TOP NEWS

Trita Parsi, Vice President of the Quincy Institute, argues that Iran is unlikely to agree to end the war without sanctions relief, while there is little sign Donald Trump is willing to offer meaningful concessions, adding that a deal remains unlikely until then.

March 24 (UPI) — An unidentified projectile struck the grounds of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant on Tuesday night, according to Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, the second time in a little more than two weeks that the facility has been threatened by the ongoing war.

The projectile struck at 9:08 p.m. local time, resulting in no casualties or damage, it said in a statement.

“Attacking peaceful nuclear facilities is not only a violation of international regulations and rights, but also seriously endangers #regional security,” Iran’s AEO said in a post tagging the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.

“It is expected that international institutions will adopt a responsible and transparent stance in response to such actions.”

The IAEA said it was informed of the incident by Iran, adding that the plant was operating normally.

The agency’s director-general, Rafael Grossi, reiterated his call “for maximum restraint to avoid nuclear safety risks during conflict,” the IAEA said in a statement.

The incident comes eight days after an unidentified projectile struck near the plant on March 17, the first reported strike near Bushehr since the war between Iran and the United States and Israel began late last month.

Located near Bushehr city on Iran’s southwest Persian Gulf coast, the Bushehr plant began construction in 1975, but its original German contractor abandoned the project following the Islamic Revolution four years later. In the mid-1990s, Russia agreed to complete Bushehr Unit 1, Iran’s first reactor, which began operating in 2011, according to the U.S. Congressional Research Service.

March 24 (Asia Today) — Ukraine’s Defense Ministry has told a South Korean civic group that two captured North Korean soldiers are recognized as prisoners of war and are being protected under the Geneva Convention on the treatment of POWs.

According to a reply disclosed Tuesday by an emergency committee campaigning for the soldiers’ transfer, the Ukrainian ministry said the men are being guaranteed contact with the outside world, access by international monitors and human rights organizations, and other protections required under international humanitarian law.

The ministry also said the principle of non-refoulement, which bars forced return to a country where a person may face harm, is being taken into account in their treatment.

The statement aligns with remarks made March 6 by South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun, who said he had received assurances from his Ukrainian counterpart that the soldiers would not be repatriated to North Korea or Russia. (Yonhap News)

The civic group, however, said the two men remain in a military detention facility under the authority of Ukraine’s Defense Ministry and still hold legal POW status, leaving open the possibility that they could become subjects of negotiations between governments.

The group said the soldiers should be shifted from military custody to an internationally protected status. It called for their transfer to a civilian protection facility and urged direct involvement by the U.N. refugee agency, the U.N. human rights office and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

It also proposed that procedures begin to determine whether the two soldiers should receive refugee status or another form of international protection.

Photo made available by the Emergency Committee for the Free Repatriation of North Korean Soldiers shows a reply from Ukraine’s Defense Ministry regarding two captured North Korean soldiers. /Provided by the committee

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260324010007333

March 24 (Asia Today) — South Korea is taking a cautious approach to whether it will join as a co-sponsor of an upcoming United Nations resolution on North Korean human rights, officials said Tuesday, citing a need to balance diplomacy with Pyongyang and international cooperation.

The resolution is expected to be adopted at the current session of the U.N. Human Rights Council later this week.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Park Il said the government’s position remains that improving human rights in North Korea is important and that Seoul will continue to work with the international community. However, he said the decision on co-sponsorship is still under review.

“The issue is being considered comprehensively, taking into account the government’s efforts toward peaceful coexistence on the Korean Peninsula and the content of the resolution,” Park said at a regular briefing.

He added that the government’s cautious stance does not signal opposition, but reflects the complexity of factors involved, and that a decision will be made through consultations among relevant agencies.

A ministry official said there is a procedural window allowing countries to join as co-sponsors within two weeks after the resolution is adopted, giving Seoul time to assess its position.

The deliberations come amid strained inter-Korean relations and President Lee Jae-myung’s call to pursue even limited openings for dialogue with North Korea.

South Korea previously joined as a co-sponsor of a similar resolution at the U.N. General Assembly last November, easing concerns that the current administration might withdraw from such efforts.

Separately, the Unification Ministry has signaled a willingness to ease tensions. Unification Minister Chung Dong-young recently made conciliatory remarks, including urging North Korea not to miss opportunities for dialogue with the United States.

Civil society groups have urged the government to take a more active role. The International Federation for Human Rights and the Transitional Justice Working Group said in a joint letter to Lee that declining to co-sponsor the resolution would send a troubling signal domestically and internationally.

They warned that overlooking human rights concerns may create only a temporary easing of tensions, while leaving underlying instability unresolved and making lasting peace more difficult to achieve.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260324010007372

March 24 (UPI) — Former Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin was sentenced to 60 days in jail and a $500 fine after he was found in contempt of court Tuesday.

Matt Bevin was found to be in contempt Friday for not disclosing his financial records in a legal battle with his estranged son Jonah Bevin. Jonah Bevin is fighting for retroactive child support after his adoptive parents allegedly abandoned him.

Jefferson County Family Court Judge Angela Johnson told Bevin: “Your arrest warrant will be issued today,” the Kentucky Lantern reported. Bevin had been ordered to appear in the Louisville court in person, but he appeared via Zoom.

Matt Bevin said he was traveling to attend the funeral of his ex-wife’s father Monday and was on his way back. He appeared to be in an office, but didn’t say where he was, the Lantern reported.

During the hearing, Matt Bevin interrupted Johnson several times. He argued that he was trying to get the information to the court but needed more time to collect records. His ex-wife, Glenna Bevin, didn’t have to appear because she already turned in her financial information.

“Every litigant in the commonwealth has to provide such information,” Johnson told Matt Bevin, the Lantern reported. “I cannot treat Mr. Bevin or Mrs. Bevin any differently.”

Johnson told the former governor that once he produced the records, including tax returns, bank statements and details of assets and income, his jail sentence would be dropped.

On Monday, Matt Bevin filed a motion calling for Johnson to be removed from the case for her “personal bias and prejudice,” the Louisville Courier Journal reported.

The case began when Glenna Bevin filed for divorce in 2023. Jonah Bevin, who is one of four children the Bevins adopted from Ethiopia, intervened demanding child support for time he spent at boarding schools for “troubled teens.” A school in Jamaica was raided by law enforcement over allegations of abuse while he was in its custody. The Bevins did not retrieve him after the school was raided and shut down.

Jonah Bevin’s attorneys said he suffered abuse at those schools and that his high school diploma from a school in Florida may not be valid.

Matt Bevin’s affidavit said some of Johnson’s rulings make it “clear to me that Judge Johnson’s decisions are being motivated by her personal desire for publicity and ‘earned media’ as a government employee who must seek re-election to remain a Circuit Court Judge in the future.”

Johnson will be up for re-election in 2030.

John Helmers and Melina Hettiaratchi, Louisville-based attorneys representing Jonah Bevin, said the judge is asking for what is standard in Kentucky family court cases.

“This judge has done nothing but give him a fair shot. When he refused, she held him in contempt — and he responded by trying to get her thrown out of the game for calling a foul,” The Courier Journal reoported their statement said. “Now that it is crystal clear he is going to have to play by the same rules as everyone else, he’s taking shots at the judge.”

Jonah Bevin said in a statement he now has “no support, no resources, and no ability to wait [Matt Bevin] out while he does everything he can to avoid sitting down with a judge.”

On Friday in court, Matt Bevin said he loves all of his children and wants “what is in their best interest.”

Matt Bevin served as the 62nd governor of Kentucky from 2015 to 2019. He lost to current Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat.

A family court trial is scheduled for March 27.

After Israel’s bombing of Beirut’s southern suburb of Dahiyeh, Palestinian refugee Dalal Dawali once again finds herself forcibly displaced. She and her children joined hundreds of families fleeing to Beddawi camp in north Lebanon. Al Jazeera’s Justin Salhani tells her story.

March 24 (UPI) — NASA on Tuesday announced plans to spend $30 billion on a permanent lunar base and send astronauts to the moon every six months after the Artemis V mission.

Speaking at a so-called “Ignition” event at NASA headquarters in Washington, D.C., Administrator Jared Isaacman discussed plans to accelerate construction of a moon base.

“There will be an evolutionary path to building humanity’s first permanent surface outpost beyond Earth,” he said.

“NASA is committed to achieving the near-impossible once again: to return to the moon before the end of President [Donald] Trump’s term, build a moon base, establish an enduring presence, and do the other things needed to ensure American leadership in space.”

NASA’s plan was initially to focus on what it called the Gateway program — a space station that was going to orbit the moon. Then the agency would build a base on the moon.

Carlos Garcia-Galan, the program executive for NASA’s Moon Base program, said the systems and hardware already established for the Gateway program would be repurposed to build the moon base.

Isaacman said the moon base plan will comprise three phases.

The first phase would include a series of missions to send small robotic landers and vehicles astronauts can drive on the surface to the moon. It would also encompass communications and scientific instruments.

The second phase would involve the construction of a “semi-habitable infrastructure” for astronauts on the lunar surface.

The third phase would start construction of a more permanent structure.

The first two phases would involve an investment of $20 billion over the next seven years and dozens of missions to the moon. The third phase would cost another $10 billion.

“The moon base will not appear overnight,” Isaacman said.

Isaacman said NASA also plans to launch a nuclear-propelled spacecraft to Mars by 2028.

NASA’s launch window for Artemis II is set to open April. The crewed mission is expected to send the Space Launch System and Orion spacecraft to orbit the moon over 10 days and return to Earth. The crew will test whether the spacecraft operates in deep space.

The long-term goal of the Artemis program is to re-establish a human presence on the moon in preparation for the ultimate aim of putting a human on Mars.

The agency will increase robotic missions to the moon and launch a spacecraft called Space Reactor 1 Freedom.

NASA has unveiled a major overhaul of its moon and Mars strategy, scrapping plans for a lunar-orbit space station and instead committing $20bn over the next seven years to build a base on the moon’s surface, while also advancing plans to send a nuclear-powered spacecraft to Mars.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman outlined the changes on Tuesday during a meeting in Washington, DC, with partners, contractors and government officials involved in the Artemis programme, saying the agency will increase robotic missions to the moon and lay the groundwork for nuclear power on the lunar surface.

Isaacman, appointed by US President Donald Trump and who took charge in December, said the changes form part of a broader overhaul of NASA’s long-term Moon-to-Mars strategy.

The planned moon base is intended to support long-term human presence on the lunar surface, with robotic missions expected to help prepare the site, test technologies and begin building infrastructure before astronauts return later this decade.

The agency also disclosed plans to launch a spacecraft called Space Reactor 1 Freedom before the end of 2028, a mission designed to demonstrate nuclear electric propulsion in deep space on the way to Mars.

The spacecraft will deliver helicopters on the Red Planet, similar to the Ingenuity robotic test helicopter that flew with NASA’s Perseverance rover, a step the agency said would help move nuclear propulsion technology from laboratory testing to operational space missions.

The Ingenuity helicopter was the first aircraft to achieve powered, controlled flight on another planet. It travelled to Mars attached to NASA’s Perseverance rover and landed in February 2021.

Pausing the Lunar Gateway station

The Lunar Gateway station, a planned space station in lunar orbit being developed with contractors including Northrop Grumman and international partners, was meant to serve as a base where astronauts could live and work before heading to the Moon’s surface.

But NASA now plans to repurpose some Gateway components for use on the surface instead.

Repurposing Lunar Gateway to create a base on the moon’s surface leaves uncertain the future roles of Japan, Canada and the ‌European Space ⁠Agency in the Artemis programme, three key NASA partners that had agreed to provide components for the orbital station.

“It should not really surprise anyone that we are pausing Gateway in its current form and focusing on infrastructure that supports sustained operations on the lunar surface,” Isaacman said.

The changes to NASA’s flagship Artemis programme are reshaping billions of dollars’ worth of contracts and come as the United States faces growing competition from China, which is aiming to land astronauts on the moon by 2030.

The Artemis programme, begun in 2017 during Trump’s first term as president, envisions regular lunar missions as NASA’s long-awaited follow-up to its first moon missions in the Apollo programme that ended in 1972.

United States President Donald Trump is insistent that “productive” negotiations have taken place with Iran to end the war he launched with Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu almost a month ago. The major problem with that narrative is that Iran’s top officials have repeatedly denied it.

Amid the fog of war and the propaganda being pushed by all sides, it is hard to know who to believe. But an analysis of what each side has to gain from any negotiations – and a potential end to the conflict – could bring more clarity.

Trump’s comments that there were “major points of agreement” after “very good” talks with an unnamed “top” Iranian figure came as stock markets opened in the US for the start of the trading week. The five-day deadline he gave for a positive response from Iran also happens to coincide with the end of the trading week.

Many have cynically noted that timing, especially as it comes after a two-week period in which oil prices have fluctuated in line with events in the Middle East, leading to a high of about $120 a barrel last week.

Trump’s talk of negotiations may also give time for more US troops to arrive in the Middle East, if Washington decides to conduct some form of ground invasion of Iranian territory.

Among those questioning Trump’s motives was the man believed by some to be the senior Iranian official Trump was referencing: the Iranian parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.

“No negotiations have been held with the US, and fakenews is used to manipulate the financial and oil markets and escape the quagmire in which the US and Israel are trapped,” Ghalibaf wrote on social media.

The impact on stock markets and oil prices is not just relevant to the US and Trump, but also to Iran. However, for Tehran, the benefit comes in the damage the war is doing to the US and global economies.

The Iranian state wants the US to feel economic pain from the war, as a means of deterrence for any future Israeli or US attack on Iran.

Therefore, as much as it is in the US interest to play up talk of negotiations in order to calm the markets, it is also in Iran’s interest to downplay any talk to do the exact opposite, and not give the Trump administration any breathing space.

US benefits?

Consequently, both sides have their own narratives on negotiations, and public comments will do little to inform us as to whether those negotiations are really taking place, or in what form they may be.

That instead leads us into what each side has to gain from negotiations, and an actual end to the war at the current stage.

Trump appears to have underestimated the consequences of the conflict that he launched with Netanyahu on February 28, and the ability of the Iranian state to withstand the attacks against it without collapsing.

“They weren’t supposed to go after all these other countries in the Middle East … Nobody expected that,” he said last week, adding that even “the greatest experts” didn’t believe that.

Leaving aside that experts – including US intelligence officials – had repeatedly made those warnings, reality has now made Trump aware of the consequences he had previously ignored.

While some allies and supporters may continue to push him to plough on with the conflict, Trump has previously shown himself amenable to cutting deals to extricate himself from difficult situations, and it is not far-fetched to see the benefits of doing so in this instance.

The US president has already ordered his government to issue temporary sanctions waivers on some Iranian oil, in an effort to calm oil prices. This is the first time Iran has lifted sanctions on any Iranian oil since 2019, and it will not be lost on Iran that the waivers have come as a result of their policy to expand the conflict to the wider Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquified natural gas transits.

The war was already unpopular in the US – and now even more so, as consumers see the impact on petrol prices and potentially other areas of the economy, all in the run-up to congressional elections later this year, in which Trump’s Republicans are likely to do poorly.

Trump, therefore, has the options of extending this war – and suffering the economic and political cost, or ending it – and facing the criticism that he was unable to finish what he termed as a “short-term excursion”.

The Iranian perspective

But whatever Trump wants to do, the decision is not totally in his hands. Iran, attacked for the second time in less than a year, now appears to have less of an incentive to end the war without the establishment of an effective deterrent to another in the future.

Gone are the days of the telegraphed attacks on US assets and the slow climb up the escalation ladder. From the outset of the current war, it was clear that Iran had changed its tactics and was not as interested in restraint.

It is now arguably in the Iranian state’s benefit to drag out the conflict and inflict more suffering on the region, if it wants to ensure its survival.

There may also be a belief that interceptor stocks in Israel are running low, allowing Iran to strike targets more effectively. The thinking – particularly among the hardliners who now appear to be in the ascendancy in Iran – will be that now is not the time to stop, and allow those interceptor stocks to replenish.

And yet, Iran is suffering. More than 1,500 people have been killed across the country, according to the government. Infrastructure has been heavily damaged, and the power grid could be next. Relations with Gulf neighbours have nosedived, and, after repeated Iranian attacks, are unlikely to return to their previous levels after the conflict.

More moderate voices in Iran will look at that and think that things could easily get worse. They can argue that some form of deterrence has been achieved, and that the time is now ripe to talk. And if they can get some concessions – such as a promise of no future attacks, or greater authority in the Strait of Hormuz – they may decide that the time is right to make a deal.

Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, ex-IRGC commander, to replace late Ali Larijani as chief of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council.

Iran has named Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, a former commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as the successor to Ali Larijani, head of the country’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), who was killed in a US-Israeli air strike earlier this month.

President Masoud Pezeshkian’s deputy of communications announced the appointment on X on Tuesday.

The SNSC, formally chaired by Pezeshkian, coordinates security and foreign policy and includes top military, intelligence and government officials, in addition to representatives of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

Zolghadr, who served in the 1980s war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, went on to become head of the IRGC’s joint staff for eight years and then deputy commander-in-chief of the elite force for another eight years.

In 2005, he was named deputy interior minister for security and police in the government of then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a move that was seen at the time as bolstering the IRGC’s influence in politics.

Since 2023, he has been the secretary of the Expediency Council, a powerful body that plays both an advisory and mediating role between Iran’s various power structures and the supreme leader.

Zolghadr’s new position consolidates the IRGC’s growing clout in Iran amid growing uncertainty regarding decision-making at the top of the system. Mojtaba Khamenei has not been seen in public since he succeeded his assassinated father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in early March.

Larijani, one of the most prominent non-clerical figures in Iranian politics, was killed last Tuesday in a week that saw the war spiralling throughout the region, upending global energy markets and roiling the world economy.

On Tuesday, the war showed no sign of de-escalation after US President Donald Trump’s claim that he was speaking to an unidentified “top person”, as he extended by five days a deadline to hit Iran’s power plants.

Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said “no negotiations” were under way, accusing Trump of seeking “to manipulate the financial and oil markets”.

The final qualification spots for the FIFA World Cup 2026 are about to be sealed via UEFA and intercontinental playoffs.

With the FIFA World Cup 2026 kicking off on June 11, the final spots that are still up for grabs are being fiercely fought by nations in qualifiers around the globe.

The last governing body to complete their continental playoff route is UEFA, with four European spots still up for grabs at the showpiece event.

Thereafter, FIFA’s Play-Off Tournament – an intercontinental competition – will provide the last-chance saloon for two more of the best non-qualified finishers from the other continental processes around the globe.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a look at UEFA’s final continental playoff path as that draws to a close.

Which UEFA teams are still in with a chance of World Cup qualification?

There will be more European teams than from any other continent at the World Cup: 16.

There are still 16 European teams, meanwhile, vying for the final four of the UEFA qualifying positions for the World Cup:

• Italy, Northern Ireland, Wales, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ukraine, Sweden, Poland, Albania, Slovakia, Kosovo, Turkiye, Romania, Denmark, North Macedonia, Czechia and the Republic of Ireland

Which UEFA teams have already qualified for the World Cup?

The 12 European teams that have already qualified for the World Cup are:

• Germany, Switzerland, Scotland, France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Austria, Norway, Belgium, England, and Croatia

What is the pathway to the World Cup for the remaining UEFA teams?

The remaining teams are divided into four paths. Only the winner of each path will qualify:

Path A:

• Italy vs Northern Ireland and Wales vs Bosnia and Herzegovina
  The winner of this path joins World Cup Group B (with Canada, Qatar, and Switzerland).

Path B:

• Ukraine vs Sweden and Poland vs Albania
  The winner of this path joins World Cup Group F (with the Netherlands, Japan, and Tunisia).

Path C:

• Slovakia vs Kosovo and Turkiye vs Romania
  The winner of this path joins World Cup Group D (with USA, Paraguay, and Australia).

Path D:

• Denmark vs North Macedonia and Czechia vs Republic of Ireland
  The winner of this path joins World Cup Group A (with Mexico, South Africa, and South Korea).

When are the first set of UEFA playoffs for World Cup qualification?

The first round of pathway matches will be played by the 16 remaining teams on March 27, and are single-leg semifinals.

When are the second set of UEFA playoffs for World Cup qualification?

The second round of pathway matches will be played on March 31, with the four winners of each pathway final progressing to the FIFA World Cup 2026. These matches will also be played over a single leg.

How have the UEFA qualifiers reached this stage?

The four final UEFA qualifying places are being decided by the teams that were the 12 runners-up from the group qualifying stage and four based on performances in the UEFA Nations League.

How were the home teams decided for the UEFA playoffs?

The highest-ranked teams are hosting the semifinals. The hosts of the finals were determined by a draw.

Pressure on Italy as playoff hopefuls eye 2026 World Cup

There is no doubt that Italy are the biggest name not amongst those nations that have already qualified.

The four-time champions are seeking to avoid the ignominy of missing out on a World Cup for a third consecutive time.

The spotlight has been on the Italian domestic league, Serie A, for falling behind the other leagues on the continent with their clubs struggling to compete in European competitions.

There will be no greater evidence of Italian football’s fall from grace, however, than the failure to reach the finals.

“It’s undeniable that there’s nervousness,” coach Gennaro Gattuso said. “Only someone without blood running through their veins wouldn’t feel it.”

Will there be any more qualifiers for the World Cup after UEFA’s?

Yes. There is a different format for the intercontinental playoffs, which FIFA simply calls the Play-Off Tournament.

Two teams will advance from a field of six.

The lineup of teams was comprised of two nations from CONCACAF (Jamaica, Suriname) and one each from Asia (Iraq), Africa (DR Congo), South America (Bolivia) and Oceania (New Caledonia).

March 24 (UPI) — Pakistani officials said Tuesday they’re prepared to host negotiations between the United States and Iran, with in-person meetings possibly set to take place in Islamabad.

Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Tahir Andrabi told Al Jazeera that Pakistan would be willing to play a part in the talks “if the parties desire.”

The government “has consistently advocated for dialogue and diplomacy to promote peace and stability in the region,” Andrabi said.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif confirmed the offer, saying he’s ready to “facilitate meaningful and conclusive talks.”

Unnamed Pakistani sources told The Guardian that Vice President JD Vance would potentially serve as chief U.S. negotiator if such talks went forward. Iranian officials have said they will not speak with President Donald Trump‘s pre-war negotiators, Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and adviser Jared Kushner.

Witkoff and Kushner met with Iranian officials in the month leading up to the war in an attempt to reach a deal to limit Iran’s nuclear program. The talks were unfruitful and Trump ordered the launch of attacks on Iran on Feb. 28 alongside Israel.

In nearly a month, the war has killed more than 2,000 people and displaced millions of others, NBC News reported.

Trump said Monday that he hopes there will be an agreement with Iran amid renewed talks, which Iranian state-run media have denied has taken place. The U.S. president said he’s holding off on strikes on Iran’s energy infrastructure for five days after “very good and productive conversations.”

Rescuers have pulled a man alive from the rubble after US-Israeli strikes hit a residential area on the outskirts of Tehran, the Iranian Red Crescent said. The US and Israel have continued to strike Iran, despite President Trump’s claims of diplomatic progress.

March 24 (UPI) — The price of oil climbed back above $100 per barrel on Tuesday as hopes for de-escalation in the Iran war faded after Washington said the situation remained “fluid,” Tehran denied there had been any negotiations and a fire put a major Texas refinery out of action.

Claims by President Donald Trump of “major” progress in talks to halt the conflict on Monday sent oil prices tumbling and rallied stock markets, but benchmark Brent crude futures rebounded to more than $103 a barrel on Tuesday after the White House appeared to walk it back, saying no high-level formal meetings were scheduled and denying reports Vice President JD Vance may attend Pakistan-brokered talks.

“These are sensitive diplomatic discussions and the United States will not negotiate through the press. This is a fluid situation, and speculation about meetings should not be deemed as final until they are formally announced by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the BBC.

Iran has, however, acknowledged there had been some contact between the sides regarding talks, with an Iranian foreign ministry official telling CBS that the regime had “received points from the United States.”

“We received points from the United States through mediators and they are being reviewed,” said the official.

The confirmation came amid claim and counterclaim after Trump walked back an ultimatum to destroy Iran’s power plants and energy infrastructure unless it allowed shipping to flow freely again through the Strait of Hormuz by Monday night.

Trump said he was giving Iran a five-day reprieve after “very good and productive” discussions with Tehran on Sunday and Monday but Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghlaibaf, who has been named as an interlocutor, described it as “fake news” and said there had been no talks.

With a blaze at the Velero Port Arthur refinery still burning after an explosion on Monday at the plant, 90 miles east of Houston, wholesale gasoline and diesel prices were up 10 cents and 16 cents per gallon, hikes Lipow Oil Associates president Andy Lipow said were due almost entirely to the incident, rather than the war.

The affected part of the plant makes diesel fuel and was likely to be out for an extended period, exerting pressure on diesel prices but gasoline production could come back online in the next few weeks as it was in a different area of the refinery, added Lipow who stressed he believed the incident was an accident and that there was no evidence of terrorist sabotage.

Analysts said the market remained fearful of the risk the Iran conflict could be an extended one with knock-on energy supply disruption impacts caused by associated strikes on critical energy production and storage facilities and shipping being unable to leave or enter the Persian Gulf.

“Despite the exuberance on Wall Street, ladies and gentlemen, oil is well off its lows after Tehran denied conducting any weekend negotiations with Washington,” Interactive Brokers senior economist Jose Torres wrote in a note.

“Additionally, in consideration of the vast number of attacks that have affected critical energy in the Middle East … there’s nervousness that there could be capacity and transportation disruptions that keep costs higher than at the beginning of the year even if there’s a deal,” added Torres.

Gulf oil-producing nations meet a large proportion of global oil and natural gas demand, about 20% of which — 20 million barrels a day — is exported on tankers that pass through the narrow Strait of Hormuz, a natural chokepoint effectively closed by Iran since the United States and Israel launched their airborne offensive on Feb. 28.

March 24 (UPI) — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth plans to request $200 billion in funding from Congress as the cost of the United States’ war with Iran grows.

The request comes on top of an already record-setting Pentagon budget passed by Congress last year. Transparency over how funds are being spent continues to dwindle, experts told UPI.

As of March 15, 16 days into the war, it had cost the United States about $12 billion, Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, said in an interview on Face the Nation.

Linda Bilmes, a Harvard Kennedy School professor and former assistant secretary and chief financial officer of the U.S. Department of Commerce under the Clinton administration, told UPI the reported cost is “just the very tip of the huge iceberg.”

“The $11 billion or whatever it is that they’re quoting is just the immediate operational spend in terms of munitions and fuel and such in the first couple weeks,” Bilmes said. “That doesn’t cover any kind of medium-term expenditures around reset, repair, resupply, replenishment of weapons and systems and munitions and so forth, which is a much bigger number.”

“We’ve probably spent at least $40 billion if you bring into account already everything that has been spent and the fact that it needs to be restocked in the inventory,” Bilmes said.

There are also longer-term costs yet to come, such as the lifetime disability benefits that some 50,000 U.S. troops stationed in the Middle East will be eligible to receive.

“The vast majority of them have been exposed to toxins, contamination from oil fumes, formaldehyde, benzine, all of these things that are in the air,” Bilmes said.

In a 2011 study, Bilmes estimated that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs would pay up to $1 trillion in benefits to veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the subsequent 30 to 40 years. In 2021, that estimate increased to $2.5 trillion as the war in Afghanistan continued until August of that year.

During a press briefing last week, Hegseth said the $200 billion request to Congress would be to “ensure that our ammunition is refilled and not just refilled but above and beyond.”

“That’s like the [gross domestic product] of Hungary, the GDP of New Zealand. Medium-sized countries have GDPs the size of just this increase,” Bilmes said. “That’s $1,500 for every household in America.”

The cost of war continues to increase for U.S. taxpayers. The U.S. military is using some advanced weapons technologies, such as AI-powered systems in combat for the first time in the Iran war. Defense contractors are preparing to increase their production of weapons for the United States four times over, President Donald Trump said following a meeting with several earlier this month.

“They have agreed to quadruple production of the ‘Exquisite Class’ weaponry in that we want to reach, as rapidly as possible, the highest levels of quantity,” Trump posted on social media on March 6. “Expansion began three months prior to the meeting and plants and production of many of these weapons are already underway.”

Trump did not clarify which companies were a part of the meeting, nor did he define what “exquisite class weaponry” is.

Bill Hartung, senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told UPI it is becoming increasingly challenging to analyze defense spending as the Pentagon has become less transparent.

Hartung’s research focuses on the arms industry and the U.S. military budget. He is the former director of the Arms and Security Program and the Center for International Policy and co-director of its Sustainable Defense Task Force.

When the United States began sending defense aid to Ukraine in 2022, the government would periodically report what weapons it was sending and the types of training missions it was involved in. That is yet to take place for the war in Iran.

“In this war, really other than a leak, they really haven’t put out much in the way of justification or what exactly is being spent,” Hartung said. “They haven’t put out even a detailed budget this year the way they normally would. Normally an administration that’s been in power a while puts it out in early February. Now, we’re kind of flying blind as to what it’s exactly all going to.”

Transparency has waned from the Pentagon over the course of years. Funding put toward defense in last year’s budget reconciliation was marked in broad categories, rather than a more detailed, itemized budget.

Hartung said it was not the “normal budget process” and that hearings over the Pentagon’s budget lacked the same level of substance and oversight of years passed.

In July, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense published its budget request for program acquisitions for the 2026 fiscal year. It requested $179.1 billion dedicated to research, development, test and evaluation of major weapon systems, $205.2 billion for procurement and $961.7 billion for total Department of Defense research and procurement. This accounts for about 40% of the department’s total funding.

The reconciliation bill passed by Congress added $150 billion in new defense spending, increasing the department’s total budget to more than $1 trillion.

Among the biggest expenditures approved by Congress were more than $25 billion for munitions and supply chain resiliency, $24 billion for integrated air and missile defense, $29 billion for shipbuilding, and $14 billion for enhancing resources for nuclear forces.

About $10 million was approved for department oversight.

The longer the war continues, the greater the cost will be to the United States. Then comes the matter of reconstruction.

The United States has historically been involved in reconstruction efforts following wars it was engaged in, including World War II and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

The U.S. government spent about $141 billion on reconstruction in Afghanistan between 2002 and 2021, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported.

The war with Iran has spread beyond its borders already. As of Monday, Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency, said that at least 40 energy sites have been damaged in the war, including sites belonging to U.S. allies.

Whether and to what extent the United States would be involved in reconstruction efforts in Iran and among affected allies is another variable that will not be known until the fighting stops.

Beyond the budget implications is the human cost of war. Hartung said, depending on the decision to put U.S. troops on the ground in Iran, the toll paid by service members could be larger yet. At least 13 U.S. troops have already been killed in action.

The Iran Health Ministry reported earlier this month that more than 1,200 civilians have been killed. Among them are at least 165 people killed in a strike on an elementary school for girls in Minab, Iraq. Many of the victims in the school bombing were children.

A preliminary investigation by the U.S. military has found that the United States is likely responsible for the deadly strike on the school by a Tomahawk missile on Feb. 28. The United States is the only country involved in the war that uses Tomahawk missiles.

The cost of the operation that killed the victims at the elementary school likely exceeds $1 million. A Tomahawk missile costs about $2 million.

“It could have been a million or two to hit that one target,” Hartung said. “They do have a small drone-like system they’ve been using that’s like $35,000 each but I don’t know exactly what they used. A cruise missile’s $2 million but then some of the other bombs could be a few hundred thousand but it’s remarkable how much even one strike can cost. Some of the planes are thousands or tens of thousands an hour.”

Unlike the Vietnam and Korean War and those that preceded them, the United States does not pay for its modern war efforts by raising taxes. Instead, it incurs an ever-growing debt that now accounts for about 17% of the government’s budget in fiscal year 2026.

Bilmes is writing about the changing approach to funding war in her upcoming book The Ghost Budget: Paying for America’s Wars. It is due to be released in the fall.

“We’ve borrowed every penny that has been spent right now. We’re just adding to the debt,” Bilmes said.

As the United States takes on more debt to fund a growing defense budget, it has also cut taxes, reducing revenues.

“Arguably, our approach to this, in engaging in another war of choice, is positioning us closer to another major economic crisis,” Bilmes said.

Former NATO official William Alberque says 440 kg of missing Iranian uranium is blocking a US victory claim. He warns that despite strikes on Natanz Nuclear Facility, the risk of proliferation remains.

Video shows Israeli forces blowing up a mosque’s minaret in Khiam in southern Lebanon. Israel says it is fighting Hezbollah but has forcibly displaced more than a million people and stands accused of trying to depopulate the entire south of the country.

March 24 (UPI) — Authorities in Washington, D.C., are hunting for at least two suspects after a U.S. Park Police officer was shot while on undercover duty in the nation’s capital.

The shooting occurred at about 7:30 p.m. EDT Monday near the 5000 block of Queens Stroll Place SE and the 4600 block of Hillside Road SE, the Metropolitan Police Department said in a statement.

U.S. Park Police Deputy Chief Scott Bretch told reporters in a press conference that the officer was riding in an unmarked police car as part of an ongoing U.S. Park Police investigation when the office was “ambushed” by at least two gunmen.

The officer was struck by gunfire, he said. Authorities said police did not return fire.

Bretch said the police vehicle continued down the street until it pulled over, where the wounded officer received first aid before being airlifted to the hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

Bretch would not say what kind of investigation U.S. Park Police was working on or how the suspects fled the scene. It was unclear how many police officers were in the targeted police car.

Interim Metropolitan Police Chief Jeff Carroll said that they believe the suspects had targeted the U.S. Park Police officer in the vehicle for being law enforcement.

Authorities are searching for two suspects both described as Black males. One was dressed in a white hoodie with blue jeans, and the other was dressed all in black with a white stripe down his sleeves and pant legs.

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser said she had been briefed on the shooting.

“Our prayers are with the officer for a quick recovery and we are grateful for all our law enforcement officers and first responders for their quick response,” she said in a statement.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said she was also briefed on the shooting by Bowser and Carroll, stating the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies will assist the Metropolitan Police Department “in any way we can.

“Please pray for the officer’s recovery,” she said.

The US-Israeli war on Iran has destroyed over 80,000 civilian units leaving many causalities, according to Iranian officials. Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi reports from a residential building hit in a recent attack.

The Cabinet on Tuesday approved two prosecution reform bills that would dismantle the current prosecution service later this year to separate its exclusive power to both initiate criminal probes and indict suspects.

When promulgated, it would mark a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s prosecution system. Under the new laws, the prosecution office will be shut down in October, 78 years after its establishment in 1948, and two new agencies will exercise indictment and investigate roles, respectively.

The bills on establishing the so-called serious crimes investigation agency and the indictment agency, pushed by the ruling Democratic Party (DP), were passed at the National Assembly last week in a plenary session boycotted by the main opposition People Power Party (PPP).

Under the laws, the new indictment agency will handle only indictments, while investigative powers will be transferred to the newly established serious crimes investigation agency.

The new investigative body will be established under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety and will be responsible for probing six major crimes, including corruption, economic offenses, defense industry-related crimes and drug offenses.

The government has been seeking to separate the prosecution service’s authority over both indictment and investigation amid longstanding criticism that the prosecution has abused its exclusive powers by carrying out politically motivated investigations.

The DP has argued that the reform is needed to curb potential political abuse of prosecutorial power, while the PPP has warned it could weaken checks on investigators and increase the risk of political influence.

The two new agencies are set to be established after the abolition of the prosecution office.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

March 24 (UPI) — The Department of Defense has announced new restrictions on reporters, including removing their office space from the Pentagon, after a judge last week struck down a Trump administration policy that threatened journalists’ credentials for obtaining unauthorized information.

Under the new policy announced Monday, reporters will be required to work from new office space outside the Pentagon but in an annex facility on its grounds. It also requires credentialed journalists to be escorted by Department of Defense personnel at all times within the Pentagon.

The announcement comes after the Defense Department announced a new policy in October that required all journalists with access to the Pentagon to sign a form acknowledging they could have their credentials revoked for collecting unauthorized information. Most Pentagon reporters declined and surrendered their credentials.

The New York Times then sued the administration of President Donald Trump. On Saturday, a federal court judge ruled in the paper’s favor, stating the policy was unconstitutional and ordered the Pentagon to reinstate the credentials of seven journalists with The Times.

The Pentagon intends to appeal the decisions, and in the interim announced the new policy shuttering the Correspondents’ Corridor and mandating journalist escorts, which Sean Parnell, assistant to the Defense secretary, said in a statement was in compliance with the court’s order.

“The Department always complies with court orders but disagrees with the decision and is pursuing an appeal,” he said.

A spokesperson with The Times quickly repsonded to the new policy, saying “We will be going back to court.”

“The new policy does not comply with the judge’s order,” Charlie Stadtlander, the Times spokesperson, said in a statement.

“It continues to impose unconstitutional restrictions on the press.”

The Trump administration has repeatedly taken actions that critics say are aimed at influencing its media coverage, including the October memorandum, restricting access to outlets over editorial decisions and seizing control of the White House press pool.

Journalists and free speech organizations were quick to crticize the policy, with the National Press Club calling the closure of the Correspondents’ Corridor an effort to undermine independent reporting of the Pentagon while it is fighting a war with Iran.

“At a time when the United States is engaged in active military conflict, the public depends on journalists being able to observe, report and ask questions freely,” NPC President Mark Schoeff said in a statement.

“Independent reporting on the U.S. military is not optional. It is essential to accountability, transparency and public trust. Any policy that curtails that access should concern everyone who values a free and informed society.”

The Pentagon Press Association said it was consulting with its legal counsel, according to a statement obtained by Axios.

“Press freedom is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and an informed public is vital to democracy,” the organization said.

“At such a critical time, we ask why the Pentagon is choosing to restrict vital press freedoms that help inform all Americans.”

The Trump administration has deployed ICE agents to airports across the United States amid staffing issues and delays. It’s seen as a negotiating tactic in a funding dispute with Democrats, who describe it as a dangerous move.