TODAY

The announcement on Friday is expected to clear the path for the confirmation of his successor, Kevin Warsh.

The United States Department of Justice has ended its probe into US Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, clearing a major roadblock to the confirmation of his successor, Kevin Warsh.

US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeannine Pirro said on X on Friday that her office was ending its probe into the Fed’s extensive building renovations because the Fed’s inspector general would scrutinise them instead.

Pirro, a Trump ally and the top federal prosecutor in Washington, DC, said she had instead asked the Fed’s internal watchdog, the Office of Inspector General, to examine cost overruns in renovations of the central bank’s Washington headquarters.

“The IG has the authority to hold the Federal Reserve accountable to American taxpayers,” Pirro said in a social media post. “I expect a comprehensive report in short order and am confident the outcome will assist in resolving, once and for all, the questions that led this office to issue subpoenas.”

The move could lead to a swift confirmation vote by the Senate for Warsh, a former top Fed official whom US President Donald Trump, a Republican, nominated in January to replace Powell. Powell’s term as chair ends May 15.

Senator Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, had said he would oppose Warsh until the investigation was resolved, effectively blocking his confirmation.

The leadership transition at the world’s leading central bank could now proceed quickly.

Republicans praised Warsh during a Tuesday hearing even as Democrats questioned his independence from Trump, the lack of transparency around some of his financial holdings, and what they said was his flip-flopping on interest rates. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the committee, questioned if Warsh will be a “sock puppet“.

Still, Trump’s previous appointment to the Fed’s board of governors, Stephen Miran, was approved by the full Senate just 13 days after his nomination.

No evidence

The investigation was among several undertaken by the Department of Justice into Trump’s perceived adversaries. For months, it had failed to gain traction as prosecutors struggled to articulate a basis to suspect criminal conduct.

A prosecutor handling the case conceded at a closed-door court hearing in March that the government had not yet found any evidence of a crime, and a judge subsequently quashed subpoenas issued to the Federal Reserve.

The judge, James Boasberg, said prosecutors had produced “essentially zero evidence” to suspect Powell of a crime. Boasberg branded prosecutors’ justification for the subpoenas as “thin and unsubstantiated”.

More recently, prosecutors made an unannounced visit to a construction site at the Fed’s headquarters but were turned away, drawing a rebuke from a defence lawyer in the case who called the manoeuvre “not appropriate”.

Warsh said during the Senate hearing on Tuesday that he never promised the White House that he would cut interest rates, even as the president renewed his calls for the central bank to do so.

“The president never once asked me to commit to any particular interest rate decision, period,” Warsh said during the hearing. “Nor would I ever agree to do so if he had … I will be an independent actor if confirmed as chair of the Federal Reserve.”

Warsh’s comments came just hours after Trump, in an interview on CNBC, was asked if he would be disappointed if Warsh did not immediately cut rates and responded, “I would.”

The decision to abandon the investigation represents a rare pullback for a Department of Justice that over the last year has moved aggressively, albeit unsuccessfully, to prosecute public figures the president does not like.

Robert Hur, an lawyer for the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, did not immediately respond on Friday to an email seeking comment.

On April 20, the United States fired at and then seized an Iranian-flagged container ship close to the Strait of Hormuz in the northern Arabian Sea, amid its blockade of Iranian ports.

It was similar to a scene which played out in the 1980s during the so-called Tanker War between Iran and Iraq, during which both countries fired on each other’s tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, seeking to cripple each other’s economies.

As naval tensions rise again in the Strait of Hormuz – this time between Iran and the US – we break down what happened in the 1980s and examine the parallels and differences between the situations then and now:

How the 1980s Tanker War played out – a timeline

The war between Iran and Iraq began in 1980 when then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein launched a full-scale invasion of Iran following Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution.

In 1984, this war reached the Gulf when Iraq attacked Iranian oil tankers, seeking to cripple its oil-revenue-dependent economy. Iran retaliated by firing at oil tankers belonging to Iraq and its allies in the Gulf.

According to a report by the University of Texas’s Robert Strauss Center for International Security and Law, Iran also threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz then, but did not do so since its own economy, already crippled by the war, was dependent on exporting oil to the rest of the world through it.

In November 1986, when Iran struck Kuwait’s ships, Kuwait asked for foreign help. The former Soviet Union was the first to respond and helped escort the nation’s ships in the Gulf.

The US, led by then-president Ronald Reagan, launched Operation Earnest Will in July 1987, also seeking to protect tankers in the Gulf and render more assistance than Moscow. The operation involved reflagging Kuwaiti tankers with the US flag so they could legally sail under US protection.

According to an article by the Veterans Breakfast Club, a US-based website which shares experiences of former US military veterans, during Washington’s very first escort mission in July 1987, a reflagged tanker hit an Iranian mine in the Gulf.

“The convoy continued, but the incident made clear that the United States had entered a shadow war with Iran at sea,” the article said.

“Over the next fourteen months, dozens of US warships rotated through the region escorting tankers and protecting shipping lanes. US forces also conducted special operations to hunt Iranian mine-layers at night and conducted strikes against Iranian military positions and ships. The mission wasn’t a small one, consuming 30 US Navy ships at one time,” the article added.

Then in April 1988, the US frigate USS Samuel B Roberts was damaged by an Iranian mine in the Strait of Hormuz. Historian Samuel Cox, writing for the US Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC), noted in 2018 that by the end of 1987 that vessel was so badly damaged, that “the only thing actually holding the ship together was the main deck”.

So, the US launched Operation Praying Mantis, seeking to destroy Iranian vessels.

The tanker war eventually ended in August 1988, following a United Nations-brokered ceasefire agreement between Iran and Iraq.

Cox noted that by the end of 1987, “Iraq had conducted 283 attacks on shipping, while Iran attacked 168 times. Combined, the attacks had killed 116 merchant sailors, with 37 missing and 167 wounded, from a wide variety of nationalities.”

“Initially, there was great concern that the attacks would cut off the vital flow of oil from the Arabian Gulf, but all they really did was drive up insurance rates. The world’s need for oil was so great, that over 100 dead merchant seamen was apparently an acceptable price,” he wrote.

What is happening in the Strait of Hormuz now?

The current hostilities between the US and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz began when Tehran, whose territorial waters extend into the strait, closed passage to all vessels after the US and Israel began bombing the country. On March 4, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) declared that it was in full control of the strait, and ships would need to get clearance from them to pass through it.

Shipping through the strait collapsed by 95 percent, sending the price of oil – 20 percent of global supplies of which are shipped this way – soaring above $100 a barrel.

Iran, through its imposition of control over who passes through Hormuz, has for almost eight weeks now, determined which vessels can exit the strait from the Gulf into the Gulf of Oman.

At first, Iran indicated that it would allow “friendly” ships to pass if they paid a toll. On March 26, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Iran’s state TV: “The Strait of Hormuz, from our perspective, is not completely closed. It is closed only to enemies. There is no reason to allow the ships of our enemies and their allies to pass.”

Vessels from Malaysia, China, Egypt, South Korea, India and Pakistan passed through the strait through most of March and early April.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) provided these vessels with an alternative route through the Strait of Hormuz to avoid potential sea mines. US officials, including Donald Trump, have said mines have been placed there by Iran, although it has not officially confirmed or denied this.

But on April 13, alarmed that Iran was continuing to ship its own oil out of the strait, the US imposed a naval blockade of all Iranian ports. Since then, US Central Command has said US forces have directed 33 Iran-linked vessels to turn around or return to an Iranian port.

On Monday, the US military fired on and then captured the Iranian-flagged container ship Touska close to the Strait of Hormuz in the northern Arabian Sea, and, a day later, detained another oil tanker sanctioned for transporting Iranian crude oil as it sailed in the Bay of Bengal, which links India and Southeast Asia.

In a post on social media after detaining the Touska, the Pentagon wrote: “As we have made clear, we will pursue global maritime enforcement efforts to disrupt illicit networks and interdict sanctioned vessels providing material support to Iran – anywhere they operate.
International waters are not a refuge for sanctioned vessels.”

Since the US naval blockade of Iranian ports began, Tehran, which was earlier allowing vessels from “friendly” nations to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, has further tightened its grip on the strait.

Justifying the decision not to allow any foreign ships to pass until the US ends its naval blockade on April 19, Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref said the “security of the Strait of Hormuz is not free”.

“One cannot restrict Iran’s oil exports while expecting free security for others,” he wrote in a post on X.

Last Saturday, Iran reportedly fired at two Indian-flagged merchant vessels in the strait. The IRGC said the two ships were attacked because they were “operating without authorisation”, according to state media reports.

Then, on April 22, Iran captured two container ships seeking to exit the Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz after firing on them and another vessel.

What are the parallels between the two wars?

Just like during the Tanker War of the 1980s, shipping has been severely disrupted by the US-Israel war on Iran, upending global oil and gas prices.

According to an April 17 article by the World Economic Forum, from the mid-1980s when the Tanker War took place, to the start of the new millennium, a barrel of crude oil averaged $20.

On Friday, while a ceasefire between the US and Iran was in effect, a naval battle was still playing out in the Strait of Hormuz, and Brent crude, the international benchmark, topped $106 per barrel. During open warfare between the US, Israel and Iran in March and early April, oil rose as high as $119 per barrel.

Mines in the sea are another problem common to both time periods.

While vessels were damaged by mines during the 1980s Tanker War, there has so far been no report of vessels being damaged by mines in the current war. However, the risk is the same.

US President Donald Trump has said the US will ramp up efforts to remove mines from the Strait of Hormuz. This has not begun yet, however.

According to CNN, there are only a few US minesweeping ships in the Gulf. The US Navy also told the broadcaster that four dedicated minesweepers stationed in the Gulf region were decommissioned last year.

John Phillips, a British safety, security and risk adviser and former military instructor, told Al Jazeera: “There are some clear parallels between the current situation in Hormuz and the Tanker War of the 1980s. In both cases, the basic idea is the same: pressure at sea can have effects far beyond the water itself.

“A relatively small amount of naval disruption, whether that means mining, harassment of shipping, missile threats, or attacks on tankers, can create real strategic and economic consequences, especially in a chokepoint like the Strait of Hormuz. So in that sense, the original Tanker War is a useful reminder of how vulnerable global trade can be when the maritime domain becomes part of a wider political or military confrontation.”

What are the differences between the two wars?

During the Tanker War, the US escorted ships to protect them from Iranian attacks and also deployed vessels to remove mines. NATO countries like the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, France and Italy also joined.

But in the current standoff in the Strait of Hormuz, US allies like the UK and other NATO nations have refused to join Washington in reopening the Strait of Hormuz, or begin minesweeping operations, fearing they will be dragged into the war.

In a post on Truth Social in early April, the US president took aim at allies, “like the United Kingdom”, which, he said, have “refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran”, telling them to either buy US fuel or get involved in the rapidly escalating war.

“You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!” Trump wrote.

The framework of the US-Israel war on Iran is different from that of the war between Iraq and Iran in the 1980s, experts say.

“In the 1980s, the Tanker War was part of the broader Iran-Iraq War, so the shipping attacks were tied to a much larger land conflict between two regional armies. Today, the situation is more about Iran’s standoff with the United States and its allies, and the maritime activity is less about asymmetrical war at sea and more about deterrence, signalling and the threat of escalation,” said Phillips.

“The military lesson, really, is that Hormuz is still one of those places where limited actions can have outsized effects, but the modern setting is more fast-moving, more technologically advanced and potentially more volatile than the original Tanker War,” he added.

Analysts have also pointed out that, unlike in the 1980s, Iran is currently stronger when it comes to withstanding attacks and naval blockades by the US.

In the Tanker War, Iraq was militarily supported by Western allies, while Iran was under a US arms embargo imposed in 1979 after the Iranian revolution. While this gave Iraq a military advantage, Iran’s IRGC used asymmetric warfare tactics by striking Iraq’s allies’ ships and oil tankers.

Experts also say that since the 12-day war between Iran and Israel last year, Tehran has shifted its military doctrine from one that is primarily about defensive containment to an explicitly offensive asymmetric posture.

“Iran today appears more structurally aggressive in doctrine where it is formally embracing earlier and more extensive use of regional missiles, drones, cyberattacks and energy coercion [when energy resources and infrastructure are targeted or cut off], but is operationally constrained by battle damage, sanctions and internal instability,” Phillips, the risk adviser and a former military chief instructor, told Al Jazeera in an interview on March 2.

A former US ambassador to Bahrain, Adam Ereli, also told Al Jazeera that Iran and the IRGC have “revolutionary fervour”, which means they can “survive”.

“They can tolerate pain for a lot longer than I think most American decision-makers and planners calculate,” he said.

Prestianni suspended ​for homophobic discriminatory conduct in Champions League match ‌against ​Real Madrid in February.

Benfica’s ‌Gianluca Prestianni has been handed a six-match suspension for discriminatory conduct ⁠that was deemed ⁠homophobic in a Champions League match against Real Madrid, UEFA announced.

Prestianni will be banned for two ⁠more matches after UEFA said on Friday that a further three-match suspension would be “subject to a probationary period of two years, starting from the date ⁠of the present decision”. He has already served a one-match provisional suspension.

The Argentinian winger was accused of directing a racist slur at Real Madrid forward Vinicius Jr during the Spanish side’s 1-0 Champions League playoff first-leg win ‌in February.

The first leg was suspended for 11 minutes shortly after Vinicius gave Real the lead early in the second half.

Television footage showed Prestianni covering his mouth with his shirt repeatedly before making comments that Vinicius and nearby teammates interpreted as a racial slur against the 25-year-old.

Prestianni had denied the accusation that he had made ⁠a racist comment, saying Vinicius had misheard him. Real’s ⁠Aurelien Tchouameni said the Argentinian told him he did not call Vinicius a “monkey” but directed a homophobic comment at him.

UEFA also said they would request FIFA to extend the ⁠suspension worldwide.

The suspension includes the one-match provisional suspension Prestianni served during the second leg of ⁠their knockout playoff on February 25, which ⁠Real Madrid won 2-1 to advance.

Benfica said they had been notified about the sanction imposed on Prestianni.

“Of the three-match effective ban, one has already been served and the remaining two ‌must be served in UEFA matches or Argentina national team matches in a FIFA context,” Benfica said.

Prestianni has played for Argentina only once, ‌making ‌his debut as a late substitute in a friendly game against Angola in November.

A United States mediated ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon has come under strain after Hezbollah dismissed the agreement as ineffective. The truce, which took effect on April 16, was recently extended by three weeks following talks hosted by Donald Trump at the White House with Israeli and Lebanese representatives.

The ceasefire was intended to reduce hostilities that reignited on March 2, when Hezbollah launched attacks in support of Iran amid a broader regional conflict. While the agreement led to a noticeable drop in violence, clashes have not fully stopped. Israeli forces have continued operations in southern Lebanon, maintaining a self declared buffer zone, while Hezbollah has accused Israel of carrying out strikes, assassinations, and destruction of towns.

Hezbollah lawmaker Ali Fayyad stated that the continued attacks render the ceasefire meaningless and reaffirmed the group’s position that it reserves the right to respond to any Israeli action.

Why it matters
The fragile ceasefire highlights the difficulty of de escalating conflicts in the Middle East, especially when multiple fronts and actors are involved. Continued violations risk collapsing the agreement entirely, which could lead to a wider confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah.

The situation is further complicated by its connection to broader regional tensions involving Iran, making the ceasefire not just a bilateral issue but part of a larger geopolitical struggle. A breakdown could escalate into a more sustained and destructive conflict along the Lebanon Israel border.

Stakeholders
Hezbollah remains a central actor, positioning itself as a resistance force while balancing domestic and regional pressures. Israel is focused on security concerns and maintaining its buffer zone in southern Lebanon.

The United States is playing a mediating role, attempting to prevent escalation and maintain stability. Iran, as a key ally of Hezbollah, continues to influence the group’s strategic decisions and has pushed for Lebanon to be included in wider ceasefire discussions.

The Lebanese government is also a stakeholder, as continued conflict threatens its sovereignty, infrastructure, and already fragile economy.

What’s next
The extended ceasefire will be tested in the coming weeks as both sides continue limited engagements. If violations persist, the agreement could unravel, leading to intensified clashes.

Diplomatic efforts led by Washington may continue, but their success will depend on whether both Israel and Hezbollah show restraint on the ground. Without a broader regional understanding that includes Iran, the chances of a lasting ceasefire remain uncertain.

With information from Reuters.

United States President Donald Trump has claimed Iran is “collapsing financially” and said the country is losing millions of dollars a day due to Washington’s naval blockade of Iranian ports.

In a post on his Truth Social platform on Tuesday night, Trump wrote: “Iran is collapsing financially! They want the Strait of Hormuz opened immediately – Starving for cash! Losing 500 Million Dollars a day. Military and Police complaining that they are not getting paid. SOS!!!”

The US blockade of Iranian ports began at 14:00 GMT on April 13. Since then, the US has fired on and seized an Iranian-flagged tanker near the Strait of Hormuz, and redirected ships in the open seas carrying cargo to or from Iran. Iran’s armed forces have called this “an illegal act” that “amounts to piracy”.

In response to the US naval blockade, Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz to all foreign shipping and has captured several foreign-flagged ships. Previously, it had allowed some ships deemed “friendly” to Iran to pass.

On April 19, Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref said the “security of the Strait of Hormuz is not free”.

“One cannot restrict Iran’s oil exports while expecting free security for others,” he wrote in a post on X.

“The choice is clear: either a free oil market for all, or the risk of significant costs for everyone,” he added. “Stability in global fuel prices depends on a guaranteed and lasting end to the economic and military pressure against Iran and its allies.”

In a statement on social media on Thursday, Iran’s parliamentary speaker and lead negotiator in the ceasefire talks, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said a full ceasefire could only work if the US naval blockade is lifted.

Analysts say the blockade is hurting Iran but believe the country has the economic and political will to sustain it.

How long can Iran survive the naval blockade?

Here’s what we know:

How is the naval blockade hurting Iran?

Iran exports oil, gas and other goods including petrochemicals, plastics and agricultural products by sea. Analysts say the US naval blockade of its ports, including in the Strait of Hormuz, could therefore affect this trade.

Soon after the start of the US-Israel war on Iran on February 28, authorities in Tehran implemented the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the only waterway out of the Gulf, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies were shipped from Gulf producers in peacetime.

The near-shutdown of the vital chokepoint sent global oil and gas prices soaring, and since then, Iran has controlled the strait. However, it has continued to export its own energy products through the waterway.

Iran’s oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz account for about 80 percent of its total oil exports. According to Kpler, a trade intelligence firm, Iran exported 1.84 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil in March and has shipped 1.71 million bpd so far in April, compared with an average of 1.68 million bpd in 2025.

From March 15 to April 14, it exported 55.22 million barrels of oil. The price per barrel of Iranian oil – across its three major variants, known as Iranian light, Iranian heavy and Forozan blend – has not fallen below $90 per barrel over the past month. On many days, the price has surpassed $100 a barrel.

Even at the conservative estimate of $90 a barrel, Iran has earned at least $4.97bn over the past month from its ongoing oil exports.

By contrast, in early February before the war started, Iran was earning about $115m a day from its crude oil exports, or $3.45bn in a month.

Simply put, Iran has earned 40 percent more from oil exports in the past month than it did before the war.

Stopping this is a key motivation behind the US naval blockade of Iranian ports.

In an interview with Al Jazeera on April 14, Frederic Schneider, a nonresident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, told Al Jazeera that the previous six weeks had been a boon for Iran in terms of oil revenues, but with the US blockade, that will change.

“Iran has some buffer in the form of crude oil reserves in floating tanks – basically parked tankers – which was estimated at about 127 million barrels in February. But that doesn’t mean that the blockade wouldn’t hurt Iran,” he said.

On Friday, Schneider told Al Jazeera that Iran, however, seems to be “playing the longer game” and has anticipated and prepared for this sort of conflict to some degree.

“The naval blockade has added economic strain, as several civilian ships have been captured in international waters. But it remains unclear how tight the blockade is, how many ships manage to pass given the considerable amount of floating Iranian oil, and how long Trump can maintain the blockade,” he said.

Can the US keep the blockade going for long?

Schneider noted that Trump will face a legislative challenge by May 1, when the 60 days he can maintain a foreign offensive without congressional approval come to an end.

Dire conditions have been reported on the ships that are upholding the blockade, he said, and it remains to be seen how China will react to the continuing seizure of ships that carry any of its cargo.

“China has already said it sees the blockade of Chinese trade with Iran as unacceptable. Further, the closure of Hormuz by Iran in retaliation is hurting, if not the US itself that much, American allies in the region and globally, raising the pressure on Trump,” he said.

“If we can glean anything from the behaviour of the two sides, it is Iran that is signalling patience and Trump showing impatience,” he added.

Adam Ereli, a former US ambassador to Bahrain, told Al Jazeera’s This is America programme that while the US blockade of Iranian ports and seizure of vessels transporting Iranian oil “makes sense” as a policy, it may not work as intended due to domestic political considerations in the US.

“The Iranians have prepared for this, for this eventuality. They have their own plans. They’ve got alternative means of storing their oil or selling their oil,” Ereli told Al Jazeera.

“Even if they ran out of oil, they have ways to survive a very tough blockade and sanctions regime that, frankly, I think will outlast Trump’s patience and the patience of the American people,” he said.

“Remember, this isn’t just about moving soldiers and ships and planes around on a map. There’s politics involved here in the United States,” he added.

“Trump is nothing if not attuned to the political winds. And for that reason, I think that you’ve got this Iran strategy on the one hand that runs up against an electoral strategy on another hand, and therefore, the question is, which one is going to give?”

Can Iran store the oil the US is blockading in the meantime?

Iran’s domestic refineries have a capacity of 2.6 million bpd, according to consultancy FGE Energy. Its oil and gas production facilities are concentrated in southwestern provinces: Khuzestan for oil and Bushehr for gas and condensate from the South Pars gasfield.

Iran is also the third-largest oil producer in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and exports 90 percent of its crude oil via Kharg Island for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

The US naval blockade has begun affecting the country’s storage capacity, according to TankerTrackers, the maritime intelligence agency. The blockade means Iran has to store more oil, and space could become tight.

TankerTrackers said that on Kharg Island, to prepare for the possibility of running out of oil storage space, Iran has brought an old tanker named NASHA (9079107) out of retirement.

“She’s a 30yo [year old] VLCC [Very Large Crude Carrier] that’s been anchored empty for the past few years; currently spending 4 days on a trip that should take 1.5-2 days,” TankerTrackers said in a post on X, suggesting that the tanker is being used to store oil. It is unclear if the ship has a heading or course.

Can Iran continue to earn revenues from oil?

Yes, analysts say that for a few months, Iran can continue to earn revenue from oil which is already in transit at sea.

Kenneth Katzman, former Iran analyst at the Congressional Research Service in Washington, DC, said Iran is not exporting new oil amid the US blockade of Iranian ports, but Tehran has between 160 million and 170 million barrels of oil “afloat” on ships around the world currently.

Those supplies, which transited the Strait of Hormuz before the US blockade was imposed, are on board hundreds of tankers and “waiting to be delivered”, Katzman told Al Jazeera.

Katzman said he had been informed by an Iranian professor that, based on those supplies, Tehran could have revenue flows that can last until August despite the US naval blockade.

“Which is a long time. Does President Trump have until August? Probably not,” he said.

“He’s probably going to have to look at kinetic escalation if he wants to bring this to the conclusion that he wants, or he’s going to have to accept less than the deal he ideally wants,” he said.

Iranian ships will still have to avoid US naval ships on the open ocean, as the US Navy has also recently intercepted ships carrying Iranian cargoes.

On Wednesday this week, for example, the US military intercepted at least three Iranian-flagged tankers in ‌Asian waters, Reuters reported, and was said to be redirecting them away from their positions near India, Malaysia and Sri Lanka.

How else can Iran earn revenue?

Besides oil revenue, Iran is also currently receiving revenue from a “toll booth” system that the country imposed on the Strait of Hormuz in March.

On Thursday, Iran’s deputy parliament speaker Hamidreza Haji-Babaei said Tehran’s central bank had received the first revenues from tolls imposed since the start of the war, according to the semiofficial Tasnim news agency. It is unclear how much that toll revenue is.

Iranian politician Alaeddin Boroujerdi told the United Kingdom-based, Farsi-language satellite TV channel Iran International in March that the country has been charging some vessels as much as $2m each to pass through the strait.

According to Lloyd’s List, the shipping news outlet, at least two vessels that have transited the strait so far have paid fees in yuan, China’s currency. Lloyd’s List reported that one “transit was brokered by a Chinese maritime services company acting as an intermediary, which also handled the payment to Iranian authorities”. It is, however, not clear how much the vessels paid.

How resilient is Iran’s leadership?

In recent days, while pressuring Iran to negotiate a ceasefire deal, US President Donald Trump has claimed that Iranians are “having a very hard time figuring out who their leader is”, alleging that there is “crazy” infighting between “moderates” and “hardliners” in Tehran.

But the country’s officials have insisted that Iran’s government is united.

Mohammad Reza Aref, Iran’s first vice president, said on Thursday: “Our political diversity is our democracy, yet in times of peril, we are a ‘Single Hand’ under one flag. To protect our soil and dignity, we transcend all labels. We are one soul, one nation.”

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also dismissed allegations that the Iranian military may be at odds with the political leadership.

“The failure of Israel’s terrorist killings is reflected in how Iran’s state institutions continue to act with unity, purpose, and discipline,” he wrote on X, referring to the assassinations of Iranian political and military figures Israel has carried out in recent weeks.

“The battlefield and diplomacy are fully coordinated fronts in the same war. Iranians are all united, more than ever before.”

One of the strongest messages of unity came from Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian.

“In Iran, there are no radicals or moderates,” he said on X.

“We are all Iranians and revolutionaries. With ironclad unity of nation and state and obedience to the Supreme Leader, we will make the aggressor regret.”

How strong is Iran militarily?

Iran has demonstrated considerable military resilience in the face of weeks of US-Israeli strikes through its use of asymmetric warfare.

This includes the use of guerrilla tactics, cyberattacks, arming and supporting proxy armed groups and other indirect tools.

During its war with the US and Israel, Iran has targeted energy infrastructure in Israel and across the Gulf, threatened to target banking institutions and targeted US data centres of technology companies such as Amazon in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

Iran has also blocked the Strait of Hormuz and reportedly placed mines in the strait to disrupt shipping, sending global oil prices soaring.

Since the US began its naval blockade of Iranian ports in mid-April, Iranian officials have repeatedly promised that their country will defend itself and respond to any US attack.

Earlier this week, after the US military said it had seized an Iranian vessel and ordered dozens of others to turn around, Iran also retaliated by capturing foreign commercial vessels around the Hormuz Strait, which it said violated naval regulations.

Ereli, the former US ambassador, told Al Jazeera that Iran and the IRGC have “revolutionary fervour”, which means they can “survive”. “They can tolerate pain for a lot longer than I think most American decision makers and planners calculate,” Ereli said.

Ereli said it was unknown how long Tehran could last under “siege conditions” imposed by the US, but probably a lot longer than the US anticipates.

“I think they can go a lot longer, especially than most people imagine, and especially when it comes to kneeling to the Americans,” Ereli said.

“There’s a level of pride and survival. They’re at war with us, and for them it’s a war of necessity. They’ve got to survive,” he added.

People in the Russian city of Tuapse are worried about the toxic effects of a huge oil refinery fire that’s been burning for days after a Ukrainian drone attack. Al Jazeera’s Yulia Shapavalova is there.

Famine was confirmed in two places in 2025 – areas of the Gaza Strip and Sudan – the first such dual confirmation since formal famine reporting began, according to the Global Report on Food Crises (GRFC) 2026.

The annual report, produced by a coalition of 18 humanitarian and development partners, found that acute food insecurity remained widespread in 2025.

Across 47 countries and territories experiencing food crises, 22.9 percent of their populations – or about 266 million people – experienced acute food insecurity last year, a marginal rise from 22.7 percent in 2024 but nearly double the 11.3 percent recorded in 2016.

The proportion of analysed populations facing acute hunger has now stayed above 20 percent every year since 2020. In absolute terms, the number of people affected has grown from 108 million in 2016 to 265.7 million in 2025, having peaked at 281.6 million in 2023.

The GRFC cautioned that the slightly lower headline figure compared with 2024 mainly reflects a reduction in the number of countries covered – from 53 to 47 – rather than any real decline in needs.

Famine, catastrophe and emergency

Famine – the most extreme classification under the hunger-monitoring Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) system – was confirmed in parts of the Gaza Strip and Sudan in 2025. The risk of famine remained in other areas of Gaza, Sudan and South Sudan, and those projections extended into 2026.

According to the IPC, famine is when:

• At least 20 percent of households face extreme food shortages.
• Acute malnutrition affects more than 30 percent of the population.
• The death rate due to starvation or hunger-related causes exceeds two deaths per 10,000 people per day.

Six countries and territories had populations facing “catastrophic conditions”, or Phase 5, the highest level in the IPC’s classification of food insecurity. They numbered 1.4 million people, a more-than ninefold increase since 2016.

The Gaza Strip was the worst affected, with 640,700 people facing famine conditions, equivalent to 32 percent of its population, the highest share recorded globally. Sudan followed with 637,200 people, or 1 percent of its population.

Four other countries recorded catastrophic food shortages among specific groups of people: South Sudan – 83,500 (1 percent of the population), Yemen – 41,200 (0.1 percent), Haiti – 8,400 (0.1 percent) and Mali – 2,600 (0.01 percent).

Additionally, more than 39 million people in 32 countries were in Phase 4, or emergency conditions, representing 3.8 percent of the population analysed, a marginal increase from 2024.

Conflict remains the main driver of hunger

Conflict and violence were the primary drivers of acute food insecurity in 19 countries where 147.4 million people were affected. They represented more than half of those facing acute hunger globally.

Weather extremes were the primary driver in 16 countries, affecting 87.5 million people, while economic shocks led in 12 countries, with 29.8 million people affected.

Against that backdrop, humanitarian and development financing for areas facing food crises declined in 2025, falling back to levels last seen in 2016-2017, the report said.

As for 2026, the report said that based on a partial picture as of March, severity levels remain critical in multiple contexts. It added that the escalation of conflict in the Middle East exposes food-crisis countries to direct and indirect risks of global agricultural and food market disruptions.

A generation of malnourished children

An estimated 35.5 million children were acutely malnourished in 2025 across 23 countries experiencing nutrition crises, including just under 10 million with severe acute malnutrition, the most life-threatening form.

A further 25.7 million children suffered from moderate acute malnutrition. About 9.2 million pregnant and breastfeeding women were also acutely malnourished across 21 countries with available data.

Displacement is concentrated in food-crisis countries

The number of forcibly displaced people in the 46 countries covered fell slightly in 2025 to 85.1 million.

About 62.6 million of them were internally displaced across 34 countries, and 22.5 million were refugees and asylum seekers in 44 countries.

Without a sustained push to address the structural drivers of hunger, the world’s most fragile countries will continue to bear a disproportionate share of the global hunger burden well into 2026, the report concluded.

A collaboration between relative military newcomer Saildrone and defense contracting giants Lockheed Martin and Fincantieri has resulted in Spectre, a 170-foot drone boat capable of traveling nearly 35 miles per hour and optimized for anti-submarine warfare.

Spectre can also come loaded for bear for a multitude of missions, with space for an optional payload of two Lockheed Mk 70 vertical launching system (VLS) containers. These are capable of slinging everything from Tomahawk cruise missiles to long-range SM-6s air defense and surface strike missiles. Other potential payloads, according to Saildrone, include twin-line towed sonar arrays like the TB-29 and Lockheed’s Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM) Quad Launcher (JQL, pronounced jackal), which is in the process of being integrated on Saildrone’s smaller Surveyor platform. Total payload is two 40-foot containers, five 20-foot containers, or a configurable mixture of both.

Saildrone Spectre: A new class of unmanned surface vessel

The Navy’s work with far smaller Saildrone platforms dates to 2021. In the Middle East, the 33-foot Voyager, specializing in persistent surveillance, has been at the heart of testing and experimentation by the service’s Task Group 59, focused on unmanned capabilities and teaming.

In the U.S. 4th Fleet area of responsibility, which includes the Caribbean and Central and South America, solar-powered Voyagers have been the USV of choice for Operation Windward Stack. This is an effort to integrate uncrewed systems into the work of apprehending drug trafficking and illegal fishing.

The Spectre design, which was unveiled Monday at the Sea-Air-Space Exposition near Washington, D.C., at which TWZ was in attendance, is the result of two years of work. It precedes the Navy’s current competition for a family of Medium Unmanned Surface Vessels, which formally launched last month. However, company executives said they now plan to enter Spectre.

“We didn’t fit to that. We didn’t change our course,” Saildrone founder and CEO Richard Jenkins said. “Now it’s changed, MUSV … it actually fits perfectly. We meet 100% of all the specs.”

Spectre comes in two variants. One is the Silent Endurance variant with the trademark sail, or “wing.” The other is the Stealth Strike variant that relies totally on its more powerful internal propulsion. While the sail-equipped variant is more focused on anti-submarine warfare and surveillance, it too can be equipped with modular VLS cells or other “concealed payloads.” The Stealth Strike variant possesses “higher-speed” and is capable of “low observable missions,” according to the company.

Powered by a 5,000-horsepower Caterpillar diesel engine, the Stealth Strike variant is designed to cruise at around 25 knots, or just under 29 miles per hour. The 30 knot, or around 35-mile-per-hour, speed that the company cites as the maximum for Spectre is likely reserved for brief “sprints” that the Stealth Strike variant may execute during operations.

The Silent Endurance variant is optimized for “infinite endurance,” Jenkins said, with an electric engine that can maintain speeds of 12 knots, or about 14 miles per hour, or the signature wing, a 43-meter composite structure made by yacht racing team American Magic Services that can harness the wind for propulsion “without any engine at all.”

Tony Lengerich, vice president of Naval Programs at the United Kingdom-based Thales Defense and Security, which made the active sonar for Spectre, described the drones as a forward lookout presence for conventional Navy ships. 

“We’re looking forward to bringing that capability in active sonar … to the Navy fleet, particularly in the theater ASW context, where you really need a vessel that can take a sensor far out ahead of the battle group, if you will, loiter there, deploy the sensor and then move again,” he said. “That’s exactly what Saildrone brings to the table, and it’s exactly what we think the Navy needs.”

Paul Lemmo, vice president and general manager for sensors, effectors & mission systems (SEMS) at Lockheed Martin, called the drones a cost-effective way of “putting more players on the field.”

“The Chief of Naval Operations [Navy Adm. Daryl Caudle] has said it’s an important thing, so you’ve got more shooters on a fairly inexpensive platform instead of a multi-billion dollar destroyer,” he said.

From an ASW perspective, Lengerich said, the platform works for clearing and assessing “broad ocean areas” before moving a manned battle force in.  

“This provides that capability to take an active sonar source forward – ping, if you will, and then your shooters … pick up the ping and identify where you have an adversary in an area that you eventually want to move the force to. So we think of this as a theater asset, one that means far ahead of the force, both in time and space, and then advances the ability for the battle force to move in and be certain of what’s waiting for them.”

The unit price of Spectre is around $40 million, Jenkins said. That’s compared to about $7.5 million for the unarmed, much smaller 20-foot Surveyor.

The Navy has struggled to get its arms around what it wants out of its drone ships and how exactly they will integrate with the manned fleet. One of its earliest unmanned surface vessel test articles, Sea Hunter, was christened a decade ago. Navy officials announced earlier this year that Sea Hunter, a medium-sized USV, and its sister ship, Seahawk, would finally leave experimental status in 2026. One of these vessels, reportedly Seahawk, is expected to deploy this year with a carrier strike group. 

Last year, the Navy unveiled plans for a family of uncrewed Modular Surface Attack Craft (MASC), emphasizing containerized missile launchers and highly configurable payloads. The service replaced this strategy last month, however, with what it called a “marketplace” for MUSVs, giving would-be competitors a matter of weeks to submit proposals for mature vessels that could be fielded in Fiscal Year 2027. Core requirements were laid out for seakeeping, long range and endurance, and cargo capabilities, as you can read more about here. The need to be able to carry two forty-foot equivalent unit (FEU) containerized payloads is a key demand, though the Navy has not yet specified publicly what might go in them.

“Honestly, inside you could have a sensor, you could have repair equipment for ships,” Rebecca Gassler, the Navy’s Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Robotic and Autonomous Systems (PAE RAS), told TWZ and other outlets during a press call in March. “You could have any number of payloads inside those, and you basically are able to just swap them on.”

Navy officials have said they want 11 operational MUSVs by next year, and have projected that half the surface fleet will be uncrewed by 2045.

Saildrone has plans to demonstrate the ability of Surveyor to carry a JAGM launcher at the joint Rim of the Pacific exercise in July. Lemmo said the team plans to demonstrate the same capability on Spectre soon. The company says construction on Spectre is about to begin shortly, with sea trials for the first vessel set for early next year.

Contact the editor: Tyler@twz.com

What should I wear today?

Do I want to choose between my comfort or someone else’s comfort? If I buy this shirt, it will be a bargain for me, but it risks someone else’s life. Is that worth it? Those workers need work, so I am helping by creating demand for their products. Right?

As a college student, I want to fit in: same styles, same jewelry, same colors, same brands. However, I am also in search of a job and living off savings from my high school job. I have bought clothes from Shein as well as other questionable fast fashion brands. I justified my purchase for my bank account’s comfort and to make me feel like I fit in. I pretended to know about the environmental harm and the treatment of garment workers, but it was a selfish decision.

Fast fashion is not new.

It started in the late 1970s and rose to popularity in the 1990s as companies tried to keep up with trends (Kelleher, 2026). Companies started offering lower prices to encourage consumers to continue buying more clothes. The lower prices often came at the cost of garment workers as well as the toll on the environment. Companies like Shein, Amazon, Forever 21, H&M, Primark, Uniqlo, Fashion Nova, and many other brands worldwide are accused of working with suppliers who violate international human rights.

Gender in the garment industry.

The garment industry consists of almost 100 million people, with 75% of the workforce being employed in Asia. However, with high levels of informal employment, a true number is hard to estimate, but around 60 to 80% of the workforce is female (Amnesty International, 2025). For women, the garment industry is seen as a way to enter the workforce (Tahir, 2024). These women are predominantly young women who are internal migrants without family and support networks, making them more vulnerable to abuse and exploitation by companies (Amnesty International, 2025). Common violations are wage theft, harassment, inhumane working hours and conditions, and restrictions on speaking out (Business and Human Rights Centre, 2023).

They also face discrimination from male management, reporting a lack of access to childcare, maternity pay, and other benefits. Pregnant women are also a target because they are considered “unproductive.” When workers unionize, they face threats and retaliation from management and hostility from the government, making negotiating better conditions impossible (Amnesty International, 2025).

Who is responsible?

Big-name brands are the ones who are profiting, because they get cheap labor and fast production time, and they get to blame the suppliers for the inhumane conditions. Brands demand that suppliers respect human rights in the workplace but incentivize them to do the

opposite. In Pakistan, they force suppliers to use price-bidding systems to undercut other factories to win contracts, which leads to cutting corners in terms of safety conditions for workers (Kashyap, 2023). After brands foster these conditions, they avoid responsibility by citing lack of control over international suppliers.

While the International Labor Organization (ILO) sets out freedoms for workers, it is up to member countries to supervise, enforce, and report on the implementation of standards. Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Myanmar, and Pakistan are all member states of the ILO and should be backing up workers’ rights, but these governments often lack capacity to address these issues (Helm, 2025). This is often seen as the government overlooking the abuses as the industry benefits economic development and growth (Amnesty International, 2025).

What can I do?

Not all consumers might have bought from companies like Shein, but you probably have bought from Amazon, Gap, Walmart, Target, IKEA, and other “higher quality” brands. You should not go to your closet and throw out all brands that are unethical; that would contribute to the environmental damage from the garment sector. Students can focus on creating a wardrobe of capsule essentials rather than today’s trendy clothes. By using articles like the Fashion Transparency Index and other credible sources to inform your consumption choices, you can support ethical practices and treatment of women in the garment industry. On an international level, you can follow and sign the accord by the Clean Clothes Campaign to ensure safety in the workplace and empower workers to speak up without fear (Clean Clothes Campaign, 2026).

Now, I stare at my closet, wondering what I should wear. My clothes help express my personality, keep me comfortable, and help my confidence, but is that really worth the cost of other women suffering? These trends will be over by the time my Amazon package arrives. The women making my clothes are more than just workers and should be treated first as humans. I know I vote with my dollars, so I will vote for the protection of workers’ rights over my own comfort.

Chinese startup says DeepSeek-V4-Pro beats all rival open models for maths and coding.

China’s DeepSeek has unveiled the latest versions of its signature artificial intelligence-powered chatbot, a year after its flagship model sent shockwaves through the global tech scene.

The Chinese startup launched preview versions of DeepSeek-V4-Pro and DeepSeek-V4-Flash on Friday as it touted its ability to go toe-to-toe with US rivals such as OpenAI and Google.

Like DeepSeek’s previous chatbots, V4-Pro and V4-Flash follow an open-source model, meaning developers are free to use and modify the source code at will.

DeepSeek-V4-Pro beats all rival open models for maths and coding, and trails only Google’s Gemini 3.1-Pro, a closed model, for world knowledge, DeepSeek said in an announcement on social media.

The “pro” version’s performance falls only “marginally short” of OpenAI’s GPT‑5.4 and Gemini 3.1-Pro, “suggesting a developmental trajectory that trails state-of-the-art frontier models by approximately 3 to 6 months,” the Hangzhou-based startup said.

The “flash” model has similar reasoning abilities to the “pro” version, while offering faster response times and “highly cost-effective” usage pricing, the firm said.

The release comes after DeepSeek-R1 stunned the tech sector upon its launch in January last year with capabilities broadly comparable with those of ChatGPT and Gemini.

Marc Andreessen, a prominent Silicon Valley venture capitalist with close ties to United States President Donald Trump, hailed the model’s release at the time as “AI’s Sputnik moment”.

The performance of the Chinese-developed model attracted particular attention as its developers claimed to have spent less than $6m on computing costs – a fraction of the multibillion-dollar budgets that are usual in Silicon Valley.

Some tech analysts challenged DeepSeek’s account of working with such scant resources, arguing that the startup most likely had access to greater funding and more advanced chips than acknowledged.

DeepSeek’s arrival on the scene prompted blowback in some countries amid concerns about data protection and Chinese government censorship.

Multiple US states, Australia, Taiwan, South Korea, Denmark and Italy introduced bans or other restrictions on DeepSeek-R1 shortly after its release, citing privacy and national security concerns.

Meta will lay off 8,000 workers while Microsoft is offering buyouts to 8,750 people, a first for the Windows maker.

Meta is laying off about 8,000 workers, or about 10 percent of its workforce, the company has said as it continues to ramp up spending on artificial intelligence infrastructure and highly paid AI-expert hires.

On Thursday, the company said it was making the cuts for the sake of efficiency and to allow new investments in parts of its business, as first reported by Bloomberg, which also said the company will leave about 6,000 jobs unfilled.

Also on Thursday, Microsoft said it was offering voluntary buyouts to thousands of its US employees.

The software giant plans to make the offers in early May to about 8,750 people, or 7 percent of its US workforce, according to two people familiar with the plan who were not authorised to speak about it publicly.

While an alternative to the sudden layoffs removing tech workers from peers like Meta and Oracle, the savings are likely tied to a similar industry upheaval that is requiring huge spending on the costs of artificial intelligence.

Meta has already warned investors that its 2026 expenses will grow significantly — to the range of $162bn to $169bn — driven by infrastructure costs and employee compensation, particularly for the AI experts it has been hiring at eye-popping pay levels.

This week, Meta also said it was breaking ground on an AI-optimised data centre in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a $1bn investment and its 28th data centre in the US.

Wedbush analyst Dan Ives welcomed Meta’s cuts in a note to investors on Thursday.

He said he sees it as part of a strategy of using AI tools to “automate tasks that once required large teams, allowing the company to streamline operations and reduce costs while maintaining productivity, driving an increased need for a leaner operating structure”.

Microsoft, based in Redmond, Washington state, has spent billions of dollars on operating an ever-expanding global network of data centres that power cloud computing services, AI systems and its own suite of productivity tools, including the AI assistant Copilot.

CNBC reported earlier on Thursday on a memo from Microsoft’s chief people officer, Amy Coleman, announcing the voluntary retirement plan.

“Our hope is that this program gives those eligible the choice to take that next step on their own terms, with generous company support,” Coleman wrote, according to CNBC.

Meta stock fell 2.3 percent on Thursday, while Microsoft stock ended the day down 3.97 percent.

Jump in prices comes as Donald Trump says vessels will need permission of US Navy to transit key waterway.

Oil prices have jumped on heightened tensions between the United States and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz following Washington and Tehran’s tit-for-tat captures of commercial vessels.

Brent crude, the international benchmark, topped $106 per barrel early on Friday morning as Washington and Tehran stepped up their confrontation over the key maritime route for transporting the world’s energy.

Brent stood at $106.80 as of 01:00 GMT, up nearly 5 percent from its closing price on Wednesday, when it surpassed $100 per barrel for the first time in two weeks.

US stocks fell overnight, with the benchmark S&P 500 index dipping 0.41 percent and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite dropping 0.89 percent.

Shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, which normally carries about one-fifth of the world’s supply of oil and natural gas, remains at a standstill as Iran continues to demand the right to decide which vessels may pass and the US blocks Iran’s maritime trade.

US President Donald Trump said in a Truth Social post on Thursday that he had ordered the US Navy to destroy any Iranian boats laying mines in the strait, shortly after the Pentagon announced that it had seized a tanker carrying sanctioned Iranian oil for the second time in less than a week.

Trump also appeared to expand the scope of the US naval blockade beyond Iranian ports, writing on Truth Social that no ship “can enter or leave” the strait without the approval of the US Navy.

“It is ‘Sealed up Tight,’ until such time as Iran is able to make a DEAL!!!” Trump said.

Trump’s threats came a day after Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps announced the capture of two foreign cargo ships in the waterway.

The IRGC said it had seized the Panamanian-flagged MSC Francesca and Greek-owned Epaminondas after the vessels had endangered maritime security “by operating without the necessary permits and tampering with navigation systems”.

The Greek Maritime Affairs and Insular Policy Ministry has denied that the Epaminondas was captured and said the vessel remains under the control of its captain.

Only nine commercial vessels transited the strait on Wednesday, compared with seven on Tuesday and 15 on Monday, according to maritime intelligence platform Windward.

Before the US and Israel launched their war against Iran on February 28, the waterway saw an average of 129 transits each day, according to United Nations Trade and Development.

Venezuela’s January 2026 hydrocarbons law reform marks a major shift in the country’s oil sector. It establishes a more flexible fiscal regime in the name of “international competitiveness,” while expanding the private sector role in extraction, operations, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

The reform follows years of US sanctions on Venezuela’s oil industry and coincides with new US licenses allowing Western conglomerates to move into Venezuela’s energy sector.

Join Blas Regnault, energy policy analyst and consultant focused on oil geopolitics, alongside Venezuelanalysis editors Ricardo Vaz and Lucas Koerner, as they break down the reform, its economic and political context, and what it means for control over strategic resources and national sovereignty.

Powered by RedCircle

U.S. President Donald Trump has ordered the Navy to attack any Iranian boats mining the Strait of Hormuz. His decree, issued on Truth Social, also claims the U.S. is currently demining the strategic waterway. His announcement comes hours after the U.S. boarded another Iranian-linked vessel in the Indian Ocean and a day after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) fired on at least three ships and seized two of them in the Strait.

All this activity is taking place as the prospect of peace talks remains unclear two days after Trump announced a ceasefire extension, which we will discuss later in this story.

“I have ordered the United States Navy to shoot and kill any boat, small boats though they may be (Their naval ships are ALL, 159 of them, at the bottom of the sea!), that is putting mines in the waters of the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump proclaimed on his social media site. “There is to be no hesitation. Additionally, our mine ‘sweepers’ are clearing the Strait right now. I am hereby ordering that activity to continue, but at a tripled up level!”

It should be noted that the IRGC has invested heavily in its fleet of small boats for decades as TWZ has explored in the past. In addition to being armed with short-range anti-ship missiles, as well as artillery rockets and other weapons, they can also be used to lay naval mines. While the president claimed that 159 Iranian ships have been destroyed, the IRGC still has a large number of these small vessels.

In a story yesterday, The Washington Post reported that the Pentagon told Congress it could take six months to fully clear the Strait of Hormuz of mines deployed by the Iranian military.

EXCLUSIVE: It could take six months to fully clear the Strait of Hormuz of mines deployed by the Iranian military, and any such operation is unlikely to be carried out until the U.S. war with Iran ends, the Pentagon has informed Congress — an assessment that means the conflict’s…

— Dan Lamothe (@DanLamothe) April 22, 2026

With three carrier strike groups, several destroyers and scores of land-based aircraft in the region, the U.S. is well-postured to take out Iranian boats if needed. Striking Iran’s Navy was a prime mission for Epic Fury, as Trump noted. However, it is not publicly known at the moment what assets are conducting the mine sweeping Trump claimed or what the current level is of that activity that he wants to triple. We’ve reached out to the White House and U.S. Central Command for more details.

While it is possible one or more of these vessels could be in the Strait, doing so would put them at a greater risk of attack from Iran’s remaining cache of land-based weapons like anti-ship missiles and drones, as well as what’s left of its flotilla of small boats and uncrewed surface vessels (USVs).

As we reported on April 13, a pair of Avenger class mine-hunters homeported in Japan were tracked sailing westward out of the Pacific Ocean, however, they are still a distance away from the Strait. USS Chief and USS Pioneer departed Colombo, Sri Lanka, yesterday following a two-day port call, public AIS data on MarineTraffic shows. They stopped transmitting AIS while steaming northwest at 10 knots toward the CENTCOM area of responsibility, although their final destination is unconfirmed.

USS Chief (MCM-14) and USS Pioneer (MCM-9) Avenger-class mine countermeasures ships leaving Singapore – April 10, 2026 SRC: INST- yplanesonly pic.twitter.com/49unSU9nuf

— WarshipCam (@WarshipCam) April 10, 2026

The U.S. also has a trio of littoral combat ships (LCS) forward-deployed to U.S. 5th Fleet and configured for mine countermeasures missions. However, as we previously reported, those ships were redeployed from Bahrain ahead of the conflict, and two emerged unexpectedly in Southeast Asia last month. It remains unclear why the decision was made to send them to the other side of the globe amid the threat of Iran mining the Strait of Hormuz, but both were recently spotted sailing northbound in the Malacca Strait after weeks in Singapore.

The Santa Barbara left Singapore on April 16 and the Tulsa left on April 2.

USS Canberra is the only confirmed mine sweeper currently in CENTCOM, according to a post on the Pentagon’s image sharing site that shows the Independence class LCS patrolling in the Arabian Sea.

The arrival of Pioneer and Chief would increase mine sweepers from one to three, tripling the coverage, which aligns with Trump’s order. The other two LCSs, USS Tulsa and USS Santa Barbara, could also be nearby or on station in the Middle East to support the MCM mission.

UPDATE: There are 4 minesweeping ships in the US Navy, 2 in Japan and 2 are en route to the CENTCOM/5th Fleet (may already be in the AOR).

There are 3 Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) with mine countermeasures modules (MCM) assigned to CENTCOM/5th Fleet with only 1, the USS Canberra… https://t.co/DOKqZdp3nt

— TheIntelFrog (@TheIntelFrog) April 23, 2026

The transit of the Chief is not without issues. A sailor assigned to the was medically evacuated to his home port after he was scratched by an Asian monkey while ashore in Thailand, Axios reported.

“The Navy reports the incident did not delay the USS Chief‘s mission and that the sailor is OK, but officials say the attack is a reminder that military missions face unexpected troubles and disruptions that are hard to war-game for,” the outlet added.

NEW: A U.S. Navy sailor assigned to a minesweeping ship that’s headed to the Strait of Hormuz was medically evacuated to his home port after he was scratched by an Asian monkey while ashore in Thailand https://t.co/NQ2xaoErBF

— Axios (@axios) April 23, 2026

UPDATES

UPDATE: 6:07 PM EDT –

“U.S. military officials are developing new plans to target Iran’s capabilities in the Strait of Hormuz in the event the current ceasefire with Iran falls apart,” CNN is reporting. 

An additional option, according to the cable network, is targeting individual Iranian military leaders and other “obstructionists” U.S. officials believe are actively undermining negotiations.

New: US military officials are developing new plans to target Iran’s capabilities in the Strait of Hormuz in the event the current ceasefire with Iran falls apart, multiple sources tell me.

Another option — target individual Iranian military leaders & other “obstructionists” US…

— Zachary Cohen (@ZcohenCNN) April 23, 2026

UPDATE: 5:50 PM EDT-

The U.S. has burned through so many munitions in Iran that some administration officials increasingly assess that America couldn’t fully execute contingency plans to defend Taiwan from a Chinese invasion if it occurred in the near term, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing U.S. officials.

“The U.S. has fired more than 1,000 long-range Tomahawk missiles since the war with Iran began on Feb. 28, as well as 1,500 to 2,000 critical air-defense missiles, including Thaad, Patriot and Standard Missile interceptors, according to U.S. officials,” the publication added.

NEW: The U.S. has burned through so many munitions in Iran that some administration officials increasingly assess that America couldn’t fully execute contingency plans to defend Taiwan from a Chinese invasion if it occurred in the near term, U.S. officials said.

— Alex Ward (@alexbward) April 23, 2026

UPDATE: 5:34 PM EDT –

Trump announced that the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon will be extended for three weeks.

“The President of the United States, DONALD J. TRUMP, Vice President of the United States, JD Vance, Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, and Ambassador to Lebanon, Michel Issa, met today with High Ranking Representatives of Israel and Lebanon in the Oval Office,” Trump announced on Truth Social. “The Meeting went very well! The United States is going to work with Lebanon in order to help it protect itself from Hezbollah. The Ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon will be extended by THREE WEEKS. I look forward in the near future to hosting the Prime Minister of Israel, Bibi Netanyahu, and the President of Lebanon, Joseph Aoun. It was a Great Honor to be a participant at this very Historic Meeting!”

.@POTUS: “We had a great meeting with very high officials of Lebanon and very high officials of Israel… They’ve agreed to an additional three weeks of ceasefire… It’ll be a wonderful thing to get this worked out simultaneously with what we’re doing in Iran.” https://t.co/Aok4VOGE6G pic.twitter.com/faS4Z6JAhv

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 23, 2026

UPDATE: 5:15 PM EDT –

Hezbollah reportedly launched about five rockets at northern Israel. The IDF says its forces intercepted all the rockets. There were no reported injuries.

UPDATE: 5:09 PM EDT –

During an afternoon press conference on healthcare, Trump offered additional insight into his ongoing dealings with Iran.

Iran “came to us, and they said ‘we will agree to open the Strait,’ and all my people are happy,” Trump exclaimed. “Everybody was happy—except me. I said, wait a minute. If we open this Strait, that means they’re going to make $500 million a day. I don’t want them to make $500 million a day until they settle this thing, so I’m the one that kept it closed. We have total control of it. And it’ll open when they make a deal or something else happens.”

BREAKING: President Trump says he could make a deal with Iran “right now,” but he wants it to be “everlasting,” not temporary.

“We have total control of the Strait… They would have opened it up three days ago. They came to us and they said, ‘we will agree to open the Strait.’… pic.twitter.com/W7ayTC6dn8

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 23, 2026

On the topic of who is in charge in Tehran, Trump said: “Iran wants to make a deal and we’ve been speaking to them, but they don’t even know who’s leading their country. They are in turmoil, so we thought we’d give them a little chance to get some of that resolved.”

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Iran wants to make a deal and we’ve been speaking to them, but they don’t even know who’s leading their country. They are in turmoil, so we thought we’d give them a little chance to get some of that resolved. pic.twitter.com/0gLeHRl8cl

— Department of State (@StateDept) April 23, 2026

As far as the military goals of Epic Fury, Trump said: “We’ve hit 78% of the targets that we’ve wanted to hit. If Iran doesn’t want to make a deal, then I’ll finish it up militarily with the other targets.”

PRESIDENT TRUMP: We’ve hit 78% of the targets that we’ve wanted to hit. If Iran doesn’t want to make a deal, then I’ll finish it up militarily with the other targets. pic.twitter.com/42h4QGnQXV

— Department of State (@StateDept) April 23, 2026

Asked about the timeline of Epic Fury, Trump snapped that: “I don’t want to rush it; I want to take my time. We have plenty of time, and I want to get a great deal. I want to get a deal where our nation and the world are safe from lunatics with nuclear weapons.”

Trump:

I don’t want to rush it; I want to take my time.

We have plenty of time, and I want to get a great deal.

I want to get a deal where our nation and the world are safe from lunatics with nuclear weapons. pic.twitter.com/qN0xKFRXw5

— Clash Report (@clashreport) April 23, 2026

Queried about whether he would use a nuclear weapon against Iran, Trump retorted: “No. Why would a stupid question like that be asked? Why would l use a nuclear weapon when we’ve totally decimated Iran without it? A nuclear weapon should never be allowed to be used by anybody.”

REPORTER: Would you use a nuclear weapon against Iran?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No. Why would a stupid question like that be asked?

Why would l use a nuclear weapon when we’ve totally decimated Iran without it? A nuclear weapon should never be allowed to be used by anybody. pic.twitter.com/7hAlHLrNT4

— Department of State (@StateDept) April 23, 2026

Earlier this morning, the Pentagon announced an overnight “maritime interdiction and right-of-visit boarding of the sanctioned stateless vessel M/T Majestic X transporting oil from Iran, in the Indian Ocean within the INDOPACOM area of responsibility.”

“We will continue global maritime enforcement to disrupt illicit networks and interdict vessels providing material support to Iran, wherever they operate,” the Pentagon said, repeating a refrain it used earlier this week after the interdiction of the M/T Tifani in the Indian Ocean. “International waters cannot be used as a shield by sanctioned actors. The Department of War will continue to deny illicit actors and their vessels freedom of maneuver in the maritime domain.”

Video released by the Pentagon shows troops boarding MH-60S Seahawk helicopters then repelling onto the ship and searching it. As in the case of the boarding of the Tifani, a U.S. Navy Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) vessel, which you can see in the background, provided support for this operation.

Overnight, U.S. forces carried out a maritime interdiction and right-of-visit boarding of the sanctioned stateless vessel M/T Majestic X transporting oil from Iran, in the Indian Ocean within the INDOPACOM area of responsibility.

We will continue global maritime enforcement to… pic.twitter.com/SWF6Jt9Ci4

— Department of War 🇺🇸 (@DeptofWar) April 23, 2026

The Pentagon gave the ship’s name as Majestic X but the ship – IMO number 9198317- is also known as Phonix, according to SeaTrade Maritime News. The open-source maritime tracking site MarineTraffic shows that the Guyana-flagged crude oil tanker is located about 200 miles east of Sri Lanka and some 2,000 miles southeast of Iran.

While MarineTraffic data indicates the vessel is currently moving southwest about 8 knots, its current disposition is unclear. The Pentagon declined to offer further information and we have reached out to the White House for additional details.

The fate of the Tifani, boarded on April 21, is now in the hands of the Department of Justice, the Pentagon told us. We reached out to them for more details.

CENTCOM said it has turned away 31 ships so far during the blockade of Iranian ports.

The command also announced that, as anticipated, the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush is now in the Indian Ocean part of its region. That brings the total carrier force to three for now, with the Abraham Lincoln and Gerald R. Ford already on station. However, the Ford, which has set a record for the longest deployment since the Vietnam War and has suffered issues ranging from a fire to leaky plumbing, is likely to depart the area soon.

Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77) sails in the Indian Ocean in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, April 23. pic.twitter.com/oDcTM6YMLF

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) April 23, 2026

Two days into the ceasefire extension declared by Trump, efforts to negotiate a peace deal remain murky.

Iranian officials have yet to commit to a new round of talks, which the president blames on schisms in its government between hardliners in the IRGC and more moderate elements.

“Iran is having a very hard time figuring out who their leader is!,” Trump exclaimed on Truth Social. “They just don’t know! The infighting is between the ‘Hardliners,’ who have been losing BADLY on the battlefield, and the ‘Moderates,’ who are not very moderate at all (but gaining respect!), is CRAZY!.”

Iranian officials have pushed back against the notion their government is fractured.

“In Iran, there are no radicals or moderates; we are all ‘Iranian’ and “revolutionary,” and with the iron unity of the nation and government, with complete obedience to the Supreme Leader of the Revolution, we will make the aggressor criminal regret his actions,” Speaker of the Iranian Parliament Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf stated on X. “One God, one leader, one nation, and one path; that path being the path to victory for Iran, dearer than life.”

در ایران ما تندرو و میانه‌رو وجود ندارد؛
همه ما «ایرانی» و «انقلابی» هستیم و با اتحاد آهنین ملت و دولت، با تبعیت کامل از رهبر معظم انقلاب متجاوز جنایتکار را پشیمان خواهیم کرد.

یک خدا، یک رهبر، یک ملت، و یک راه؛ آن هم راه پیروزی ایرانِ عزیزتر از جان.
#ایران_ما

— محمدباقر قالیباف | MB Ghalibaf (@mb_ghalibaf) April 23, 2026

However, at about the time Ghalibaf posted that, Israel’s N12 News outlet reported that Ghalibaf stepped down as a result of interference from the IRGC.

“The reason for the extreme step is his refusal to accept the growing intervention of IRGC generals – including prominent names such as Ahmed and Heidi and Abdullahian,” the outlet claimed in its unsourced story. “According to the information obtained by News 12, the generals penetrate into the decision-making processes and prevent Ghalibaf from providing the maneuver required to manage the negotiations.”

The War Zone cannot independently verify this.

In an extremely notable development, Israel’s N12 news outlet is reporting that the Iranian Speaker of the Parliament Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf has been forced to resign from the Iranian negotiating team by factions within Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). pic.twitter.com/bOu01XX8AT

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) April 23, 2026

Meanwhile, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said his country “is prepared to resume the war against Iran,” but needs permission from Trump.

“We are awaiting a green light from the United States — first and foremost to complete the elimination of the Khamenei family and to push Iran back into a dark age,” Katz added. “This time, the strike will be different and far more lethal, delivering devastating blows at the most sensitive points — ones that will shake and undermine its very foundations”.

🚨🚨 Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz: “Israel is prepared to resume the war against Iran — We are awaiting a green light from the United States — first and foremost to complete the elimination of the Khamenei family and to push Iran back into a dark age. This time, the…

— Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) April 23, 2026

In his Truth Social post about Iranian leadership, Trump added that the U.S. has “total control over the Strait of Hormuz. No ship can enter or leave without the approval of the United States Navy. It is ‘Sealed up Tight, until such time as Iran is able to make a DEAL!!!”

The Iranians, however, have a different take.

“We have control over this Strait,” Hamidreza Hajibabaei, the deputy speaker of Iran’s parliament, said Thursday, according to the semi-official Fars News Agency. Hajibabaei, speaking at a public gathering in the western city of Kuhdasht, added that the first revenues from Iran’s new tolls on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz have been deposited in the Iranian state central bank account.

“If the United States continues on its current course, no vessels will pass through the Strait of Hormuz,” Hajibabaei warned. “We are not engaged in negotiations — rather, we are making demands.”

“The amount collected from each ship depends on its cargo and level of risk they pose,” said Alireza Salimi, another member of the Iranian parliament, according to the IRGC-linked Tasnim News Agency.

“Iran determines how much and how these fees are collected, in other words, we determine the rules,” Salimi said. The War Zone cannot independently verify this claim.

Trump has previously threatened ships that pay tolls to Iran to use the Strait.

Iran Deposits Transit Fees from Hormuz Strait Ships into Treasury Account

Iran has begun depositing transit fees collected from ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz into the national treasury. pic.twitter.com/jkMUH3thZ4

— Tasnim News Agency (@Tasnimnews_EN) April 23, 2026

Lloyds List reports that the Houthi rebels of Yemen, an Iranian proxy, could institute their own tolls around the Bab al-Mandab region.

“Mechanisms have been discussed at senior leadership levels indicating Houthi ambition to control, and not merely disrupt, maritime traffic,” the outlet reported. “Conversations have been supported by Iranian involvement. But the militia is looking to act on its own terms.”

You can read more about what a Houthi intervention into the conflict would mean in our report about it here.

Iran’s decision to levy payments on transiting vessels has created a model that Houthi militants may soon replicate at the Bab el Mandeb, further threatening global trade flowshttps://t.co/AGcgSytuBk

— Lloyd’s List (@LloydsList) April 23, 2026

The maritime security environment across the Arabian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, and Strait of Hormuz “remains CRITICAL, driven by recent attack patterns, continued navigation interference, and persistent operational disruption, including impacts to port activity,” according to the latest update from the Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC). Despite the April 8 ceasefire, “commercial traffic remains limited, with constrained transits and continued routing uncertainty.”

With the Strait of Hormuz closed, the demand on transiting the Panama Canal has become so intense that one vessel carrying liquefied natural gas (LNG) paid $4 million to skip the line and avoid a wait that can take up to five days, according to AFP, citing an official report.

🇵🇦 Strait of Hormuz blockade drives up traffic at Panama Canal

The war in the Middle East has boosted demand to move vital cargo through the Panama Canal to such an extent that one vessel carrying liquefied natural gas (LNG) paid $4 million to skip the line and avoid a wait that… pic.twitter.com/ySnwGLSv46

— AFP News Agency (@AFP) April 23, 2026

Oil isn’t the only commodity supply affected by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. According to the United Nations, one-third of global fertilizers are stalled in that body of water as well. 

“With planting seasons already underway, we have no time to lose,” the world organization noted. “This is not a matter of logistics or economics – it’s about saving lives. If we don’t act, a massive food crisis will hit the most vulnerable the hardest.”

One-third of global fertilizers are stalled in the Strait of Hormuz. With planting seasons already underway, we have no time to lose.

This is not a matter of logistics or economics – it’s about saving lives. If we don’t act, a massive food crisis will hit the most vulnerable…

— Jorge Moreira da Silva (@UNOPS_Chief) April 22, 2026

Indian crew aboard two of the ships fired upon yesterday in the Strait of Hormuz by IRGC are safe, according to Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesman Randhir Jaiswal.

The firing happened on 2 foreign ships in Hormuz, Indian nationals on them are safe, says MEA Spox Randhir Jaiswal; In touch with Iran govt over safe passage of Indian vessels. pic.twitter.com/kalngqpjVw

— Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) April 23, 2026

During the now-extended ceasefire with Iran, the U.S. continues to flow military assets to the Middle East.

Online flight trackers indicate that the first group of aerial refueling tankers supporting F/A-18C Hornets from the VMFA-312 “Checkerboards” are airborne from Lajes.

“The flight plans filed for the tankers indicate the jets are going straight into CENTCOM today,” according to open-source flight tracker DefenceGeek.

Coronet East 052 – Marines Move Forward to CENTCOM #FreeIran‌
— Operation EPIC FURY —

The first group of tankers supporting the onward movement of VMFA-312 “Checkerboards” F/A-18C “Hornet” fast-jets today are airborne from Lajes (LPLA). The flightplans filed for the tankers… pic.twitter.com/42ZauX778m

— DefenceGeek 🇬🇧 (@DefenceGeek) April 23, 2026

Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors are expected to convene again at the State Department on Thursday for a second round of meetings amid the latest conflagration in the Middle East, according to ABC News.

The first direct negotiations between the two states since 1993 “are intended as preparatory meetings to shape future talks on a deal to normalize ties between the countries,” the network noted. “Thursday’s meeting is expected to focus on extending a shaky ceasefire that has halted fighting between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia.”

Lebanon enters potential talks with Israel amid deep internal divisions, echoing the failed 1983 peace deal. While some argue negotiations are vital for stability, senior figures and Hezbollah oppose direct talks, risking renewed unrest.

Al Jazeera’s @ZeinakhodrAljaz reports. pic.twitter.com/IupaGElwlW

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) April 23, 2026

Trump will host the event.

“The ambassador-level talks between Israel and Lebanon will now take place at the White House,” an official tols us. “President Trump will greet the representatives upon their arrival.”

🔴 BREAKING: US President Donald Trump may attend today’s meeting between Lebanese and Israeli officials, which has been moved from the State Department to the White House, according to sources familiar with the matter. pic.twitter.com/2HknXgzqBE

— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) April 23, 2026

Despite the ongoing ceasefire, Israel is maintaining its positions in southern Lebanon and issued a new warning to residents there.

“We reiterate and warn that, out of concern for your safety and the safety of your family members, and until further notice, you are required not to move south of the line of the villages shown and their surroundings,” IDF spokesman Avichay Adraee stated on X. “Additionally, approaching the Litani River area, Wadi Salhani, and Salouqi is not permitted.”

#عاجل ‼️رسالة عاجلة إلى سكان جنوب لبنان

⭕️نجدد تأكيدنا انه خلال فترة اتفاق وقف إطلاق النار يواصل جيش الدفاع تمركزه في مواقعه بجنوب لبنان في مواجهة النشاطات الإرهابية المستمرة لمنظمة حزب الله.

⭕️نعود ونحذر انه وحرصًا على سلامتكم وسلامة أبناء عائلاتكم وحتى إشعار آخر انتم مطالبون… pic.twitter.com/YBjksAhVja

— افيخاي ادرعي (@AvichayAdraee) April 23, 2026

Heading into a second round of rare direct talks with Israel, Lebanon is urging the Trump administration to pressure Israel to scale back its demands and end its military invasion of the country, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said in an interview with The Washington Post.

Salam said Lebanon could not sign any agreement that does not include a “full withdrawal” of Israeli forces.

“We cannot live with a so-called buffer zone,” he said, “an Israeli presence where Lebanese displaced people are not allowed to return, where destroyed villages and towns cannot be rebuilt.”

Hours before the second round of direct talks with Israel, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam says any agreement must include a “full withdrawal” of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon.

Speaking with the Washington Post, Salam says that Beirut is urging the U.S. to pressure…

— Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) April 23, 2026

Israeli strikes killed one journalist and wounded another in southern Lebanon on Wednesday, The New York Times reported.

“The Lebanese Ministry of Public Health said the Israeli military had targeted the journalists in the town of Tayri, where they took shelter in a nearby house after an airstrike struck a vehicle in front of the car they were traveling in,” the newspaper noted. “About an hour and a half later, a second strike hit the house they were hiding in, according to a statement by a Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, which employed the journalist who was killed.”

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Caracas, April 23, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez has established a commission to assess the “strategic” value of state-owned assets and their possible transfer to the private sector.

The Commission for the Evaluation of Public Assets held its first meeting on Wednesday. In a short televised message, Rodríguez said the commission had the purpose of bringing “agility and modernity” to the Venezuelan state.

The acting president announced that Venezuelan state assets would be divided into four categories: strategic ones to remain under state control, “strategic alliances” where the state retains ownership but management is turned over to the private sector in concession-type deals, “non-strategic” assets to be fully privatized; and assets to be liquidated or reincorporated elsewhere.

“The purpose of this commission is to elevate Venezuela’s productivity levels, so that the Venezuelan state can be robust and attend to the strategic aspects of the nation,” she said.

The commission includes Economic Sector Vice President Calixto Ortega, Finance Minister Anabel Pereira, Industry Minister Luis Villegas, State Solicitor Arianny Seijo, Communes Minister Ángel Prado, as well as Luis Pisella, former president of industry guild CONINDUSTRIA, representing the private sector.

Former Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez spearheaded a nationalization campaign in the 2000s to impose state control of key economic areas such as oil, electricity, telecoms, banking, and the heavy industries.

In recent years, with the economy heavily targeted by US sanctions, the Nicolás Maduro government expanded “strategic alliances” with the private sector, particularly in the Venezuelan countryside. However, campesino organizations have denounced that the private takeover of companies that formerly supplied seeds, inputs, and tractors has significantly raised costs for small-scale producers. Strategic alliances in sugar mills have also drawn complaints of companies defrauding sugar cane growers.

The Cisneros Group, one of Venezuela’s largest private sector conglomerates, has recently announced plans to raise over $1 billion in funds ahead of potential sell-offs of state assets.

Elias Ferrer Breda, financial analyst and director of Orinoco Research, told Venezuelanalysis that he foresees privatizations in basic industries such as steel and cement.

“In my view, we will see virtually all the industries that are running at low capacity and without turning profits privatized,” he predicted. “We are talking about industries like steel and cement, but also other sectors like hotels or agricultural land.”

Ferrer affirmed that state companies currently under strategic alliances, such as sugar mills or Ferrominera Orinoco, an iron-ore complex presently managed by India’s Jindal Steel, could continue under similar deals as opposed to being sold outright.

“Where investors have mostly expressed an interest is in extractive industries: oil and mining,” he added. Ferrer additionally claimed that US “strategic and business interests” are likely to pursue control over Venezuelan critical mineral reserves, which are not presently certified.

Rodríguez had unveiled the commission to evaluate state assets in an April 9 presidential address. The acting leader also set in motion efforts to reform Venezuela’s labor, tax, and pension legislation. The Venezuelan National Assembly has recently approved pro-business overhauls of the country’s hydrocarbon and mining laws.

Caracas reestablished dealings with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank on April 16. On Wednesday, Rodríguez disclosed a conversation with IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva and stated Caracas’ priority in unblocking around US $5 billion worth of Special Drawing Rights to improve public services such as electricity and water supply.

For her part, Georgieva acknowledged a “very valuable and productive call” and that the next steps include IMF “policy advice and capacity development.”

Venezuelan leaders have vowed that there are no plans to incur IMF debt. However, the Caribbean nation could soon face pressure from creditors looking to collect on a massive external debt, with unpaid loans, defaulted bonds, and international arbitration awards totaling as much as $170 billion with accrued interest.

On April 16, the so-called Venezuelan Creditor Committee held talks with US officials amid efforts to secure a license to engage in debt negotiations with Caracas. The committee includes Fidelity Management & Research Company LLC, Morgan Stanley Investment Management, Greylock Capital Management, and others.

Since the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the Trump administration has seized control of Venezuelan oil revenues while issuing licenses to grant Western corporations favorable access to the Caribbean nation’s energy and mining sectors.

Edited by Lucas Koerner in Fusagasugá, Colombia.

As the US expands its war with Iran, opposition is growing – not just among the public, but inside the military itself. Some service members are questioning orders, exploring conscientious objection, and speaking out. What’s driving this shift, and how far could it go?

In this episode: 

• Mike Prysner (@MikePrysner), Executive Director of the Center on Conscience & War

Episode credits: 

This episode was produced by Marcos Bartolomé, Tamara Khandaker, and Sarí El-Khalili with Spencer Cline, Tuleen Barakat, and our host, Malika Bilal. It was edited by Tamara Khandaker and Noor Wazwaz. 

Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Our video editors are Hisham Abu Salah and Mohannad al-Melhem. Alexandra Locke is The Take’s executive producer.

Connect with us:

@AJEPodcasts on X, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube