TODAY

Mérida, August 24, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) –The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued two general licenses granting specific permissions for telecommunications operations with Venezuela.

Under General License 61 (GL61), published on Friday, OFAC authorized US companies to provide “technology, software, or services for the installation, maintenance, refurbishment, repair, upgrade, operation, or support of telecommunications” to Venezuela’s state-owned telecommunications company CANTV and National Telecommunications Commission CONATEL.

According to official OFAC definitions, telecommunications services encompass fixed and mobile telephony, data transmission, internet connectivity, radio and television broadcasting, news agency feeds, satellite communications, and submarine cables.

GL61 permits specific operational activities, including payment processing, logistics, air freight, insurance, data storage, server maintenance, roaming agreements, and infrastructure leasing. However, the license specifies that Venezuelan state entities must procure new acquisitions directly from US companies or US citizens.

In addition, the Trump administration published General License 62 (GL62), authorizing negotiations for contracts in Venezuela’s telecommunications sector, though specific agreements remain contingent on a separate specific license,

Both sanctions waivers impose that any contracts be governed by the laws of a state or federal jurisdiction within the United States. Furthermore, the licenses demand that “dispute resolution proceedings relating to the contract occur in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, or Singapore.”

The Treasury licenses maintain bans on debt swaps, physical gold, or digital currencies and tokens issued by or on behalf of the Venezuelan government.

Furthermore, GL61 and GL62 maintain restrictions prohibiting “any transaction involving a person located in the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Cuba, the People’s Republic of China, or any entity that is owned or controlled by or in a joint venture with such persons”.

Since the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Washington has upheld its wide-reaching coercive economic sanctions in areas such as energy and mining,  while issuing licenses to favor US and Western corporations.

US sanctions and restrictions on Chinese technology firms present a challenge to CANTV’s recent operational landscape. For the past two decades, the Venezuelan government has forged bilateral agreements with Chinese telecom firms, including ZTE and Huawei, establishing joint projects to manufacture and deploy telecommunications equipment domestically. 

Over the last decade, CANTV has worked with Huawei and ZTE to modernize networks, expand fiber-optic infrastructure, and sustain broadband services nationwide. Venezuelan authorities have not commented on the latest US licenses and potential impact on existing agreements.

In addition, CANTV has been identified by analysts as a potential candidate for privatization. The company has recently been mired in controversy after reportedly slashing retired workers’ incomes. Retirees have staged protests in several states in recent days after a US $200 monthly bonus was arbitrarily slashed, while also demanding the restoration of basic medical insurance and health coverage guaranteed by collective bargaining agreements.

In parallel, CONATEL has launched technical and legal working sessions with representatives of SpaceX’s Starlink service to examine radio spectrum allocation, equipment homologation, and regulatory compliance under Venezuela’s Organic Telecommunications Law.

Despite Maduro previously criticizing SpaceX owner Elon Musk for destabilizing politics in Venezuela and Latin America, the acting Delcy Rodríguez government thanked the tech mogul for activating free Starlink services in the wake of the June 24 double earthquake in the Caribbean nation.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Andrei Fedorov, an adviser to the Kremlin, says there might be a “semi-military” response against UK drone factories by “unknown sources” over the sharing military blueprints with Russia.

His comments on BBC Newsnight come as UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham says he plans to travel to the US next month with European leaders to lobby US President Trump on Ukraine’s defence needs.

In an interview with Bloomberg, Burnham said, “I’m looking forward to going to New York in September,” when the UN General Assembly will meet.

He said that while the details were not “fully confirmed”, it is “likely” he will go. The trip would be his first to the US since becoming prime minister in July.

“Leaving today, I’m quite clear what I need to do in the next few weeks,” he said following his official visit to Ukraine on Monday, during which he promised to continue pressuring Russia.

The UK has also agreed to hand over blueprints for British-made components for the Scalp missile, a French version of the UK’s Storm Shadow cruise missile. The blueprints will allow Ukraine to produce the long-range weapon domestically.

Fedorov, who is Russia’s former deputy foreign minister, said Putin was facing “serious” pressure “to undertake certain measures against UK”. Asked on BBC Newsnight where the pressure was coming from, Fedorov responded, “public opinion polls, it’s coming from journalists, from mass media”.

Asked what a “semi-military” response might look like, Fedorov said “it could take the form of something might happen with enterprises, with factories which are producing drones for Ukraine.”

“They could be attacked not by Russia, but by from unknown sources,” he said.

The comments are in line with those made by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Monday, when he criticised the UK’s decision to share the missile blueprints. Peskov said it prevented “even the slightest progress” towards achieving peace.

He told reporters on Monday that the Russian military was already gathering data to locate any missile production sites to destroy them.

“Britain is involved in this war on the side of the Kyiv regime. Britain methodically and regularly adds fuel to the fire,” he added.

In response, Burnham said: “Who started the fire? That’s the question, isn’t it?”

Burnham’s visit to Ukraine was his first official international visit. He met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv and chaired his first meeting of the “coalition of the willing”, set up by the UK and France under his predecessor Sir Keir Starmer.

Burnham has been reaffirming the UK’s support for Ukraine in the wake of escalating Russian strikes in recent weeks – including one last week on a shopping centre that killed at least 16 people.

Ukraine has been relying on American supplies of the Patriot interceptor missiles, which are used to combat Russia’s ballistic missiles, but stockpiles are running low due to the war in Iran, leaving Ukraine vulnerable to Russian attacks.

Zelensky has said he is hoping to secure 300 patriot missiles ahead of winter, when Russia is likely to increase its attacks on energy infrastructure, as it has done in past years.

In the interview with Bloomberg, Burnham said that he felt “really confident” that the issue was “fixable”. But he pointed out that it wasn’t only the US who could supply Ukraine with Patriots.

“There are other players who could help in the mix who we have influence with,” he said. “It’s probably going to be a solution that involves a lot of layers and a lot of negotiation.”

In July this year, three weeks after offering Ukraine the right to produce Patriots itself, Trump backtracked, saying, “We have not agreed to that. We’re talking about it. But it’s a hard thing to give away, that kind of technology.”

“These weapons are incredible. We have to be very careful about letting somebody build them,” Trump told a cabinet meeting.

In a joint statement after the meeting in Ukraine, Burnham and co-chairs French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the group would aim to strength Kyiv’s air defences “as a matter or urgent priority”.

They also condemned Moscow’s “systemic and escalating strikes against Ukraine’s cities, critical infrastructure and civilians” and pledged to “constrain Russia’s war chest through sanctions and actions against the “shadow fleet”.

In a statement ahead of the visit, Burnham said: “On Ukraine’s 35th anniversary of independence, the Ukrainian people should be in no doubt: the UK is behind you today and for as long as it takes.

“I am proud of the contribution our country has made to Ukraine and I want the Ukrainian people to hear it directly from me that our support will not waver. After all, Ukraine’s security is our security.”

He said the friendship Ukraine shared with the UK would “long outlast Russia’s illegal war”, adding: “Russia should be in no doubt of our resolve. We will not back down until there is a just and lasting peace.”

Netanyahu’s claim comes after US and Israel killed Iran’s supreme leader and four of his family members in a strike on Tehran.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that Iran tried to kill one of his sons, but gave no details on when or where the alleged plot took place or which of his sons was targeted.

Netanyahu’s allegation on Monday came as his coalition trailed in opinion polls ahead of the general election in October, in the wake of the United States and Israel’s war on Iran.

The war began with a joint US-Israeli strike on Tehran that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and four members of his family, including his daughter, Boshra, and his 14-month-old granddaughter, Zahra.

According to The Jerusalem Post, Netanyahu made the claim about the alleged Iranian plot against his son during a phone interview with Channel 14, a conservative Israeli outlet known for favourable coverage of the government.

“This is an unbelievable case. Iran targeted one of my sons. Iran tried to murder him, tried to murder one of my sons,” Netanyahu said.

He was responding to reports that one of Israel’s security agencies had declined to provide a security detail for Gadi Eisenkot, the former army chief who is running neck and neck with Netanyahu for the next prime minister ahead of elections.

Netanyahu voiced support for around-the-clock protection for Eisenkot, saying it was “not a luxury”.

“Without that, [the Iranians] will succeed,” he said.

Netanyahu has two sons and a daughter. Both of his sons and his wife were granted extended personal protection by Israeli authorities in July, according to The Jerusalem Post.

His elder son, Yair, 35, has spent extended periods in the US city of Miami since early 2024, drawing controversy in Israel over the cost to taxpayers of protecting him.

Iran, meanwhile, has promised revenge for the killings of Khamenei and his family.

Khamenei’s son, Mojtaba, was named the new supreme leader a week after Ali Khamenei’s death.

Mojtaba Khamenei has not been seen in public since his appointment, but in a message published on the occasion of funeral ceremonies for his father, he pledged to “avenge the blood” of the former supreme leader.

If the action happens, it will be the largest single mass revocation of visas in US history, AP reports.

The United States is preparing to cancel business and tourism visas of up to 200,000 foreigners who have applied for or are seeking asylum in the country, according to the Associated Press news agency.

The AP, citing State Department documents and interviews with two US officials, reported on Monday that if the plan goes ahead, it would be the “largest single mass revocation of visas” in the country’s history.

It said the State Department is expected to announce the action within the coming weeks, working in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

It would target so-called B1 and B2 visas issued between 2016 and 2026, whose holders have sought asylum or are now seeking asylum.

“We are coordinating with DHS to identify and revoke the nonimmigrant visas of foreigners who have come to the United States claiming to be short-term visitors, but then file for asylum to stay here permanently,” said State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott.

Officials cited by the AP said the revocations would not automatically trigger deportations.

Instead, most people with pending asylum cases would be shifted into a different immigration category, effectively stripping their business or tourist designation while their cases proceed.

In a social media post on Monday, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau called out people who he said try to use tourist and business visas to get into the US and then apply for asylum.

“People in the US and all over the world are fed up with bogus asylum claims,” Landau wrote on X. “Asylum isn’t supposed to be a loophole to circumvent immigration law.”

Since President Donald Trump took office for his second term last year, his administration has steadily ramped up restrictions on visa applicants – demanding more information about their social media histories, requiring the posting of expensive bonds for the processing of visas, and outright banning the issuance of visas to citizens of certain countries.

In the past 18 months, the State Department has also revoked about 175,000 visas for people who have been convicted or accused of crimes ranging from drunk driving to rape and robbery, as well as for people who have spoken out publicly against US policies, particularly in the Middle East.

There is a report of a new ship attack in the Strait of Hormuz, highlighting the difficulty of ending hostilities with Iran. The strike came hours after the Trump administration on Monday unleashed the threat of harsh new sanctions to further isolate the Islamic Republic. Though details were sparse, and no deadlines were issued, the goal was to compel the Iranians to return to negotiations by inducing additional economic pain instead of through bombardment. Originally touting the announcement as an “economic D-Day” against Iran, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s lack of firm timelines presented Monday doesn’t seem to match that initial rhetoric.

Monday evening, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center (UKMTO) said it “received a report of an incident 9NM northeast of Ash Shishah, Oman.”

“The Master of an oil tanker reports the vessel has been struck by an unknown projectile causing damage to the engine room and disabling the vessel,” UKMTO reported on X. “Crew are reported safe. Environmental impact is unknown at time of report. Vessels are advised to transit with caution and report any suspicious activity to UKMTO. Authorities are investigating.”

UKMTO didn’t assign blame, but it’s obviously extremely likely the attack was carried out by Iran.

Hours before Bessent’s sanctions announcement, the Houthi rebels of Yemen also attacked another Saudi ship in the northern Red Sea. These strikes are a stark reminder that the war launched on Iran by the U.S. and Israel on Feb. 28 is still sending kinetic shockwaves around the region and roiling the global economy.

At a press conference in Washington, Bessent formally announced the broad outlines of a new list of measures to cut Iran off from global trade. The move comes as the Iranian economy, which was reeling even before the war broke out, continues to suffer after months of war and an ongoing U.S. naval blockade of its ports.

“We are level-setting with every country to tell them our expectations. We know who they are. They know who they are,” Bessent told reporters. “So when the hammer of U.S. Treasury actions falls upon them, they will have no one to blame but themselves.”

Dubbed “Operation Economic Outcast,” the plan calls for every country to “be given a defined timeline to shut down its Iran-related business activity,” Axios noted. “If it fails to do so, the U.S. will impose secondary sanctions.”

As part of this effort, the Treasury Department “issued determinations against five critical sectors––digital assets, technology, gold, aviation, and shipping––that the Iranian regime uses to try to prop up its failing economy,” it explained. In addition, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) “sanctioned nearly 60 entities, individuals, and vessels in multiple jurisdictions that enable the Iranian regime’s recklessness, including illicit nuclear and missile technology procurement, cyber operations, and oil‑revenue generation networks.”

OFAC also “suspended several general licenses that previously authorized certain remittance payments to Iran and Iranian access to the U.S. cultural and academic system,” Treasury noted. “OFAC issued additional guidance on the sanctions risks of bowing to Iranian demands related to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.”

Asked by a reporter what actions the U.S. might take against China, Bessent hinted that Beijing is not exempt. China has been a major importer of Iranian oil and its banks have helped support Tehran’s economy.

“We want to make clear here today that no one is above the reach of U.S. sanctions,” Bessent responded. “That if they facilitate transactions and are part of the ecosystem that turns Iranian oil into money, into repression, they will be targeted.”

BIG: Bessent on China and Iran:

We want to make clear here today that no one is above the reach of U.S. sanctions.

That if they facilitate transactions and are part of the ecosystem that turns Iranian oil into money, into repression, they will be targeted. pic.twitter.com/hVuFLlgaZa

— Clash Report (@clashreport) August 24, 2026

Bessent did not offer any further specifics. He was equally vague about any timelines for this effort.

“We are giving everyone the opportunity to remedy bad behavior,” Bessent told reporters. “Why would I want to blow up the global financial system?”

For their part, the Iranians dismissed Bessent’s plan and promised their own harsh response to the new sanctions.

“Americans know that no one buys their bombast; the United States is not in an economic position to further restrict its relations with other countries,” Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of the Iranian parliament, stated on X. “Iran’s trading partners, both in the media and through messages sent to us, have made it clear that they don’t take these statements into account anywhere.”

آمریکایی‌ها می‌دانند که کسی گُنده‌لافی‌های آنها را باور نمی‌کند؛ آمریکا از لحاظ اقتصادی در شرایطی نیست که بخواهد روابط خود با دیگر کشورها را محدودتر از این کند.
شرکای تجاری ایران، هم در رسانه‌ها و هم با ارسال پیام‌ به ما اعلام کرده‌اند که این اظهارات را به هیچ جا حساب نمی‌کنند.

— محمدباقر قالیباف | MB Ghalibaf (@mb_ghalibaf) August 24, 2026

“Any escalation of this situation will undoubtedly bring about consequences,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said. “Our hands are not tied.”

Baghaei did not offer specifics, but Iran still possesses missiles and drones that it can use to strike U.S. and allied interests in the region. In addition, Tehran still maintains a large degree of control over shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Even the threat of additional attacks could affect the flow of oil through the strategic chokepoint.

In addition, on Saturday, Mohsen Rezaei, the head of Iran’s national security council, threatened to attack U.S. businesses, The Telegraph reported. He also warned allies of the U.S. that they would be considered enemies, and their interests harmed if they joined Trump’s economic warfare. Cyberattacks on U.S. water systems that officials suspect may be linked to Iran-backed hackers have been reported in at least a dozen states, CBS News reported earlier this month. Iranian-linked hackers are also suspected of forcing a small British power generator offline for four days last month. Aside from that, there are still many U.S. business interests in the Middle East, and especially energy firms, with major facilities right across the Persian Gulf.

While the U.S. and Iran trade threats, the Houthis carried out a fresh strike on Saudi shipping as we noted earlier in this piece.

The Iranian-backed group claimed it hit the oil tanker Amzan off the coast of Yanbu. That’s the kingdom’s key port on the northern Red Sea, about 600 miles north of Houthi territory.

🔺Ansarallah says it struck the Saudi oil tanker Amzan with a ballistic missile off Yanbu in the northern Red Sea, declaring the attack part of its maritime blockade on Saudi Arabia and its “blockade for blockade” campaign.

Military spokesperson Yahya Saree said the missile hit… pic.twitter.com/PS6vna9XA2

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) August 24, 2026

Both the UKMTO and the Ambrey maritime security company confirmed the attack, which took place about 64 nm west of Yanbu, Ambrey noted.

After the vessel was hit, “the Egyptian Navy was reported to have responded and was transiting to the area of interest to conduct a rescue operation,” Ambrey stated. “At the time of the attack, the vessel was not transmitting its AIS signal. Its previous AIS transmission was recorded at 02:33 UTC on 8 August.”

The ship attack was the latest Houthi strike against the Saudis. The Yemen-based group had already struck Saudi ships in the southern part of that body of water and refineries along the northern portion after imposing a blockade on the Bab al-Mandeb Strait (BAM), leading several oil tankers in the Red Sea to avoid that route in favor of the Suez Canal. The expansion of the Houthi campaign against Saudi shipping began earlier this month with an attack off the port of Yanbu on the NCC Wafa, a Saudi oil tanker.

Though both the Strait of Hormuz and the BAM remain under pressure, ship traffic ticked upwards in both chokepoints last week, according to the Kpler global trade intelligence firm. Those numbers alone, however, don’t paint the full picture, Kpler cautioned.

“Traffic edged higher through the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb last week, but headline volumes obscure contrasting risk signals,” Kpler cautioned on X. “Hormuz crossings rose 2.5% to 121, while laden transits fell 27% and sanctioned crossings increased from 9 to 16. Use of Iran’s unilateral routing scheme also climbed to 46.3% of crossings.”

“Bab el-Mandeb traffic rose 3.1% to 269 crossings,” the firm added. “Dark transits declined, but sanctioned and shadow fleet crossings remained broadly flat at 74 combined. The data suggest commercial substance is weakening at Hormuz even as overall traffic holds up, while Bab el-Mandeb remains resilient despite an active threat environment.”

Hormuz traffic masks rising risk

Traffic edged higher through the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb last week, but headline volumes obscure contrasting risk signals.
Hormuz crossings rose 2.5% to 121, while laden transits fell 27% and sanctioned crossings increased from 9 to… pic.twitter.com/iHKsCigEJL

— Kpler (@Kpler) August 24, 2026

While the U.S. is threatening further moves to hurt the Iranian economy, doing so has inherent risks. For decades, Iran has weathered sanctions and isolation and yet the regime has persevered. It withstood mass protests against it earlier this year with bloody crackdowns that played a big role in moving U.S. President Donald Trump to take military action.

Iran continues to wield the cudgel of threatening the U.S. by resuming attacks on its assets in the region as well as against allies. In July, Tehran took rare initiative with a surprise attack on U.S. forces in Jordan, a contrast to its previous pattern of responding to strikes.

For the U.S., continued conflict risks further expenditure of its stocks of high-end offensive and defensive weapons and strain on its troops and equipment. It would also add new economic pressure. To help mitigate gasoline prices that shot up during the war, the Trump administration began releasing a large amount of oil from the strategic petroleum reserve. That move set off a cascade of downstream effects.

“Stocks of crude ​oil in the ‌U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) ​fell ​by about 3.7 million ⁠barrels ​to 289.7 million ​barrels last week, the lowest ​level since ​November 1982,” Reuters reported, citing data from the Department of Energy. “The ​drawdowns ​are ⁠part of a ​U.S. agreement ​to ⁠release 172 million barrels ⁠from ​the ​facility.”

Barchart, the global market data and technology firm, offered a stark assessment of the state of the SPR.

“The U.S. has just 41 days of crude oil inventory left, the lowest level in half a century,” Barchart noted on X.

While that doesn’t mean gas pumps in the U.S. are about to shut down, the alarm bells are ringing.

Earlier this month, the president said his new strategy was to be “low-keying it” in Iran, a suggestion wants to avoid further major military action. However, in addition to global and domestic economic pressure, there are other factors weighing on Trump as he decides what to do next with regard to Iran.

The war is unpopular and the midterm elections are fast approaching. The White House and Republican leadership remain keenly aware that the conflict dragging on until November won’t help the party’s bid to hold onto control of both the Senate and the House.

We will have to see if the Treasury’s plan is actually enacted and what Iran’s response will be. As it sits now, the administration is clearly hoping the threat of such economic isolation will press them to the negotiating table, but Iran has shown no signs yet that it will.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com 

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has announced new economic sanctions on Tehran, describing the measures as an “economic D-Day” as the US war on Iran approaches the six-month mark.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the sanctions on Monday, alongside a naval blockade of Iranian ports.

Bessent said the sanctions target key sources of Iran’s revenue, including its oil and gas industry, and called on countries around the world to cut economic ties with Tehran.

What are the sanctions?

The Treasury Department said the sanctions will target Iran’s aviation, digital assets, gold, technology and shipping sectors, as well as impose sanctions on 60 specific individuals and vessels.

“The main point is that Iran seems to have much less room than it did in previous years to simply work around sanctions,” Peiman Salehi, a Tehran-based geopolitical analyst, told Al Jazeera.

Bessent also said on Monday that the new sanctions expose Tehran’s trade partners to secondary penalties. According to a Treasury Department release on Monday, the targets include ships based in or associated with countries including Singapore, China, and Hong Kong.

“Today’s sanctions are mostly incremental, but are part of trying to intimidate remaining trading partners into cutting ties [with Iran],” said Rachel Ziemba, an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security think tank.

“There’s a lot of signalling and bluster aimed at getting other countries to crack down on entities involved in grey-zone trade, but new measures are mostly incremental for now,” she said. Grey-zone trade refers to both illegal, underground trade and trade that is unsanctioned but difficult.

The Treasury Department said Iran has used cryptocurrency to circumvent its longtime sanctions and facilitate transactions involving the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and members of the Iranian regime. The department also said Iran has used gold to help prop up the value of its currency amid economic instability.

The new shipping sanctions target Iran’s state-linked shipping fleet, which the Treasury Department alleges is being used to transport oil as well as “sensitive weapons components”.

The technology sanctions are intended to restrict Iran’s acquisition of materials that could be used in its weapons programmes. The aviation sanctions target Iranian airlines that the Treasury Department alleges are being used to transport weapons and military personnel, as well as financial resources to Iran’s proxies.

Washington also indefinitely suspended several broad exceptions to its ongoing sanctions on Iran, including those covering academic exchanges, personal money transfers and certain sporting activities. Organisations currently engaged in those activities have until September 8 to wind down their operations.

Ziemba says these measures “will have more effect on Iranians, not just the regime”.

What sanctions were already in place?

Washington’s sanctions on Iran have been in place since 1979, after students took hostages at the US Embassy in Tehran, and increased over the next 45 years. Sanctions were briefly paused, however, after the administration of President Barack Obama and world powers signed a nuclear deal with Tehran in 2015. But the Trump administration withdrew from the deal during its first term, in 2018, bringing back old penalties while adding new ones.

Washington imposed new sanctions during Trump’s second term, many of them before the US and Israel first struck the country on February 28.

In February 2025, the Treasury Department sanctioned 30 individuals and vessels involved in the “brokering [of] the sale and transportation of Iranian petroleum-related products”, according to a department release. The targets were based in several countries, including India and China.

In December 2025, Washington sanctioned 29 vessels it accused of being part of a so-called shadow fleet used to transport Iranian petroleum. It also sanctioned Egyptian businessman Hatem Elsaid Farid Ibrahim Sakr over his businesses’ alleged ties to seven of those 29 vessels. The measures continued the 1979 sanctions campaign against Iran’s oil industry.

The Treasury Department stepped up the sanctions again in April 2026, targeting another two dozen individuals, companies and vessels operating within the network of Iranian oil shipping magnate Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani, the son of now-deceased senior Iranian security official Ali Shamkhani.

Later that same month, the Treasury also targeted what it described as “regime-linked cryptocurrency” and said it had seized nearly half a billion dollars from so-called “shadow banking networks”.

How have sanctions affected US consumers?

Pressure on the Iranian oil market, both through existing sanctions as well as the current war, has tightened the rest of the globe’s oil supply and affected countries that buy Iranian oil.

China, for example, is the primary destination for Iranian oil, buying roughly 90 percent of Iran’s crude oil exports. Beijing bought 1.4 million barrels per day in 2025.

At the same time, Asian markets, China included, also heavily rely on oil travelling through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, where roughly one-fifth of the globe’s oil transited before Iran choked off the route.

This has put pressure on the global oil supply, meaning the benchmark for crude oil has ticked up, translating to higher prices on fuel and food.

For US consumers, that has been most apparent at the petrol pump. The average price for a gallon of petrol (3.78 litres) is $4.09, up from $2.98 on February 28 when the US and Israel first struck Iran, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks daily petrol prices.

Experts warn that if Iran retaliation accelerates, it could hit Americans hard.

“If sanctions provoke Iranian retaliation against Gulf shipping, materially reduce oil exports, or cause insurers and shipping companies to avoid the region, then Americans could feel it very quickly through gasoline, diesel, airfares, freight costs and ultimately inflation,” John Deal, managing director of capital markets at Post Oak Group investment bank, told Al Jazeera.

The economy and Iran are emerging as key issues heading into the US midterm elections, with voters expressing dissatisfaction on both fronts. That could put pressure on Republicans in competitive races, including in traditionally red states such as Texas.

A late-July Reuters/Ipsos poll suggested that only about a third of Americans supported the war, while just 28 percent of respondents in a CNN poll approved of Trump’s handling of Iran.

On the economy, an AP/NORC poll suggested that 32 percent of Americans approved of Trump’s performance. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, meanwhile, suggested that Democrats were narrowly ahead of Republicans on which party voters trust more to handle the economy—the first Democratic advantage in roughly a decade.

How are the sanctions affecting markets?

The latest sanctions announcement is weighing on Wall Street as well as the oil and gold markets.

On the heels of the announcement, the price of gold, largely considered a safe investment during times of economic uncertainty, jumped by 0.8 percent to $4,639.49 per ounce (28 grams) in midday trading, ticking up to its highest level since mid-May.

As for oil, prices pulled back on Monday after two weeks of gains. The price of the global benchmark Brent crude tumbled by more than 2 percent on Monday to $85.22 a barrel.

On Wall Street, the major indices are mixed amid the latest sanctions news as well as Trump’s announcement of new tariffs on Canada. The Nasdaq is down 0.5 percent, and the S&P 500 is down 0.2 percent. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, however, is trending in positive territory, 0.2 percent higher than the market open on Monday.

The oil sector is taking a hit. Chevron is down 0.8 percent, ExxonMobil tumbled 0.9 percent, BP fell more than 2 percent, and Shell is down 0.2 percent.

Washington also rescinded designation of HTS, formerly led by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, as a ‘terrorist’ organisation.

The United States has removed Syria from its list of “State Sponsors of Terrorism,” the US Treasury has announced.

A statement issued on Monday confirmed the revocation of a decades-old designation placed on the country during the rule of the ousted Assad regime.

The announcement confirms a decision initially revealed last month. It also revoked the designation of al-Nusrah Front – the group formerly led by the now-President Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – as a global “terrorist” organisation.

The move, first announced earlier this year pending a review by Congress, removes a critical impediment to investment in Syria, as the country seeks to reestablish itself in the international community and markets.

It represents a further vote of confidence in al-Sharaa, who has launched what many experts have described as a charm offensive aimed at Western powers, including meetings with President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron.

“Today’s action will help foster additional investment in Syria to promote political and economic stability,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement, adding that it is “in line with President Trump’s promise to deliver sanctions relief to Syria”.

Having lifted sanctions on Syria in June 2025, alongside the European Union, the US announced in July its decision to delist Syria from its “terror” list, citing efforts by al-Sharaa to unify the country.

HTS was once al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria and was led by al-Sharaa. Under his leadership, the group removed former President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 following a lightning offensive.

The ⁠designation of the state carried restrictions on US foreign ⁠assistance, defence exports, and ⁠financial transactions, so Syria’s removal from the list is already being celebrated in the country, particularly by financial officials.

The governor of Syria’s central bank, Safwat Raslan, said on X that this is “a historic step that restores the country to its natural place in the global economic system”. He added that the bank is “working to build a modern and reliable financial system”.

Syrian Finance Minister Mohammed Barnieh described Washington’s move as “a major and historic success for Syrian diplomacy”, according to the country’s official news agency SANA.

It “opens a major and long-awaited door to strengthening Syria’s integration into the global economic and financial system, attracting investment and modern technologies, and supporting development opportunities”, he said.

US envoy to Syria Tom Barrack, meanwhile, called the end of the designation a “decisive step in Syria’s remarkable journey from isolation to partnership, and from a source of terrorism to a committed partner in the global fight against it”.

Falling Republican support, rising gas prices, and fears of a long conflict drive a decline in backing for the Iran war.

Support in the United States for the war on Iran has fallen as President Donald Trump’s approval remains at a record low, a Reuters/Ipsos poll suggests.

Public backing for the war has dropped to its lowest level since the early stages of the conflict, with declining Republican support contributing to the shift, according to the poll released on Monday.

Just 31 percent of Americans surveyed said they support US military action against Iran, down from 37 percent in March and 34 percent earlier this month. Support among Republican respondents fell to 69 percent, compared with 77 percent in March.

The war is also continuing to weigh on Trump’s standing with the public, the poll suggests. For the second consecutive Reuters/Ipsos survey, 33 percent of respondents said they approved of Trump’s performance as president, matching the lowest approval rating recorded in the polling series across his first and second terms.

Trump has defended the military campaign as necessary to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. The conflict began on February 28 with US and Israeli attacks on Iran.

But the economic effects of the war remain a concern for Americans. Iran has maintained a de facto blockade of oil exports from the region, contributing to a rise in US petrol prices to near record highs.

The Trump administration has also announced recent pledges to increase economic pressure on Iran. Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent said on Monday that the US would target all of Iran’s sources of revenue, including oil, with the aim of preventing other countries and companies from doing business with Tehran. The campaign is dubbed “Operation Economic Outcast”.

A growing majority of Americans expect the war to continue for some time, the poll suggests. Eighty-three percent of respondents said they believe the conflict will last for an extended period, up from 80 percent earlier this month.

The prospect of a lengthy war presents a challenge for Trump, who campaigned for the presidency in 2024 on promises to bring down inflation and to adopt an “America First” strategy of avoiding foreign military engagements.

Six months into the conflict, petrol prices are more than $1 per gallon (3.8 litres) higher than they were before the war, adding to economic pressure ahead of November’s midterm elections.

The higher fuel costs could also create difficulties for Republicans defending narrow congressional majorities.

The poll suggests that independent voters favour Democrats over Republicans when asked which party they would support in a congressional election held today. Among independents, 33 percent said they would vote for a Democrat, compared with 19 percent who said they would choose a Republican.

The Reuters/Ipsos survey questioned 1,215 adults across the United States over four days and has a margin of error of 3 percentage points in either direction.

The U.S. Navy made a major splash this weekend when it revealed the existence of the AIM-424 Malice Long-Range Air-to-Air Missile (LRAAM), which is already deep in development. At the same time, the service also highlighted plans for a new Compact Air-to-Air Missile (CAAM) optimized for shorter-range engagements and internal carriage on stealthy fighters like the F-35 and future drones as part of its larger future missile vision. Readers can first get caught up on what is known about the long-range AIM-424 in our initial reporting on that missile here.

As described so far, the core goals for CAAM sound virtually identical to what the service has outlined previously in relation to a “Compact Variant” of the AIM-9X Sidewinder (AIM-9X CV), which TWZ was first to report on. A missile in this general category would offer a boost in magazine depth that could be especially valuable for more localized defense of carriers and other high-value assets against large waves of missiles and drones.

The “Compact Air-to-Air Missile (CAAM) effort is a future inner boundary weapon. Requirements are being evaluated and assessed by N98 [the Air Warfare Division of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations] at this time,” a Navy official told TWZ when asked for more information. “The Navy does not plan to provide routine updates beyond approved public releases because of operational security and program sensitivity.”

Mention of CAAM was included in the same briefing where the AIM-424 was first unveiled at the Tailhook Association’s annual convention this weekend. A central focus of the CAAM is on “increasing internal carriage capacity for inner boundary weapon,” according to that presentation.

For the Navy, at present, “internal carriage” is a consideration most applicable to the service’s F-35Cs and, by extension, other variants of the Joint Strike Fighter. Internal weapons bays will also be a feature on whatever design the Navy may ultimately select as its future sixth-generation carrier-based combat jet, currently referred to as F/A-XX. Future Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) type drones or other uncrewed aircraft the service might acquire in the future could also have internal bays. We will come back to this later on.

The description of CAAM as an “inner boundary weapon” points to a focus on shorter-range engagements, where there could also be less total time to react overall.

In terms of what the Navy’s core requirements for the CAAM might be beyond internal carriage, details are limited. A rendering included in the presentation at Tailhook this weekend shows a relatively generic-looking design with fins only at the tail and a yellow band around the front of the body indicating the presence of a high-explosive warhead.

However, earlier this year, the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD), part of Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), did put out a contracting notice regarding rocket motor developments to support CAAM and other developments.

NAWCWD “intends to procure on a Full and Open competition basis to develop and demonstrate technology that results in greatly enhanced kinematic capability for the next generation of tactical missiles,” the notice explained. “To support this technological development efforts, NAWCWD is interested in maturing high total impulse loaded and energy tailorable solid propulsion systems for transition into compact weapon systems, including a Compact Air-to-Air Missile (CAAM).”

“Requirements will include tasking and products needed to provide a Concept Design with build-to-print data package, identify critical technology gaps, conduct critical component and rocket motor experiments, conduct a Design for Manufacturing & Assembly study to identify features required to meet manufacturing and cost goals, and provide a plan to mature the CAAM HLG Concept Design to a maturity state ready to enter a Department of Defense (DOD) Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) program,” the notice added.

“HLG” here stands for “Highly Loaded Grain.” This, in turn, refers to solid-fuel rocket motors designed to maximize output per volume. This is an area of missile technology where the Navy has already been heavily investing for years with a broad eye toward increasing the range and improving the performance of future missiles. Furthermore, a missile with an HLG rocket could offer substantially increased capability over a similarly-sized design with a non-HLG motor. This, in turn, offers particular advantages when designing missiles for carriage in internal bays with rigid dimensions.

“The Next-Generation Highly Loaded Grain project team has matured the technology and seeded the development of future mission-modular propulsion systems that can increase weapon ranges by up to 1.5x while maintaining inner boundaries for short-range and time-critical missions,” according to one fact sheet detailing notable achievements by NAVAIR’s Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCAD) in 2023. Note here also the explicit mention of ‘inner boundary’ design considerations.

As mentioned earlier, the Navy has previously used virtually identical language to describe the planned AIM-9X CV, which is also a joint program with the U.S. Air Force.

“The AIM-9X CV repackages the SIP IV technology into a compact airframe optimized for internal carriage on advanced aircraft with improved kinematic performance,” according to the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request, released earlier this year. “The program will deliver increased capability to the warfighter with greater standoff range, increased aircraft weapon station capacity, and maintains inner boundary performance.”

How exactly the CAAM and the AIM-9X CV programs may be related is unknown, but they clearly have the same general goals if they are not different names for the same development effort. From what was shown this weekend, CAAM is a distinctly different-looking missile from the AIM-9X, and plans for a compact Sidewinder variant or derivative could also be a stepping stone to a new design intended to fill the same general role.

U.S. defense contractors have been publicly showing concepts for compact air-to-air missiles for years now. This includes Raytheon’s Peregrine, unveiled in 2019, which was said to be roughly half the size of an AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) while still offering comparable range. The company said it also had equivalent maneuverability to current-generation Sidewinders. Raytheon is the prime contractor for the AIM-120 and the AIM-9, as well as the newly unveiled AIM-424.

In the late 2010s, Boeing also put forward a concept for a multi-stage Long-Range Air-to-Air Missile (LRAAM), which had a design that raised the possibility of whether the first stage could be used as a more compact, stand-alone weapon. In 2022, Boeing notably received funding for further development of that missile under a contract from the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) to “investigate advanced missile sub-system components to support the Compact Air-to-Air Missile [CAAM] and Extended Range Air-to-Air Missile Systems [ERAAM].”

During the 2010s, Lockheed Martin promoted a compact anti-air missile design called Cuda, with a focus on internal carriage, as well. However, Cuda had largely disappeared from the company’s marketing materials by the end of the decade.

Regardless, the use case for such a CAAM-type missile is clear-cut, especially for the Navy and its carrier air wings. In particular, the service is facing a threat ecosystem that is rapidly evolving in scale and scope, including multiple different classes of anti-ship missiles (ballistic, cruise, hypersonic) and long-range one-way attack drones. There is a very real prospect of large-volume and complex attacks made up of very different tiers of weapons incoming from multiple vectors simultaneously, creating a greater risk that both long- and short-range defenses will be overwhelmed. TWZ previously explored this reality in depth in discussing how the long-range AIM-174B, an air-launched version of the Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) that was officially unveiled in 2024, fits into the service’s larger plans.

How The Navy’s New Very Long-Range AIM-174 Will Pierce China’s Anti-Access Bubble

Added localized defensive capability and capacity could also be relevant for aerial force packages pressing their way to a target in hostile territory, where similarly growing aerial threats could materialize suddenly and in close proximity. Depending on its capabilities, CAAM might even be able to provide a new layer of defensive capability against incoming anti-air missiles, including for larger aircraft. So, giving individual aircraft more total engagement opportunities will only become more valuable, if not vital, as time goes on.

As noted, stealth platforms with limited internal bay space face particular constraints in this regard. For years, more magazine depth via smaller missiles has been seen as a key avenue for improving payload limitations for platforms like the F-35 and F-22 when operating in their most low-observable (stealthy) configuration. In many scenarios, these aircraft can get closer to their targets without detection, offering different options for the employment of what could be shorter-range weapons. A compact air-to-air missile design that still offers comparable performance to larger existing designs, through the use of a high-load-grain rocket motor and other features, would be even more of a boon. Having something that is capable of short-to-intermediate-range engagements, but that can be loaded in greater numbers internally would expand tactical flexibility, amplify lethality, and increase utility of the aircraft as they can down more targets on a single sortie in certain scenarios.

The continued growth of drone threats, especially those posed by long-range one-way attack types, has added another dimension to this equation. Limited magazine depth limits the ability to rapidly retask stealthy platforms to respond to often unpredictable high-volume drone attacks. Furthermore, the anti-air version of the 70mm Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II) laser-guided rocket, the U.S. military’s current go-to lower-cost air-to-air weapon against drones, cannot be fired at all from the internal bays on the F-35 or the F-22. CAAM can offer the ability to address these threats better than aircraft like the F-35 and F-22 can today.

A weapon like CAAM would also be especially relevant for future collaborative combat aircraft, which have extreme constraints on payload capacity, internal and external, as well as total takeoff weight. For CCA-type uncrewed aircraft, keeping the airframe size as small as possible to meet requirements is also essential for meeting affordability and producibility targets. Arming these platforms with an AIM-120-sized missile might not necessarily be required, or even be ideal, especially when operating along the leading edge of the air-to-air battle, closer to threats. In those scenarios, having the option of carrying even twice as many missiles per sortie, internally (if available) or externally, even if they have shorter reach, could be hugely beneficial.

There could easily be interest in a CAAM-like missile from other branches of the U.S. military, if it is not already a joint service effort. The Air Force is already known to be involved in the AIM-9X CV effort. The service has publicly pursued new compact and lower-cost air-to-air missile concepts over the years under various different project names. This includes its own CAAM effort, through which Boeing previously received funding.

What is clear now is that the Navy is pushing to maximize the anti-air capabilities of its aircraft at both the shorter- and longer-range ends of the engagement spectrum.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Speaking in June last year to British businesswoman and podcaster Emma Grede, Meghan talked about her Netflix lifestyle series With Love, Meghan, and hinted at a return to acting when asked if she missed that side to her life.

“Sometimes,” Meghan replied. “Being back on set with With Love, Meghan was great because I realised how much I miss my crew. I love being around a crew.”

But Variety’s chief correspondent Marlow Stern says when it comes to deliberations over a potential acting role for Meghan, “a lot of it has to do with scheduling, to be honest”.

“They’re maybe also negotiating the size of the role and how many days she’ll shoot, and also compensation for it. Both sides often play the media to try and push things along, and we could be seeing that.”

For Harry, the focus once back in the UK will be on the charity work and patronages he has kept hold of while living thousands of miles away.

He has now completed his final charity engagements in the US before flying back to the UK in the coming days.

In Washington DC, he met military veterans and their families and visited America’s main hospital for injured servicemen and women, Walter Reed National Military Medical Centre.

At Arlington National Cemetery, he visited the final resting place of many service personal killed in Iraq and Afghanistan wars where he himself served on two operational tours.

At the grave of Sergeant Michael Verardo, who died last year from complications related to injuries sustained in Afghanistan in 2010, he met Verardo’s widow Sarah – who now supports other military families – and their nine-year-old daughter, Elizabeth.

The Metropolitan Police have sent a file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) relating to a man in his 80s as part of its investigation into Mohamed Al Fayed.

A man and a woman, both in their 80s, were interviewed under caution last month on suspicion of aiding and abetting rape and sexual assault, and assisting the commission of sexual offences.

The CPS will now decide whether a charge can be made.

Earlier this year, three women, aged in their 40s, 50s and 60s, and one man in his 60s were also questioned. The former Harrods owner died three years ago aged 94 having never faced any charges.

A Met Police spokesperson said “detectives submitted a full evidential file” to the CPS for a “charging decision”.

“The file relates to one suspect, a man in his 80s, and relates to two indecent assaults on two women in London. Officers will continue to work closely with CPS prosecutors as the case progresses.

“To date, seven suspects have been interviewed under caution on suspicion of offences including aiding and abetting rape and sexual assault, assisting in the commission of sexual offences, and human trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation.”

Co-chairs of the Justice for Fayed and Harrods Survivors Jen Mills and Lindsay Mason welcomed the latest development.

“The submission of a full evidential file to the CPS is a significant step, and it matters most of all for the two women whose allegations are at the centre of it,” the statement said.

“Both are members of Justice for Fayed and Harrods Survivors and, as with all those impacted by this scandal, we stand alongside them with love and empathy.”

A cross-party delegation lands in Beijing as Tokyo tries to defrost its worst China rift in decades.

Japanese lawmakers have travelled to Beijing in a bid to soothe strained relations between the two nations.

The delegation landed in China on Monday for talks aimed at restoring communication. The mission was undertaken after Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi issued comments on Taiwan that triggered a diplomatic dispute that has begun to weigh on economic relations.

The visit will run through Thursday and marks the first such consultations with senior Chinese Communist Party officials since ties soured late last year.

Relations plunged after Takaichi suggested in November that Japan could respond militarily if China attacked Taiwan, a self-governing island that Beijing claims as its own territory.

China is highly sensitive regarding Taiwan and considers questioning of its claim on the island a red line. In response to Takaichi’s comments, it warned its citizens against travel to Japan and tightened trade restrictions, including measures that reportedly disrupted the flow of rare earth minerals to Japanese firms, adding an economic sting to the diplomatic fallout.

Among those making the trip was Gaku Hashimoto, a member of the House of Representatives and Takaichi’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party. He was joined by other lawmakers from the opposition Komeito and Centrist Reform Alliance parties.

An official from Hashimoto’s office confirmed only that he had “departed for Beijing to stay for two days”.

Before leaving Tokyo, delegation member Shinichi Isa, a spokesperson for the Centrist Reform Alliance, told reporters: “Communication has been severed in all areas, and we are beginning to see their impact in many areas. I hope we can somehow find a clue to restart a dialogue.”

Isa, a former diplomat at the Japanese embassy in China, had already sounded the alarm over the situation this month in a post on X, writing that officials had always managed to stay in contact even during past low points but now “all channels between officials and ministries have been cut off.”

He described the current state of relations as the worst since diplomatic ties were normalised in 1972.

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Friday that “some people of insight from both Japan’s ruling and opposition parties” were troubled by the state of relations and hoped to help steer them back on track while calling on Tokyo to heed those voices and act to restore normal exchanges between the two countries.

Takaichi has not retracted her comment on Taiwan and is yet to respond to the concerns.

Further exchanges are planned. Former Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya is expected to lead another delegation to China in late September, which is to be followed by a group of Japanese business representatives later in the year, according to the Kyodo News agency.

The waters far away from El Niño’s Pacific hunting ground are also extremely warm, including around the UK and Europe.

The western English Channel has seen almost continuous marine heatwave conditions for more than three years, peaking at 7C above normal in July, according to Prof Tim Smyth, director of science at Plymouth Marine Laboratory.

“This is unprecedented,” he added.

Scientists say such widespread warmth around the planet is a clear sign of the growing effect that human-caused climate change is having on the world’s seas.

The oceans take up more than 90% of the excess heat trapped by humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions, mainly from burning fossil fuels.

“The latest Copernicus data reinforce the troubling upward trend in ocean temperatures,” said Smyth.

Warmer seas help to fuel more extreme weather. They can provide storms with extra moisture and energy, and can intensify heatwaves on land in some coastal regions by reducing the cooling effect of sea breezes.

Warmer water also takes up more space, raising sea levels and bringing a greater risk of coastal flooding – while intense ocean heat can be devastating for sea habitats, such as coral reefs.

The increasing frequency of marine heatwaves is already “putting increasing pressure on marine ecosystems and the communities that depend on them”, Burgess said.

Attacks on Palestinian communities by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank, which are often supported by Israeli forces, have gathered pace over the past month since settlers from the Havat Gilad settlement attacked Palestinian homes on the eastern edge of Tal, southwest of Nablus.

On Sunday and Monday, the Israeli military raided multiple towns, villages and refugee camps across the occupied territory, and reports of arrests, home searches and settler attacks have continued to mount.

A 15-day siege on three families comprising 15 people, including two children, in the village of Qusra, which is ongoing, drew a rare public condemnation this month from the United States ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, a staunch supporter of Israel and its West Bank settlements.

Israel is also pushing ahead with plans for the so-called E1 settlement expansion close to Jerusalem, which human rights organisations warn would essentially sever the West Bank in two, further hampering the freedom of movement of Palestinians on either side of it and endangering the possibility of a Palestinian state.

The West Bank attacks increasingly fit the definition of a pogrom, experts said. United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories Francesca Albanese described these Israeli attacks against Palestinians as “pogroms against defenceless civilians”.

So why are experts calling settler attacks pogroms, and do they fit the formal definition of one?

What’s happening in the West Bank?

Settlers, frequently supported by the Israeli military, have been attacking Palestinian homes, businesses, and agricultural fields across the occupied West Bank. Such attacks have been commonplace for decades as settlements have expanded across the territory, but they gathered pace after October 7, 2023 when Israel launched it genocidal war on Gaza, and have become particularly violent and frequent over the past month.

Israeli settlements across the West Bank are illegal under international law.

According to the Palestinian Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission, however, Israeli settlers now number roughly 780,000 across the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, living among 192 settlements and 400 outposts, rising to 71 percent of Area C, which is under full Israeli civil and military control, and 91 percent of the Jordan Valley.

Settlers often set up outposts without formal approval around Palestinian villages from which they launch a campaign of harassment, including killing livestock, cutting supply lines and damaging property, in order to drive local residents out. Once they establish a more formal settlement, they often receive retrospective approval from the Israeli government for the settlement.

In some places more recently, illegal settlers have laid siege to individual family homes – such as in the Ras al-Ein area of Qusra – cutting off water and other supplies and damaging orchards or harming livestock.

This has set a new pattern: settlers establish a tent adjacent to individual homes; Palestinians’ homes are besieged, with essentials cut off; and Israeli soldiers arrive not to remove the settlers, but rather to remove the family – through arrest or ostensibly for their “protection”.

In Qusra, the three besieged families were forced together into one of the family houses. Meanwhile, Israeli forces have occupied one of the other homes for use as a military post and thrown furniture and belongings from its windows, according to the Palestinian news agency Wafa.

The UN humanitarian affairs office recorded more than 1,330 settler-related attacks on Palestinians in the occupied West Bank between January and late July this year, averaging six a day and marking the fastest pace since the agency began systematic tracking two decades ago.

Separately, a UN-appointed commission of inquiry has found that the Israeli authorities have repeatedly failed to prevent foreseeable settler attacks and, in some cases, have directly enabled them through army protection and the provision of weapons and funding.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has found that settler attacks, demolitions and evictions forcibly displaced more Palestinians in the first four months of this year than in the whole of 2025.

OCHA reported that 107 communities, comprising 5,900 Palestinians, had been completely or partially displaced as a result of settler violence since January 2023. It also found that the Israeli military have expelled another 32,000 Palestinians from their homes in the occupied West Bank since January 2025, essentially emptying the Jenin, Tulkarem and Nur Shams camps.

What is the definition of a pogrom?

Major US and UK dictionaries vary to some degree on the definition of a “pogrom”.

The British Collins Dictionary identifies a pogrom as “organised, official violence against a group of people for racial or religious reasons”, with a notable inclusion of official, or state-backed violence.

Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary calls it “the organised killing of large numbers of people, because of their race or religion”, without mention of state-sanctioned violence.

Merriam-Webster says it is “an organised massacre of helpless people” – “specifically: such as a massacre of Jews”.

Cambridge Dictionary says it is “an act of organised cruel behaviour or killing that is done to a large group of people because of their race or religion”.

The word is understood to have been introduced via Yiddish and was at first used to describe the wave of violent, organised mob attacks on Jewish communities in the Russian Empire following the assassination of Tsar Alexander II in 1881.

It is important to note that unlike legal terms including “crimes against humanity” or “genocide,” “pogrom” has no established legal definition under international law.

Can attacks in the West Bank be referred to as pogroms?

Besides Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, who has described Israeli attacks against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank as “pogroms against defenceless civilians”, Israeli officials themselves have described such attacks as “pogroms”.

On February 26, 2023, hundreds of Israeli settlers attacked Huwara and surrounding Palestinian communities after two Israeli settlers were killed. A Palestinian was killed, hundreds were injured, and homes, businesses and cars were burned.

The Israeli military’s then-commander in the occupied West Bank, Yehuda Fuchs, called the settlers’ attack a “pogrom”, and it was also recorded as such by the US State Department.

Israeli-Palestinian human rights group B’Tselem has also previously described Israeli actions in the occupied West Bank as “pogroms”, especially after the February 2023 attacks. Later, it followed up with a report titled, “The pogroms are working – the transfer is already happening”, which argued that settler attacks were contributing to the displacement of Palestinian communities.

“Settler violence is not a new phenomenon. But over the past three years, it has become more violent, more systematic and, most importantly, part of a state mechanism intended to ethnically cleanse large parts of the West Bank,” said Yair Dvir, the spokesperson for B’Tselem.

“The government funds and arms the settlers, while the Israeli military stands by and, in many cases, actively participates in the attacks,” he told Al Jazeera. “So far, these militias have expelled 64 Palestinian communities and taken control of around one million dunams of land.”

Dvir also told Al Jazeera that the Israeli settlers are “now carrying out organised attacks on established Palestinian villages and towns in order to drive out their residents”.

“These are armed militias operating as an unofficial arm of the state, with a shared goal: to ethnically cleanse as much of the West Bank as possible,” he added.

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, which is named after Polish-Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin, who is credited with coining the term genocide after the Holocaust, referred to settler attacks on Al-Mughayyir, a Palestinian village in Ramallah, as “pogroms”, reporting that hundreds of armed settlers attacked residents and burned buildings and cars while soldiers stood by earlier this year. In 2025, the Israeli military uprooted thousands of Palestinian olive trees at Al-Mughayyir.

Raheel Dhattiwala, an Indian scholar who focuses on collective violence, told Al Jazeera: “West Bank attacks fit the characteristics of a pogrom – systematic targeting of one civilian group by another with state approval. A few senior Israeli army officers have called it ‘pogroms’ in the past too, for example after attacks in Huwara.

“One might want to debate the use of the term, ‘pogrom’, but it is accurate to call settler violence systematic attacks of occupiers, with government approval, on groups of occupied people.”

Ahmed Krim spent 30 years teaching English in Algeria’s middle schools. Now retired, the 60-year-old watched the language he loved remain firmly behind French as the country’s second language.

English was less valued than French, which might have been the language of Algeria’s coloniser, but continues to be present in every dialogue, six decades after independence.

On July 25 , Algeria’s Education Minister, Mohamed Seghir Saadaoui, announced that English will become the sole foreign language taught in the third year of primary school in the new academic year for 2026-2027.

French would be pushed back to the fourth year, ending its domination of foreign language classes in Algerian schools.

From next month, eight-year-olds across Algeria will become the first to learn English before French.

“It is a very good decision. But it requires thinking, planning and resources,” Krim told Al Jazeera.

It is among the first steps in President Abdelmadjid Tebboune’s linguistic overhaul for Algeria, which he first outlined in 2022 with English being introduced to primary schools.

Since then, medicine and science faculties have begun switching from French to English.

The French language has been erased from some utility bills and Air Algerie tickets. Road signs are beginning to feature English alongside Arabic, while government ministers’ websites will also have English as an option.

The shift from French to English as Algeria’s secondary language is both sweeping and structural.

It comes amid the most serious diplomatic crisis between the two countries since Algeria’s independence from France in 1962.

In July 2024, French President Emmanuel Macron publicly backed Morocco’s sovereignty claim over Western Sahara.

Algeria, which supports the Sahrawi Polisario Front and hosts over 170,000 Sahrawi refugees, viewed that as highly provocative.

That, and other issues, saw Algeria expel French diplomats, and vice versa.

Algeria’s replacement of French as the country’s second language accelerated after the diplomatic crisis grew.

A classroom without enough teachers

A rethink of the whole education system in Algeria may be needed.

“First and foremost, specialised training centres must be restored and candidates must not be forced into the teaching profession without wanting it – we need people who genuinely want to do this work,” Krim said.

He refers to dedicated institutes established after independence, where primary and middle school teachers, like himself, trained via a model that combined classroom instruction with direct school placements to meet the gap in Arabic instructors.

The centres operated until the late 1990s, when an economic crunch replaced them with the fewer and more selective Ecoles Normales Superieures.

Most teachers today are university graduates, but lack the practical, classroom-first grounding that the older model provided.

Krim said that school curricula must be designed and entrusted to “a qualified body that includes both linguistic and pedagogical expertise, free from all ideology”.

But journalist and analyst Noureddine Bessadi said the ideological dimension matters in Algeria, which overthrew colonialism following a bloody and bitter struggle against the French.

“Since independence in 1962, every shift in language policy has been fought as much on political as pedagogical grounds,” Bessadi told Al Jazeera.

After independence, Algeria’s Arabisation drive, when French was displaced from government and education, was “part of state building and enforcing Algeria’s identity, centring Arabic and Islam”, Bessadi added.

Tamazight, a non-Semitic language spoken by around a quarter of Algeria’s population, was marginalised until 1995, Bessadi said, shaped by an “ideological perception of unity that prioritised linguistic and cultural harmony”.

Critics argue that the transition from French to English is happening faster than the system can keep up with. For one, it is believed that there are not enough qualified English teachers to make the language reforms work.

But one source familiar with the matter told Al Jazeera that there are enough teachers to roll out this programme in primary schools and that any shortage could be filled through contractors.

In February, Algeria’s education ministry reportedly recruited about 15,000 English language teachers for primary schools.

Rafik Laceb, a lecturer in English at Mouloud Mammeri University in Tizi Ouzou, is cautiously optimistic about the primary school reform. But he considers the parallel push to teach university subjects in English to be rushed and poorly executed.

“Frankly, and beyond any chauvinism, I believe this decision is positive… I believe there is, today, sufficient supervision and evaluation work from the first experience,” Laceb said, in reference to the previous introduction of English in later primary school years.

The university experiment that began in 2023-2024 produced insufficient contact hours, a lack of genuine assessment of students’ English levels and no tracking of their progress.

Around 50 percent of teaching at Tizi Ouzou University’s English department is by younger contract staff, which brings other challenges.

“A young contract teacher must first master the basic principles of medicine before attempting to teach medical terminology in English,” he said.

Levelling the playing field

Currently, children only begin learning a foreign language in the third year of state primary schools, whereas multiple languages are taught at private schools from kindergarten.

Djamel Merah, whose daughter attended private schools before transferring to public secondary school, studied Arabic, French and English simultaneously from kindergarten level.

Merah welcomes the government’s language reforms at state primary schools, which will provide more children with the opportunity to learn English.

“It addresses a question about the gap in opportunities between children who get multilingual education from the start and those in public schools who don’t get the same chance,” he said.

Shakespeare’s rising shelf space

There also appears to be a more organic response among the public that precedes the government’s promotion of the English language.

Krimo Taleb, a bookseller at the Libre Pensee bookshop in Tizi Ouzou, has seen a growth in English-language book sales, particularly among female readers.

“In my opinion, it has nothing to do with government decisions. The majority of young readers today speak three languages fluently,” he said.

His own daughter, a middle school student, reads fluently in Arabic, English and French.

Colleen Hoover, Ana Huang and J. K. Rowling are some of the best-selling authors at his shop.

“Previously, our bookshops provided for English literature students the works of Shakespeare,” Taleb says. “Today, there is a diverse range of English-language titles aimed at the general public.”

However, French remains Algeria’s most influential foreign language. According to the International Organisation of La Francophonie (OIF), Algeria has approximately 15 million French speakers, nearly a third of its population.

There is not a single newspaper published in English and written English by Algerians remains in its infancy.

But there are signs that former colonies are turning their backs on France’s linguistic legacy, particularly in Africa, where Paris’s military and political presence made a resurgence in recent decades.

In March 2025, Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso withdrew from the OIF, accusing it of being a political instrument of Paris.

“Mali made its national languages official in 2023, demoting French to a working language. Burkina Faso followed the same year and Niger in 2025,” Bessadi added. “Even Senegal, which has not removed French as an official language, has begun encouraging local languages at its expense.”

For Krim, Algeria’s linguistic ambitions are not far-fetched, but for it to work, the country needs the “necessary resources… and transparency”.

New Delhi, India – An investigation by human rights group Amnesty International has confirmed that Indian government forces used lethal weapons, including pellet-firing shotguns, grenades, batons and electric shock devices against demonstrators in Gen Z protests that rocked the national capital last month.

On July 20, thousands of protesters had all but shut down New Delhi, blocking off Parliament Street, demanding the resignation of then-Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan following a string of examination scandals involving the leaking of national exam papers and other irregularities.

More than 100 students were injured in the crackdown by police and paramilitary forces that day. Indian newspapers obtained hospital records that showed that doctors had treated pellet wounds in several cases.

India’s opposition, led by Congress party leader Rahul Gandhi, has since called on Home Minister Amit Shah, seen as Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s confidant, to answer questions about the alleged police brutality and has joined protesters in calling for his resignation.

But despite mounting evidence and growing political criticism, the Modi government repeatedly insisted that security forces had been measured in their response to the protests and denied using excessive force.

Now, an Amnesty investigation has found the use of tactics that Indian law enforcement rulebooks themselves warn against using in all but exceptional circumstances.

What happened on July 20 in New Delhi?

In July, the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), a satirical, youth-led movement which gathered momentum in response to the national examinations scandal, called on its supporters to march on the Indian Parliament after a monthlong sit-in failed to oust the education minister.

Two days before the march, the police forcibly removed renowned activist Sonam Wangchuk, who had been taking part in a hunger strike. That move galvanised public anger, bringing out more protesters in New Delhi.

On the morning of the march day, the police used tear gas as protesters swelled, then attacked them with electric shock batons, as well as shooting at them with pellet guns, Amnesty International’s Evidence Lab has verified from video and photographic evidence alongside witness testimony.

Amnesty also found that government forces had put up barricades and enforced a communications blackout.

“The weapons were deployed in a manner that breached international law and standards and domestic policing guidelines,” Amnesty said in a statement on Monday.

The rights group’s report also noted that the Delhi Police had publicly denied any disproportionate use of force, specifically pellet guns. The police also repeated this before India’s top court during a hearing about the alleged use of excessive force.

Amnesty says the evidence it has gathered “directly contradicts [the police’s] account”.

Four days after the July 20 march, as protests spread across the country, police in Bihar state’s Siwan town opened fire on protesters, injuring at least three youths.

Did government forces fire pellets at protesters?

Following the July 20 protest, several videos and photos emerged of protesters with injuries consistent with pellet wounds, which were reflected in their medical records as well.

The Evidence Lab verified two videos showing a paramilitary Rapid Action Force officer firing a shotgun into the crowd at the intersection of Connaught Place and Parliament Street in New Delhi, where protesters had gathered.

At least two protesters had wounds consistent with those caused by birdshot, a hunting round that fires a large number of small metal pellets, the group noted.

“The doctors confirmed that they were pellet injuries. Thankfully, my bones have been saved, but my body has been scarred badly,” one protester told Amnesty.

Amnesty said birdshot ammunition has not been developed for law enforcement purposes due to the widespread dispersion of the metal pellets, which “is inherently inaccurate and presents a high risk of serious injuries to the targeted person and even bystanders”.

Amnesty also said the police did not issue a public warning before firing pellet guns, as recommended by the Indian government’s Bureau for Police Research and Development.

Police and security forces have used metal pellets for more than a decade in Indian-administered Kashmir, leading to the first mass blinding during a 2016 civilian uprising.

Posting on X, Delhi Police called the reports of pellet injuries during the latest protests “fake news”, “completely false and misleading” and warned that “appropriate legal action” would be taken against anyone “spreading rumours”.

A subsequent internal inquiry by India’s paramilitary forces, however, reportedly found that personnel had fired at least seven rounds of ammunition containing metal pellets.

“Instead of facilitating the right to protest, Indian authorities suppressed it first with a communication blackout, barricades and transport disruption. They then attempted to crush it with unnecessary or excessive use of force against peaceful protesters, including children,” said Aakar Patel, chair of the board, Amnesty International India.

“This heavy-handed response was state-sanctioned violence masked as crowd control. The continued impunity after a month is a testament to that,” Patel said.

Did police use tear gas grenades and batons?

Government forces did use tear gas grenades to disperse the crowd at several places in New Delhi, as seen by Al Jazeera and verified by Amnesty, not just on July 20 to prevent CHP supporters’ march to Parliament.

“Tear gas grenades releasing an excessive amount of explosive energy are extremely dangerous and should be prohibited for use in public assemblies,” Amnesty said, referring to videos of tear gas shells exploding near students.

The group also noted that witnesses observed that “tear gas grenades were launched directly at protesters instead of at an angled trajectory above the head of protesters, at odds with UN Guidance on the use of Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement”.

Amnesty has also verified claims that the police used lathis, the Indian version of batons, to beat protesters.

The UN special rapporteur on torture considers lathis to be inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading as “they deliver a greater level [of] kinetic force than conventional batons, causing excessive pain and increasing the risk of serious injury” and has called for them to be prohibited, a position that Amnesty supports.

The group also found men in civilian clothing beating protesters “while uniformed officers, who escorted them toward the crowd, stand beside them and make no attempt to intervene”, as visible in videos seen by Al Jazeera. Several officials were not wearing their name tags or badge numbers, as required.

What has been the reaction to the use of excessive force?

A day after the crackdown in New Delhi, CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke told the crowd, “Every police person who attacked you would be identified and dragged to the courts”.

The group also launched a platform for protesters to upload videos and photos from the crackdown.

The opposition, led by the Congress’s Gandhi, pushed the home minister for a discussion on the issue in Parliament, an issue that plagued the monsoon session with Shah missing.

Gandhi argued that either Shah ordered the usage of lethal weapons, in which case “he is guilty”, or he was unaware of the situation, which makes him “incompetent” for the job.

Sahil Lochab, a 19-year-old who lost vision in one eye due to pellet injuries, said the police had been refusing to register his complaint. In response, Gandhi staged a seven-hour sit-in outside the office of the Delhi Police chief, insisting that a case be registered over the use of pellet guns on protesters, alongside Lochab.

After Gandhi’s pressure, the police relented. A student at the University of Delhi, Lochab received multiple pellet injuries on his chest, back, arms and face. Several pellets could not be taken out, he said in his complaint.

“My medical documents show that there are over 200 pellets in my body. Doctors have told me that the possibility of my eyesight coming back is less than 1 percent,” Lochab wrote in his complaint.

US Southern Command says that Sunday’s strike targeted a vessel operating along established narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific.

The United States military said it struck a suspected drug-trafficking boat in the Pacific Ocean, killing two people.

In a Monday post on X, US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) said Sunday’s strike targeted a vessel operating along established narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific.

“Confirmed intelligence revealed the vessel’s active involvement in narco-trafficking,” SOUTHCOM added.

“This operation is a clear and decisive reminder that SOUTHCOM is taking the fight directly to the cartels.”

Grainy, black-and-white video accompanying the post appeared to show a boat moving through the water immediately before a large explosion.

The post stated that under the direction of SOUTHCOM Commander General Francis L. Donovan, the Joint Task Force Western Hemisphere executed a lethal kinetic strike on the low-profile vessel.

“We are committed to imposing total systemic friction on narco-terrorists — disrupting their operations, dismantling their leadership and eliminating cartel terror across the region,” Donovan was quoted as saying.

“Let me be clear, we will not permit narco-terrorists to operate with impunity in the Western Hemisphere, nor will we allow their deadly poison to reach American communities. This operation is a powerful demonstration of our lethal precision, overwhelming capability, and absolute resolve to protect the U.S. homeland.”

The US military launched Operation Southern Spear in early September, with President Donald Trump arguing that Washington is effectively at war with Latin American drug cartels.

Since then, more than 200 people have been killed in strikes across the Eastern Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea, according to a tally by the AFP news agency.

However, the Trump administration has not provided definitive evidence that the targeted vessels were involved in drug trafficking.

Legal experts and rights groups warn that the attacks could amount to extrajudicial killings.

The Pentagon’s inspector general said in May that it would review whether the military followed standard targeting procedures, though the evaluation will not examine the legal authority behind the strikes.

US President Donald Trump’s administration has said it aims to sever “every” economic lifeline sustaining Iran in what officials have warned will be the toughest sanctions campaign ever seen.

The threat, if followed through, would mean putting China, Iran’s biggest trade partner, squarely in the crosshairs of US sanctions.

That would be a risky proposition for Washington due to the likelihood of severe blowback from Beijing – so much so that some analysts doubt that the Trump administration’s measures, set to be announced on Monday, will match its rhetoric in scope or severity.

While the Trump administration has yet to provide details about what it has dubbed “economic D-Day”, US officials have made it clear that Iran’s trade partners are in their sights.

In an op-ed in the Financial Times on Sunday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned that countries fearful of breaking ties with Iran should not “discount the cost of testing Washington”.

“The president has created the conditions to leverage every agency, every authority and action many assumed we would never summon,” said Bessent, who is scheduled to unveil the sanctions in a news conference at 17:00 GMT.

Brett Erickson, a sanctions expert and managing principal of Obsidian Risk Advisors, said the Trump administration’s willingness to target China will be an indication of its resolve to mount a sustained economic offensive against Tehran.

“That is not a relationship you degrade lightly. If the United States decides to really bring China into the ring, it will be a serious indication that the United States plans to wage this economic war for a prolonged period of time,” Erickson told Al Jazeera.

“If they do not, it will be a tacit admission from the Trump administration that they do not believe economic hardship can seriously bring about a change in the Iranian position,” Erickson said.

Any US pressure campaign that excludes China would be necessarily limited in scope given the outsized importance of Beijing and Tehran’s economic ties.

China reported $9.96bn in two-way trade with Iran in 2025, a figure that does not include some $31.2bn in Iranian oil shipments, according to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

China’s purchases of Iranian oil have been a particularly crucial lifeline for Tehran, accounting for about 90 percent of its oil sales, according to the US Treasury Department.

Until now, the Trump administration’s Iran sanctions regime has targeted only a handful of relatively minor China-based entities.

In April, the Trump administration sanctioned Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refinery, one of China’s largest independent refineries, commonly known as “teapots”, over its alleged purchases of Iranian oil.

The Trump administration also imposed sanctions on four firms in Hong Kong in May, followed by measures in August targeting six China and Hong Kong-based shipping lines.

Washington has so far left Chinese financial institutions, widely viewed as a key node in Iran’s oil trade, untouched.

“Cutting off Chinese economic ties will be key to the success of any attempt to increase pressure on Iran. However, the United States won’t do it,” Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow at Defense Priorities, a Washington-based foreign policy think tank, told Al Jazeera.

“If it does, China will retaliate and has the leverage to impose costs on the US,” Kavanagh said.

China has vigorously opposed US sanctions against Iran, arguing that economic pressure will not resolve the nearly six-month-long war.

In a statement on Sunday, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Beijing remained “committed to promoting peace talks” and willing to “continue making efforts for the early restoration of peace and tranquility in the region”.

Iran, for its part, has threatened to retaliate against countries that support the US measures.

Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, warned on Saturday that any country that participated in sanctions would be considered an “enemy” and that “not a drop” of oil would leave the Gulf if Iran’s neighbours joined the US campaign.

Wang Wen, dean of the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China, said Beijing would inevitably take countermeasures in response to any US sanctions and their intensity would depend on the “severity of US actions”.

“China maintains its desire to avoid conflict, but its bottom line cannot be crossed,” Wang told Al Jazeera.

For Trump, invoking Beijing’s ire would risk not only economic retaliation, but also unravelling efforts to stabilise US-China relations only weeks before the US president is due to host Chinese leader Xi Jinping at the White House.

Trump’s scheduled summit with Xi on September 24 would be their second face-to-face meeting aimed at lowering the temperature in US-China relations since Washington launched its war on Iran in late February, following Trump’s visit to Beijing in May.

Zichen Wang, deputy secretary-general of the Center for China and Globalization (CCG) think tank in Beijing, said neither Beijing nor Washington were likely to want Iran to define the upcoming summit.

“Unless the US measures become very broad or directly target major Chinese interests, both sides are likely to try to keep this dispute from overwhelming the wider agenda,” Wang told Al Jazeera.

“That said, Chinese restraint should not be read as an absence of response,” Wang said.

“Beijing has often avoided immediate rhetorical escalation, but when unilateral US actions have materially affected Chinese companies or other Chinese interests, it has shown a growing willingness to answer with practical countermeasures.”

While the Trump administration could potentially make it more challenging and expensive for China to continue its economic support of Iran, it is unlikely to be able to stop Beijing outright if it is determined to maintain ties, said Erickson of Obsidian Risk Advisors.

“US sanctions can absolutely force companies to de-risk in order to avoid exposure, but there will always be an entity willing to fill this role,” Erickson said, adding that Xi is unlikely to “merely stand by while Trump flexes the powers of American economic statecraft without flexing Beijing’s own in return”.

Though US officials have stated their intention to “collapse” Iran’s government with ramped-up sanctions, Erickson expressed doubt that the Trump administration will be able to achieve its war goals through economic pressure alone.

“Unless the Trump administration is willing to burn serious bridges and employ all remaining levers of economic warfare simultaneously, there is no reasonable assertion that can be made that it will be able to produce the victory that kinetic warfare could not,” he said.