.

The paradox is clear. A gesture meant to signal peace could weaken the very mechanisms that prevent war.

The Question That Matters

The central question remains unchanged.

Will the Kim family regime behave like a responsible member of the international community?

If it reduces conventional forces, dismantles nuclear weapons, and abandons its hostile posture, then an end of war declaration could become part of a genuine peace settlement.

If those conditions remain absent, the declaration becomes something else. It becomes leverage in a broader campaign aimed at weakening the alliance.

History suggests caution.

For seven decades the regime has used negotiations to gain concessions while preserving its core capabilities. It has advanced nuclear weapons even during diplomatic engagement.

Why should a symbolic declaration suddenly transform that pattern?

Conclusion

Peace on the Korean peninsula is a worthy goal. It is a goal shared by Koreans, Americans, and the broader international community.

But peace is not achieved through declarations alone.

It is secured through credible deterrence, alliance unity, and diplomacy grounded in the behavior of adversaries rather than hopes about their intentions.

The ROK/U.S. alliance has preserved stability for generations because it rests on credible military power. That credibility depends on readiness, presence, and integration. Until the military threat from the north changes, the war cannot truly be declared over.

Paper and words do not trump steel.

David Maxwell, executive director of the Korea Regional Review, is a retired U.S. Army Special Forces colonel who has spent more than 30 years in the Asia-Indo-Pacific region. He specializes in Northeast Asian security affairs and irregular, unconventional and political warfare. He is vice president of the Center for Asia Pacific Strategy and a senior fellow at the Global Peace Foundation, where he works on a free and unified Korea. After he retired, he became associate director of the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University. He is on the board of directors of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea and the OSS Society and is the editor at large for the Small Wars Journal.

Aimee Zambrano is a Venezuelan anthropologist, researcher, and consultant who has made significant contributions to the struggle against gender-based violence in the country. She is currently pursuing a master’s degree in Women’s Studies. She is the founder of the Utopix Femicide Monitor, a platform that collects data on femicides from open sources. In this interview, Zambrano sheds light on the main challenges to advance a feminist agenda in Venezuela.

How has gender-based violence evolved in Venezuela in recent years?

It is difficult to answer precisely because there are no official figures. The former Attorney General, Tarek William Saab, presented some figures, but he did not break them down; rather, he spoke in general terms about a period during his tenure. So it is very difficult to assess what changes have occurred, especially in quantitative terms. 

We undertake a partial registry based on cases that appear in the media, so these are not official figures. But it is enough to see patterns emerging. We have been monitoring since 2019 and saw an increase in femicides in 2020 due to the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which also led to an increase in all types of gender-based violence, not only in Venezuela but in most countries around the world. In 2019, when we began monitoring, we recorded 167 femicides, then in 2020 we recorded 256. In 2021, there was a decrease and we counted 239 cases. In 2022 and 2023, there were 240 and 201, respectively. In 2024, we recorded 188 femicides, and for 2025, we estimate that the figure will be around 165.

There has been a decrease in the number of perpetrated femicides. However, when we look at other forms of violence, such as attempted femicides, we are seeing an increase compared to previous years. This is a warning sign because these are attempts to murder women that leave physical, psychological, and social consequences on both the survivor and her environment. We have also seen an increase in femicides of Venezuelan women abroad year after year. We are also witnessing a large number of cases of sexual abuse, especially child sexual abuse and trafficking, both abroad and in our country. Similarly, here in Venezuela, the disappearance of women is not classified as a type of gender-based violence, but according to various investigations we have carried out, disappearance or abduction, in the specific case of women, girls, and teenagers, is directly related to gender-based violence, and many of these disappearances are associated with femicides where the bodies are hidden, or cases of gender-based violence where the aggressors end up confining the victim. At the same time, we have seen a large number of cases of vicarious violence, where the aggressor inflicts violence on children, family members, or even pets.

So, a decrease in the number of femicides does not mean that other forms of violence are not on the rise. It is also important to talk about political violence. In the context of the July 2024 presidential elections, two femicides occurred and we saw threats against many community leaders by right-wing groups, who persecuted and harassed them. The same goes for media violence, social media, and artificial intelligence. In fact, there need to be changes in the laws so that these new forms of violence can be punished.

How does the lack of official and updated figures from the Venezuelan government affect the implementation of effective public policies to combat gender-based violence?

It has a huge impact. It’s not that there are no figures, but that they are not public. In fact, several public programs such as the Mamá Rosa Plan for Gender Equality and Equity, the various homeland plans, and even the Organic Law on Women’s Right to a Life Free of Violence, mandate that the state must create an observatory for gender-based violence. 

The absence of data means that we cannot measure the efficacy of the public policies that are being enacted. Statistics could also allow organizations to develop proposals, not only legislative ones, but also from women’s groups, which must also participate in the elaboration of these policies.

It is often said that the deterioration of living conditions in Venezuela disproportionately affects women, but what does this mean in practice? Does it also impact the number of femicides?

Yes. We were affected by the rentier culture, the crisis, and economic sanctions. It has been a multifactorial phenomenon. The rentier culture did not change, public policies depended on oil revenues, and a series of US-led unilateral coercive measures were imposed on us that affected all aspects of life. In crises, it is always women’s bodies that pay the price. Currently, we have to work four or five jobs, usually informal ones, to make ends meet. For those of us with children, it is even worse, because we also have the burden of unpaid work in the home. The same is true for the care of the elderly or people with disabilities, which always falls on our shoulders. 

In Venezuela, the vast majority of heads of households are women, who are either alone or part of extended families of women living together and raising children. In addition to this, women are the ones who make up a large part of the social fabric, they are grassroots leaders. At the same time, the country is experiencing a crisis in services, electricity, water, and gas, which further increases the burden of care work. Women have to figure out how to get water for cooking, washing, and bathing their children, how to cope when there is no electricity, or how to cook without gas, especially in the interior of the country, where public services are in a more dire state. 

Does this have an impact on the number of femicides? It does. Violent, aggressive men find themselves in the midst of an economic crisis, where there is unemployment or underpaid work, they become increasingly frustrated, and where do they take out all this frustration? On women, their partners, their families, their homes. It would be interesting to see if GDP figures or periods of high inflation correlate with peaks in femicides. 

With the US attacks on January 3, we saw the kidnapping of Cilia Flores and also the rise to power of the first female president, albeit in an acting capacity, Delcy Rodríguez. How can this be interpreted from a feminist perspective?

The bombing of Venezuela was a flagrant violation of international law, but we also saw how National Assembly Deputy Cilia Flores appeared during the arraignment hearing in New York with bruises on her face and body. Her attorney requested medical attention, which indicates that during the operation she was the victim of violence by the US military. This, of course, is indicative of what foreign powers do when they bomb and invade other countries, especially in the Global South, where they do so to extract natural resources. 

Talking with friends, I have realized that many of us feel violated, as women, by everything that has happened. Now the acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, has a very difficult task: to take the reins of the state with a gun to her head. It takes a lot of courage to face this. In addition, after the bombing, Trump’s threat to her was very direct: do what I want or you will be worse off than Maduro. It is difficult to take on that role and have the responsibility of preventing more lives from being lost. 

In the current context, what are Venezuela’s main challenges in terms of the feminist agenda? You have suggested, for example, the need to create a structural feminist emergency plan. What would that look like?

The first thing is to define what that feminist agenda is, because in Venezuela there are different grassroots movements and organizations with different political stances, and polarization sometimes makes it very difficult to unify the points. Sometimes we try, but the efforts can get fragmented again due to specific political events. I would say that there is the issue of gender violence and also the decriminalization of abortion in Venezuela, as common ground that unifies many of us. We also demand a justice system that has a gender and feminist perspective because the current one is built from an androcentric, patriarchal perspective; that is, it is a justice system created by men and for men. An amnesty law is currently being implemented, so this has to be included in it. 

By a feminist emergency structural plan, we mean that the Ministry for Women and Gender Equality should not be the only institution responsible for public policies relating to women and the LGBTIQ+ population. It should rather involve the entire state. I am not saying anything new because this already appears in the Organic Law on Women’s Right to a Life Free of Violence and also in the Mamá Rosa plan, which was supposed to culminate in 2019, but almost nothing that was stipulated ended up being implemented. All ministries, all affiliated entities, all state institutions, including governors’ and mayors’ offices, must address gender issues, and a robust budget is needed for this. For example, the Ministry of Communication must run ongoing campaigns in the media and on social networks about the different forms of violence and the telephone hotlines and websites where incidents can be reported. The Ministry of Housing must focus on creating shelters for victims. The Ministry of Education must review the curriculum to include gender studies, comprehensive sexuality education, and different types of violence, as well as implement protocols for care in schools, high schools, and universities. In addition, all state officials have a duty to educate themselves on the issue.

How do you assess the retreat of the state in certain areas and the growing “NGOization” leveraged by Western funding?

It’s complex because initiatives, activities, marches, etc., require resources, and many of our organizations don’t have them. In addition, there is another factor at play here, which is the proliferation of religious groups, especially Pentecostal evangelicals, who have grown significantly in Venezuela, have a presence within the state and within political parties, and are also very wealthy, which allows them to carry out campaigns, mobilizations, etc. Feminist movements face many obstacles because most of us also have to work several jobs and take care of our homes and communities. So it is difficult to keep up with evangelical and conservative right-wing groups. 

I think we need to identify who the enemies are, who targets our rights, and then assess the contradictions and coordinate women’s and feminist movements. I make the distinction because there are women’s organizations that do not necessarily identify as feminist. But we have to grow, see what issues unite us, and begin a series of actions. I always make this call: despite our political differences, let’s try to unite around an agenda that unites us all.

How does social media influence the proliferation of violence, and gender violence in particular?

I believe that violence has always been present, but now it is exposed because some forms of violence that we used to consider normal or common have been explained or denormalized. In addition, social media and the internet allow us all to learn about different cases in different parts of the world. But, on the other hand, we have the issue of anonymity and lack of accountability, meaning that people can say outrageous things, threaten, insult, and commit violence facilitated by technology. Social media also allows virtual groups to come together to commit violence, and there are also certain influencers on Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok spreading crazy ideas. Guys like El Temach in Mexico, who speak to you from their machismo, what some call “toxic masculinity” but I call “the healthy descendant of patriarchy.” 

There is also another point here: the algorithm. For example, a teenager starts searching for content about exercise, and soon after, the algorithm will introduce them to these influencers, thus creating mass communities such as incels, which organize themselves through forums like Reddit. This also breaks down the entire social fabric of face-to-face interactions, and people end up isolated but believing they are “accompanied on social media.” All of this leads to disorders such as anxiety and depression. In addition, teenage girls and women become caught up in the aspirational idea of having a certain type of body, aesthetic violence, etc. In short, I’m not saying this from a moralistic point of view, but social networks have encouraged a lot of violence. Besides, who owns these networks? What ideology do they profess? What are they using them for? We have to investigate so we can arm ourselves and fight this battle.

ITV News’ political editor Robert Peston was branded ‘unprofessional’ by viewers who took issue with his bright red and white Nike Air Jordans.

ITV political editor Robert Peston has been slammed once again for his choice of footwear after he was seen sporting a pair of red and white Nikes in a bulletin covering the Middle East. The broadcaster was branded “unprofessional” by viewers for opting for a pair of trainers and bright red socks with his suit rather than proper shoes.

On Tuesday night’s ITV News, the 65-year-old was covering the escalating conflict involving Iran and Israel, but viewers couldn’t help but notice his eye-catching attire. Social media users were quick to comment on his outfit choice, taking to X to complain. One wrote: “The absolute state of Robert Peston on ITV. Since when did it become acceptable to wear trainers with a suit?”

READ MORE:

READ MORE: Grim moment Kemi Badenoch upstaged by rodent in live TV interview

READ MORE:

READ MORE: Kemi Badenoch uses ChatGPT as her ‘new search engine’ – but is it better than Google?

Another added: “Jesus Christ: I’ve just seen ITV News a few moments ago with Mary Nightingale with Robert Peston and he is wearing brightly coloured Nike trainers! Very unprofessional attire and a far cry from the days of true professionals like @AlStewartOBE.”

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

A third viewer jibed: “Peston must be pushing 70 but he insists on wearing trainers with a suit, seriously Robert?” Back in February, ITV News viewers were also perturbed by his outfit, with one posting: “Looking at @itvnews Robert Peston in a suit with RED socks and posh trainers.”

And in October last year, the same issue was brought up on social media. One person wrote: “The absolute state of Robert Peston on ITV. Since when did it become acceptable to wear trainers with a suit?”

Robert, who also hosts The Rest is Money podcast, discussed his penchant for wearing trainers to, saying it’s simply a matter of practicality. Speaking to Belfast’s News Letter, he explained: “Ah, the latest thing, of course, is the trainers.

“I’ve worn trainers for a couple of years just because I’m on my feet all day and running around the whole time. There was a period, long before the (former) Prime Minister got into Adidas Sambas, that I was wearing them. Now I wear Air Jordans and people have decided that’s the talking point.”

The University of Oxford graduate went on to explain that he was “pretty interested in fashion and clothes” before he had kids, when he had the money to spend on his attire. He added that he is fully aware he looks ” a bit shabby and shambolic sometimes” but went on to assert that it doesn’t mean he doesn’t care.

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

The president of the United Arab Emirates spoke for the first time on the widening war in the Middle East as Iran continues to strike Gulf countries hosting US military assets with drones and missiles.

“The UAE has thick skin and bitter flesh – we are no easy prey,” said Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in comments aired by Abu Dhabi TV on Saturday as he visited wounded patients in a hospital.

He added the UAE is in “a period of war” but would “emerge stronger”.

In a social media post, Sheikh Mohamed said the UAE, which has seen attacks affecting hubs such as airports, tourist attractions, and the US consulate in Dubai, is prepared to confront “threats” against the “security and the protection of all citizens”.

One driver was killed when debris from an intercepted projectile slammed into his vehicle, Dubai’s Media Office said, describing the victim as Asian but providing no further details.

Sheikh Mohamed’s comments were aired as the region entered a second week of war sparked by a major US-Israeli attack on Iran.

Earlier, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian offered an apology to neighbouring nations for launching strikes on their countries housing US military bases. His comments were swiftly contradicted by Iranian judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, also a member of the interim leadership council.

“Evidence from Iran’s armed forces shows that the geography of some countries in the region is openly and covertly at the disposal of the enemy,” he said. “The heavy attacks on these targets will continue.”

Pezeshkian himself rolled back on his remarks that Gulf countries would not be targeted unless attacks originated from their territories, caveating that while his country emphasised “the preservation and continuation of friendly relations,” Iran still has an “inherent right” to defend itself against US-Israeli aggression.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also clarified the leader’s comments on X, saying, “President Pezeshkian expressed openness to de-escalation within our region – provided that our neighbours’ airspace, territory, and waters are not used to attack the Iranian people.”

Iran retaliates after attack on water supplies

All the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman – have been targeted because of the presence of US assets within and around their borders.

In the Gulf, the deadly attacks have caused major disruption to flights, closure of airspace, and heavy knock-on impacts on oil-and-gas production reverberating across the world.

On Saturday, Iranian state media reported the country’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps targeted US forces at Bahrain’s Jufair airbase in retaliation for an attack on a freshwater desalination plant on Qeshm Island.

Araghchi called the US attack on the plant a “dangerous move with grave consequences”, accusing the US of committing a “blatant and desperate crime”, which affected the water supply to 30 villages.

Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, later said the attack was carried out with support from one of the airbases in a southern neighbouring country, stressing nations will not enjoy peace as long as the US has bases in the region.

Harlan Ullman, a senior adviser with the Atlantic Council, told Al Jazeera that attacks on water supplies could bring “greater chaos” to the Gulf.

“About 95 percent of all water in the Gulf comes from desalination,” he said. “If Iran wants to target desalination and water installation plants, they can bring the Gulf to a halt.”

Other attacks on Gulf

The UAE, a US ally and home to US military installations, has been the most heavily targeted nation in the Gulf during the war.

The Emirati Ministry of Defence said on Saturday it was targeted with 16 ballistic missiles and more than 120 drones.

Hours after Pezeshkian’s apology, the IRGC said their drones struck a US air combat centre at al-Dhafra airbase near Abu Dhabi, capital of the UAE.

Later, an unidentified object was intercepted near Dubai airport, the world’s busiest for international traffic, forcing it to briefly suspend operations.

Iranian attacks also hit Abu Dhabi airport, the upmarket Palm Jumeirah development, and the Burj Al Arab luxury hotel over the past week, while drone debris caused a fire at the US consulate in Dubai.

Also on Saturday, Qatar’s armed forces intercepted a missile attack, according to the Ministry of Defence. No immediate details were released about possible damage or casualties.

In Saudi Arabia, the defence ministry said a ballistic missile landed in an uninhabited area after being launched towards Prince Sultan Air Base, southeast of Riyadh, which hosts US troops.

Kuwait also reported intercepting a drone while the country’s national oil company announced a “precautionary” cut to its production of crude because of Iranian attacks and threats to the Strait of Hormuz, a key transit point for Gulf hydrocarbons.

Iran to select new supreme leader

Posting on social media on Saturday, US President Donald Trump warned his country would hit Iran “very hard” and threatened to expand strikes to include new targets.

Speaking at an event hosting Latin American leaders in Miami, Florida, Trump said on Saturday his country’s forces sank 42 Iranian navy ships in three days.

Israel launched what its military described as a new wave of strikes on Tehran and Isfahan. The military said on Saturday that more than 80 fighter jets completed a wave of strikes on Iranian army sites, missile launchers and other targets.

In a statement, the army said targets hit in Iran included missile storage sites, ballistic missile launchers and military facilities linked to Iran’s security forces.

Among the attacks, it said it struck 16 aircraft at Tehran’s Mehrabad airport, which belonged to the Quds Force branch of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard overseeing its foreign operations.

The Israeli military reported missiles were fired from ‌Iran at Israel on eight different occasions on Saturday, setting off air raid sirens in parts of the country and actioning air defences.

Iranian state media reported Saturday that the IRGC hit a Marshall Islands-flagged tanker in Hormuz.

Iran’s Assembly of Experts will be meeting in the next 24 hours to choose a new supreme leader, according to assembly member Ayatollah Mozafari.

Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, has rejected Trump’s demands to have a say in selecting Iran’s new supreme leader.

Introduction

In 1974, Muhammad Yunus began experimenting with an initiative to give small loans to impoverished rural women to foster a sense of empowerment through entrepreneurial start-ups – an initiative that was institutionalised through the famous Grameen Bank. In just a couple of years, this initiative had snowballed into the United Nations declaring 2005 the International Year of Microcredit, with Yunus winning the Nobel Peace Prize for economic development.

In an age of international globalisation and neoliberal theories, microcredit seemed to be the solution to the ills of the developing world. Economists, development theorists, and journalists began to discuss the multiple success stories from the Grameen Bank and the vast impact small loans were having on people.

But a much darker reality came to take place. Although Yunus said that credit is a human right, he failed to address the fact that debt follows. Stories like Razia’s became far too frequent.

The Feminisation of Debt: Razia’s Story

Razia had taken out an initial microcredit loan of around $50 from Grameen Bank to put food on the table and pay for her children’s education; to her, this money was a lifeline to meet her family’s immediate needs. She was offered an interest rate of 20%, which she did not initially realise due to her limited fiscal literacy, and she could not pay.

Loan sharks targeted her family with violent threats when they were unable to meet payment deadlines; she had to sell her heirloom jewellery, her belongings, and eventually her home to make the payment – and even now, she continues to face threats from the loan sharks.

Razia’s story is not uncommon and illustrates how a linear model of microcredit has led to the feminisation of debt: women took out these loans to cover basic needs and fulfil their societal roles as caretakers, only to be uniquely burdened and targeted because they were unable to meet deadlines. This led women to be prone to economic vulnerability, social shame due to the procurement of debt, and violence from debt collectors.

Questioning the Efficacy of Microfinance

In addition to Razia’s story, the reality of the Grameen Bank’s efficacy is also up for debate. More and more economists became wary of the narrative that microfinance helps start income-generating enterprises, and recognised that this led many to feed their families or afford education. Another fundamental assumption was that microfinance would empower the poor, especially women, through microenterprises, given their financial bargaining power within the community. The neoliberal social policies used to model microenterprises for poor rural women to sell their labour or to ‘sub-contract’ their services were broadly not adopted, and forced women into disempowering roles in the informal sector.

Dr. Lamia Karim conducted research on the particular claims on gender empowerment by microcredit programmes and ended up creating a ‘local economy of shame’; repayment of these loans was tied to a woman’s standing and honour within the community, and these norms created environments of disempowerment, subjugation, and stress to repay the loans.

Theoretical Frameworks: From WID to GAD

Yunus’s microcredit initiative followed the theoretical prescriptions of Women in Development (WID), which sought to address gender-based economic disparities and integrate women into existing economic systems. The Grameen Bank was able to meet these goals; however, the linear model of empowerment used and the integration of women within the neoliberal economic market failed to meet the overall goals of empowerment.

As organisations, advocates, and economists saw the initial model struggling to meet the holistic goals of empowerment, they integrated theoretical prescriptions from Gender and Development (GAD), which sought to confront the root causes of gender inequality and to meet both the practical and strategic needs of women. This empowers women not only to meet economic goals to ensure survival, but also to develop collective action skills to confront power structures that lead to their subjugation.

Proshika: A New Model for Empowerment

Proshika was formed in 1979 under the WID model and focused on targeting rural communities, but realigned its goals with a GAD model in 2009. Their mission statement was revised to reflect the integration of collective-action training into their microcredit initiatives. As an organisation, they planned to “develop their capacity, so they can claim their due rights from the government” and “ensure life security” – a revolutionary shift within the broader conversation about microcredit.

Proshika had a model very similar to the Grameen Bank microcredit programmes; however, they added organisational spaces for women to meet and discuss community issues, embedding collective action within the programme. When a woman signed up for a loan, she was connected with other women in her community and asked to discuss pressing issues. Proshika organised a total of 42,809 groups; these various groups looked into important societal issues, such as the prevention of child marriage, the prevention of violence against women, and the abolition of dowry practices.

These trainings connected women with existing government systems and taught them how to access the judicial system, enabling them to pursue institutional avenues of change.

Building Social Capital and Political Agency

These spaces within the community allow women to build social credit, serving as places where information flows and as essential spaces for building trust and relationships. They increase social awareness, social interaction outside of one’s family unit, and increase domestic power and civic participation.

Dr Paromita Sanyal studies the role of microfinance agencies in Bangladesh, and credits NGOs such as Proshika for building both vertical and horizontal lines of social credit. Vertical social credit enables women to build essential connections within their own communities, and horizontal social credit allows them to connect with NGOs, politicians, and governing bodies. This axis of power builds political agency within communities and empowers women to challenge restrictive gender norms.

Proshika operates in 8,784 villages, 1,639 unions, 266 sub-districts, 42 districts, and 7 divisions within Bangladesh – they have organised 33,982 female groups across the nation. Through their collective action programmes, they were able to see a statistically significant decrease in child marriages, dowries, and gender-based violence within rural villages.

Towards True Empowerment

Proshika’s microfinance initiative not only enabled income-generating activities in rural villages but also empowered women to make a difference in their communities. Proshika’s success story should serve as a model for reforming existing microfinance institutions and incorporating collective action mechanisms into programmes.

Unlike the Grameen Bank, which focused solely on women’s practical needs, Proshika made an effort to address women’s and community members’ strategic needs. This led to statistically significant decreases in domestic violence and child marriages, as well as increased awareness of government systems and the justice system as a whole, with civic engagement opening accessible avenues for change.

Dr. Andrea Cornwall’s critical feminist analysis of women’s empowerment suggests that true empowerment is about changing asymmetrical power relations and requires building critical consciousness to help people recognise fundamental inequalities. Empowerment is relational and involves the interplay between personal and political to create a process, rather than focusing on an outcome.

Unlike the Grameen Bank, Proshika focused more on the various aspects of empowerment, without adopting a linear view of tangible results. This led to successful grassroots movements that brought attention to women’s structural needs and raised awareness of women’s value to community spaces.

Empowerment comes from changing power relations within the community, and Proshika met both women’s practical and strategic needs. It is essential to address the extreme poverty that women face, but also to build avenues for them to challenge the institutions they participate in.

Sue and Noel Radford, best known for starring on 22 Kids & Counting, have made it to the Canary Islands after they faced backlash for complaining that their Dubai holiday had originally been cancelled

Sue and Noel Radford have arrived in a beach resort amid backlash. The 22 Kids & Counting star, 50, and her husband managed to get to the Canary Islands, after previously complaining that their Dubai holiday had been cancelled.

Last week, war broke out in the Middle East as Israel and the USA struck Israel, which killed its leader, Ali Khamenei. Iran then retaliated by striking military bases and various places across the Middle East including Tehran, Beirut and the UAE, including missile strikes and drones in Dubai. The strikes have lead to mass flight cancellations as the Foreign Office advised against all but essential travel to the UAE.

In an update posted onto her Instagram, Sue revealed that she had managed to jet off after all, as she posted what looked like a view from her balcony in a luxury resort.

READ MORE: Sue Radford jokes husband Noel ‘will kill me’ over giant surprise she took homeREAD MORE: Sue Radford under fire as she complains about Dubai holiday being cancelled

She captioned the post: “”The sun is shining we are all checked in and looking forward to a few days in the sun loving the Canary Islands we’ve not been for years.”

Sue was due to go to Dubai but has understandably cancelled her trip given what is going on. However, she has left her fans fuming by saying she was having a “nightmare” with the travel company they used as she tries to get a refund.

Taking to Instagram, she wrote: “As you know Chris and Aimee both got us weekends away for Christmas but as we couldn’t do the dates we swapped it to Dubai we were going to be flying tonight. Anyway hands up who’s been having a nightmare with travelup1 because I think there’s going to be lots of you.

“Phone lines dead so guessing they have turned them off and no response from them to emails i have commented on their insta page but all of our comments have been deleted and there been lots from very unhappy customers.

“I know we are safe in this country but even if you wanted to rebook you can’t because they aren’t dealing with it, so anyone who’s booked with this company think twice PLEASE.”

Editing her post later on, Sue said the company had been in touch. She added: “Travelup have messaged on insta so for others in the same situation it might be worth doing the same.

“The point of this post is that we do not want to rebook I would imagine lots wouldn’t but this company switching phones off is not the way to go about it so people can’t contact them at all and deleting comments is bad.”

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

Despite her insisting it was all resolved now, angry fans took to social media to fume over her original post. One branded it “tone deaf”, writing: “This is tone deaf. People are dying. Others are hiding in hotel rooms/basements. And the rest are stranded with many fearing for their lives. Your holiday dues not matter right now.

“Your refund/swap is not the priority. You should have travel insurance and be Atol/Abta protected – you’ll get your money. For now just sit tight and be thankful you’re not one of the people I just listed above.”

Another added: “Love you guys and this family so much, watch their shows every week and you’re all so lovely…. But please can we be kind to companies who are dealing with a war. This isn’t a day to day situation. I know we all want to rebook flights, I want to get some sun !! and get on our holidays, but why don’t we let the dust settle and give people a time to breathe and take stock of what’s actually going on, especially since the situation is escalating by the day.”

“I wouldn’t normally comment but I’m not being funny but face palming and talking about a weekend away when thousands of people are stuck in the Middle East either as ex pats or holiday makers/ on cruises etc. I think the travel agents have a little bit on their plates currently with a war occurring,” a third wrote.

“I like this family… but maybe think of those who are actually stuck over there instead of hounding travel companies. They will have a ridiculous amount to deal with, not just your holiday which im sure in due course will be sorted out for you,” a fourth penned.

Like this s tory? F or more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

Israeli forces dug up graves during an airborne operation in eastern Lebanon, in search of the remains of a pilot who went missing nearly 40 years ago.

At the inaugural “Shield of the Americas” summit in South Florida, United States President Donald Trump announced the creation of what he calls the Americas Counter-Cartel Coalition: a group of a dozen politically aligned countries committed to fighting drug trafficking.

But as he signed a declaration to cement that commitment, Trump signalled that it came with the expectation that cartels would not be confronted with law enforcement action, but instead military might.

“ The only way to defeat these enemies is by unleashing the power of our military. So we have to use our military. You have to use your military,” Trump told the audience of Latin American leaders.

“You have some great police, but they threaten your police. They scare your police. You’re going to use your military.”

Saturday’s summit was the latest step in a larger foreign policy pivot under Trump.

Since taking office for a second term, Trump has distanced himself from some of the US’s traditional allies in Europe, instead forging tighter partnerships with right-wing governments around the world.

The attendance at the Shield of the Americas summit reflected that shift. Right-wing leaders, including Argentina’s Javier Milei, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele and Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa, were among the guest list.

But notably absent was top-level leadership from Mexico, the US’s biggest trading partner, and Brazil, the largest country in the region by economy and population.

Both Mexico and Brazil are led by left-wing presidents who have resisted some of Trump’s more hardline policies.

The growing rift between the US and some of its longtime partners was a feature in the brief remarks delivered by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who praised attendees for their cooperation.

“They’re more than allies. They’re friends,” Rubio said of the leaders present.

“At a time when we have learned that oftentimes an ally, when you need them, maybe may not be there for you, these are countries that have been there for us.”

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, meanwhile, reiterated his view that criminal networks and cartels pose an existential crisis for the entire Western Hemisphere, which he described as sharing the same cultural and religious roots.

“ We share a hemisphere and geography. We share cultures, Western Christian civilisation. We share these things together. We have to have the courage to defend it,” Hegseth said.

A military-first approach

Latin America is one of several areas where Trump has launched military operations since returning to office in January 2025.

His rationale for authorising deadly operations in the region has centred primarily on the illicit drug trade.

Trump has repeatedly argued that Latin American criminal networks pose an imminent threat to national security, through the trafficking of people and drugs across US borders.

Experts in international law have pointed out that drug trafficking is considered a criminal offence — and it is not accepted as justification for acts of military aggression.

But the Trump administration has nevertheless launched lethal military strikes against alleged drug traffickers in Latin America.

Since September, for instance, the Trump administration has conducted at least 44 aerial strikes on maritime vessels in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing nearly 150 people.

The victims’ identities have never been publicly confirmed, nor has evidence been publicly released to justify the deadly strikes.

Some families in Colombia and Trinidad and Tobago have stepped forward to claim the dead as their loved ones, out on a fishing expedition or travelling between islands for informal work.

In Saturday’s remarks, Trump justified the attacks by arguing that cartels and other criminal networks had grown more powerful than local militaries — and therefore necessitated a lethal response.

“Many of the cartels have developed sophisticated military operations. Highly sophisticated, in some cases. They say they’re more powerful than the military in the country,” Trump said.

“Can’t have that. These brutal criminal organisations pose an unacceptable threat to national security. And they provide a dangerous gateway for foreign adversaries in our region.”

He then compared cartels to a disease: “They’re cancer, and we don’t want it spreading.”

A ‘nasty’ operation in Venezuela

In late December and early January, Trump also initiated attacks on Venezuelan soil, again defending his actions as necessary to stop drug traffickers.

The first attack targeted a port Trump linked to the gang Tren de Aragua. The second, on January 3, was a broader offensive that culminated in the abduction and imprisonment of Venezuela’s then-leader, President Nicolas Maduro.

On Saturday, Trump reflected on that military operation, which he characterised as an unmitigated success.

Maduro is currently awaiting trial on drug-trafficking charges in New York, though a declassified intelligence report last May cast doubt on Trump’s allegations that the Venezuelan leader directed drug-trafficking operations through groups like Tren de Aragua.

“America’s armed forces also ended the reign of one of the biggest cartel kingpins of all, with Operation Absolute Resolve to bring outlaw dictator Nicolas Maduro to justice in a precision raid,” Trump told Saturday’s summit.

He then described the military operation as “nasty”, though he underscored that no US lives were lost.

The early-morning raid, however, killed at least 80 people in Venezuela, including 32 Cuban military officers, dozens of Venezuelan security forces, and several civilians.

“We went right into the heart. We took them out, and it was nasty. It was about 18 minutes of pure violence, and we took them out,” Trump said of the operation.

Trump has since held up Venezuela as a model for regime change around the world, particularly as it leads a war with Israel against Iran.

Maduro’s successor, interim President Delcy Rodriguez, has so far complied with many of Trump’s demands, including for reforms to the country’s nationalised oil and mining sectors.

Just this week, the two countries re-established diplomatic relations for the first time since 2019, under Trump’s first term as president.

In Saturday’s remarks, however, Trump reiterated that his positive relationship with Rodriguez hinged on her cooperation with his priorities.

“She’s doing a great job because she’s working with us. If she wasn’t working with us, I would not say she’s doing a great job,” he said.

“In fact, if she wasn’t working with us, I’d say she’s doing a very poor job. Unacceptable.”

‘We’ll use missiles’

Trump did, however, express consternation with other presidents in the Latin American region, accusing them of allowing cartels to run amok.

“Leaders in this region have allowed large swaths of territory, the Western Hemisphere, to come under the direct control” of the cartels, Trump said.

“Transnational gangs have taken over, and they’ve run areas of your country. We’re not going to let that happen.”

He even delivered an ominous warning to the summit’s attendees: “Some of you are in danger. I mean, you’re actually in danger. It’s hard to believe.”

Many of the leaders in attendance, including El Salvador’s Bukele, have launched their own harsh crackdowns on gangs in their countries, employing “mano dura” or “iron fist” tactics.

Those campaigns, however, have elicited concerns from human rights groups, who have noted that presidents like Bukele used emergency declarations to suspend civil liberties and imprison hundreds of people, often without a fair trial.

Still, Trump dismissed alternative approaches in Saturday’s speech. Though he did not mention Colombia by name, he was critical of efforts to negotiate for the disarmament of cartels and rebel groups, as Colombian President Gustavo Petro has sought to do.

Instead, he offered to deploy military might throughout the region.

“We’ll use missiles. If you want us to use a missile, they’re extremely accurate — pew! — right into the living room, and that’s the end of that cartel person,” Trump said.

“A lot of countries don’t want to do that. They say, ‘Oh, sure. I’d rather not have that. I’d rather not have it. I believe they could be spoken to.’ I don’t think so.”

A call to ‘eradicate’ Mexico’s cartels

One country he did single out, though, was Mexico. Trump suggested that it had fallen behind other countries in the region in its efforts to combat crime.

“We must recognise the epicentre of cartel violence is Mexico,” he said.

“The Mexican cartels are fueling and orchestrating much of the bloodshed and chaos in this hemisphere, and the United States government will do whatever’s necessary to defend our national security.”

Since the start of his second term, Trump has pressured Mexico to step up its security efforts, threatening tariffs and even the possibility of military action if it does not comply.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has responded by increasing military deployments throughout the country.

In February 2025, for instance, she announced 10,000 soldiers would be sent to the US-Mexico border. For the upcoming FIFA World Cup, her officials have said nearly 100,000 security personnel will be patrolling the streets.

Just last month, her government also launched a military operation in Jalisco to capture and kill the cartel leader Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, nicknamed “El Mencho”. She has also facilitated the transfer of cartel suspects to the US for trial.

But Trump reemphasised on Saturday his belief that Sheinbaum had not gone far enough, though he called her a “very good person” and a “beautiful woman” with a “beautiful voice”.

“I said, ‘Let me eradicate the cartels,’” Trump said, relaying one of his conversations with Sheinbaum.

“We have to eradicate them. We have to knock the hell out of them because they’re getting worse. They’re taking over their country. The cartels are running Mexico. We can’t have that. Too close to us, too close to you.”

‘Last moments of life’ in Cuba

Trump also used his podium to continue his threats against Cuba’s communist government.

Since the January 3 attack on Venezuela, Trump has increased his “maximum pressure” campaign against the Caribbean island, which has been under a full US trade embargo since the 1960s.

His administration severed the flow of oil and funds from Venezuela to Cuba, and in late January, Trump announced he would impose steep economic penalties on any country that provides the island with oil, a critical resource for the country’s electrical grid.

Already, the country has been struck with widespread blackouts, and the United Nations has warned Cuba is inching closer to humanitarian “collapse”.

But Trump framed the circumstances as progress towards the ultimate goal of regime change in Cuba.

“As we achieve a historic transformation in Venezuela, we’re also looking forward to the great change that will soon be coming to Cuba,” he told Saturday’s summit.

“Cuba’s at the end of the line. They’re very much at the end of the line. They have no money, they have no oil. They have a bad philosophy. They have a bad regime that’s been bad for a long time.”

He added that he thinks changing Cuba’s government will be “easy” and that a deal could be struck for the transition of power.

“Cuba’s in its last moments of life as it was. It’ll have a great new life, but it’s in its last moments of life the way it is,” Trump said.

But while Trump’s remarks largely focused on governments not represented at the summit, he warned that there could be consequences even for the right-wing leaders in attendance.

Trump’s “Shield of the Americas” coalition comes as he seeks to bring the whole of Latin America in line with US priorities. It’s a policy he has dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine”, a riff on the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine, which claimed the Western Hemisphere as the US’s sphere of influence.

To Trump, that means ousting rival powers like China as they seek to forge relationships and economic ties with Latin America. Trump has even mused about retaking the Panama Canal, based on his allegation that the Chinese have too much control in the area.

“As these situations in Venezuela and Cuba should make clear, under our new doctrine — and this is a doctrine — we will not allow hostile foreign influence to gain a foothold in this hemisphere,” Trump said.

He then made a pointed remark to Panama’s president, Jose Raul Mulino, who was in the audience.

“That includes the Panama Canal, which we talked about. We’re not going to allow it.”