NEWS

Responding to a question from The War Zone at a press conference at CENTCOM headquarters in Tampa, Florida, the admiral leading the war against Iran praised the Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS) kamikaze drone. Based on the Iranian Shahed-136, these weapons were used in combat for the first time just six days ago. They were fired against unspecified Iranian targets in the opening salvos of the Operation Epic Fury joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran and repeatedly since.

The War Zone has advocated for the procurement of this exact class of drone by the American military and today, Adm. Brad Cooper backed up that assessment.

“LUCAS, indispensable,” Cooper told us when we asked how effective they have been and how much they’ve helped preserve magazine depth, given their comparative low cost and faster and easier production.

America’s stockpile of offensive and defense munitions remains a concern as Epic Fury drags on, even though War Secretary Pete Hegseth, who also spoke at the press conference, downplayed it. More on that later in this story.

A Tomahawk cruise missile cost roughly between $2 million to $2.5 million a piece. Air launched cruise missiles currently in service cost over a million a piece, although work is being done to reduce that number considerably. There is still a tradeoff in warhead size, response time, and survivability, but cheaper weapons in greater quantities that can deliver a payload over hundreds of miles are badly needed as part of a arsenal mix that includes more advanced types.

“Costing approximately $35,000 per platform, LUCAS is a low-cost, scalable system that provides cutting-edge capabilities at a fraction of the cost of traditional long-range U.S. systems that can deliver similar effects,” Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, a CENTCOM spokesperson, told TWZ back in December. “The drone system has an extensive range and the ability to operate beyond line of sight, providing significant capability across CENTCOM’s vast operating area.”

Moreover, the LUCAS design includes features that allow for “autonomous coordination, making them suitable for swarm tactics and network-centric strikes,” a U.S. official told us in December. As we have explained in detail in the past, the swarming capabilities combined with some of the drones being equipped with Starlink terminals, means extremely advanced cooperative tactics and dynamic targeting are possible, all while keeping humans in the loop.

The video below is said to show a LUCAS drone, recovered largely intact in Iraq. Its beyond-line-of-sight satellite datalink can be seen detached and hanging by a cable.

Locals in Iraq appear to have recovered a crashed and almost entirely intact Low-Cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS), an American copy of the Iranian Shahed-136 Attack Drone, which is confirmed to have been used recently by Task Force Scorpion Strike during U.S. attacks on… pic.twitter.com/SEqO6627en

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) March 2, 2026

Cooper highlighted how the U.S. has reworked the Iranian Shahed, which have been wreaking havoc during this conflict, killing six U.S. troops and causing destruction across the Middle East.

“We captured it, pulled the guts out, sent it back to America, put a little ‘Made in America on it,’ brought it back here and we’re shooting it at the Iranians.”

In a video message earlier this week, Cooper said that the U.S. has fired “countless one-way attack drones” to great effect.

Thursday, we asked him what kinds of targets LUCAS drones have been used against and he offered a short response.

“Good ones,” he said.

We asked Cooper to respond to stories that have emerged saying the Pentagon and at least one Gulf ally are talking to Ukraine about procuring their low-cost Shahed interceptors. He deferred to Cooper.

“I’m not familiar with the particular offer, but the interceptors in general, we’ve had a number of new capabilities being fielded,” the CENTCOM commander explained. “Obviously, I’m not going to talk about it from the operational perspective of what those are, but I think you have seen over a period of time us kind of get on the other side of this cost curve on drones in general.”

“If I just walk back a couple of years, remember what you used to always hear, we’re shooting down a $50,000 drone with a $2 million missile,” he added. “These days, we’re spending a lot of time shooting down $100,000 drones with $10,000” weapons.

Before Cooper answered our questions, Hegseth repeated the Pentagon’s assertion that it has the weapons it needs to outlast Iranian missile and drone barrages.

“We’ve got no shortage of munitions,” Hegseth proclaimed. “Our stockpiles of defensive and offensive weapons allow us to sustain this campaign as long as we need to again, our munition status only increases as our advantage increases our capabilities.”

As we recently pointed out, Iran’s ability to launch missiles and drones at U.S., Israeli, and other allied targets in the Middle East has been severely degraded, curbing concerns, even if to just a small degree, about America’s magazine depth.

However, as we have often noted, one of the big concerns about Epic Fury is whether Iranian missile and drone barrages would outlast the ability of the U.S. and allies to defend against them. Despite six days of intensive attacks, Tehran still possesses thousands of missiles and drones, though a significant number of these weapons and their launchers — specifically the longer range ballistic missile types —have been destroyed or prevented from being accessed by crews.

The effort to eliminate the Iranian regime’s mobile missile launch capabilities continues. We are finding and destroying these threats with lethal precision. pic.twitter.com/AkGRYOjnOz

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 5, 2026

Though Iran has been severely pummeled by both the U.S. and Israel, it is unknown how much longer the conflict will grind on. President Donald Trump had stated that it could last four or five weeks. Now the time table is very murky, with the administration indicating it could last much longer. Regardless, the more it drags out, the more munitions the U.S. will expend, but at least it knows it can quickly build more LUCAS drones, if need be.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Iran state TV presenter has threatened women’s national team for not singing anthem at opening AFC Cup match.

The global representative organisation for professional footballers, FIFPRO, has urged governing bodies responsible for the 2026 Women’s Asian Football Confederation Cup to protect the Iran national team after they were labelled “wartime traitors” by an Iranian state ‌television presenter.

Both FIFA, world football’s governing body, and the AFC have been called upon to “undertake all necessary steps to ensure the safety of Iran’s Women’s National Team players”.

The Iran women’s national football team players did not sing their national anthem before their Asian Cup opener against South Korea in Australia earlier ⁠this week.

Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting presenter Mohammad Reza Shahbazi said in a video that the players showed a lack of patriotism and their actions amounted to the “pinnacle of dishonour” in footage circulating widely on social media.

“Let me ⁠just say one thing: traitors during wartime ⁠must be dealt with more severely,” Shahbazi said.

“Anyone who takes a step against the country under war conditions must be dealt with more severely. Like this matter of ⁠our women’s football team not singing the national anthem … these people must be dealt with more ⁠severely.”

In a statement released on the social media platform X, FIFPRO released a strong and lengthy statement outlining its concerns.

“In addition to the dangerous situation the players would face if they return to Iran following the tournament, FIFPRO Asia/Oceania is deeply concerned by reports that Iranian state television has publicly attacked the members of the team for remaining silent during the national anthem before their opening match,” the statement read.

“Footage circulating online shows Mohammad Reza Shahbazi, a state TV presenter, calling for them to face the ‘stigma of dishonour and betrayal’.

“These statements significantly heighten concerns for the players’ safety should they return to Iran after the tournament.

“FIFPRO Asia/Oceania has once again written to the AFC and FIFA, calling on them to uphold their human rights obligations under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and FIFA’s Human Rights Policy and protect the players.

“We call on the AFC and FIFA to urgently engage with the Iranian Football Association, the Australian Government and all other relevant authorities to ensure that every effort is made to protect the safety of the players.”

The Iranian players stood in silence when Iran’s anthem was played at the Gold Coast ahead of their 3-0 opening loss to South ‌Korea on Monday, though they sang and saluted before a 4-0 defeat by hosts Australia three days later.

The Reuters news agency has contacted both the Asian Football Confederation, the Iranian football federation and the team at the Asian Cup for comment.

Ahead of their game against Australia, Iran forward Sara Didar fought ‌back tears and spoke about the war, while coach Marziyeh Jafari said her players were doing their best to focus on the ‌tournament ‌despite concern for their families back home.

Iran face the Philippines on Sunday in their final group match.

Drone video showed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem empty at the start of the third Friday in Ramadan, after Israeli authorities restricted access to holy sites.

Kyiv, Ukraine – As Washington’s Middle Eastern allies use US-made Patriot air defence systems to shoot down Iranian missiles and drones, Ukraine is about to face a dire shortage of ammunition for them.

And Russian President Vladimir Putin is sure to exploit the shortage of pricey guided missiles the truck-mounted Patriots launch at machinegun speed to down his pride and joy, Russia’s ballistic missiles that he once declared were “indestructible”, experts have told Al Jazeera.

The Patriots were developed in the 1970s to down Soviet missiles whose modifications Russia still rains on Ukraine.

The supply of Patriots to Ukraine began in 2023 and was initially limited to several batteries stationed in the capital, Kyiv. The location of the systems was constantly changed to protect them from Russian attacks.

The Patriots utilise advanced radars to detect targets flying at supersonic speeds and launch their guided missiles with the sound that resembles super-fast electronic beats – up to 32 missiles per minute.

But the noise – along with thunderous shockwaves that follow split-second, sun-bright explosions – made Ukrainians feel safe during harrowing, hours-long Russian assaults that have targeted civilian areas and involve hundreds of drones and dozens of missiles.

Within weeks after their deployment, the Patriots intercepted Russia’s Kinzhal (Dagger) intercontinental ballistic missiles that are launched by supersonic fighter jets and fly in the Earth’s stratosphere.

The interceptions disproved Putin’s earlier claims that the Kinzhals made any Western air defence systems “useless”.

The safety, however, came with a hefty price tag – each Patriot guided missile costs several million dollars, and their manufacturing never exceeded more than 900 units a year.

‘Tomorrow’s problem’

Some 800 guided missiles have been used to repel Iranian aerial attacks within just three days after Tehran began raining its missiles and drones on almost a dozen nations, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Thursday.

“Ukraine has never had this many missiles to repel attacks,” Zelenskyy said, reiterating his readiness to dispatch Ukrainian experts and drone interceptors to help Gulf nations counter the attacks.

The shortage of guided missiles is, however, not immediate and may occur in several weeks.

“This is not today’s problem, this is tomorrow’s problem,” Volodymyr Fesenko, head of the Kyiv-based Center for Applied Political Studies (Penta) think tank, told Al Jazeera.

But the problem may become catastrophic.

In recent days, Moscow stopped attacking Ukraine with drones and missiles – a sign of amassing them for massive raids in the near future, Fesenko said.

“Russia’s most obvious actions would be to bleed Ukraine’s stock of Patriot missiles dry to inflict maximal damage on us through massive missile attacks,” he said.

Kyiv already faces a less critical problem with the shortage of missiles for Western-supplied F-16 fighter jets that proved effective in downing Russian missiles.

“The problem is less critical, but also vital for us,” Fesenko said.

Ukraine has experienced a shortage of Patriot missiles before.

Last summer, when the US and Israel struck Iranian nuclear sites, the Pentagon stopped the Patriot missiles’ supply as it was “auditing” its own stocks.

The suspension of Patriot interceptors and HIMARS multiple rocket launchers left Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, including thermal power stations and transport hubs, more vulnerable to Russian attacks.

Russia’s tactics of indiscriminate aerial strikes have been tried and tested over the past four years.

Moscow starts an air raid with drones and decoy drones to make Ukrainian air defence units use as many Patriot missiles as possible.

It then launches several more waves of attack drones and ballistic and cruise missiles.

As to upcoming attacks, “the question is that this time, it won’t be energy infrastructure, but whatever other targets the Kremlin will want to choose”, Kyiv-based analyst Igar Tyshkevych told Al Jazeera.

He referred to devastating attacks on energy and central heating facilities that left millions of Ukrainians without power and heat this winter, triggering health problems and deaths from hypothermia.

Russia already targets sites unprotected by Patriots: Military expert

Meanwhile, Israel and the European nations that pledged to transfer their stock of Patriot missiles to Ukraine are reluctant to do so now.

“Considering the general instability, I don’t think that many nations will open up their stock and pass it on to us,” Tyshkevich said.

Since the supplies of Patriots began, the US-Russian technological battle has kept raging on, according to the former deputy head of Ukraine’s general staff of armed forces, who for decades specialised in air defence.

“There is a confrontation in engineering,” Lieutenant-General Ihor Romanenko told Al Jazeera.

“Russians change something, Americans together with our experts change something else, because remaining on the old [technological] level means losing the battle before it begins.”

Russian engineers “modified software making the [Iskander-M] missiles able to manoeuvre mid-air, and the modernisation largely complicated the operation of the few Patriot systems that we have to destroy them,” Romanenko said.

The Patriots, however, have not become a Ukraine-wide aegis against the Russian strikes.

Ukraine has fewer than a dozen batteries, while Kyiv said it needed at least 25.

Russians “already know that we have but a few Patriot batteries against their ballistic missiles, so they were hitting the sites that had not been covered by the Patriots, or where they had not been deployed,” Romanenko said.

Luckily, Ukraine has an alternative.

A handful of French-Italian SAMP/T systems with solid-fuel anti-aircraft missiles have been deployed to Ukraine since 2023 and showed the advantages of their radars and “engagement logic” with high-speed targets.

While a Patriot battery requires up to 90 support servicemen and takes half an hour to deploy, SAMP/Ts require about a dozen.

But their ability to down modified Russian missiles will have to be battle-tested, Romanenko said.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s increasingly daring drone and missile strikes deep inside Russia destroy or damage their arm depots and plants producing drones and missiles.

In recent weeks, they hit the Admiral Essen, a Russian frigate capable of launching Kalibr cruise missiles from the Black Sea, nine air defence systems in Russia-occupied Donetsk and Crimea, and Russia’s only plant that produces fibre-optic cable for drones.

Supporters of the United States and Israeli military campaign against Iran argue that weakening Tehran by degrading its missile capabilities, crippling its navy and reducing its ability to project power through regional allies will make the Middle East safer. But this strategy rests on an assumption that a weaker Iran would produce a more stable region. In reality, destabilising one of the Middle East’s largest and most strategically important states could unleash forces far more dangerous than the status quo.

According to briefings provided to congressional staff in Washington, DC, there was no intelligence suggesting Iran was planning to attack the US. Yet military escalation continues in the belief that weakening Iran will ultimately serve US interests. If that assumption proves wrong, the consequences could be severe not only for the region but also for American strategic interests.

The first danger is internal fragmentation. Iran’s population is ethnically diverse. While Persians form the majority, the country is also home to large Azeri, Kurdish, Arab and Baloch communities, among others. Several of these groups already have histories of political tension or insurgency, including Kurdish militant activity in the northwest and a long-running Baloch insurgency in the southeast.

A strong central state has largely kept these fault lines contained. But if Iran’s governing structures weaken significantly, those tensions could intensify. The result could resemble the fragmentation seen in other Middle Eastern states after external military pressure or regime collapse.

Recent history offers sobering examples. In Iraq, the dismantling of state institutions after the 2003 US invasion created the conditions for years of sectarian violence and ultimately the rise of ISIL (ISIS). Libya’s state collapse in 2011 left the country divided between rival governments and armed militias, a crisis that persists more than a decade later. Syria’s civil war produced one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes of the century while turning large swaths of territory into battlegrounds for militias and extremist groups. At the height of the conflict, ISIS was able to seize and govern territory across eastern Syria, declaring a so-called caliphate that controlled millions of people.

Iran’s collapse would produce an even more dangerous scenario. Its population is far larger than Iraq, Libya or Syria, and its territory borders multiple conflict-prone regions. The emergence of armed factions, ethnic militias or insurgent groups inside Iran could quickly transform the country into another arena of prolonged instability.

Such instability would not remain local. Iran sits at the heart of the Gulf, one of the world’s most strategically important energy corridors. Roughly a fifth of global oil supplies pass through the Strait of Hormuz along Iran’s southern coastline. Armed factions, rival militias or uncontrolled naval forces operating along Iran’s coast could disrupt shipping lanes, attack tankers or try to block access to the strait, turning a regional crisis into a global energy shock. That would have consequences far beyond the Middle East. Higher energy prices would ripple through global economies, affecting everything from transportation costs to inflation. American policymakers often view energy instability as a regional problem, but in reality, it quickly becomes a global one.

The strategic consequences would extend further. Iran currently serves as a central node in a network of regional alliances and proxy groups that includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, various militia groups in Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen. These actors operate within a framework influenced, to varying degrees, by Tehran. If the Iranian state weakens dramatically, that structure could fragment. Some groups might operate independently, others might compete for influence, and still others could radicalise further without central coordination. The result would be a far more unpredictable security environment across the Middle East, which would make diplomatic engagement more difficult and military conflicts harder to contain.

Another risk lies in leadership uncertainty. Some policymakers assume that weakening the current Iranian leadership will produce a more moderate political order. But regime change rarely follows a predictable script.

Iran’s political system contains multiple competing factions, including conservative clerical networks, reformist politicians and powerful elements within the security establishment such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Iran’s leadership transition is less about a single successor than about the balance of power between clerical institutions, elected offices and the security apparatus. If the existing leadership were weakened or removed during wartime conditions, that balance could quickly unravel. The IRGC, which already commands vast military and economic resources, could try to consolidate authority, potentially pushing Iran towards a more overtly militarised political order. In such an environment, more radical actors, particularly those who view compromise with the US as impossible, could gain influence.

There is also little evidence that sustained military strikes will generate pro-American sentiment among the Iranian population. History suggests that external pressure often strengthens nationalist sentiment rather than weakening it. The 2003 invasion of Iraq, for example, did not produce pro-American attitudes but instead fuelled resentment and insurgency. Similarly, repeated Israeli military campaigns in Lebanon have tended to strengthen support for Hezbollah rather than weaken it.

Beyond the Middle East itself, instability in Iran could also trigger significant migration flows. Iran already hosts millions of refugees from neighbouring countries, particularly Afghanistan. If internal conflict were to erupt inside Iran, even a small share of Iran’s population of more than 90 million people seeking refuge abroad could produce migration flows far larger than those seen during recent Middle Eastern crises.

Many of those migrants would likely move towards Turkiye and eventually Europe, placing additional pressure on governments already grappling with migration crises. While this may appear distant from American shores, the political consequences for US allies in Europe would inevitably affect transatlantic relations and Western cohesion.

Taken together, these risks illustrate a broader strategic problem. Weakening Iran may appear attractive to the US from a narrow military perspective, but destabilising a large regional power rarely produces orderly outcomes.

The United States has confronted similar dynamics before. The collapse of state authority in Iraq after 2003 did not eliminate threats in the region; it produced new ones. Libya’s fragmentation after 2011 created an enduring security vacuum. Syria’s civil war turned into a multisided conflict that reshaped the politics of the entire region.

For Washington, the question should be whether the long-term consequences of destabilising Iran would ultimately make the region and the world more dangerous. If recent history offers any guidance, destabilising Iran may ultimately create the very threats Washington hopes to eliminate.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Caracas, March 5, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez met Wednesday with US Interior Secretary Doug Burgum at the Miraflores Presidential Palace in Caracas to discuss a bilateral agenda focused on energy and mining.

Senior officials from both countries also attended a closed-door meeting, including US Chargé d’Affaires Laura Dogu and Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello. Rodríguez and Burgum later gave a joint press conference.

“We welcomed Burgum to address important aspects related to metallic, non-metallic, strategic and non-strategic minerals,” the acting president told reporters. “We want the Venezuelan people to see the advantage of having good relations with the world and with the United States.”

Rodríguez said that her economic team will soon present a proposal to the National Assembly to “expand” Venezuela’s Mining Law, urging lawmakers to reform it “swiftly” in order to showcase “investment and development opportunities in the mining sector” to both domestic and international business groups.

Venezuela’s current mining legislation was approved in 1999. Rodríguez noted that the government intends to replicate the “win-win formula” of the recent hydrocarbon reform approved on January 29, which introduced wide-reaching benefits for foreign capital in the oil sector.

Under the overhauled legislation, private operators get expanded control over operations, with limited parliamentary oversight and a reduced tax burden.

Rodríguez also thanked US President Donald Trump for a social media post praising the Venezuelan acting president for “doing a great job.” The Venezuelan leader highlighted the US government’s “kind disposition” to work on a “mutually beneficial” cooperation agenda.

For his part, Burgum said that Venezuela is “an extraordinarily rich nation” in oil, gas, and critical minerals, adding that the opportunities for collaboration between the two countries “have no limits.” He serves as chair of the US National Energy Dominance Council as well.

According to the senior White House official, who holds the natural resources portfolio, the potential cooperation could deliver something “truly remarkable” for both the Venezuelan and American people. Burgum’s delegation included representatives from over 20 US and Canadian mining companies, some of them with a past presence in Venezuela.

“These companies are ready to begin,” he said. “I know that [Acting President] Rodríguez, like President Trump, wants to cut bureaucratic red tape so this capital investment can start flowing.”

Among the companies represented in the visit were US firms Peabody Energy—the world’s largest private coal company—Hartree Partners, Orion CMC, Paulson & Co., and Caterpillar Inc., along with Canada’s Lundin Mining Corp and Singapore-based commodities trader Trafigura.

Canadian miner Gold Reserve also announced plans to return to the Caribbean nation and disclosed a 30-day US Treasury license to negotiate with Caracas.

According to Axios, US officials additionally negotiated a multimillion-dollar agreement with Venezuela’s state mining company Minerven to sell up to one metric ton of gold to the US market, currently valued at roughly $165 million.

The deal would require Minerven to supply between 650 and 1,000 kilograms of doré gold bars—a crude alloy of gold and silver with 50 to 90 percent purity—to Trafigura, which would transport the metal to US refineries. The transaction details were not disclosed, including whether Trafigura will deposit payment in US-run accounts in an arrangement similar to the one the Trump administration has imposed for Venezuelan oil exports.

Burgum is the fourth senior US official to visit Venezuela since the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, National Assembly deputy Cilia Flores.

Earlier visits included US Southern Command chief Francis Donovan, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and US Energy Secretary Chris Wright.

Venezuela possesses vast unexplored and proven mineral reserves, including significant gold, iron, bauxite, diamonds, nickel, and copper deposits. Coltan reserves have likewise been touted in recent years.

According to the International Center for Productive Investment (CIIP)—an agency attached to the Venezuelan vice presidency—the country holds the eighth-largest iron reserves in the world, estimated at 14.7 billion metric tons, as well as more than 321 million tons of bauxite, the raw material used to produce aluminum.

Regarding gold, the CIIP estimates that Venezuela may hold between 2,200 and 8,000 metric tons, which would place the country among the largest gold reserves globally. 

Analysts have also highlighted the possibility of finding rare earth deposits in the South American country. The 17 elements have diverse applications in cutting-edge technology and advanced weapons systems. Washington is currently highly dependent on rare earth imports from China.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Lebanon’s Hezbollah group urges Israelis to evacuate border areas as Israel continues to bomb the country.

The death toll from Israeli attacks on Lebanon this week has risen to at least 123 people, the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health says, as a new wave of strikes pounded the country and Hezbollah warned Israeli residents to evacuate towns within 5km (3 miles) of their northern border, in one of the fiercest fronts in the wider United States-Israel war on Iran.

“The toll from the Israeli aggression on Monday … increased to 123 martyrs and 683 wounded,” a ministry statement said on Thursday.

Lebanese state media said early on Friday that Israel had launched air strikes on several towns in southern Lebanon.

“Enemy warplanes launched nighttime strikes on the towns of Srifa, Aita al-Shaab, Touline, as-Sawana and Majdal Selem,” the official National News Agency (NNA) reported.

Another strike hit the eastern Lebanese town of Douris at dawn, the NNA said.

Hezbollah’s message to evacuate the border areas came less than a day after Israel threatened residents that they should leave Beirut’s southern suburbs, prompting a huge exodus from a swath of the capital’s densely populated area known as Dahiyeh, where some half a million people live.

The Israeli army said it has conducted 26 rounds of attacks in Dahiyeh. It claims to have hit various infrastructure used by Hezbollah, including the headquarters of the group’s Executive Council and a warehouse with drones.

“Your military’s aggression against Lebanese sovereignty and safe citizens, the destruction of civilian infrastructure and the expulsion campaign it is carrying out will not go unchallenged,” Hezbollah said.

Hezbollah claimed responsibility for a wave of attacks early on Friday on Israeli ground forces, including those who have entered Lebanon’s territory in recent days.

In a statement on Telegram, Hezbollah said its fighters had attacked Israeli forces in several areas, including Maroun al-Ras and Kfar Kila, within Lebanese territory.

Hezbollah also attacked Israel’s Yoav military camp in the occupied Golan Heights and a navy base in Israel’s Haifa port, the statement said.

There were no immediate reports of casualties.

Israel has said it will not evacuate its border towns and has sent more soldiers into Lebanon, claiming it was a defensive measure meant to protect its citizens who live nearby.

In contrast, tens of thousands of people in Lebanon have fled their homes after threats from Israel, with a mass exodus from Beirut’s southern suburbs leaving the area “almost empty”, the NNA said.

Hundreds of displaced families were left to seek shelter on a Beirut beach, where they waited despondently – many for the second time, after evacuating during a 2024 war between Israel and Hezbollah.

‘We are not animals’

Zeina Khodr, reporting from Beirut, said the humanitarian crisis is growing rapidly, as people seeking shelter can be seen “on the side of the roads on almost every corner”.

“There aren’t enough schools to shelter the hundreds of thousands of people who were forced to flee their homes after Israel’s forced displacement threat for Beirut’s southern suburbs yesterday,” she said.

“People are telling us: ‘We are not animals; we are human beings, our children are cold.’”

She noted that the Lebanese government has opened a number of shelters and told people to head to the north of the country.

Khodr added: “But many do not have any means of transport. It’s not just Lebanese who live in Beirut’s southern suburbs, but also Syrian refugees and Palestinian refugees.”

Lebanon was pulled into the war in the Middle East on Monday, as Hezbollah opened fire, prompting Israeli air strikes focused on Beirut’s southern suburbs and on southern and eastern Lebanon.

The war has rekindled fighting between Israel and Iran-allied Hezbollah fighters, and Israel launched a series of air raids late on Thursday into Friday in the southern suburbs of Beirut and other areas.

Multiple Gulf nations, Arab states, as well as Turkiye and Azerbaijan have been caught in the crosshairs of the war.

Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency has reported that overnight attacks on Bahrain’s capital, Manama, targeted the Financial Harbour Towers commercial complex, the location of the Israeli embassy in the city.

The first week of the United States-Israel war on Iran and Tehran’s retaliatory strikes on nations hosting US forces and assets has engulfed the region and beyond into a broader conflict.

The Reuters news agency reported Friday that an Iranian drone was intercepted and destroyed in the vicinity of the complex.

Multiple Gulf nations, Arab states, as well as Turkiye and Azerbaijan have been caught in the crosshairs of the war.

The Saudi Ministry of Defense on Friday said a cruise missile was intercepted and destroyed to the east of the country’s central al-Kharj governorate. The ministry provided no additional information.

The ministry also said later it had intercepted three drones to the east of the Riyadh region.

Additionally, the Qatari Ministry of Defence announced overnight that its air defence forces successfully intercepted a drone attack targeting the Al Udeid Air Base in Doha that hosts US assets.

Earlier, authorities issued an alert warning that the security threat level had been elevated, requiring people to remain indoors and to stay away from windows and other exposed areas.

Several explosions rang out in Doha on Thursday.

European Union leaders expressed support for Arab countries in the Gulf as Iran continues to launch missile and drone attacks on targets across the region, in response to attacks by the US and Israel.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas and other European leaders held talks with Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) officials on Thursday in Brussels, denouncing what they described as “Iran’s inexcusable attacks against the GCC countries”.

Elsewhere n Friday, air defences shot down several drones in the Jordanian city of Irb, according to an Al Jazeera correspondent on the ground.

The US House of Representatives has joined the Senate in killing a war powers resolution that would have forced Donald Trump to end his war on Iran. Although the vote was largely symbolic, Al Jazeera’s Patty Culhane says Democrats are using it to get Republicans on the record.

New Delhi, India — Dressed in a blue Navy uniform and sleek sunglasses, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in late October, addressed a gathering of the country’s sea warriors.

He listed out the strategic significance of the Indian Ocean — the massive volumes of trade and oil that pass through it. “The Indian Navy is the guardian of the Indian Ocean,” he then said, to loud, proud chants of “Long Live Mother India” from his audience.

Less than five months later, India has been shown up as a “guardian”, unable to protect its own guest.

On Wednesday, the Iranian warship, IRIS Dena, was torpedoed by a US submarine just 44 nautical miles off (81km) southern Sri Lanka, as it was returning home from naval drills hosted by India. During the “Milan” biennial multilateral naval exercise, Indian President Droupadi Murmu had posed with sailors from the Dena.

Yet it took the Indian Navy more than a day after the Iranian warship was struck to respond formally to the attack, which US officials made clear was a sign of how the Donald Trump administration was willing and ready to expand its war against Iran.

“An American submarine sank an Iranian warship that thought it was safe in international waters,” US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said at the Pentagon on Wednesday. “Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo. Quiet death.”

Tehran is furious over the attack on its warship hundreds of miles away from home. And Iran made sure to note that the IRIS Dena warship was  “a guest of India’s navy”, returning after completing the exercise it joined upon New Delhi’s invitation.

“The US has perpetrated an atrocity at sea, 2,000 miles [3,218km] away from Iran’s shores,” Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said, referring to the sinking of the frigate. “Mark my words: The US will come to bitterly regret [the] precedent it has set.”

Now, the IRIS Dena is at the bottom of the Indian Ocean, and more than 80 Iranian sailors, who marched during joint parades and posed for selfies with Indian naval officers during their two-week visit, are dead.

What has also fallen, said retired Indian naval officers and analysts, is India’s self-image as a net security provider in the Indian Ocean. Instead, they said, the US attack on the Dena has exposed the limits of India’s power and influence in its own maritime back yard.

‘War reaches India’s backyard’

After participating in the naval exercises, IRIS Dena left Visakhapatnam on India’s eastern coast on February 26. It was hit in international waters, just south of Sri Lanka’s territorial waters, in the early hours of March 4, local time.

In response, Sri Lankan Navy rescuers recovered more than 80 bodies and picked up 32 survivors, reportedly including the commander and some senior officers from the warship. More than 100 men are still missing.

In a tweet welcoming the Dena to the naval drills, the Indian Navy’s Eastern Command had posted: “Her arrival … [reflects] long-standing cultural links between the two nations [Iran and India]”.

Vice Admiral Shekhar Sinha, the former vice chief of India’s naval staff, told Al Jazeera that he attended the Iranian parade at the function.

“I met and really liked them, especially their march for sailors travelling thousands of miles,” Sinha said. “It is always sad to see a ship sinking. But in a war, emotions don’t work. There’s nothing ethical in a war.”

Sinha said that the Indian Ocean — central to the strategic and energy security of the nation with the world’s largest population — was thought to be a fairly safe zone earlier. “But that is not the case, as we are learning now,” he told Al Jazeera.

“The unfolding battle [between the US and Israel on the one hand, and Iran on the other] has reached India’s back yard.
New Delhi has to be concerned,” Sinha, who served in the Indian Navy for four decades, added. “The liberty we enjoyed in the Indian Ocean has apparently shrunk.”

India’s Catch-22 situation

Only on Thursday evening did the Indian Navy issue any formal statement on the attack — more than 24 hours after the Dena was hit by a torpedo.

The Navy said that it received distress signals from the Iranian ship and had decided on deploying resources to help with rescuing sailors. But by then, it said, the Sri Lankan Navy had already stepped to lead the rescue effort.

Neither New Delhi nor the Navy has criticised — even mildly — the decision by the US to sink the Iranian warship.

Military analysts and former Indian naval officers say India is caught in a classic catch-22: Was India aware of the incoming US attack in the Indian Ocean on an Iranian warship, or was it blindsided by a nuclear-submarine in its backyard?

Admiral Arun Prakash, the former chief of India’s naval staff, told Al Jazeera that if New Delhi was blindsided, “it reflects on the US-India relationship directly.”

“If it is a surprise, then that’s a great concern since we have a so-called strategic partnership with the USA.”

And if India knew about the attacks, it would be seen by many as strategically siding with the US and Israel over their war on Iran.

C Uday Bhaskar, a retired Indian Navy officer and currently the director of the Society for Policy Studies, an independent think tank based in New Delhi, said that the US sinking an Iranian warship in the Indian Ocean muddies the Indian perception of itself as a “net security provider” in the region.

Bhaskar said the incident is a “strategic embarrassment” for India and weakens New Delhi’s credibility in the Indian Ocean, while its moral standing “takes a beating” because of the Indian government’s near-silence.

‘India on aggressor’s side’

In the post-colonial world order, India was a leader of the non-alignment movement, the Cold War-era neutrality posture adopted by several developing nations.

India now no longer calls its approach non-alignment, instead referring to it as “strategic autonomy”. But, in reality, it has inched closer to the United States and its allies, most importantly, Israel.

Merely two days before the US and Israel bombed Iran, Modi was in Israel, addressing the Knesset and warmly hugging Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who called his Indian counterpart a brother.

But Iran, under the late Supreme Leader Khamenei, was a friend of India as well, with New Delhi making strategic, business, and humanitarian investments in the country.

However, Modi has not said a word in condolence after Khamenei’s assassination. On Thursday, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri visited the Iranian embassy in New Delhi to sign a memorial book. Indian governments normally deploy ministers — not bureaucrats or diplomats — for such sombre occasions.

It is against that backdrop that India’s response to the attack on the Dena has come under scrutiny.

Because the frigate was hit when it was in international waters, India had “no formal responsibility”, said Srinath Raghavan, an Indian military historian and strategic analyst.

“But the US Navy’s actions underline both the spreading geography of this war and the sharp limits of India’s ability to manage, let alone control, its fallout,” Raghavan told Al Jazeera.

Diplomatically, India has “objectively positioned itself on the side of the aggressors in this war,” he said, by “acts of commission — visit to Israel on the eve of war — and of omission, with not even [an] official condolence, let alone condemnation, of the assassination of the Iranian head of state.” Modi visited Israel on February 25-26.

Mallikarjun Kharge, the president of India’s opposition Congress party, said the Modi government had recklessly abdicated “India’s strategic and national interests”. And the government’s silence “demeans India’s core national interests and destroys our foreign policy, carefully and painstakingly built and followed by successive governments over the years.”

In addition, Raghavan highlighted that Modi has only criticised Iran’s retaliation, which threatens to drag the Gulf region to the brink of war.

“It is difficult not to conclude that India has drastically downgraded its interests in the relationship with Iran,” he said.

“All of this detracts from India’s credibility as a player in the region and will have short and long-term consequences for the equities in West Asia [as the Middle East is referred to in India],” Raghavan told Al Jazeera.

Videos showed a projectile striking near Kuwait’s Ali al-Salem Air Base, which has hosted a substantial number of US forces. Earlier on Thursday, the United States announced it was closing its embassy in the country and is reportedly evacuating its staff.