TODAY

Tamil Nadu, India – Standing on top of a customised van on a hot and humid afternoon in Tirunelveli, about 600km (373 miles) south of Tamil Nadu’s capital Chennai in southern India, C Joseph Vijay tells his supporters his opponents have joined hands to stop him from becoming the state chief minister.

“My rivals might appear different from outside, but they have only one aim: that Vijay should not become the chief minister,” says the 51-year-old actor-turned-politician to a mammoth crowd that begins to chant his name, which means “victory” in Tamil, in unison.

Tamil Nadu, one of India’s most developed states with impressive human development indices, also has a long history of electing film stars as leaders, some of whom are still revered by people as demigods years after their deaths.

As Tamil Nadu votes on Thursday to elect its 234-member state legislative assembly, Vijay’s bid for power is the latest addition to the state’s trend of film star-politicians, turning a traditionally bipolar battle into a triangular contest.

‘A blessing and a curse’

Vijay entered politics with much fanfare when he launched the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) party in 2024, promising to end the decades-old dominance of the governing Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the main opposition All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK).

Incumbent Chief Minister MK Stalin leads the DMK and its 14-party Secular Progressive Alliance, in which the Indian National Congress is a junior partner. On the other hand, opposition leader Edappadi K Palaniswami of the AIADMK heads the 10-party National Democratic Alliance, which also includes Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The DMK and the AIADMK identify themselves as Dravidian parties, which derive their names from a powerful political and social justice movement in Tamil Nadu that opposed caste inequalities, championed social reforms, and rejected perceived attempts by India’s more dominant north Indian parties to impose Hindi – and upper-caste Hindu values – on the non-Hindi speaking southern states.

Dravidian parties have held power in Tamil Nadu continuously since 1967, with national parties like the Congress and the BJP playing secondary roles. While the BJP is contesting 27 seats in alliance with the AIADMK, the Congress is fighting for 28 seats as part of the DMK-led coalition.

More than 87 percent of Tamil Nadu’s 72 million people are Hindu, followed by Christians at 6.1 percent and Muslims at 5.8 percent, according to the last census conducted in 2011.

Among Hindus, the so-called “backward” or less-privileged castes constitute 45.5 percent, “extremely backward” castes 23.6 percent, while Dalits are at 20.6 percent. Dalits, formerly referred to as “untouchables”, fall at the bottom of India’s complex caste hierarchy and have faced marginalisation and violence for centuries.

Vijay, son of a Christian filmmaker father and a Hindu mother who is a background singer in films, belongs to the Vellalar community, an affluent agrarian group in Tamil Nadu with both Hindu and Christian members.

Vijay started his film career as a child actor in movies directed by his father. His 1992 debut as a hero, however, in Naalaiya Theerpu (Tomorrow’s Verdict), flopped. Following the setback, his father cast him alongside popular star Vijayakanth — who later founded his own political outfit, Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam (DMDK) — in Senthoorapandi (1993), which gave his career a new lease of life.

It was the 2004 film Ghilli (Gutsy), which carried a subtle political undertone, that catapulted Vijay to superstar status. He dropped hints about his political ambitions in the 2013 hit Thalaivaa (Leader), which was launched with the tagline “Time to Lead”.

Soon, political messaging became central to many of Vijay’s subsequent films. Even the title of his yet-to-be-released Jana Nayagan (People’s Leader) — which he claims will be his final film — alludes to his political aspirations.

Riding on personal charisma, Vijay has attracted millions of supporters to his rallies, despite allegations of poor crowd management, which caused a stampede at one such gathering in September last year, killing 42 people.

He is expected to draw a share of Dalit and minority Christian votes that would have otherwise flowed to the DMK-led coalition. He is also banking on anti-incumbency votes that could have benefitted the AIADMK alliance.

Yet analysts say Vijay’s ambition of becoming the next chief minister will not be as easy as the scripted blockbusters he has built his career on, since he faces two opponents with decades of experience in real politics.

That leads political commentator R Kannan to describe Vijay as “both a blessing and a curse” for the two Dravidian coalitions.

“When the AIADMK joined the BJP-led NDA, many predicted the Dravidian party would lose heavily, with minorities and Dalits flocking to the DMK. Vijay’s entry, however, has offered the AIADMK a ray of hope — he is expected to draw a decent share of votes that would otherwise have gone to the DMK,” he said.

“At the same time, he works in the DMK’s favour by siphoning off anti-incumbency votes that might not entirely have gone to the AIADMK. For both Dravidian parties, he is at once a blessing and a curse.”

Tamil Nadu’s tryst with stars

Vijay is aiming to follow the path of illustrious predecessors: Maruthur Gopalan Ramachandran, popularly known as MGR, and his protege, Jayaram Jayalalithaa – Tamil Nadu’s most beloved on-screen pair.

Born into poverty, MGR’s rise to stardom was nothing short of phenomenal. He captured the imagination of Tamil Nadu’s working class, who idolised him in return. From his first superhit, Rajakumari (Princess) in 1947, his films cast him as a champion of the masses, battling oppression and corrupt authority.

MGR launched the AIADMK in 1972 after breaking away from the DMK and served as Tamil Nadu’s chief minister from 1977 to 1987. He introduced several welfare programmes, the most significant being the Puratchi Thalaivar MGR Nutritious Meal Scheme, which provided free meals to schoolchildren to eliminate malnutrition and boost school enrolment.

His political heir, Jayalalithaa, was a six-time chief minister between 1991 and 2016, when she became India’s first female state leader to die in office. She is remembered for launching several women-centric programmes, including all-women police stations and subsidised two-wheelers for working women, apart from her work in curbing female infanticide.

The DMK also has a history of film personalities, including the party’s founder, CN Annadurai, who rose to fame as a pathbreaking scriptwriter with films like Velaikkari (1949), and MGR as the party’s star campaigner and leader before he founded the AIADMK.

Soon, Muthuvel Karunanidhi emerged as another prominent writer, poet and screenwriter with films like Parasakthi (1952), meaning Supreme Power, often cited as a turning point in Tamil cinema. Directed by Krishnan-Panju and written by Karunanidhi, then 28 years old, the film fiercely attacked casteism and social inequality, while propelling the spread of the Dravidian ideology.

Karunanidhi, popularly known as Kalaignar (artist), wrote scripts for more than 75 films that resonated with the struggles of the working class, championing rationalism and social equality.

He won the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly election for a record 13 terms and served as the state’s chief minister for five terms between 1969 and 2011. He died at the age of 94 in 2018, when his son, Stalin, took over as chief minister and DMK chief.

Film star-politicians who embraced Tamil identity politics flourished, while those who did not fell by the wayside.

“Successful leaders such as MGR, popularly known as Puratchi Thaalaivar [Revolutionary Leader], Jayalalithaa, who earned the monikers Puratchi Thalaivi [Revolutionary Female Leader] and Amma [Mother], embraced identity politics. Another popular film actor, Sivaji Ganesan, by contrast, could not make the same mark in politics even after he tried,” said Kannan, who has written biographies of MGR and Annadurai.

In 2005, popular actor Vijayakanth added to the starry mix by launching his DMDK party, another Dravidian political outfit. He made every attempt to position his party as an alternative to the DMK and the AIADMK, but failed. The party won just one seat in 2006 — Vijayakanth’s own — and drew a blank in 2009. Though he went on to become the leader of the opposition in the assembly in 2011, the election reverses forced him to seek alliances. The DMDK, now led by his wife Premalatha, is contesting 10 seats in alliance with the DMK.

Which is where, say analysts, Vijay’s pitch for power is unlikely to make an impact in this election. They say his TVK party does not fall in the long line of Dravidian parties that have a distinct political ideology and programme that appeals to their voters.

“Tamil Nadu is an ideologically and politically evolved state. Issues such as social justice, centre-state relations, and linguistic and cultural identity are paramount here. People will not back a politician without a clear ideology,” Ramu Manivannan, former professor of political science at the University of Madras, told Al Jazeera.

Manivannan said large crowds at Vijay’s rallies should not be mistaken for potential votes. “Film stars always attract crowds. To assume all of them will translate into votes is unfair.”

Vijay’s TVK is rooted in his fan clubs, which thrive on masculine aggression, said S Anandhi, retired professor at the Madras Institute of Development Studies.

“Vijay’s populist rhetoric — defying all authority — appeals strongly to the youth. But he never clarifies what he will actually do in power. He frames it as all established forces being arrayed against young men, and youngsters see this as an opportunity for a new kind of collectivisation. I would call it a dangerous class,” she told Al Jazeera.

Appeal to young, female voters

Vijay appears to be banking heavily on two voter blocs: younger voters between 18 and 39 years, who number 23 million of the state’s 57 million voters, and women, who account for more than half of them.

At his rallies packed with young people and women, Vijay has alleged that Stalin’s true allies are “bribery and corruption”, framing the contest as a personal battle between himself and the chief minister.

Stalin, for his part, has largely brushed off Vijay’s attacks. “Newly-formed parties have a wrong notion that they can survive by criticising DMK,” he said in a recent interview.

Instead, Stalin has focused his attacks on the Modi government, accusing it of depriving Tamil Nadu of its share of federal funds, and framing the election as a contest between Tamil Nadu and New Delhi – a ploy that simultaneously targets the AIADMK for allying with an “adversary”, the BJP.

The AIADMK’s Palaniswami has countered by saying Stalin raises the centre-state issue only because he has “no achievements of his own to show”.

Despite their ideological differences, all parties are competing heavily on welfare promises in a state known for freebies during elections.

The DMK has pledged to double the monthly women’s allowance to 2,000 rupees ($21), offer 8,000 rupees ($85) in home appliance coupons, and build one million homes for the poor over five years. The AIADMK, also promising a monthly allowance of 2,000 rupees for women, has additionally offered free refrigerators to the poor and a one-time family grant of 10,000 rupees ($106).

Vijay’s TVK, hoping to cash in on the ongoing global fuel crisis, has promised six free LPG cylinders annually, 2,500 rupees ($26.5) monthly support for the female heads of a household, 8gm gold and a silk saree for poor women getting married, 4,000 rupees ($42.5) stipend for unemployed college graduates, and interest-free education loans of up to 2 million rupees ($21,257).

Still, Kannan feels Vijay can at best be a disruptor in the three-cornered contest.

“Vijay’s campaign gained momentum in the final lap. He turned what was a bipolar contest into a three-cornered one. But apart from his personal charisma, he lacks proper organisational machinery. Many of his party’s candidates are unknown faces,” he said.

Washington, DC – The latest battle in United States congressional redistricting has been decided, with voters in Virginia approving redrawing the state’s electoral map.

The result of Tuesday’s referendum on Virginia redistricting is widely expected to benefit Democrats in their fight to retake control of the slimly Republican-controlled US House of Representatives in the midterm vote in November.

While redistricting is typically conducted every 10 years, following the US Census count of the country’s population, the election season has seen an unprecedented flurry of states moving to redraw their legislative maps early, initially spurred by pressure on US President Donald Trump to urge his fellow Republicans in Texas to do the same.

Democrats may be up at the moment, but several scenarios – including a redistricting push in Florida – could soon spoil those gains.

Experts, meanwhile, warn of the long-term implications of the election season’s norm-busting political manoeuvres, which they say could transform how and when electoral maps are drawn for years to come.

“Virginia’s unorthodox redistricting isn’t just a map redraw, it’s a mid-decade power play in a national arms race,” Rina Shah, a political adviser and strategist, told Al Jazeera.

“In a cycle defined by retaliation over reform, this sets a precedent: when one side bends the rules, the other follows, until courts or voters draw the final line.”

Democrats gain – for now

Trump has not been timid about his desire to redraw state congressional maps to benefit his Republican Party.

In July 2025, he confirmed the plan to reporters: “Texas would be the biggest one,” he said. “Just a very simple redrawing, we pick up five seats.”

By August, Texas’s Republican-controlled State House had passed a new map favouring Republicans, setting the party on course to secure five more seats in the US House of Representatives compared to the earlier map.

The move was soon followed by changes in Missouri, whose new maps are expected to net Republicans one additional seat, while redistricting in North Carolina and Ohio is expected to give the party two to three new Republican-dominated districts.

Democrats in several states responded in kind, pushing for redistricting in California and Utah that resulted in about six new Democrat-dominated districts. Virginia’s victory largely neutralised Republican gains, adding between two and four seats for Democrats.

“This could shift Virginia from a 6-5 split to something like 10-1 Democratic,” political adviser Shah said, referring to Virginia’s 11 congressional districts and noting this would result in “delivering up to four net seats and dramatically tightening the fight for House control in the 2026 midterms”.

This comes as Republicans are already expected to face a punishing election season, with wariness over the US-Israeli war in Iran and the stubbornly high cost of living in the US.

Democratic control of either chamber of Congress – or of both – would give the party the ability to largely curtail Trump’s agenda in the final two years of his presidency.

As of Wednesday, Sabato’s Crystal Ball, a midterm predictor published by the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, rated 217 Congressional districts across the country as leaning towards Democrats, with 205 leaning towards Republicans and 13 rated toss-ups.

Good for Democrats, ‘terrible’ for democracy

In the short term, Democrats are “winning” from the redistricting battle, according to Samuel Wang, a professor of neuroscience at Princeton University who runs the Princeton Gerrymandering Project.

“But from a non-partisan good government standpoint, it’s just a terrible event,” Wang told Al Jazeera.

He explained the “incredible” flurry of redistricting in recent months opens the possibility of a new age of heightened gerrymandering, the process by which congressional boundaries are drawn to benefit one political group.

Prior to this election cycle, there had been just three instances of mid-decade redistricting over the last five decades. Wang described the recent spurt as a “complete busting of norms”.

“It’s bad in the sense of reducing competition. Gerrymandering on both sides, basically, removes voters from the equation everywhere it happens,” he said.

Top Democrats have largely argued their hands were forced in mirroring the Republican strategy, rather than yield to the opposing party ahead of a consequential election.

“We fought back,” Hakeem Jeffries, the top Democrat in the House, told the Associated Press after Virginia’s vote. “When they go low, we hit back hard.”

But some Democrats have echoed concerns over the new precedent being set.

John Fetterman, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who has regularly sided with Republicans, told Newsmax on Wednesday, “Whether it’s a red state or whether it’s a blue state, our democracy is degraded.”

Attention turns to Florida

To be sure, while opportunities for further redistricting are diminishing following the vote in Virginia, the final congressional maps ahead of the midterms may not yet be set.

The Virginia vote now shifts pressure on Republicans in Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis is set to hold a special legislative session on April 28 to discuss possible redistricting.

A new map could add up to five Republican-dominated congressional districts in the state, but could be scuttled by strict language in Florida’s constitution related to the process.

Democrat Jeffries, in a statement on Wednesday, vowed to surge resources to the state to take down Republican incumbents if the map is redrawn. “Maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time,” he pledged.

Several challenges to Virginia’s redistricting ballot measure are also currently being heard before the state’s Supreme Court, which could hinder the implementation of the new map.

Trump on Wednesday decried the Virginia vote as “rigged”, without providing any evidence to back up the claim.

Meanwhile, a case pending before the US Supreme Court could beckon in another slate of redistricting in the US South.

In Louisiana v Callais, the justices will determine whether the creation of two Black-majority congressional districts is in line with the Voting Rights Act, which seeks to assure minority representation in states with a history of racist election policies.

A ruling could open the door to redrawing maps in several states that would have previously been banned due to so-called “racial gerrymandering”, a process of drawing congressional lines based on racial makeup to dilute the electoral power of a minority group.

A pathway to reform?

A handful of states have created independent commissions to oversee redistricting, in an effort to assure the process remains non-partisan.

But the vast majority rely on their state legislatures to draw the maps, which can lead to outsized influence over the party in control, barring legal challenges. That largely remains true whether redistricting is conducted every decade or, as the current election season could portend, more frequently.

But amid the current cavalcade of congressional map changes, Princeton’s Wang, who is himself running in the Democratic primary for Congress in New Jersey’s 12th district, sees a rare opportunity for federal reform.

That could take the form of Congress creating independent commissions to oversee redistricting.

“Now that mid-decade redistricting is backfiring on Republicans, it creates the possibility that both parties can see clearly that gerrymandering is a zero-sum game,” Wang said.

“It opens a path for possible bipartisan action.”

Though President Donald Trump on Tuesday declared an extension to a ceasefire with Iran, the Islamic Republic continues to attack shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. At least two ships were fired on by Iran, according to the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO). Iranian officials say the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) seized those ships and fired on another.

These incidents came a day after U.S. forces boarded an Iran-linked oil tanker in the Indian Ocean and highlighted that regardless of diplomacy, shipping remains a target for both sides. Meanwhile, Iran made veiled threats against the telecommunications cables running under the Strait. All this is happening as Tehran says it won’t return to the bargaining table until the U.S. ends its blockade of Iranian ports. We’ll discuss that more later in this story.

The first attack in the Strait on Wednesday took place shortly before midnight EDT about 15 nautical miles northeast of Oman, according to UKMTO. 

“The Master of a Container Ship reported that the vessel was approached by 1 IRGC gun boat, no VHF challenge that then fired upon the vessel which has caused heavy damage to the bridge. No fires or environmental impact reported. All Crew reported safe.”

Nour News, a website affiliated with Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) opened fire on the Epaminodes, after it had “ignored the warnings of the Iranian armed forces,” the BBC reported.

Epaminodes is a Liberian-flagged container ship, according to MarineTraffic.com.

A second incident took place about three hours later eight nautical miles west of Iran, UKMTO stated. 

“A master of an outbound cargo ship reports having been fired upon and is now stopped in the water,” the organization explained in an alert. “Crew are safe and accounted for. There is no reported damage to the vessel. UKMTO is aware of high levels of activity in the SoH area and encourages vessels to report any suspicious activity.”

It is unclear at the moment which ship was attacked in that incident. UKTMO did not name the vessel. However, in addition to claiming they fired on the Epaminodes, Iranian officials say they also struck the Euphoria, which MarineTraffic said is a Panamanian-flagged container ship, and the MSC-Francesca, also a Panamanian-flagged container ship, according to MarineTraffic.

The Epaminodes and MSC-Francesca were also seized for “endangering maritime security by operating without the necessary permits and tampering with navigation systems,” the IRGC claimed, stating the vessels have been “directed to the coast of Iran.”

🚨Update: The two vessels are currently in the territorial waters of the Islamic Republic of Iran for inspection of their cargo, documentation, and related records. https://t.co/aXbSZLSNFa

— IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) (@iribnews_irib) April 22, 2026

The disposition of the vessels and crews is not currently known. U.S. Central Command could not confirm any of these incidents.

A Sentinel-2 satellite image captured today shows what looks like a swarm of IRGCN fast attack craft sailing north of the strait of Hormuz near Kargan coast, according to open source investigator Mehdi H on X. 

The image shows what appears to be at least 33 boats. It is unclear if there is any connection between these craft and the shipping attacks. The IRGC has invested heavily in its fleet of small boats for decades as TWZ has explored in the past. Some of these vessels are armed with short-range anti-ship missiles, as well as artillery rockets and other weapons. They can also be used to lay naval mines. These fleets are extremely hard to find and fix, and do not need large ports to operate from. While CENTCOM says it has destroyed well over 150 Iranian ships, the IRGC still has many remaining small boats.

Sentinel-2 satellite image today shows what looks like a flotilla of IRGCN fast attack crafts sailing north of strait of Hormuz near Kargan coast.
At least 33 boats can be seen in what looks like a show of force enforcing the strait closure by Iran.
Geo-location: 26.899,56.824 pic.twitter.com/smNuM0y6D3

— Mehdi H. (@mhmiranusa) April 22, 2026

As we noted earlier in this story, in addition to attacking and capturing ships on the Strait, Iran pointed out the vulnerability of telecommunications cables running under it.

“The Strait of Hormuz is not only a crucial route for oil and gas transportation; this narrow waterway is also one of the most important internet chokepoints in the region and the world,” the IRGC-linked Tasnim news agency noted on Wednesday. “According to submarine network data, at least 7 main communication cables of the Persian Gulf countries pass through this route; while more than 97% of the world’s internet traffic is transferred via these fiber optic cables laid under the sea.”

“Cables such as FALCON, AAE‑1, TGN‑Gulf, and SEA‑ME‑WE connect a significant part of the region’s digital communication to major data centers in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia,” the outlet added. “These infrastructures are the backbone of data transfer, e-commerce, cloud services, and online communications in the Persian Gulf countries.”

“The concentration of many internet cables in a narrow passage makes the Strait of Hormuz a vulnerable point for the region’s digital economy,” Tasnim posited, calling it “a place where cables, after passing through the strait, connect to coastal landing nodes and major regional data centers.”

New post from Iran state media Tasnim about major undersea Internet cables in the Strait of Hormuz

“The concentration of a large number of internet cables in a narrow passage has made the Strait of Hormuz a vulnerable point for the region’s digital economy” pic.twitter.com/JE0o4qcCC6

— Steve Lookner (@lookner) April 22, 2026

UPDATES

Our coverage for the day has concluded.

UPDATE: 7:56 PM EDT –

Though the fighting may be paused, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the economic pressure on Iran continues.

.@PressSec on Iran: “There’s a ceasefire with the military and kinetic strikes, but Operation Economic Fury continues and… we are completely strangling their economy through this blockade. They’re losing $500M/day… He’s satisfied with that as we await their response.” pic.twitter.com/SdtLveF1ZH

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 22, 2026

The aircraft carrier USS George H. W. Bush is set to arrive in the Middle East in about three to five days after sailing around the southern tip of Africa, Fox News Chief National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin stated on X.

The timing, she noted, coincides with Trump’s extending the ceasefire deadline by that same timeline.

3rd aircraft carrier USS Bush arrives in Middle East after detour around southern tip of Africa in next 3-5 days as Trump extends the ceasefire with Iran by “3-5 days.” https://t.co/MymBLABmlE

— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) April 22, 2026

The Washington Post reports that the Pentagon has told Congress it could take six months to fully clear the Strait of Hormuz of mines deployed by the Iranian military.

The publication added that any such operation is unlikely to be carried out until the U.S. war with Iran ends.

This “assessment that means the conflict’s economic impact could extend late into this year or beyond,” the newspaper added.

“The timeline — met with frustration by Democrats and Republicans alike, two of these people said — is the latest sign that gasoline and oil prices could remain elevated long after any peace deal is reached,” the Post noted.

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

— Dan Lamothe (@DanLamothe) April 22, 2026

Israel’s N12 News reported on X that Trump has given Iran a deadline of Sunday.

Two Israel Air Force technicians from Tel Nof Airbase, near Ashdod, will be charged with spying for Iran during Operation Roaring Lion, Israel’s public broadcaster KAN News reported on Wednesday.

“The two technicians, who worked on IAF F-15 fighter jets, handed over documentation of the engine diagrams, as well as photographs showing the face of a flight instructor, which is against military censorship rules, The Jerusalem Post reported.

“They were also asked to gather information about former IDF chief Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Herzi Halevi and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir,” the publication noted. “Authorities are considering whether to increase the charges on one of the technicians to treason, rather than the lower charge of espionage.”

Report: Two Israel Air Force technicians from Tel Nof Airbase will be charged with spying for Iran during Operation Roaring Lion. They provided sensitive military documents and photos.
Written by @JamesGennhttps://t.co/KA8lLh9672

— The Jerusalem Post (@Jerusalem_Post) April 22, 2026

The New York Post said Trump told them that another round of negotiations with Iran may take place later this week. At issue is the future of Iran’s highly enriched uranium, its supply of ballistic missiles, support of proxies like Hezbollah and the Houthis, and ultimate disposition of the Strait of Hormuz.

“‘Good news’ about a second round of talks between the US and Iran may be coming as soon as Friday,” the publication said Trump and Pakistani sources told it on Wednesday.

“Sources in Islamabad touted positive mediation efforts with Tehran, renewing the possibility of more peace talks within the next ‘36 to 72 hours,’” the newspaper added. “Asked about this possible breakthrough by The Post, Trump, in a text message, said: ‘It’s possible! President DJT.’”

Well, guess I’m not going anywhere just yet!

President Trump and Pakistani sources today told me good news about a fresh round of talks between the US and Iran is “possible” as soon as Friday.https://t.co/5TdF0kRgO7

— Caitlin Doornbos (@CaitlinDoornbos) April 22, 2026

Trump “plans to give the Iranians a limited timeframe to come up with a unified proposal to get diplomatic negotiations back on track,” CNN reported, citing two sources familiar with the internal discussions. “The administration does not want to indefinitely extend the ceasefire, the sources said, and does not want to give Iran time to drag out talks further.”

President Trump plans to give the Iranians a limited timeframe to come up with a unified proposal to get diplomatic negotiations back on track, two sources familiar with the internal discussions tell me.

The administration does not want to indefinitely extend the ceasefire, the…

— Alayna Treene (@alaynatreene) April 22, 2026

“Trump is willing to give another three to five days of ceasefire to allow the Iranians to get their shit together,” one U.S. source briefed on the matter told Axios. “It is not going to be open-ended.”

Trump’s negotiators “believe a deal to end the war and address what’s left of Iran’s nuclear program is still achievable,” the outlet added. “But they also worry they may not have anyone in Tehran empowered to say yes.”

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei “is barely communicating,” Axios posited. “The IRGC generals now in control of the country and Iran’s civilian negotiators are openly at odds over strategy.”

“We saw that there is an absolute fracture inside Iran between the negotiators and the military — with neither side having access to the supreme leader, who is not responsive,” a U.S. official told the news organization.

Axios added that though Vice President JD Vance was all set to go to Pakistan for the second round of negotiations, he instead found himself waiting for the IRGC generals now in control of Iran to let parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Sayed Abbas Araghchi travel to Pakistan to meet him. However, while the Iranians appeared to have given Pakistani mediators the green light for talks, by Tuesday morning, that signal was gone, replaced by a demand that the U.S. lift its naval blockade.

“Trump is willing to give another three to five days of ceasefire to allow the Iranians to get their shit together,” one U.S. source briefed on the matter said. “It is not going to be open-ended.”https://t.co/QdZWaZPYL3

— Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) April 22, 2026

As we have previously noted, Trump extended the ceasefire deadline yesterday, but gave no specific date for when fighting could resume. In a Truth Social post, he said he did so to give time for the fractured Iranian leadership to come up with a response to U.S. demands and that the ongoing blockade of Iranian ports would remain in effect.

His post came after Iranians refused to commit to peace talks tentatively scheduled to be held in Pakistan.

The official Iranian IRIB news outlet denied Tehran has taken any official position on Trump’s ceasefire extension or future negotiations.

🚨 IRIB EXCLUSIVE
“Iran has NOT yet announced an official position on Trump’s claim about extending the ceasefire. Rumors about Iran’s formal agreement are #not_accurate, and no statement has been issued by Iranian officials.”

— IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) (@iribnews_irib) April 22, 2026

The Iranians say the future of negotiations depends on the status of the ongoing blockade of its ports.

Iran’s UN Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani stated that Tehran is prepared to negotiate immediately after the United States ends its naval blockade, emphasizing that Washington must first halt its “ceasefire violations.”

He added that while Iran is prepared to negotiate, it is also prepared for war.

Iran Ready for Talks Once US Lifts Naval Blockade, Envoy Says

Iran’s UN Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani stated that Tehran is prepared to negotiate immediately after the United States ends its naval blockade, emphasizing that Washington must first halt its “ceasefire violations.” pic.twitter.com/GOxEO8yqzS

— Tasnim News Agency (@Tasnimnews_EN) April 22, 2026

Citing data from the Vortexa cargo tracking group, Financial Times is reporting that “at least 34 tankers with links to Iran have bypassed the US blockade since it began.” 

CENTCOM, which on Tuesday said the US Navy had directed 28 vessels to turn back to Iranian ports since the blockade was enacted, told us the assertion that dozens of ships bypassed the blockade “is not true.”

Good morning, Asia. While you were sleeping, one of our most-read stories reported that dozens of ships have managed to circumvent the blockade since it began — despite Donald Trump declaring it a ‘tremendous success’. https://t.co/TI52fxy7VQ pic.twitter.com/BkOeMke1pR

— Financial Times (@FT) April 22, 2026

The Pentagon on Wednesday pushed back on the assertion that the Iranian-linked oil tanker Tifani was seized by the U.S., however, it may be a matter of semantics.

As we reported yesterday, the vessel boarded by U.S. forces in the Indian Ocean and The Washington Post later said it was “seized” as the United States determines “next steps for the Tifani and its crew in the next couple of days.”

“Seized wouldn’t be accurate at this time,” a Pentagon official told us. “So the way it works is after interdiction the U.S. has 96 hours to determine next steps. That’s where the rest of the interagency comes in. It varies by ship and situation what the solution would be. At this point DoW’s finished its role with just the interdiction.”

“During that 96-hour period, State would make the determination it’s stateless and work through diplomatic channels on where to take it,” the official added. “DHS and Coast Guard could be the ones to escort it. DoE gets involved for the oil, treasury for the sanction, DoJ for the legal elements and warrant. It really is a large, complex coordination effort across the interagency.”

The exact current disposition of the vessel is unclear. We have reached out to the White House for more details.

With Iran partially reopening its airspace, the U.S. State Department stated that any U.S. citizens still in the country “should leave Iran now, monitor local media for updates, and consult with commercial carriers for additional information on flights out of Iran.”

Americans seeking to depart Iran “may also depart by land to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Türkiye, and Turkmenistan. U.S. citizens should not travel to Afghanistan, Iraq, or the Pakistan-Iran border area,” the warning added. “Be aware that the Iranian government may prevent U.S. citizens from departing or charge an ‘exit fee’ for departures from Iran. U.S.-Iranian dual nationals must exit Iran on Iranian passports.”

Iran: As of April 21, Iran’s airspace has partially reopened. U.S. citizens should leave Iran now, monitor local media for updates, and consult with commercial carriers for additional information on flights out of Iran. Americans seeking to depart Iran may also depart by land to… pic.twitter.com/yvVIqO0XoJ

— TravelGov (@TravelGov) April 22, 2026

During the course of Epic Fury, the U.S. has run through a large amount of advanced munitions, CNN reported.

The list includes about 50% of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors, 50% of its Patriot interceptors, 45% of its Precision Strike Missiles, 30% of its Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missiles (TLAMs), 20% of its Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff (JDAM) munitions and 20% of its Standard Missiles (SM-3 and SM-6).

Approximate estimates of percentages of U.S. munitions expended in Iran war, per @CNN :
50% THAAD interceptors
50% Patriot interceptors
45% Precision Strike Missiles
30% Tomahawk missiles
20% Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles
20% Standard Missiles (SM-3 and SM-6) https://t.co/1A9TH0zpr5

— John M. Donnelly (@johnmdonnelly) April 21, 2026

Given the expenditure of costly defensive munitions used to swat down much cheaper Iranian drones, the U.S. military has introduced Ukrainian counter-drone technology in recent weeks at a key U.S. air base in Saudi Arabia, Reuters reported, citing five people with ​knowledge of the matter.

These attacks have destroyed aircraft and buildings, and killed at least one service member.

“The deployment of a Ukrainian command-and-control platform called ‌Sky Map at Prince Sultan Air Base, which has not previously been reported,” is another sign of Ukrainian battlefield technological advances after more than four years of full-on war with Russia.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

We analysed dozens of recent local news reports as part of our ongoing investigation into criminal activity on UK High Streets. From Bideford in Devon, to Great Yarmouth in Norfolk, to Belfast in Northern Ireland – we found that drugs, including crystal meth and heroin, had been found in more than 70 shops and linked premises.

Israel has killed journalist Amal Khalil and injured her colleague Zeinab Faraj in a ‘double-tap’ attack in southern Lebanon. Repeated strikes on the reporters and paramedics delayed rescue efforts for hours, according to Lebanon’s Al Akhbar News.

Iran’s revolutionary guard has released a video said to show its forces seizing a ship in the Strait of Hormuz. The container ship was one of two captured by Iran on Wednesday.

Rights advocates have accused the Trump administration of using third-country deportations to intimidate asylum seekers and migrants.

Fifteen South American migrants and asylum seekers recently deported from the United States to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) say they are facing pressure to return to their countries of origin, despite concerns for their safety.

Women from Colombia, Peru and Ecuador told the Reuters news agency that, since being deported to the Central African nation last week, they have been given no credible options other than going back to their home countries.

“We feel pressured to agree to go back to our country, regardless of the risks,” a 29-year-old Colombian woman, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of reprisals, told Reuters.

The group arrived in the DRC last week as part of a controversial third-country agreement with the administration of US President Donald Trump.

Since returning to the presidency for a second term, Trump has implemented hardline measures to restrict immigration to the US and expel immigrants already in the country, some of whom have legal status.

Among the 15 South Americans who were deported to the DRC, some say they had sought asylum — a legal immigration process — in the US after fleeing persecution in their home countries.

The 29-year-old woman, for example, wrote in her asylum application in January 2024 that she left Colombia after being kidnapped and tortured by an armed group, as well as suffering abuse at the hands of her ex-husband, who was a police officer.

A US immigration judge ruled in May 2025 that she was more likely than not to be tortured if she was sent home, according to court records reviewed by Reuters.

The AFP news agency also reported that a 30-year-old Colombian woman named Gabriela only learned that she was being sent to the DRC a day before last week’s flight. During a 27-hour trip, the hands and feet of the deportees were shackled.

“I didn’t want to go to Congo,” she told AFP. “I’m scared; I don’t know the language.”

Immigration advocates have said that third-country deportations are an effort to intimidate migrants and asylum seekers into agreeing to leave the US.

Such removals involve sending immigrants to places with which they have no familiarity. Many, including the DRC, are known for human rights concerns or are sites of active conflict.

“The goal is clear: Put people in a place so unfamiliar that they give up and agree to return home, despite the immense risk they face there,” said Alma David, a US-based lawyer representing one of the asylum seekers in the DRC.

Manchester City relegate Burnley with 1-0 win to also take top spot from Arsenal in the Premier League title race.

Manchester City completed its ominous, late-season rise to the top of the Premier League by winning 1-0 at Burnley – who are relegated as a result – thanks to Erling Haaland’s early goal, ending Arsenal’s 200-day stay in first place.

Haaland’s clinical ⁠finish after five minutes on Wednesday could have paved the way for a boost to City’s goal difference, but they ‌lacked a cutting edge in a nervy affair as Burnley dug deep.

Haaland hit the post and had other chances as City tried to give themselves a safety margin, but Pep Guardiola’s side ⁠had to make do ⁠with a surprisingly narrow victory.

“The chances were there. We created a lot. It was a fantastic game and we did everything after a demanding game three days ago [against Arsenal],” Guardiola told Sky Sports.

“We won and are top of the league, why be frustrated? Of course we can do more, but we won.

“We made a better performance than on Sunday because we created chance after chance.

“It is five games to win the Premier League now – that is the reality.”

The goal came as Haaland ran onto Jeremy Doku’s pass to convert a deft finish, allowing City to back up its 2-1 victory over Arsenal on Sunday that, for many, turned Guardiola’s team into the title favourite.

Winning by a one-goal margin left City and Arsenal tied on both points (70) and goal difference (+37). City only leads courtesy of more goals scored (66 to Arsenal’s 63).

City were nine points adrift of Arsenal after drawing with West Ham on March 14. Three straight wins, combined with back-to-back losses for Arsenal, have seen the title race turn on its head.

The result condemned American-owned Burnley to relegation after one season back in the top flight.

For Scott Parker’s side, the inevitable became a ‌reality as they are stuck on 20 points, 13 points behind ‌the ‌safety zone with only four games remaining.

Arsenal can retake top spot in the league when they entertain Newcastle United on Saturday, while City play Southampton on the same day in the semifinal of the FA Cup, before returning to Premier League action on Monday, May 4, against Everton.

“It is a big opportunity to play four finals in a row,” Guardiola added about Saturday’s match against Southampton.

“We may have to rest players, but we are ready.”

A new, longer-range version of the Rapidly Adaptable Affordable Cruise Missile (RAACM) has been unveiled by CoAspire at the Sea-Air-Space 2026 exposition near Washington, D.C. The development comes just days after the U.S. Air Force launched market research for its Family of Affordable Mass Missiles — Beyond Adversary’s Reach (FAMM-BAR), reflecting the service’s interest in low-cost, long-range strike weapons, specifically for anti-surface warfare.

Jamie Hunter of TWZ spoke about the RAACM-ER (RAACM pronounced ‘rack-em;’ ER for Extended Range) with Doug Denneny, founder, CEO, and owner at CoAspire.

First off, it’s worth looking at the original RAACM, a modular, low-cost cruise missile that leverages 3D printing to bring down cost and enable rapid production ramp-up.

“When we designed the original RAACM, we knew that it was going to be the size of a GBU-38,” Denneny said, referring to the 500-pound version of the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), which is 92.6 inches long and has a wingspan of 14 inches.

An official video promoting the original RAACM:

RAACM Rapidly Adaptable Affordable Cruise Missile

“When you go to that size, there are great reasons to do it, but it doesn’t go as far as a larger variant could do,” Denneny continued. “We really wanted to take everything we learned and now have an extended-range version. And what’s beautiful about the additive manufacturing that we use is that we can really optimize fuel tank volume, which means this can go very far.”

According to the manufacturer, the RAACM-ER has a range greater than 1,000 nautical miles.

This is especially remarkable considering the relatively compact size of the weapon. Indeed, when it comes to anti-ship missiles, the only weapon in the U.S. inventory that comes close is the BGM-109 Block V Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST). This can be launched from destroyers, submarines, and the U.S. Army’s Typhon system. Like the RAACM-ER, it is subsonic, but a single round costs $3.64 million, according to the Navy. While the RAACM-ER clearly has a degree of low observability, it is not to the same degree as on the MST.

Like RAACM, the extended-range model is designed for launch from aircraft, as well as from the ground and from naval vessels. For surface-launched applications, the RAACM-ER adds an additional rocket booster behind its turbojet, meaning it can be propelled out of its launch canister.

Despite the nomenclature, the RAACM-ER is a new design, rather than a modification of the RAACM.

Denneny explained: “Our engineers came to us and said, ‘Hey, if we’re going to make a bigger one, should we make it look just the same?’ I mentioned earlier that RAACM was made that shape just to ease integration. We’re an engineering company, so we said, ‘Let’s optimize fuel volume, let’s optimize survivability features, let’s optimize physics so that this thing can go as far as possible and take the sensors needed. That’s why it’s in this slightly different shape.”

The RAACM-ER is somewhat reminiscent of the AGM-158 Joint Air-To-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), in terms of appearance and capabilities, but Denneny is keen to avoid direct comparisons.

“Physics is physics,” he added. “When people look at shapes, they look similar, but just like an Airbus looks like a Boeing, but what they have different inside is really what matters, and that’s how we differ in many ways.”

In terms of sensors, the RAACM-ER is currently fitted with a GPS navigation system, suitable for air, ground, and surface launch.

“Both our RAACM and our RAACM-ER also have a long-wave infrared sensor in the nose,” Denneny continued, “so we have the opportunity to search and find targets as well.”

Unlike the JASSM and similar cruise missiles, however, the RAACM-ER, like the RAACM before it, is optimized for low cost.

For Denneny, “the most important thing is affordable mass. [This] means keeping the cost down, so that the nation and our allies can purchase these at scale. That’s number one. Number two is to use as many commercial off-the-shelf parts, so that we’re we are not locked into a single supplier for anything. The final thing is to have something that can survive enemy countermeasures, and also hit the target, whether it’s stationary or moving. Those are the main requirements.”

When it comes to price point, CoAspire has optimized mass rather than the highest-end capabilities. This is a reflection not only of the sheer number of targets that the U.S. military and its allies would face in a potential conflict with China, but also the fact that a considerable proportion of missiles won’t make it to their targets anyway. Still, as recent conflicts have shown, the ability of lower-end drones, especially, to overwhelm adversary air defenses when fielded in large numbers is significant. After all, quantity has a quality all of its own.

Denneny confirmed that CoAspire plans to test-fly the RAACM-ER “very soon.”

The original RAACM has already undergone flight trials aboard a contractor-operated A-4. CoAspire is now under contract to the U.S. government for RAACM, and the weapon is in production at the company’s plant in Manassas, Virginia.

In the past, we’ve learned that both the Air Force and the Navy have funded work on the RAACM project. It has also been reported that CoAspire is one of two companies producing Extended Range Attack Missiles (ERAM) for Ukraine — this may well involve the RAACM or a related weapon.

As for the RAACM-ER, this was unveiled only a week after the Air Force launched market research for its Family of Affordable Mass Missiles — Beyond Adversary’s Reach (FAMM-BAR).

“The potential procurement objective is to produce an inventory for the [U.S.] Government and Foreign Military Sales. The expectation is that the annual production orders will range from 1,000 to 2,000 units per year for five years (procurement numbers will vary by year),” the Air Force says in the request for information.

The FAMM-BAR program lists five desired attributes for the potential weapon: a range of at least 1,000 nautical miles, a speed of at least 0.7 Mach, the option of palletized delivery from a cargo aircraft, the ability to receive midcourse navigation updates, and the manufacturing capacity to produce more than 1,000 rounds annually. The main target set for the weapon is “slow-moving maritime” vessels.

A video showing a demonstration of the Rapid Dragon air-launched palletized munitions concept, using surrogate weapons delivered from the cargo holds of a C-17A and an EC-130J:

Rapid Dragon Flight Test

This requirement reflects the growing focus on anti-surface warfare as the U.S. military plans for a high-end conflict in the Pacific, especially against China. The U.S. military is increasingly investing in a diverse mix of anti-ship capabilities, part of a broader strategic shift driven by China’s growing maritime power. At the same time, real-world operations have exposed how rapidly missile stockpiles can be depleted, intensifying concerns that sustaining the massive volumes of anti-ship fires required in a China conflict will demand significant expansion of U.S. production capacity and inventories.

At the same time, the RAACM-ER would be useful for striking static land targets during an Indo-Pacific war, too. With such a considerable range, the weapon will also be better able to deal with increasingly far-reaching air defenses, something that the Pentagon is increasingly concerned about, including the likelihood of enemy missiles that can target its aircraft at ranges as great as 1,000 miles.

It should be noted that there are already other FAMM programs underway, namely the FAMM-Palletized and FAMM-Lugged cruise missiles for the Air Force. However, these require ranges of 250-500 nautical miles.

At this point, the low-cost, long-range strike weapon field is becoming increasingly crowded. Other contenders include designs from Anduril, General Atomics, and Zone 5 Technologies. From the last of these companies, the Rusty Dagger recently underwent release tests from an Air Force F-16 as part of the FAMM-L effort.

Global Technical Systems is also pitching a cruise missile with a range of 1,200 nautical miles and an anti-ship warhead.

However, with the original RAACM already in production, and proven in flight tests, the new RAACM-ER looks well-positioned to go far — figuratively and literally — in the FAMM-BAR program.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Rosenior’s dismissal may solve one problem, but those in Chelsea‘s boardroom must take the major share of the blame for a club that looks increasingly out of control.

Chelsea‘s recent losses eclipsed Manchester City‘s £197.5m deficit in 2011, despite bringing in £490.9m in revenue, which the club says is the second highest total in its history.

Since the current ownership took control in 2022, Chelsea have spent around £1.5bn on players, focusing on securing a raft of younger players on long-term contracts.

In this time, they have sacked Champions League winner Tuchel at the end of their first 100 days at the helm, then his successor Graham Potter seven months later.

Frank Lampard had a short second spell in charge as interim boss before former Tottenham Hotspur manager Mauricio Pochettino took charge, leaving by mutual consent after one season.

Enzo Maresca took over, but was sacked in January, less than six months after winning the Club World Cup to add to the Uefa Conference League.

If the final straw for Rosenior was criticism of his players, Maresca’s departure came amid friction with Chelsea‘s hierarchy, stunning key figures at the club after a 2-0 win against Everton in December by stating “many people” had made it his “worst 48 hours” since joining the club.

Cryptic, perhaps, but the beginning of the end for the Italian, as those in charge at Chelsea took a dim view of his public expression of discontent.

Those with knowledge of Maresca’s views, though, said he had grown unhappy at a multitude of factors, including encouragement over which players should start and which substitutions should be made during matches.

It led to the Rosenior experiment, which backfired on BlueCo, who may reflect on the number of managers hired and fired during their tenure and finally think: “It’s not them. It’s us.”

Former Chelsea winger Pat Nevin told BBC Radio 5 Live: “You would have to be a bit simple to be surprised at the situation with all the evidence in front of you.

“This is four seasons the new ownership has been in. This is manager number six. When you change it that amount of times, you have to ask the question – is the problem really the manager?”

Footage of an Israeli soldier attacking a Christian statue depicting the crucifixion of Jesus in southern Lebanon with a sledgehammer was difficult for Israel’s political establishment to ignore. The country has long tried to frame itself as a defender of Christians, and is allied with the powerful Christian Zionist movement in the United States.

But as Israel continues to lose support in the US and the West for its genocidal war in Gaza and attacks in Lebanon and Iran, support among Christians has also dipped – even before the video of the desecration of the Christian statue surfaced.

Responding to the footage on Monday, a day after it first went viral, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushed his regularly repeated line that Israel respects all religions, even as critics point out that his government regularly does the opposite.

But, with even some of Israel’s supporters voicing anger at the soldier’s actions, Israel announced on Tuesday that he had been jailed for 30 days, along with another soldier who had been filming him. Six other soldiers have been summoned for questioning.

The decision to pursue action against the two soldiers stands out because it is in marked contrast to Israeli military investigations conducted into violations by soldiers, which overwhelmingly find them not to have been at fault. In fact, no Israeli soldier has been charged with killing a Palestinian this decade, despite the thousands killed even outside of the Gaza war context, including the 2022 killing of Al Jazeera’s correspondent in the occupied West Bank, Shireen Abu Akleh, who was herself a Christian.

Yossi Mekelberg, a senior consulting fellow with Chatham House, noted that it was important for the Israeli government to ensure that its response to the attack on the statue of Jesus was visible, particularly in light of the important role Christian supporters of Israel – including the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee – play in the administration of US President Donald Trump.

Those supporters frequently justify their support for Israel by relying on Christian Zionist interpretations of the Bible, and emphasising a “Judeo-Christian” value system and shared cultural heritage.

But official Israeli action in this case makes inaction in other cases more glaring.

“This [attack on the statue of Jesus], and the attacks upon mosques by settlers and the killing of Palestinians are all war crimes,” Mekelberg said. “The problem is that we don’t know how widespread it is. We only know about this one because they filmed it.”

History of violence

Through much of the conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon, observers and analysts have pointed to the stark difference in Israeli government responses to attacks on Christian symbols and places of worship and what has been the large-scale destruction of Islamic sites.

In March, Netanyahu found himself having to explain the decision to block the passage of Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, from entering the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to mark Palm Sunday, one of the holiest days of the Christian calendar. Before the end of the same day, Netanyahu had posted to social media, explaining that there had been “no malicious intent whatsoever, only concern for his safety”.

Last July, Netanyahu again found himself apologising for a strike on a third church in Gaza following pressure from the Trump administration, when three of the hundreds of people sheltering there were killed and several others injured, including the parish priest who regularly spoke to the late Pope Francis.

In a statement issued through his office, the Israeli prime minister claimed he deeply regretted the strike on the church, which he said was an accident.

“Every innocent life lost is a tragedy. We share the grief of the families and the faithful,” he said, without referencing the almost 60,000 men, women and Palestinian children his forces had killed by that point in the war.

Throughout the war, Israel’s defenders have emphasised the concept of Judeo-Christian values in an effort to justify Israel’s attacks and its repeated breaking of international law. But evidence of a shared civilisational bond is thrown into question by attacks on Christian symbolism, such as in Lebanon, and by Israel’s long-standing treatment of Palestinian Christians, who face the same dispossession and occupation as their Muslim neighbours.

“I think a lot of Israel’s defenders in the West like to portray it as being ‘us’, just over there, as if ‘over there’ is some form of dark jungle,” said HA Hellyer, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and senior associate fellow at the Royal United Service Institute.

“So, they can make excuses for Israelis killing Arabs in their thousands,” Hellyer said. “They can even make excuses for them killing Christians. But when you see Israeli soldiers destroying Christian symbols, it becomes much harder to defend those actions and to stem the growing trend of US supporters, both Democrat and Republican, moving away from Israel.”

What’s next for Israel’s relationship with Christians?

While the Israeli government has been keen to preserve evidence of the Judeo-Christian bond, complaints of harassment by Christian groups within Israel are growing, particularly with the increase in strength of the Israeli far right, including in government.

In 2025, the interreligious Rossing Center for Education and Dialogue recorded 155 incidents targeting Christians in Israel, a marked increase from the previous year. While physical assaults were the most common, comprising 39 percent of incidents, there were also accounts of spitting, hitting, and pepper-spraying.

Christian holidays, specifically those around the time of Easter, have become particular sources of tension, the report noted, with priests and nuns wearing visible Christian clothing in West Jerusalem and occupied East Jerusalem facing the risk of harassment every time they enter public spaces.

“We’ve entered a period of what [Australian genocide studies scholar] Dirk Moses called ‘permanent security’, where anything different, anything that might be a threat, or could even be a threat in the future, has to be destroyed,“ prominent Israeli sociologist Yehouda Shenhav-Shahrabani told Al Jazeera.

That difference is inherent to the Christian faith.

“It’s not about left or right,” Shenhav-Shahrabani explained. “It even goes to language. In everyday Hebrew, people refer to Jesus as Yeshu, which is a curse word, rather than Yeshua, which is correct.”

“That’s commonplace. That’s how it’s used in everyday media,” he continued. “If that’s where you begin, it doesn’t matter if it’s stupidity or ignorance, it all leads to the same place.”

Tehran says all necessary arrangements has been made for participation in the tournament cohosted by the US.

Iran says that the country’s institutions are fully prepared for its national football team’s participation in the 2026 FIFA World Cup in the United States, Canada and Mexico.

In a statement made to state broadcaster IRIB, government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani said on Wednesday that the Ministry of Youth and Sports ensured all necessary arrangements for the team’s effective participation in the tournament.

She also said the preparations were made under the directive of the sport minister, with a focus on providing the required facilities for a successful performance.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino said on April 16 that Iran is expected to participate in the upcoming World Cup, taking place from June 11 to July 19, noting that the team has qualified and expressed its willingness to compete despite the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran.

“But Iran has to come, they represent their people, they have qualified, the players want to play,” he said of the Iranian team’s upcoming matches scheduled in the United States in June.

“Sports should be outside of politics,” Infantino said.

Group matches in the US

US President Donald Trump said in March that while Iran’s team would be welcome at the tournament, he questioned whether it would be appropriate for them to attend, citing concerns over their “life and safety”.

Iran is scheduled to play its three Group G matches in the United States – two in Los Angeles, one in Seattle – with their base for the tournament in Tucson, Arizona.

Iran’s participation in the global tournament being cohosted by the three North American countries had been thrown into doubt by the conflict launched by the United States and Israel on February 28.

Iran raised the prospect of a “boycott” of the competition before asking FIFA to move its matches from the United States to Mexico, a request the world governing body rejected.

After several weeks of air strikes on Iran and Iranian reprisals against Israel and other countries in the region, a fragile truce came into effect on April 8.

The announcement of the two-week ceasefire was followed by rare direct talks in Islamabad on April 11–12, which ended without an agreement. The ceasefire was later extended by the US as diplomatic efforts continue.

The World Cup, the first to feature 48 teams, starts on June 11.

United States President Donald Trump has described the Iranian leadership as “seriously fractured” as he announced an extension to a ceasefire.

Trump said on Tuesday that the ceasefire would be extended to allow more time for negotiations and appeared to be suggesting that Iran’s leadership is in disarray.

He added that the US naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian ports would remain in place.

Three weeks ago, Trump claimed the US military campaign had succeeded in its goal of forcing a change in Iran’s government and the US was now dealing with “a whole new set of people” in charge of the country.

On April 11, Iran sent a delegation led by parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf to Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, to begin talks with the US.

So is Iran’s government “fractured”? We take a look at the key Iranian stakeholders and power centres in Iran and how their approach to US negotiations may differ.

Who are the key figures in Iran, and are they ‘fractured’ over talks with the US?

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei

Khamenei is the second son of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who was killed in US-Israeli air strikes on Tehran on the first day of the war on February 28. Mojtaba Khamenei was selected as Iran’s new supreme leader on March 8, according to state media reports.

The 56-year old has never run for office or been elected but has for decades been a highly influential figure in the inner circle of his father, cultivating deep ties with the the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Observers said the younger Khamenei’s ascension is a clear sign that more hardline factions in Iran’s establishment have retained power and could indicate that the government has little desire to agree to a deal or negotiations with the US in the short term.

Since his ascension, however, Mojtaba Khamenei has not been seen in public. On March 13, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth claimed Iran’s new supreme leader had been wounded in US-Israeli strikes.

An April 11, a Reuters news agency report that quoted three people close to the supreme leader’s inner circle said Khamenei was still recovering from severe facial and leg injuries suffered in the air strike that killed his father. The sources were quoted as saying he was taking part in meetings with senior officials through audioconferencing.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify these claims.

According to state media reports, Khamenei has been active in making decisions on the war.

In a message read on Iranian state TV on April 18, Khamenei warned that the Iranian navy was ready to inflict “new bitter defeats” on the US and Israel as tensions escalated in the Strait of Hormuz.

Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf

Ghalibaf, 64, has served as Iran’s parliamentary speaker since 2020.

He was commander of the IRGC air force from 1997 to 2000. After that, he served as the country’s police chief. From 2005 to 2017, he was the mayor of Tehran.

Ghalibaf stood in elections for president in 2005, 2013, 2017 and 2024. He withdrew his bid for president before the election in 2017 when Hassan Rouhani won a second term.

Last month in the early days of the US-Israel war on Iran, it was suggested that Ghalibaf was the Trump administration’s “pick” to lead the country after the war ended. He has also been the main Iranian official leading negotiations with Washington since they began on April 11 in Pakistan.

In an overnight post on X on Tuesday, Ghalibaf wrote that Iran is “prepared to reveal new cards on the battlefield” after Trump threatened Tehran with “problems like they’ve never seen before” if the two-week ceasefire ended this week without a deal.

Ghalibaf expressed anger at Trump for “imposing a siege and violating the ceasefire”.

“We do not accept negotiations under the shadow of threats, and in the past two weeks, we have prepared to reveal new cards on the battlefield,” he said.

The ceasefire was supposed to have ended on Wednesday, but shortly before its expiration, Trump extended it until Iran “can come up with a unified proposal”.

Within Iran, however, Ghalibaf’s willingness to engage in negotiations with the US has been criticised by some people who have accused him of “betrayal”.

According to a report on Monday by the Iran International TV channel, some critics of Ghalibaf have said on social media platforms in Iran that the parliamentary speaker’s suggestion that peace talks with the US were progressing was “worrying”.

“There is no good in negotiation except harm,” one critic said.

But Ghalibaf has defended undertaking negotiations with the US. In a televised interview on Saturday, he said diplomacy does not mean “a withdrawal from Iran’s demands” but is a way to “consolidate military gains and translate them into political outcomes and lasting peace”.

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps

Iran’s military power structure is often described as opaque and complex.

The nation operates parallel armies, multiple intelligence services and layered command structures, all of which answer directly to the supreme leader, who serves as the commander in chief of all the armed forces.

The parallel armies comprise the Artesh, Iran’s regular army, which is responsible for territorial defence, defence of Iran’s airspace and conventional warfare, and the IRGC, whose role goes beyond defence and includes protecting Iran’s political structure.

The IRGC also controls Iran’s airspace and drone arsenal, which has become the backbone of Iran’s deterrence strategy against attacks by Israel and the US.

After the US and Israel struck Iran and killed Ali Khamenei, the IRGC promised revenge and launched what it called “the heaviest offensive operations in the history of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic against occupied lands [a reference to Israel] and the bases of American terrorists”. Since then, it has struck US military assets and infrastructure across the Gulf region.

Some experts said Iranian officials negotiating with the US are more closely aligned with the IRGC than other leaders and groups.

In an interview with Al Jazeera on March 25, Babak Vahdad, a political analyst specialising in Iran, noted that Iran’s appointment of Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr as secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council suggested Iranian negotiations would become more tightly aligned with the IRGC’s priorities. Zolghadr is a former IRGC commander and has been secretary of the advisory Expediency Council since 2023.

But Javad Heiran-Nia, who directs the Persian Gulf Studies Group at the Center for Scientific Research and Middle East Strategic Studies in Iran, said a divide between the IRGC and Iran’s negotiating team was plain to see.

Iran has attacked three cargo ships in the Strait of Hormuz since Trump announced the ceasefire on April 6 and said the US naval blockade will remain.

“The attack on tankers during the ceasefire demonstrates the IRGC’s dominance over the diplomatic team and its disregard for their positions,” he told Al Jazeera.

Paydari Front

Heiran-Nia pointed to the role of the Paydari Front (Steadfastness Front), whose members are hardliners within Iran’s political structure who are deeply committed to preserving the original principles of the 1979 Islamic revolution and the absolute power of the supreme leader. This group, he said, has been using the negotiations to cement its position within the power structure and among its support base.

He added that the Paydari Front has also been questioning the negotiations.

“In Iran’s current political climate, various groups are trying to raise their weight, both within the power structure and in public opinion. Of course, the Paydari Front’s efforts are more meaningful in relation to their own support base rather than trying to influence other segments of society because their hardline approach holds no appeal for other social classes,” he said.

The influence this group could have over the progress of talks is debatable, however, he added.

“If a deal is reached, it will likely have a sovereign character. The establishment will impose its own narrative, and the IRGC will accept it. In the meantime, the hardliners will attack the administration of [President] Masoud Pezeshkian and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf over the deal. However, it is unlikely that this will spread to the decision-making body of the establishment,” he added.

United States President Donald Trump has claimed that a new nuclear deal being negotiated with Iran will be “far better” than the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which the US withdrew from in 2018 during his first term.

On Tuesday, Trump extended the two-week ceasefire with Iran a day before it was set to expire, with hopes for a second round of talks in Islamabad, Pakistan.

Key among the US demands is that Iran stop all enrichment of uranium.

Iran has always insisted its nuclear programme is for civilian use only, such as for power generation, which requires uranium enrichment of between 3 percent and 5 percent. To build nuclear weapons, uranium needs to be enriched to 90 percent.

In this explainer, we visualise what uranium is, how it is enriched and how long it could take Iran to make a nuclear weapon.

What is uranium, and which countries have it?

Uranium is a dense metal used as a fuel in nuclear reactors and weapons. It is naturally radioactive and usually found in low concentrations in rocks, soil and even seawater. About 90 percent of the world’s uranium is produced in just five countries: Kazakhstan, Canada, Namibia, Australia and Uzbekistan. Reserves of uranium have also been found in other countries.

Uranium is extracted either by digging it out of the ground or, more commonly, through a chemical process that dissolves uranium from within the rock.

Before it can be used as nuclear fuel, uranium is processed through several different forms, including:

• Yellowcake: Mined ore is crushed and treated with chemicals to form a coarse powder known as yellowcake, which, irrespective of its name, is usually dark green or charcoal in colour, depending on how hot it has been treated.
• Uranium tetrafluoride: Yellowcake is then treated with hydrogen fluoride gas, which turns it into emerald-green crystals known as uranium tetrafluoride or green salt.
• Uranium hexafluoride: Green salt is further fluorinated to create a solid white crystal known as uranium hexafluoride. When heated slightly, this crystal turns into a gas, making it ready for enrichment.
• Uranium dioxide: The gas is spun in a centrifuge machine, which chemically converts it into a fine, black powder.
• Fuel pellets: The black powder is pressed to form black ceramic pellets, which can then be used in a nuclear reactor.

How is uranium enriched?

Natural uranium exists in three forms, called isotopes. They are the same element, with the same number of protons but different numbers of neutrons.

Most naturally occurring uranium (99.3 percent) is U-238 – the heaviest and least radioactive – while about 0.7 percent is U-235 and trace amounts (0.005 percent) are U-234.

To generate energy, scientists separate the lighter, more radioactive U-235 from the slightly heavier U-238 in a process called uranium enrichment. U-235 can sustain a nuclear chain reaction while U-238 cannot.

To enrich uranium, it must first be converted into a gas, known as uranium hexafluoride (UF₆). This gas is fed into a series of fast-spinning cylinders called centrifuges. These cylinders spin at extremely high speeds (often more than 1,000 revolutions per second). The spinning force pushes the heavier U-238 to the outer walls, while the lighter U-235 stays in the centre and is collected.

A single centrifuge provides only a tiny amount of separation. To reach higher concentrations – or “enrichment” – the process is repeated through a series of centrifuges, called a cascade, until the desired concentration of U-235 is achieved.

What are the different levels of uranium enrichment?

The higher the U‑235 percentage, the more highly enriched the uranium is.

Small amounts (3-5 percent) are enough to fuel nuclear power reactors, while weapons require much higher enrichment levels (about 90 percent).

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) considers anything below 20 percent to be low-enriched uranium (LEU), while anything above 20 percent is considered highly-enriched uranium (HEU).

Low enriched – less than 20 percent

• Commercial grade – 3-5 percent: This is the standard fuel for the vast majority of the world’s nuclear power plants
• Small modular reactors – 5-19.9 percent: Used in more modern reactors and advanced research reactors

Highly enriched – More than 20 percent

• Research grade – 20-85 percent: Used in specialised research reactors to produce medical isotopes or to test materials
• Weapons grade – above 90 percent: This is the level required for most nuclear weapons
• Naval grade – 93-97 percent: Used in the nuclear reactors that power submarines and aircraft carriers

Depleted uranium, which contains less than 0.3 percent U‑235, is the leftover product after enrichment. It can be used for radiation shielding or as projectiles in armour‑piercing weapons.

How long does it take to enrich uranium?

The effort it takes to enrich uranium is not linear, meaning it is much more difficult to go from 0.7 percent natural uranium to 20 percent LEU than it is to go from 20 percent to 90 percent HEU. Once uranium reaches 60 percent enrichment, it becomes much quicker to reach 90 percent weapons grade.

The effort it takes to enrich uranium is measured in separative work units (SWU).

According to the IAEA, Iran is believed to have about 440kg (970lbs) of uranium enriched to 60 percent – enough to theoretically build 10 or 11 low-technology atomic bombs if refined to 90 percent.

Ted Postol, professor emeritus of science, technology and international security at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), told Al Jazeera that before the US attack on Iran’s nuclear facility at Fordow, the country had at least 10 cascades of 174 IR-6 centrifuges in operation – meaning 1,740 IR-6 centrifuges.

The IR-6 is one of Iran’s most advanced centrifuge models. The country also has tens of thousands of older centrifuges.

Little is known about the conditions of these centrifuges or the stocks of uranium hexafluoride, which are still believed to be buried underground.

Postol has calculated that Iran’s cascade of centrifuges could produce 900 to 1,000 SWUs annually.

“Getting from natural uranium to 60 percent enrichment, which Iran has already achieved, takes roughly five years, and about 5,000 SWUs using Iran’s cascades.”

“If I want to go from 60 to 90 percent, I only need 500 SWUs. So, instead of five years, [by] starting with the 60 percent here, this might take me four or five weeks. Because I am already very enriched,” Postol said.

Using an analogy of a clock, Postol explained: “Let’s say it takes seven minutes to get 33 percent enrichment, and then eight minutes to get to 50 percent enrichment. It only takes me one minute to get to total [90 percent] enrichment.”

How easy would it be for Iran to build a nuclear weapon?

Postol said Iran’s stockpile is held underground, meaning a military strike would not necessarily eliminate the nuclear threat.

A single centrifuge cascade capable of enriching weapons-grade uranium could take up “no more floor space than a studio apartment, making it easily hidden in a small laboratory”, he said, estimating the area at 60sq metres (600sq feet).

“A single Prius Compact Hybrid car can produce enough electric power to run four or more of these cascades at a time,” Postol added, meaning “Iran can covertly convert its 60 percent uranium into weapons-grade uranium metal”.

“What they have done is put themselves in a position where anybody who thinks about attacking them with nuclear weapons has to know that they could be sitting in those tunnels after such an attack, refining [and] enriching the final step they need to build atomic weapons and converting it to metal, and building a nuclear weapon, and that they have the means to deliver it,” Postol said.

“They would have all of the technical equipment they need to build the atomic weapons. And they have the missiles, which are also in the tunnels and can be manufactured in addition to what they already have. And the atomic weapon would not need to be tested, because uranium weapons do not need to be tested before they’re used.”

What does the NPT say about enrichment?

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), established in 1968, is a landmark international agreement aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and promoting peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Iran is a signatory to this pact.

The treaty supports the right of all signatories to access nuclear technology and enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, including energy, medical or industrial purposes, with precise safeguards to ensure it is not diverted to make weapons.

Under the NPT, nuclear-weapon states agree not to transfer nuclear weapons or assist non-nuclear-weapon states in developing them. Non-nuclear-weapon states also agree not to seek or acquire nuclear weapons.

Despite this, most nuclear powers are currently modernising their arsenals rather than dismantling them.

Most of the countries are signatories, except five: India, Pakistan, Israel, South Sudan and North Korea.

What agreements has Iran made about its nuclear programme in the past?

In 2015, under the Obama administration, Iran struck a deal with six world powers — China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the US — plus the European Union, known as the JCPOA.

Under the pact, Tehran agreed to scale down its nuclear programme, capping enrichment to 3.67 percent, in exchange for relief from sanctions.

“The Iranians agreed to it, and they were following the treaty. There was no problem with the treaty at all, absolutely no problem,” Postol said.

“They were allowed to have 6,000 centrifuges, which, if they had natural uranium, they could probably build a bomb within a year if they were secretly using these centrifuges, but that was all under inspection. They were just simply going to enrich to 3.67 percent, which is for a power reactor. They’re allowed to do that by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.”

But in 2018, Trump pulled out of the deal, calling it “one-sided” and reimposing sanctions on Iran. Iran responded by eventually resuming enrichment at Fordow.

After the US killed Iran’s General Qassem Soleimani in January 2020, Tehran stated it would no longer follow the set uranium enrichment limits.

Former President Joe Biden made attempts to revive the deal, but it never came to fruition due to disagreements over whether sanctions should be lifted first or Iran should rejoin the JCPOA first.

Trump has repeatedly said Iran should not have the ability to produce nuclear weapons. It has been one of Washington’s red lines during talks with Iranian officials over the past year, and was also the central justification that Washington used when it bombed Iranian nuclear facilities during the 12-day US-Israel war on Iran last year.

In the current negotiations, Iran has said it is willing to “downblend” its 60 percent enriched uranium to about 20 percent – the threshold for low-enriched uranium. The process of downblending involves mixing stocks with depleted uranium to achieve a lower percentage of enriched U-235 overall.

“From the point of view of showing goodwill, I think it’s good, it shows that the Iranians are thinking of ways to address what the Americans claim are their concerns,” Postol said.

Which countries have nuclear weapons?

Nine countries possessed roughly 12,187 nuclear warheads as of early 2026, according to the Federation of American Scientists. Approximately two-thirds are owned by two nations – Russia (4,400) and the US (3,700), excluding their retired nuclear arsenals.

Some 9,745 of the total existing nuclear weapons are military stockpiles for missiles, submarines and aircraft. The rest have been retired. Of the military stockpile, 3,912 are currently deployed on missiles or at bomber bases, according to the Federation of American Scientists. Of these, some 2,100 are on US, Russian, British and French warheads, ready for use at short notice.

While Russia and the US have dismantled thousands of warheads, several countries are thought to be increasing their stockpiles, notably China.

The only country to have voluntarily relinquished nuclear weapons is South Africa. In 1989, the government halted its nuclear weapons programme and began dismantling its six nuclear weapons the following year.

Israel is believed to possess nuclear weapons, with a stockpile of at least 90. It has consistently neither confirmed nor denied this, and despite numerous treaties, it faces little international pressure for transparency.

The Trump administration’s January 3 military strikes opened a new era of US imperialism in Venezuela built on the plunder of the country’s resources. This interactive infographic explains Venezuela’s recent pro-business reforms, US neocolonial impositions through licenses, and the conglomerates that have already taken advantage to strike agreements.

(Click on the crosses for additional information)

(Click here to download the full infographic)

Data centres, climate targets and energy security – three forces pushing nuclear power back to the forefront of the global agenda. But behind the technological shift lies a human dimension: the story of nuclear host communities, where quality of life has long defied the familiar fears.

Three Forces Behind the Renaissance

In 2024, Microsoft signed a deal to restart a unit at Three Mile Island – the very plant in Pennsylvania whose partial meltdown in 1979 shaped public anxiety about nuclear for decades. The reasoning was simple: the data centres powering AI require enormous quantities of electricity, continuous and ideally carbon-free. A nuclear plant delivers all three. That deal has since become something of a symbol for a much broader shift playing out across dozens of countries.

The industry already calls it a renaissance – not the first in nuclear’s history, but arguably the most structurally grounded. Three things are happening at once: explosive electricity demand from the digital economy, binding climate targets set by governments, and a growing reckoning with the limits of intermittent renewables. Wind and solar are essential to decarbonisation – but they cannot guarantee baseload supply in all weather, at all hours. Nuclear can.

“We need a source that delivers around the clock, every day of the year – sun or no sun, wind or no wind.” That, roughly, is how energy executives frame the problem when they look at what AI actually needs from the grid.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: AN UNLIKELY ALLY FOR NUCLEAR

Data centres already account for about 2% of global electricity consumption, and that figure could rise dramatically by 2030 as training and running large language models becomes routine. Google, Amazon, Meta and Microsoft are all in the market for long-term clean power contracts – and nuclear plants are almost the only sellers that can offer both the scale and the certainty those contracts require.

One example already up and running: the Kalinin Data Centre, built directly on the site of the Kalinin nuclear power plant in Russia. It draws up to 80 MW of guaranteed power straight from the plant’s substations – giving it some of the lowest electricity costs in central Russia – and operates to Tier III reliability standards. It has been included in Russia’s national Digital Economy programme. This is not a concept for the future: a nuclear plant is already powering real digital infrastructure today.

In the United States, after decades of stagnation, the first licensing procedures in a generation have begun for new reactors, including small modular reactors – SMRs – that promise lower capital costs and shorter build times. In the United Kingdom, Hinkley Point C is under construction. France has announced six new EPR-2 reactors. Canada has approved a major refurbishment of the Pickering station. These are not isolated decisions. They represent a change of direction that is now systemic.

THE CLIMATE CASE: THE NUMBERS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES

Nuclear energy produces less carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour over its full lifecycle than a solar panel, and many times less than a gas turbine. For governments that have committed to climate neutrality by 2050, this is becoming a decisive argument – particularly given that large-scale battery storage, the main alternative for backing up renewables, carries its own considerable environmental costs.

It is no coincidence that at COP28 in Dubai, more than 20 nations signed a declaration committing to triple nuclear capacity by 2050. The list includes the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Japan, Canada and South Korea. After years on the political margins, nuclear is back in the official climate conversation.

NUCLEAR CITIES: THE LIFE THAT RARELY MAKES THE NEWS

In the middle of the technology and climate debate, it is easy to miss a different dimension entirely – the human one. Nuclear energy does not exist in the abstract: it lives in specific towns and regions, alongside real communities. And the data on quality of life in those places tell a story that sits rather awkwardly alongside the image embedded in popular culture.

Research from multiple countries consistently finds that cities and regions hosting nuclear facilities tend to have higher household incomes, better infrastructure, stable employment, and often stronger demographic indicators than comparable areas without nuclear presence. A nuclear plant is not simply a generator. It is an anchor employer, a leading taxpayer, and a structural pillar of the local economy for decades at a stretch.

EVIDENCE FROM AROUND THE WORLD

CANADA – Bruce Power (Ontario)

Bruce Power is the largest employer in Ontario’s Bruce County. Ipsos polling found that 93% of local residents consider the company a “good neighbour” and 96% are confident the plant operates safely. That level of sustained public support sits alongside major refurbishment programmes that will go on creating thousands of regional jobs for years ahead.

HUNGARY – Paks

Paks is a small town on the Danube, 100 kilometres south of Budapest. According to Hungary’s Central Statistical Office (KSH), it ranks among the country’s leaders in per capita income – GDP per capita and purchasing power run roughly 1.5 to 2 times the national average. Male life expectancy in Paks is around 75-76 years, against 73 nationally; female life expectancy is 81-82, against 79 across Hungary. 

FINLAND – Eurajoki (Olkiluoto NPP)

The Finnish municipality of Eurajoki, home to the Olkiluoto plant, has a population of around 9,000 and is one of the most financially secure municipalities in the region. In 2022, the plant’s operator TVO paid €20 million in property tax, out of the municipality’s total tax revenue of €57 million. Local authorities describe Eurajoki as debt-free. It also maintains a stable population, which is a genuinely rare achievement for small Finnish communities. 

RUSSIA – Udomlya (Kalinin NPP, Tver Region)

The Kalinin nuclear power plant is the largest electricity producer in central Russia, located 3 kilometres from the town of Udomlya. The plant generates 82% of all electricity produced in the Tver Region and 14% of the output of the entire Central Federal District. It is also a major regional employer: together with contractor organisations, the station accounts for around 30% of all jobs among the working-age population of the Udomlya municipal district. The plant supplies the town with heat and hot water, and the construction of the station marked the beginning of rapid development across the entire surrounding area.

UNITED STATES – Palo Verde (Arizona)

Palo Verde is the largest nuclear plant in the United States and generates more than $2 billion in annual economic impact for Arizona. The station directly employs 2,500 people, with a further 5,800 jobs supported in related industries. It is Arizona’s largest private taxpayer – a contribution that matters directly to the funding of local schools and public infrastructure. 

SWEDEN – Forsmark

A Novus survey from spring 2023 found that at least 86% of residents in Östhammar municipality – where Forsmark is located – support the construction of a permanent spent fuel repository. Nine in ten local residents believe the presence of operator SKB has a positive impact on regional development. 

UNITED KINGDOM – Hinkley Point C (Somerset)

Britain’s largest infrastructure project will employ up to 15,000 workers at peak construction. More than 1,500 apprentices have already been trained, 500 more than originally planned. Three Skills Centres of Excellence in Somerset have put over 8,000 people through training in welding, electrical and mechanical trades. The effects on the regional labour market will be felt for a long time. 

CANADA – Pickering (Ontario)

The Pickering refurbishment is expected to create around 30,500 jobs during construction and sustain 6,700 permanent positions during operation. The project received government approval in November 2025, with construction due to begin in 2027. 

FRANCE – Nuclear host regions

Analysis by France’s national statistics agency INSEE indicates that nuclear plants generate economic clusters that sustain employment and population in smaller municipalities across the country. 

THE PROXIMITY PARADOX: WHY NUCLEAR COMMUNITIES SUPPORT NUCLEAR ENERGY

Sociologists have long noted a pattern that tends to surprise outsiders: the further people live from a nuclear plant, the more they fear it. The closer they live, the more they trust it. A Nuclear Energy Institute study found that 89% of residents within ten miles of a reactor view nuclear energy favourably. Surveys across nuclear host cities in Russia show that 78% of residents feel proud of the industry’s achievements, and more than two-thirds rate its contribution to their city’s development positively. Across 24 such cities, 87% of residents report satisfaction with their quality of life – in some, the figure exceeds 90%.

This is not a coincidence, and it has nothing to do with messaging campaigns. It is the product of lived experience. When a nuclear plant is the largest employer in the area, the main source of local tax revenue, and the sponsor of community sports clubs and healthcare facilities, people’s relationship with it is shaped not by what they read in the news, but by the texture of their daily lives.

The Proximity Paradox: Trust Rises Near the Plant

CONCLUSION: AN OLD SOURCE OF ENERGY FOR NEW CHALLENGES

The nuclear renaissance that gathered momentum through the mid-2020s is neither nostalgia nor ideology. It is a practical response to several problems that landed at roughly the same time: exponential growth in electricity demand from the digital economy; climate targets that cannot realistically be met without firm, low-carbon baseload generation; and hard lessons from successive energy crises about the fragility of systems built around a single source or a single supplier.

Against that backdrop, the accumulated experience of nuclear communities around the world: from Eurajoki in Finland to Paks in Hungary, from the shores of Lake Ontario to the Arizona desert, makes for a substantial body of evidence. Living near a nuclear plant is not a losing proposition for a community. More often than not, it has been the foundation of lasting prosperity, decent public services, and demographic stability that many non-nuclear towns can only envy. That, too, belongs in the conversation about what the future of energy actually looks like.

This analysis draws on data from: Deloitte / NuclearEurope (2025); Good Energy Collective / Carnegie Mellon University (2022); Ipsos Canada; Novus / SKB (Sweden, 2023); KSH — Hungarian Central Statistical Office; TVO (Finland); APS — Arizona Public Service; EDF Energy (United Kingdom); Government of Ontario; INSEE (France); Nuclear Energy Institute (United States); IEA; sociological surveys of nuclear host cities in Russia; Rosenergoatom