conflict

A group of Democrats in the United States Senate is demanding public hearings on the country’s war against Iran after receiving a series of classified briefings from officials in President Donald Trump’s administration.

Lawmakers say the White House has not clearly explained why the US entered the conflict, what its goals are, or how long it may last.

Republicans currently hold a narrow, 53-47 Senate majority, which gives them the power to control what legislation comes to the floor for debate.

Some Democrats have expressed frustration after the latest closed-door briefing. Trump has not ruled out sending US ground ⁠troops into Iran.

“I just came from a two-hour classified briefing on the war,” Senator Chris Murphy from the state of Connecticut said on Tuesday. “It confirmed to me that the strategy is totally incoherent.

“I think this is pretty simple: if the president did what the Constitution requires and came to Congress to seek authorisation for this war, he wouldn’t get it – because the American people would demand that their members of Congress vote no,” he added.

Here is what we know:

What has happened so far?

Since the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran on February 28, senior officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have held several closed-door meetings to brief Congress members on the military campaign and its progress.

Because the meetings are classified, lawmakers are restricted in what they can publicly disclose about the information they received.

What are Democrats saying?

Several Democratic senators have said they left the briefings frustrated, arguing that the administration had not provided clear answers about the war’s objectives, timeline or the long-term strategy guiding their approach to the conflict.

Earlier this week, six Democratic senators also called for an investigation into a strike on a girls’ school in Minab, in southern Iran. Reports indicate the attack, which investigators say involved US forces, killed at least 170 people, most of them children.

“There seems to be no endgame,” Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal said. “The president, almost in a single breath, says it’s almost done, and at the same time, it’s just begun. So this is kind of contradictory.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts raised concerns about the cost of war.

“The one part that seems clear is that while there is no money for 15 million Americans who lost their health care, there’s a billion dollars a day to spend on bombing Iran,” Warren said on Tuesday.

“The one thing Congress has the power to do is to stop actions like this through the power of the purse,” she added.

Others seem worried that a ground deployment could take place.

“We seem to be on a path toward deploying American troops on the ground in Iran to accomplish any of the potential objectives here,” Blumenthal, of Connecticut, told reporters after Tuesday’s classified briefing.

“The American people deserve to know much more than this administration has told them about the cost of the war, the danger to our sons and daughters in uniform and the potential for ⁠further escalation and widening of this war,” he added.

What are Republicans saying?

Republicans, who have slim majorities in both houses of Congress, have almost unanimously backed Trump’s campaign against Iran, with only a handful expressing doubt about the war.

Some Republican leaders say the strikes are necessary to curb Iran’s military capabilities, missile programme and regional influence.

They have also argued that the operation is limited in scope and designed to weaken Iran’s ability to threaten US forces and allies in the region.

Republican Representative Brian Mast of Florida, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, last week publicly thanked Trump for taking action against Iran, saying the president is using his constitutional authority to defend the US against the “imminent threat” posed by Tehran.

But some Republican members of Congress have voiced concerns.

Representative Nancy Mace from South Carolina said she did “not want to send South Carolina’s sons and daughters into war with Iran”, in a post on X.

Rand Paul, a Republican senator from Kentucky, accused the Trump administration of changing its narrative and rationale for the war on a daily basis.

“We keep hearing new reasons for war with Iran—none convincing,” he wrote on X. “‘Free the oppressed’ sounds noble, but where does it end? We’ve been told for decades Iran is weeks from a nuke. War should be a last resort, not our first move. A war of choice is not my choice.”

Why does the debate matter?

The dispute has revived a long-running debate in Washington, DC, about the limits of presidential war powers.

Under the US Constitution, Congress has the authority to declare war, but modern presidents have frequently launched military operations without formal congressional approval, often citing national security or emergency threats.

The law allows the president to deploy US forces for up to 60 days without congressional authorisation, followed by a 30-day withdrawal period if Congress does not approve the action.

Some lawmakers and legal experts say the war on Iran highlights the need for stronger congressional oversight of military action.

“In the 1970s, we adopted something called the War Powers Resolution that gives the president limited ability to do this,” said David Schultz, a professor in the political science and legal departments at Hamline University.

“And so, either you could argue that what the president is doing violates the Constitution by… not [being] a formally declared war; or b, it exceeds his authority, either as commander-in-chief or under the War Powers Act,” he added.

“And therefore, you could argue that domestically, his actions are illegal and unconstitutional,” Schutlz said.

The Trump administration has argued that the February 28 strikes were justified as a response to an “imminent threat”, a rationale often used by presidents to justify military action without prior congressional approval.

However, US intelligence agencies had themselves said before the start of the war that they had no evidence of an imminent Iranian threat to the US or its facilities across the Middle East.

Washington, DC – Several Democrats in the United States have emerged from a classified briefing about the war on Iran, saying they still have little clarity about President Donald Trump’s justifications and end goals, even 11 days into the conflict.

“I emerge from this briefing as dissatisfied and angry, frankly, as I have from any past briefing in my 15 years,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, following Tuesday’s briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Their statements marked the latest wave of condemnation from congressional Democrats, who have a slim minority in the Senate and the US House of Representatives.

Party members in both chambers had recently voted in near unison on resolutions seeking to halt the war, which the US and Israel launched on February 28.

But their efforts to pass a “war powers resolution” to rein in Trump failed amid widespread Republican opposition.

More recently, Democrats have pledged to delay proceedings in the Senate unless top officials from the Department of State and the Pentagon testify under oath about the war.

Following Tuesday’s briefing, Democrats like Blumenthal argued that the Trump administration owes the US public more clarity about the war.

Blumenthal added that the meeting piqued concerns that US forces may be deployed to either Iraq or Iran.

“I am left with more questions than answers, especially about the cost of the war,” he said.

“I am most concerned about the threat to American lives of potentially deploying our sons and daughters on the ground in Iraq. We seem to be on a path towards deploying American troops on the ground in Iran to accomplish any of the potential objectives.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren, meanwhile, said that the Trump administration “cannot explain the reasons that we entered this war, the goals we’re trying to accomplish and the methods for doing that”.

She also pointed to the high cost of the military operations against Iran, which some have estimated to exceed $5.6bn in the first two days alone.

Warren pointed out that Republicans cut healthcare subsidies last year in an effort to reduce federal spending, but appear to have no problem approving military expenses.

“While there is no money for 15 million Americans who lost their healthcare”, she noted, “there’s a billion dollars a day to spend on bombing Iran”.

While approached by reporters, Senator Jacky Rosen indicated she was limited in her ability to comment on classified briefings. Still, she offered brief remarks to voice her frustration.

“I can tell you what I heard is not just concerning. It is disturbing,” she said. “And I’m not sure what the end game is or what their plans are. They certainly have not made their case.”

‘On our timeline and at our choosing’

The latest round of criticism came shortly after US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth pledged to conduct the “most intense day” of strikes since the war began.

As of Tuesday, the war had killed at least 1,255 people in Iran, 394 people in Lebanon, 13 in Israel, six in Iraq and 14 across the Gulf.

Trump has repeatedly said the war would not be prolonged, but his officials have offered shifting timelines. Hegseth, for instance, said the fighting would not stop “until the enemy is totally and decisively defeated”.

“We do so on our timeline and at our choosing,” he said.

The Trump administration has also offered an array of justifications for launching the war, which came amid indirect talks with Iran on the future of its nuclear programme.

Trump has blamed Iran’s nuclear ambitions for the conflict, though Tehran has denied seeking a nuclear weapon, and his administration has also said the war was necessary to end Iran’s ballistic missile programme.

Experts have said that available evidence does not support the Trump administration’s claims that either posed an immediate threat to the US.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters last week that the US attacked because its close ally Israel had planned to attack Iran, which would have led to retaliation against US assets.

Rubio and Trump subsequently backed away from the circular rationale, with Trump claiming last week that Iran was the one planning to strike first.

Another rationale the Trump administration offered is that the totality of Iran’s actions since the 1979 Islamic revolution represented a threat to the US, thereby necessitating an attack.

Trump and his top officials have not provided evidence for any of their claims.

Calls for hearings, investigation

Democrats have been largely sidelined since the war began. Only a handful of Republicans have joined the left-leaning party in its efforts to rein in Trump through legislative means.

Under the US Constitution, only Congress can declare war. But presidents can still use the military to respond to imminent threats in instances of self-defence.

Still, there are limits to how long such operations can proceed. Under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, presidents must withdraw forces within 60 to 90 days of an unauthorised military campaign, or else seek congressional approval.

Trump, however, has denied he needs congressional backing for the military campaigns he has conducted since returning to office.

The latest attacks in Iran have sparked widespread public opposition, with polls suggesting a majority of US citizens oppose the war effort.

Earlier this week, six Democratic senators called for an investigation into a strike on a girls’ school in Minab, in southern Iran. Several investigations have indicated that the US was responsible for the attack, which killed at least 170 people, mostly children.

Last week, nearly 30 members of Congress called for an investigation into reports that US military leaders had used biblical motivations to justify the war to subordinates.

Some reportedly invoked “religious prophecy and apocalyptic theology” in statements to other enlisted personnel.

On Monday, Senator Cory Booker said Democrats had “collectively agreed” to use an array of procedural mechanisms in the chamber to block legislative business until Trump officials agree to testify under oath.

“Each individual senator has a tremendous amount of power to disrupt the normal functioning of the Senate, as well as certain privileges that we can exercise,” Booker said.

“And what we have agreed right now is that we’re not going to let the Senate continue business as usual, which seems to be ignoring the urgent issues the American people are dealing with.”

A Maronite Catholic priest has been killed by Israeli tank fire after it targeted a home in southern Lebanon. Father Pierre al-Rahi was reportedly killed when an Israeli tank fired on the home of a local couple a second time after several people had rushed there to try to help.

WASHINGTON — As Congress responds to President Trump’s attack on Iran, lawmakers who served on the front lines of Iraq and Afghanistan are making their voices heard in a war debate that has taken on intensely personal meaning.

Many admit mixed feelings, taking satisfaction in seeing vengeance taken on the leadership of an Iranian regime that has targeted U.S. service members for decades, yet fearful that another generation of soldiers could soon face the same combat experiences that they did.

“Do I take gratification? You know there’s the Marine side of me: Yeah, of course,” said Arizona Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego, whose company suffered some of the heaviest losses on the U.S. side during the Iraq War. “I know they killed a lot of American soldiers, American Marines. But do I also understand that I have a responsibility not to let my lust for revenge drive my country into another war?”

Experiences in the post 9/11 wars are also coloring the decisions of the Trump administration, given that top officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, were once deployed to Iraq.

Gallego, like others on Capitol Hill, leaned heavily on his firsthand experience of fighting in the wars after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as he assessed the Iran conflict. Lawmakers wore bracelets etched with the names of friends killed in battle, told stories of coming under attack from Iran-backed militant groups and reflected on their own life-changing injuries suffered during combat.

Veteran lawmakers are wary of war

While the initial votes on Iran saw Congress divide mostly along party lines, with Republicans backing Trump’s actions and Democrats warning of an extended conflict, veterans in both parties share deep reservations about entering the conflict.

“As somebody who knows a lot of friends that didn’t come home and a lot of Gold Star families, that’s why the week before the attack, I was actually one of the ones that was talking about caution and why we needed to avoid at all costs getting into another long, drawn-out Middle Eastern war,” said Republican Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona, a former Navy SEAL who left college to enlist the week after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Crane said his concerns were partially assuaged by briefings from the Trump administration that indicated to him the president is not planning a drawn-out war. He voted against a war powers resolution that would have halted attacks on Iran unless Trump got congressional approval.

But Crane said wars are never straightforward. “I’ve been on military operations that did not go to plan many times, and so I understand the nature,” he said, adding that he was calling for the Trump administration to approach the conflict with “humility and caution.”

Gallego and other Democrats worried that it was too late for that approach. They paid tribute to the six U.S. military members who were killed in a drone strike in Kuwait and worried that there could soon be more American casualties. A seventh service member died on Sunday from wounds suffered during a March 1 attack in Saudi Arabia.

“War is dirty, and mistakes happen,” Gallego said. The longer the conflict drags on, he added, the greater the chance there will be for U.S. military members to be killed. He experienced that firsthand in Iraq when friends would be killed by seemingly random shots from enemy combatants.

Still, many Republicans argued that it was necessary to attack Iran to stop a regime that for decades has helped train and arm militant groups throughout the Middle East. Republican Rep. Brian Mast, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, led the debate on the House floor against the war powers resolution.

Mast, who served as an Army bomb disposal expert, now uses prosthetic legs after receiving catastrophic injuries from an improvised explosive device in Afghanistan. “Me especially, many of my other colleagues, no one wants to see our military go into combat or war,” he said.

Then he added, “But Iran’s terror, which has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans, it has to stop.”

Trying to push soldiers to forefront of war debate

Important questions loom for Congress as the conflict with Iran unfolds and spreads to other parts of the Middle East. The price of the operation is already likely running into the billions of dollars, likely forcing the Trump administration to soon seek billions in funding from Congress. The outbreak of war has also scrambled global alliances and the future of U.S. foreign policy.

Shadowing it all is the potential of another drawn-out conflict. Lawmakers said they owe it to their fallen comrades to ensure that doesn’t happen.

“To me, it’s to speak out. It’s to say another generation should not go fight in an open-ended, ill-conceived regime change war in the Middle East,” said Democratic Rep. Pat Ryan, his hand moving to a bracelet etched with the names of friends who were killed during his two Army combat tours in Iraq.

Others remembered how frustrated they became with Washington during their service, especially as soldiers tried to fight with insufficiently armored vehicles and not enough troops.

“I know what it was like to be on the very end of the receiving line of the decisions made in Washington,” said Democratic Rep. Jason Crow, who entered the Army as a private before being promoted to a captain and deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Crow said that front-line soldiers often suffered “because people stopped asking tough questions. People stopped being held accountable. Congress stopped voting on it.”

Another veteran, Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, said that was one of the reasons she sought a congressional seat in the first place. As a Blackhawk helicopter pilot with the Illinois National Guard, Duckworth lost her legs when her helicopter was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade in Iraq.

“I ran for Congress so that when the drums of war started beating once again, I’d be in a position to make sure that our elected officials fully considered the true cost of the war,” she said. “Not just in dollars and cents but in human lives.”

Groves writes for the Associated Press.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said air-to-air missiles and a reconnaissance plane will be sent to region amid conflict with Iran.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Australia will deploy a long-range reconnaissance aircraft and send air-to-air missiles to help countries in the Gulf region defend against Iranian attacks.

“The Iranian conflict in the Middle East began just over a week ago, and Iran’s reprisal attacks continue to escalate, already at a scale and depth we haven’t seen before. Twelve countries across the region, from Cyprus through to the Gulf, are continuing to be targeted,” Albanese said in a news conference on Tuesday.

He said the Royal Australian Air Force will send an E7A Wedgetail surveillance aircraft and supporting personnel to “protect and secure airspace above the Gulf” for the next four weeks, and help the region with its “collective self-defence”.

Australia will also send advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles to the United Arab Emirates, he said, following a phone call with UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

Albanese cited the 115,000 Australians living in the Middle East – among them, 24,000 in the UAE – as a major factor behind the deployment of military assets.

“Helping Australians means also helping the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf nations defend themselves against what are unprovoked attacks,” he told reporters, stressing that the deployments were for defensive purposes only.

“My government has been clear: We are not taking offensive action against Iran, and we are clear we are not deploying Australian troops on the ground in Iran,” he said.

Some 2,600 Australians have left the Middle East since last week, Albanese said, but “significant challenges” remain in helping those who want to leave but remain in the region.

The prime minister’s announcement was immediately slammed by the opposition Greens party, which said Australia risks becoming embroiled in another US-led “forever war”.

Australia joined the US-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2003, and lost more than 50 personnel during the conflicts, according to the Australian War Memorial.

Greens Senator Larissa Waters said she feared more Australian lives were at risk with the announced deployments, which the government, led by the Labor Party, said would be accompanied by 85 Australian personnel.

“Australians do not want to get dragged into Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal war on Iran. Labor shouldn’t be sending troops to help a military that’s killed 150 schoolchildren in a primary school bombing. That will only escalate an illegal conflict that’s already spiralling out of control, and leave Australia trapped in yet another forever war,” Waters said in a statement on Tuesday.

“Every day Trump and Netanyahu’s demands of Australia keep growing. It was refuelling US spy planes yesterday, a recon jet and missiles today, and could be ever more troops tomorrow. Labor has no red lines when it comes to appeasing Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu,” she said, referring to the US president and Israeli prime minister, respectively.

Albanese said separately on Tuesday that Canberra has formally granted asylum to five members of Iran’s women’s football team, who were visiting Australia for the Asian Football Confederation Women’s Asian Cup 2026 in Queensland.

Albanese said the women had been issued with humanitarian visas and moved to a safe location with the assistance of Australian Federal Police.

“Australians have been moved by the plight of these brave women. They’re safe here, and they should feel at home here,” Albanese told reporters.

Itamar Greenberg laughed when asked if he thought he should be afraid. The 19-year-old Israeli antiwar activist had just described being spat on in the street and is the target of an online hate campaign.

“Yes!” he finally responded. “If I thought about it, I probably should be. I just don’t have time.”

Voices like Greenberg’s are rare in Israel at a time when public clamour for war is growing, and genocidal language already familiar to millions of Palestinians is reemerging, but with a different target – Iran.

Officially, 11 Israelis have been killed in Iranian strikes since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran on February 28. What the actual number might be, or how many of Iran’s ballistic missiles may have penetrated the country’s Iron Dome defence shield, is unknown.

Speaking at the site of an Iranian missile strike in West Jerusalem, shortly after the start of the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu returned to the use of apocalyptic language that has characterised the genocide his country has conducted in Gaza. Comparing Iranians with the Jewish people’s biblical foe, Amalek, who the Jews had been divinely ordered to wipe from the face of the planet, Netanyahu told reporters: “In this week’s Torah portion, we read, “‘Remember what Amalek did to you.’ We remember, and we act.”

So far, Iran claims to have launched strikes across Israel, saying its missiles and drones hit military sites, symbolic infrastructure, and even Netanyahu’s office. Tehran has described the attacks as precise and strategic, rather than indiscriminate and part of a broader regional response. Iran also claims to have targeted locations such as Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion airport and Haifa.

However, Israeli officials have denied many of the specific claims. Netanyahu’s office dismissed Iranian assertions about hitting his office, or affecting his condition, as “fake news”, with stringent reporting restrictions on Iranian strikes within Israel making confirmation either way difficult.

What is clearer is that against the drumbeat of Iranian strikes, the fervour for war appears to be increasing among the public. A poll carried out last week by the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) suggested overwhelming public support for the war, with 93 percent of Jewish-Israeli respondents expressing support for the strikes on Iran, and 74 percent expressing support for Netanyahu, the country’s historically divisive prime minister.

“No one’s talking about opposition to the war,” Greenberg said, describing an environment in which figures from across Israel’s media and political landscape – with the exception of the left-wing Hadash party and antiwar organisations such as Greenberg’s Mesarvot – had lined up behind the war. “It’s also getting increasingly violent,” he said.

“We held a protest on Tuesday, where the police were already waiting. They beat and arrested us. I was illegally strip-searched,” he said, describing it as efforts intended to humiliate him.

Greenberg is no stranger to such tactics. Six months ago, after being arrested for protesting the genocide in Gaza, prison guards had threatened to carve a Star of David on his face, a permanent reminder of what they thought his priorities should be.

It’s not just antiwar activists who have faced the brunt of the Israeli security establishment’s force.

“The atmosphere is very violent,“ lawmaker Ofer Cassif of the Hadash party told Al Jazeera. “When I leave the house, I’m more worried by the danger posed by a physical attack by fascists than I am by any missile,” he said.

Hadash and lawmakers like Cassif have been targeted by physical threats and attacks throughout the Gaza war. But criticism of the Netanyahu government’s handling of Israeli captives in Gaza meant that opposition to the Gaza war was – comparatively – more socially acceptable. When it comes to Iran, the current climate is toxic, Cassif said.

“We’re often accused of supporting the regime in Tehran,” Cassif explained of the attempts to delegitimise their opposition to the war.

“We’re unequivocally not. We want to see that regime go, but we’re not going to allow Netanyahu to say he’s doing this for the Iranian people. He isn’t. That’s not just rhetoric, that’s fact. The Israeli leadership was just as supportive of the shah as the US, and he was a murderous dictator no less than the current regime,” Cassif said, referring to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the leader of Iran before the Islamic revolution.

For now, analysts and observers in Israel describe a society that believes it is almost engaged in a holy war.

“They brought an antiwar activist onto one of the light news programmes,” political analyst Ori Goldberg said from near Tel Aviv, “and she was treated like you would a flat-earther. It’s as if it’s inconceivable that anyone would oppose this war.

“Israel has become a society with no middle ground, no capacity for conversation. It’s as if our entire existence is dependent on our ability to do anything we want. And if the world tries to stop that, then the world’s anti-Semitic, and we all burn.”

US-Israeli attacks on Iran continue as Iranians rally in support of new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

A new supreme leader in Iran – Mojtaba Khamenei – has replaced his assassinated father.

His selection sends a defiant message to the United States and Israel as they attack the country.

So, who is Iran’s new leader – and what does his appointment mean?

Presenter: Tom McRae

Guests:

Hassan Ahmadian – Associate professor at the University of Tehran

Mehran Kamrava – Professor at Georgetown University in Qatar and director of the Iranian Studies Unit at the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies

Alex Vatanka – Senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said that Kyiv could provide defensive systems as well as assistance to civilians and American soldiers “deployed in certain countries” in the Middle East as the war in Iran continues.

He has reportedly proposed an exchange of Ukrainian defensive technology to combat Iranian drones in return for advanced US defensive systems to use in the war against Russia.

The US-Israel-Iran conflict, which started 10 days ago when the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran and killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has continued to escalate. Iran has responded with strikes on Israel and US military assets and other infrastructure in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

As Gulf and other Middle Eastern states continue to attempt to intercept incoming drones and missiles with US-supplied air defences, the US has asked Ukraine to contribute some of its own air-defence systems.

Here is what we know.

What has the US requested from Ukraine and why?

The US has asked for Ukraine’s help in defending Washington’s allies in the Middle East against Iranian missile attacks on infrastructure and US military assets, Ukraine’s president confirmed last week.

At the moment, the US is using air defence systems such as the Patriot, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) batteries and Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft, to intercept Iranian drones and missiles targeting its military assets in the region. The Patriot Advanced Capability-2 (PAC-2) and PAC-3 are advanced surface-to-air missile defence systems.

However, these types of systems are extremely expensive, costing millions of dollars for each interceptor missile fired, and there are concerns that supplies of US interceptor missiles could run low.

“We received a request from the United States for specific support in protection against ‘shaheds’ in the Middle East region,” Zelenskyy wrote in an X post on March 5.

Shahed drones, particularly the Shahed-136, are Iranian-designed “kamikaze” or loitering munitions which are very low cost compared to the interceptors being used by the US. Costing roughly $20,000-$35,000 each, these GPS-guided drones are about 3.5m (11.5 feet) long and fly autonomously to pre-programmed coordinates to strike fixed targets with explosive payloads. They blow up as they hit their targets.

Over the course of the Iran war, Shahed-136 drones have targeted Middle Eastern countries including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and the UAE where US military assets and troops are hosted. Experts estimate that Iran has thousands of these drones.

Iran has also been supplying Moscow with many thousands of Shahed drones during Russia’s war on Ukraine.

During the course of Russia’s four-year war on Ukraine, Ukraine’s domestic arms industry has been forced to innovate, building low-cost interceptor drones priced at roughly $1,000 to $2,000 to counter Russian attacks with imported Iranian Shahed-136s.

Kyiv is now mass-producing these low-cost interceptor drones.

“The role of Shahed-type drones in long-range attacks has become more prominent in Ukraine after Russia took Iranian technology, improved it, and built it in previously unimaginable numbers,” Keir Giles, a Eurasia expert for the UK-based think tank Chatham House, told Al Jazeera.

What has Zelenskyy said?

Zelenskyy has posted several statements on social media confirming that he is ready to help Middle Eastern countries defend their territories by providing technical expertise.

“Ukrainians have been fighting against ‘shahed’ drones for years now, and everyone recognises that no other country in the world has this kind of experience. We are ready to help,” he wrote on X on March 5.

“I gave instructions to provide the necessary means and ensure the presence of Ukrainian specialists who can guarantee the required security.

“Ukraine helps partners who help ensure our security and protect the lives of our people.”

It is understood that Ukraine is in talks with several Middle Eastern countries about this.

On Monday, Zelenskyy said Ukraine has deployed interceptor drones and a team of specialists to help protect US military bases in Jordan.

Zelenskyy wrote on X that he has also spoken directly to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) about “countering threats from the Iranian regime”.

He also said he had spoken with the leaders of Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE.

Zelenskyy has repeatedly stressed that Ukraine must not weaken its own air defences. However, it is mass-producing this equipment now, and may well be able to afford to share.

“The fact that there are surplus capabilities ready to be sent to the US and the Middle East is unsurprising because Ukraine has led this innovation,” Giles said.

Zelenskyy has therefore proposed an exchange of air defence systems with the US ones being used in the Middle East.

“We ourselves are at war. And I said, completely frankly, that we have a shortage of what they have. They have missiles for the Patriots, but hundreds or thousands of ‘shaheds’ cannot be intercepted with Patriot missiles – it is too costly,” Zelenskyy said.

“Meanwhile, we have a shortage of PAC-2 and PAC-3 missiles. So, when it comes to technology or weapons exchange, I believe our country will be open to it.”

Zelenskyy may also have good political reasons for extending help, analysts say.

“The US has declined support for Ukraine on the ground that it had insufficient supply of air defence munitions, and now more of those Patriots have been fired in the Middle East in a few days, than have been supplied to Ukraine in four years,” Giles said.

“Zelenskyy will be aware that in providing this assistance, he is not only shaming the US, but also directly supporting potential friends and partners in the Middle East, who before now have been ambivalent to the situation in Ukraine,” Giles said.

Who else has sent defensive backup to the Gulf?

European countries including the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy have pledged to provide defensive backup to Gulf nations over the past week. Additionally, Australia said it was deploying military assets to the region.

Wary of becoming directly involved in the US-Israeli war on Iran, European countries have nevertheless been drawn into the conflict by attacks on a British base on Cyprus in the Mediterranean and Iranian strikes on Western allies in Gulf countries that host US troops in military bases.

What will happen next?

Just as Ukraine is getting involved in the war, Russia might too, say experts.

“We should not be surprised if before long, as well as Russian technology in Iranian drones, we see Iran launching Shaheds manufactured in Russia,” Giles said.

He described Russia as a “primary beneficiary of current US actions,” pointing to how the surge in oil prices, the relaxation in US curbs on Russian energy exports to keep crude and gas prices under control, and the diversion of air defence munitions from Europe to the Middle East all helped Moscow. These, he said, “are all lifelines for Russia”.

Ministry of National Defence says no casualties or damage after missile shot down over southern city of Gaziantep.

The Turkish Ministry of National Defence says NATO air defences have intercepted a ballistic missile launched from Iran towards Turkiye as concerns grow that the United States-Israel war against Iran will escalate.

The missile was intercepted on Monday over the Sahinbey district of Gaziantep in southern Turkiye, the ministry said in a statement. No casualties or damage were reported.

“Ankara emphasized its capability and determination to protect national airspace and border security, while warning that further escalation in the region must be avoided,” the statement said.

The ministry also urged all sides, especially Tehran, “to refrain from actions that could endanger civilians or undermine regional stability”.

Monday’s incident was the second time an Iranian ballistic missile was fired towards Turkiye since the US and Israel launched a war against Iran on February 28, according to local authorities.

The US-Israeli attacks have prompted a wave of Iranian missile and drone strikes across the wider region, including on targets in Arab Gulf countries.

Iran did not immediately comment on the Turkish ministry’s statement.

NATO spokesperson Allison Hart confirmed that the military alliance had intercepted “a missile heading to Turkiye”. “NATO stands firm in its readiness to defend all Allies against any threat,” Hart said in a post on X.

Iran denied firing a ballistic missile towards Turkiye on Wednesday after Turkish authorities said NATO air defences shot down a projectile over the Eastern Mediterranean.

NATO condemned that launch, expressing its “full solidarity” with Turkiye.

“This is a tangible demonstration of the Alliance’s ability to defend our populations against all threats, including those posed by ballistic missiles,” NATO said of the interception.

Article 5 of the alliance’s North Atlantic Treaty says an attack on one NATO country will be considered an attack on all. It also commits each NATO member state to taking action deemed necessary “to restore and maintain” security.

In an interview with the Reuters news agency last week after the first ballistic missile heading towards Turkiye was shot down, NATO chief Mark Rutte said there was no talk of invoking Article 5.

Iranian authorities have said they are firing at US military bases and other US- and Israel-linked targets across the region in self-defence, but civilian infrastructure has also been attacked.

“Iran’s targets are not just US bases; they are, in fact, primarily large-scale infrastructure and civilian targets as well,” said Rob Geist Pinfold, a lecturer in defence studies at King’s College London.

“This is not a mistake. This is by design,” Pinfold told Al Jazeera, explaining that Tehran is seeking to “unleash as much chaos as possible to destabilise the region and global markets” in an effort to force Washington to abandon the war.

“We’ve seen that Iran is targeting every single [Gulf Cooperation Council] state. It’s prepared to burn its bridges with all of them to pursue this very uncertain and high-risk strategy,” he said.

“It really shows you how Iran feels like it’s facing an existential threat. For them, this is a real do-or-die moment.”

Israeli strikes on fuel depots and petroleum logistic sites in Tehran on Sunday saw apocalyptic images coming out of the Iranian capital, as the spilled oil ignited a river of fire, and thick black smoke blanketed the city of 10 million, leaving streets and vehicles covered with soot.

Israel and the United States claimed they were targeting Iranian military and government sites, but government officials and people say civilian structures such as schools, hospitals and major landmarks are increasingly coming under attack. At least 1,255 people have been killed in the strikes since February 28.

What Israeli and US military planners frame as a calculated degradation of state infrastructure is being described by local officials and environmental experts as an act of total warfare, and collective punishment.

Shina Ansari, head of Iran’s Department of Environment, described the systematic destruction of the oil depots as a blatant act of ecocide.

The attacks systematically targeted four major storage facilities and a distribution centre, including the Tehran refinery in the south and depots in Aghdasieh, Shahran, and Karaj. In the Shahran district, witnesses reported unrefined oil leaking directly into the streets as temperatures hovered around 13C (55F).

Ansari from Iran’s Department of Environment stated that the environment remains the silent victim of the war, noting that the incineration of vast fuel reserves has trapped the capital under a suffocating shroud of pollutants.

The medical and environmental fallout is immediate and severe. The Iranian Red Crescent Society warned that the smoke contains high concentrations of toxic hydrocarbons, sulphur, and nitrogen oxides. The organisation noted that any rainfall passing through these plumes becomes highly acidic, posing risks of skin burns and severe lung damage upon contact or inhalation.

Ali Jafarian, Iran’s deputy health minister, told Al Jazeera that this acid rain is already contaminating the soil and water supply. Jafarian added that the toxic air poses a life-threatening risk to the elderly, children, and those with pre-existing respiratory conditions, prompting authorities to advise residents to remain indoors.

The destruction has also forced the Iranian Ministry of Petroleum to slash daily fuel rations for civilians from 30 litres [8 gallons] to 20 litres [5 gallons]. At least four employees, including two tanker drivers, were killed in the depot strikes.

The strategic bombing myth

Major General Mamoun Abu Nowar, a retired Jordanian military analyst, told Al Jazeera that the primary objective of the strikes is to break the resilience of the Iranian people and paralyse the country’s logistics and economy.

“They are preparing the Iranian environment for an uprising against the regime,” Abu Nowar said, adding that the broader goal is to halt state operations and curb Tehran’s regional influence.

However, Abu Nowar raised urgent concerns about the specific munitions deployed, urging Iranian authorities to investigate the bomb fragments given the unusual density of the smoke and the resulting acid rain.

Some military strategists argue that striking an adversary’s vital infrastructure can paralyse the state from the inside out, bypassing the need to fight its military forces directly.

Modern warfare has increasingly relied on this strategic bombing via precision drones and missiles to destroy morale and incapacitate an adversary’s ability to wage war. For Israel, which is engaged in a genocidal war in Gaza and wider regional conflicts, targeting oil depots is viewed as a way to send a coercive message while avoiding a ground war.

However, Adel Shadid, a researcher in Israeli affairs, told Al Jazeera Arabic that the strategy is designed to make life hell for ordinary Iranians in hopes of sparking an uprising. Shadid noted a glaring contradiction in the rhetoric of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who claims to support the Iranian people while overseeing the destruction of their basic means of survival.

Raphael S Cohen, director of the Strategy and Doctrine Program at the RAND Corporation, notes that such bombing campaigns consistently fail to achieve their primary goal of breaking a population’s will. Instead, Cohen argues, strategic bombing typically produces a rally-around-the-flag effect, unifying societies against a common foe rather than causing them to capitulate.

Historical echoes and retaliation

The reality of targeting oil infrastructure rarely aligns with sterile military theory, as history shows that such tactics reliably produce devastating, long-term environmental consequences.

During the 1991 Gulf War, the torching of Kuwaiti oil wells created a regional environmental catastrophe. Similarly, during the battle against ISIL (ISIS) in Iraq, the burning of the Qayyarah oil fields created a “Daesh Winter” that blocked out the sun for months.

The fires released vast quantities of toxic residues, including sulphur dioxide and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, causing severe respiratory illnesses, soil acidification, and long-term carcinogenic risks for the local population.

Meanwhile, Mokhtar Haddad, director of the Al-Wefaq newspaper, told Al Jazeera Arabic that the targeting of energy hubs could trigger a global energy war.

According to Al Jazeera’s Sohaib al-Assa, reporting from Tehran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has already retaliated by striking the Haifa oil refinery and targeting a US base in Kuwait, signalling that the conflict is no longer confined to military targets.

On Monday, Bahrain’s state-run oil company Bapco declared force majeure after waves of Iranian strikes targeted its energy installations. Iran has also been accused of also targeting energy facilities in other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries.

Palestinian journalist Amal Shamali, who worked as a correspondent for Qatar Radio, has been killed in an Israeli air strike on the Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza, the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS) says.

Shamali, who was killed on Monday, also “worked with several Arab and local media outlets and was among the journalists who continued performing their media mission despite the ongoing assault and war on the Gaza Strip”, the PJS said in a statement.

More than 270 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza since Israel launched a genocidal war against Palestinians in the territory on October 7, 2023, in response to Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel.

“This represents one of the bloodiest periods for journalists in modern history, reflecting the scale of the deliberate targeting of Palestinian journalism in an attempt to silence the voice of truth and prevent the documentation of the crimes and violations committed against the Palestinian people,” the PJS said.

The PJS also said: “Targeting journalists will not succeed in breaking the will of the Palestinian journalistic community or deterring it from fulfilling its professional and humanitarian mission of conveying the truth and documenting the crimes and aggression faced by the Palestinian people.”

Gaza’s Government Media Office released a statement after Shamali’s killing, saying it “strongly condemns the systematic targeting, killing, and assassination of Palestinian journalists by the Israeli occupation”.

The office also said it “holds the Israeli occupation, the U.S. administration, and the countries participating in the crime of genocide – such as the United Kingdom, Germany, and France – fully responsible for committing these heinous and brutal crimes”.

It called on international and regional media associations, the international community and human rights organisations to condemn “the crimes” committed against Palestinian journalists and media professionals working in Gaza and to work towards holding Israel accountable for its “ongoing crimes” against Palestinian journalists.

Israeli attacks have killed about 13 journalists every month over more than two years of war, according to a tally by Shireen.ps, a monitoring website named after Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, who was shot and killed by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank in 2022.

Of those journalists, at least 10 of them worked for Al Jazeera, including Al Jazeera Arabic correspondent Anas al-Sharif, who had reported extensively from northern Gaza.

Israel’s war on Gaza has been the single deadliest conflict for journalists.

According to Brown University’s Costs of War project, more journalists have been killed in Gaza since the war began on October 7, 2023, than in the US Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean War, Vietnam War, the wars in the former Yugoslavia and the post-9/11 war in Afghanistan – combined.

As per a report released early this year by the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), Palestine was the deadliest place to work as a journalist in 2025.

The IFJ said the Middle East was the most dangerous region for media professionals, accounting for 74 deaths last year – more than half of the 128 journalists and media workers killed.

The Middle East was followed by Africa with 18 deaths, the Asia Pacific (15), the Americas (11) and Europe (10), according to the report.

Since a US- and Qatar-brokered “ceasefire” came into effect in October, 640 Palestinians have been killed and at least 1,700 wounded, according to Gaza’s Ministry of Health. At least 72,123 Palestinians have been killed since October 2023 while 171,805 people have been injured. At least 1,139 people were killed in the Hamas-led attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023.

HOLIDAYS to Dubai have been left in chaos following the Iran conflict, with thousands of flights cancelled after a number of drone attacks on the city in recent weeks.

So here is everything you need to know right now about travelling to the UAE city.

Is it safe to travel to Dubai right now?

Dubai remains on the no travel list, unless it is essential.

The UK Foreign Office states: “FCDO advises against all but essential travel to United Arab Emirates.

“Your travel insurance could be invalidated if you travel against advice from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO).”

While this isn’t outright ban against all travel, essential travel doesn’t usually mean holidays, but is instead things like work or essential family travel.

DUBITE-SIZE INFO

Discover whether you need a visa to travel to Dubai from the UK

TONY PARSONS

They may be thick tax dodgers but here’s key reason we must help Dubai expats

The UK government also warns: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption.  

“Stay away from areas around security or military facilities.”

The most recent incident in Dubai was a drone strike at the main Dubai International Airport on Saturday, which saw flights temporarily suspended, as well as a drone hitting 23 Marina Tower.

It isn’t clear when the UK Foreign Office will lift the current travel advice.

Are flights going to Dubai?

Airlines are starting to restart routes from Dubai.

Emirates said: “Following the partial re‑opening of regional airspace, Emirates is operating a reduced flight schedule.

“Customers transiting in Dubai will only be accepted for travel if their connecting flight is operating.

“Please do not go to the airport unless you hold a confirmed booking for these flights.”

Virgin Atlantic briefly restarted flights from both Dubai to the UK.

However, a recent 16-hour ‘flight to nowhere’ which was forced to return to London Heathrow has led to the airline scrapping flights until the end of the season (March 28).

British Airways is also unable to operate flights to Dubai, and only has limited flights from Oman to London Heathrow.

Anyone flying with British Airways to Dubai up to March 15 can request a full refund, or change the flight date for free up to March 29.

Other areas in the Middle East such as Doha and Abu Dhabi are still being affected.

Qatar Airways is operating one flight a day to and from London Heathrow to Doha but warns that “scheduled flight operations remain temporarily suspended due to the closure of Qatari airspace”.

Etihad is operating limited flights to London Heathrow and Manchester from Abu Dhabi, but also warns that “all other scheduled commercial services to and from Abu Dhabi remain suspended.”

What if I have a holiday to Dubai booked?

Most tour operators will allow Brits to cancel their holidays to Dubai for a full refund, or offer an alternative option, due to it being on the ‘only essential travel” list.

While this is not mandatory, many are cancelling holidays nonetheless.

Loveholidays is cancelling all holidays up to March 15 either to Dubai or ones that are travelling via Dubai.

They explained:”We’ve made the decision to cancel all holidays departing up to and including 15 March 2026 to countries currently on the FCDO ‘all but essential travel’ list

“This includes holidays with a connecting flight via one of these countries.

“Our team has begun processing full refunds for affected bookings in departure date order and will contact you directly with further information.”

Refunds will be processed in 3-5 working days.

They are also allowing anyone with Emirates flights up to March 31 to cancel their holidays for a full refund, while anyone flying to Dubai with Virgin Atlantic up until March 31 will have their holidays cancelled.

They are not selling any holidays to Dubai up until May, although June holidays remain unaffected.

TUI‘s latest Dubai update was on Friday, saying: “If you are due to travel to the UAE, or are scheduled to transit through, within the next seven days, our pre-travel team will contact you ahead of your departure date to discuss your options.”

On the Beach has cancelled all holidays to the UAE until tomorrow with full refunds although this is likely to be extended.

The Sun’s Head of Travel has answered all your other holiday questions.

SEOUL, March 9 (UPI) — The United States and South Korea began their annual Freedom Shield joint military exercise on Monday, as speculation swirled that Washington may be shifting some military assets from the Korean Peninsula to the Middle East amid its widening conflict with Iran.

About 18,000 South Korean troops will participate in the exercise, which runs through March 19 and includes command-post simulations and field training drills. U.S. Forces Korea has not disclosed the number of American personnel involved.

The drills come as local media reports have raised questions about whether U.S. military equipment stationed in South Korea could be redeployed to support operations in the Middle East.

South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency reported Sunday that U.S. C-5 and C-17 transport aircraft landed at Osan Air Base in Pyeongtaek, south of Seoul, late last month before departing between Wednesday and Saturday.

The aircraft movements followed reports that U.S. Forces Korea relocated some Patriot missile defense systems to Osan from other American bases in the country.

Two Patriot batteries deployed with USFK were temporarily rotated to the Middle East in June last year during strikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, before returning to South Korea in October.

The Patriot system detects, tracks and intercepts drones, cruise missiles and short-range or tactical ballistic missiles at low- to mid-range altitudes. It forms a key component of South Korea’s layered missile defense network designed to counter threats from North Korea.

U.S. Forces Korea said last week it could not comment on the relocation or movement of its assets due to operational security.

South Korea’s Defense Ministry also declined to address the reports directly during a briefing Monday.

“There is constant communication between the U.S. military and our side,” ministry spokeswoman Jeong Bit-na told reporters. “We are always communicating closely to ensure that there are no security concerns or gaps.”

She added that the Freedom Shield exercise was proceeding as planned.

“The South Korea-U.S. joint exercise is being implemented normally regardless of the situation in the Middle East, and we are thoroughly implementing it as agreed and planned,” Jeong said.

The drills come as the administration of South Korean President Lee Jae Myung seeks to stabilize relations with Pyongyang, which routinely condemns the allies’ joint exercises as rehearsals for invasion.

The number of field training exercises during this year’s Freedom Shield has been reduced to 22, down from 51 conducted during the previous iteration of the drills under the conservative government of impeached former President Yoon Suk Yeol.

North Korea recently concluded a major congress of the ruling Workers’ Party, where leader Kim Jong Un pledged to expand the country’s nuclear arsenal and improve its delivery systems and operational capabilities.

At the same time, Kim appeared to leave the door open to future negotiations with the United States, saying there was “no reason” the two sides could not improve relations if Washington abandons what he described as its hostile policy.

Kim has previously said he has “fond memories” of U.S. President Donald Trump, whom he met three times during Trump’s first term. South Korean officials have pointed to Trump’s planned visit to China later this month as a possible opportunity to revive diplomacy with Pyongyang.

Kim has continued to take a hostile tone toward Seoul, however, recently describing South Korea as “the most hostile entity.”

Thousands of civilians have fled an opposition stronghold in eastern South Sudan after the army ordered evacuations to clear the way for a military offensive, the latest sign that the country’s fragile peace is unravelling, as fears of a return to all-out civil war haunt the world’s youngest nation.

The town of Akobo, near the Ethiopian border, was almost completely emptied by Sunday after the South Sudan People’s Defense Forces issued an ultimatum on Friday demanding that civilians, aid workers and United Nations peacekeepers leave ahead of a planned assault.

“The town is now almost empty,” said Nhial Lew, a local humanitarian official. “Women, children and the elderly have left and crossed into Ethiopia.” By Sunday evening, he could hear the conflict closing in. “We are hearing the sound of machine guns approaching,” he told the Associated Press news agency.

The army’s deadline was set to expire Monday afternoon.

The order extends a government counteroffensive, launched in January and dubbed Operation Enduring Peace, that has already displaced more than 280,000 people across Jonglei state since December, when opposition forces began seizing government positions.

The UN’s Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan warned of a possible “return to full-scale war” if the country’s leadership didn’t take the challenges it faces more seriously.

“Preventing further mass atrocity crimes, institutional collapse, and the destruction of South Sudan’s fragile transition requires urgent coordinated national, regional and international re-engagement,” the report said.

Akobo, which had been considered a relatively safe haven and sheltered more than 82,000 displaced people, is one of the last remaining strongholds of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-in-Opposition, or SPLM-IO, the armed movement loyal to South Sudan’s detained former vice president, Riek Machar.

Two UN flights evacuated most humanitarian staff on Sunday, though the International Committee of the Red Cross had not yet pulled its personnel from a surgical unit it runs at the local hospital, where wounded patients were still being treated.

“We are worried for our patients,” said Dual Diew, the county health director. “We tried to make a plan to take them to a safer location, but we don’t have enough fuel.”

The offensive comes amid a wider breakdown of the 2018 peace agreement that ended a civil war between forces loyal to President Salva Kiir and those backing Machar, a conflict that killed an estimated 400,000 people and forced millions from their homes.

Machar has been under house arrest in the capital, Juba, since March 2025, facing charges of treason and murder that his supporters say are politically motivated.

His detention coincided with a sharp rise in armed opposition activity, and a UN inquiry has since found that South Sudan’s leaders have been “systematically dismantling” the accord.

Conflicts have taken place across the country among groups associated with the two factions, said Jan Pospisil, a South Sudan researcher who spoke to Al Jazeera.

Dozens killed in the north

On Sunday, at least 169 people were killed, among them 90 civilians, including women and children, when armed men stormed a village in Abiemnom county in the country’s north.

The local administrator blamed the attack on elements of the White Army, a militia historically allied to Machar, alongside SPLM-IO-affiliated forces. The group denied any involvement. More than 1,000 people sought shelter at a UN base in the area.

“Such violence places civilians at grave risk and must stop immediately,” said Anita Kiki Gbeho of the UN mission in South Sudan.

Aid organisations operating in the conflict zone have also been targeted, with Doctors Without Borders, known by its French initials, MSF, saying on Monday that 26 of its staff remain unaccounted for, a month after a government air strike destroyed its hospital in the town of Lankien and a separate facility in Pieri was looted.

Staff who had been reached described “destruction, violence and extreme hardships”. It was the 10th attack on an MSF facility in 12 months.

“Medical workers must never be targets,” said Yashovardhan, the charity’s head of mission in South Sudan, who uses only one name.

Pospisil said the crisis had exposed the fragility of Kiir’s hold on power.

“The state is literally falling apart,” Pospisil said, referring to the convergence of conflict in the country and the elderly state of the president, whose condition has raised questions.

Pospisil added that the outcome of Machar’s ongoing trial would likely shape what comes next.

Tehran, Iran – Senior religious leaders have signalled that Iran’s government may soon announce a new leader as hardliners and sidelined reformists deliberate their futures amid the quickly escalating United States-Israeli war on Iran.

Mohammad Mehdi Mirbagheri – a top figure in the 88-member Assembly of Experts, which will appoint the new supreme leader after Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in Tehran on February 28 – said the choice had to be made with care so it would be indisputable internally.

“An almost decisive opinion has been reached. A significant majority has been formed, but at the same time, some obstacles have to be removed, which we hope will happen soon,” the head of the Qom Academy of Islamic Sciences said in a video released on Sunday by the Fars news agency, which is affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The top ultraconservative Muslim leader representing the holy Shia city of Mashhad in the Assembly of Experts, Ahmad Alamolhoda, said on Sunday that the leader has been chosen and the secretariat of the Assembly of Experts must soon announce the result.

Abbas Kaabi, a senior member of the Guardian Council, said on Friday that the powerful 12-member constitutional body was not given any names to consider for the next supreme leader by Khamenei during his lifetime, only attributes.

“He said: Among all attributes, the financial piety of the supreme leader is of primary importance because, given the important powers and responsibilities of leadership, if financial deviation occurs, it will spread to all other matters,” Kaabi was quoted as saying by the IRGC-affiliated Mehr news agency.

The religious leader also quoted Khamenei as pointing to “a rooted belief in the fundamentals of the [1979] Islamic revolution, having insight and knowledge of enemies and sedition, and especially being anti-arrogance and having faith and resistance in confronting America and the Zionist regime” as being among other top attributes for a future leader.

Mojtaba Khamenei, the second son of the late supreme leader, is believed to be a frontrunner for the position as he enjoys wide backing from powerful commanders in the IRGC who have been launching missiles and drones across the region over the past week.

US President Donald Trump, who has said he wants to play a role in determining the future leadership of Iran, has objected to the younger Khamenei’s ascension.

The Israeli army has said it will try to assassinate Iran’s remaining leaders and has bombed their offices and gathering spots in Tehran, Qom and other cities. Israel and the US have repeatedly expressed their interest in changing the government of Iran.

Israeli media reported on Saturday that Asghar Hejazi, a senior religious leader who was Khamenei’s acting chief of staff, was killed in a series of overnight air strikes targeting an underground compound in downtown Tehran used by the supreme leader and other officials. Iran has not commented.

Reformists weigh in as Pezeshkian creates row

President Masoud Pezeshkian came under fire after he released a video from an undisclosed location on Saturday and apologised to regional neighbours who have been fighting off Iranian missiles and drones.

The armed forces leading the military attacks, including the Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters of the IRGC and interim leadership council member and chief justice of the Supreme Court, Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, quickly released statements to emphasise that the strikes would continue, with Iran as well as the US and Israel, saying they are ready for months of war if necessary.

The row prompted more hardliners, including religious leaders, lawmakers and IRGC-affiliated media, to call on the Assembly of Experts to move quickly to announce the next supreme leader. Ayatollah Hossein Nouri-Hamedani said the process should be expedited to “disappoint the enemy and preserve the unity and solidarity of the nation”.

The disagreement has broken out after reformist factions within the establishment have been pushed aside by hardliners in recent years while the conservatives also have lost favour among an increasingly disillusioned public.

Mohammad Khatami, a reformist religious leader who was president from 1997 to 2005, released a statement to mourn Khamenei last week but also signalled that he sees a future for a reformed Islamic Republic.

The establishment is in need of “reforming approaches and practices objected to by the people”, he said without naming any examples.

“Our path is the path of freedom, independence, people-centrism and fair living, and that is a difficult path to tread and requires wisdom and tolerance,” he said.

Khatami and the Reformist Front of Iran also released general calls for reform after thousands of people were killed during nationwide protests in January.

The Iranian government said “terrorists” backed by the US and Israel were responsible for the killings, but the United Nations and international humanitarian organisations blamed state forces for a lethal crackdown against peaceful protesters.

The leaders of the Reformist Front were arrested or summoned by Iranian intelligence and judicial authorities last month for what the establishment called an attempt to “disrupt the country’s political and social order” and working “for the benefit” of Israel and the US during the antigovernment protests.

Most have since been released on bail, but some remain incarcerated as do many of the tens of thousands of people believed to have been arrested during and in the aftermath of the protests.

Hassan Rouhani, the moderate religious leader who was president from 2013 to 2021 and who rejected being part of a reported power grab last month, has remained publicly silent during the deliberations over the next supreme leader.

Former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, another influential figure, survived an assassination attempt last week, according to Iranian media.

Fuel reserves and oil refineries in Tehran were bombed by the Israeli military overnight into Sunday, leaving thick plumes of smoke enveloping the sprawling city of 10 million people during the day as oil residue fell as part of a heavy rain.

Khan Younis, Gaza Strip – On the blue, wavy surface off the Khan Younis seaport, two Palestinian fishermen paddled their small, battered boat nearly 200 metres (656 feet) into the sea. On the shore, Dawood Sehwail, a 72-year-old Palestinian fisherman, stood inspecting a torn net, his eyes fixed on the waves as if reading a language only he understands.

Displaced from Rafah, further to the south, in May 2024 as a result of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Sehwail now comes daily to the water’s edge, not just to fish, but to have an escape, to study the sea, and to remember.

“The feeling never gets old,” he said, with a sparkle in his eye that defies his age. “You come to see what wonders the sea might still have for you.”

“We were always shackled [by Israel],” Sehwail said quietly. “But one period was less harsh than another.”

Even before October 2023, when Israel started its genocidal war on Gaza, the Palestinian enclave’s fishermen operated under heavy restrictions imposed by Israel. Fishing zones were repeatedly reduced. Maritime boundaries outlined in agreements since the 1993 Oslo Accords were rarely implemented on the water. The distances fishermen were permitted to travel in the sea constantly shifted, often shrinking without warning.

“After every Israeli aggression, the consequences fell on us,” Sehwail explained. “We were supposed to [be allowed to] go further into the sea, but the occupation kept pushing us back.”

Controlling the sea

For a coastal territory, the sea should have been a source of wealth, stability, and fresh food. Instead, under Israel’s blockade that controls Gaza’s land, air, and sea since 2007, it has become another mechanism of control and persecution.

Sehwail once owned a stone distribution business, but was forced to shut it down after the Israeli blockade on Gaza tightened in 2007. He eventually turned to fishing, a skill he had learned as a child, and which he once thought he had abandoned.

“Our profession is day by day,” he said. “It used to be that, if you work, and are lucky, you can sell your catch and feed your family. If you’re very lucky, you save a little for the future of your children.”

But within a few days of Israel’s genocidal war, everything changed. Gaza’s seaport was destroyed by Israeli air strikes. Israel also bombed fishing installations from north to south. Boats were burned or sunk. The sector collapsed almost instantly.

“The Rafah fishermen had six fishing trawlers,” Sehwail recalled. “All of them were bombed and burned. I tried to keep my own small boat and nets for as long as I could, but they were destroyed by the occupation just days before we were displaced in May 2024.”

At Khan Younis port, the aftermath is no different. The harbour has turned into a crowded displacement site. Broken or burned boats are no longer vessels but tent supports, tied with ropes to hold fragile shelters in place.

A rusted metal skeleton of a trawler protrudes from the sand where displaced children now play around. But even in ruin, fishermen improvise.

“What we do now is try not to die,” Sehwail said. “We borrow tools. Some even turn refrigerator parts into floating boards. We have no motors, only paddles. We use whatever is left.”

Originally from the coastal village of Jourat Asqalan, depopulated of its Palestinian residents during the 1948 Nakba and the formation of Israel, Sehwail’s bond with the sea runs generations deep. “The connection is powerful,” he said. “My home in Rafah was also near the beach. Even in displacement, the sea keeps me company. But now my children and their families are scattered across displacement camps.”

No safety

Material destruction has been only part of the toll for Gaza’s fishermen. According to the Gaza Fishermen’s Syndicate, at least 238 fishermen have been killed by Israel since October 2023, whether at sea or on land, among more than 72,000 Palestinians.

The sector once consisted of more than 5,000 fishermen providing for more than 50,000 family members, who depended on fishing as a primary source of income. And Israeli violations have continued since the “ceasefire” began in October, with more than 20 fishermen reported to have been killed or detained.

“The sea is practically closed,” said Zakaria Baker, the head of Gaza’s Fishermen Syndicate, in a recent interview with Al Jazeera.

Baker explained that some fishermen do not risk venturing more than 800 metres (2,625 feet) offshore in small boats, as there is still uncertainty over how far they can go into the sea.

Standing on the shore, Sehwail pointed toward an Israeli naval boat.

“They are always there,” he said. “There is no official clearance for us. We enter at our own risk. The farthest we can go is about 800 metres, and even that depends on their mood.”

He described sudden chases by the Israeli navy: boats shot at or sunk, fishermen detained.

“They can see clearly what we are doing,” he said. “But it depends on the soldier’s mood whether he lets you fish or decides to shoot you dead.”

“Israel ‘executed’ fishing in Gaza,” Sehwail said, repeating the phrase in pain. “What we do now is not real fishing. It’s risking your life for the hope of bringing back one or two fish to your tent.”

Critical source of food

Before the genocide, Gaza’s fisheries sector played a vital role in food security and poverty alleviation. According to the United Nations, by the end of 2024, the sector was operating at less than 7.3 percent of its pre-October 2023 production capacity. The UN also estimated that 72 percent of Gaza’s fishing fleet had been damaged or destroyed.

The collapse has severely affected food availability, income generation, and community resilience. The reduction of fishing access to less than a nautical mile (1.85km) has drastically limited both quantity and species variety.

“The further west we used to go, the more variety [of fish] we could find,” Sehwail explained. “But now in shallow waters, you find only small quantities and mostly juvenile sardines that should be left to grow. But people needed whatever they could find.”

Months of Israeli starvation have turned fresh protein into a rarity; thus, fish is a special luxury.

Even now, with the relative relief brought by the “ceasefire”, fish seen in Gaza’s markets are largely frozen imports, often more expensive than fresh local fish was before the genocide. Catastrophic economic collapse means many families cannot afford them.

Baker emphasised that rehabilitation and recovery require more than ceasefire declarations. “No materials or compensation have been allowed in so far,” he said, “Israeli restrictions continue to block the entry of equipment. Fishermen need stable and safe conditions to return to work without fear of Israeli bullets.”

“The fishermen are simple, poor people,” Sehwail said. “We only want to live with dignity and provide for our families. Across Gaza from north to south, we’re all in need of support to finally fish as we actually deserve.”

Israel has claimed responsibility for an assassination attempt, which killed at least four people, at a busy Beirut hotel. The Israeli military claims it targeted members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) at the Ramada Plaza. Al Jazeera’s Heidi Pett spoke to hotel guests who experienced the blast.

Flames engulfed Kuwait’s Public Institution for Social Security high-rise headquarters after it was hit by a suspected drone amid a wave of Iranian aerial strikes on the country.

Footage captured a massive fire raging at the Shehran oil depot on the outskirts of northern Tehran following an Israeli attack late Saturday night. The Israeli military claimed responsibility for striking fuel storage and related sites it alleges are affiliated with the Iranian armed forces.

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE report more attacks despite assurance from Iran’s president that the strikes will stop.

United States President Donald Trump has posted on social media that he does not need the United Kingdom to deploy aircraft carriers to the Middle East, amid the ongoing war with Iran.

Saturday’s post on Truth Social follows a statement from the UK’s Ministry of Defence that one of its two flagship aircraft carriers, the HMS Prince of Wales, has been placed on “high readiness”.

“The United Kingdom, our once Great Ally, maybe the Greatest of them all, is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East,” Trump wrote.

“That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember. We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!”

The post, with its reference to the UK as a “once great ally”, signals a deepening rift between the two countries that has emerged since Trump returned to office last year.

The divide appears to have deepened over the past week, as the US and Israel continue to hammer Iran as part of a war they launched on February 28.

The conflict has sparked fears across the Middle East, as retaliatory strikes from Tehran target US allies across the region.

Already, an estimated 1,332 people have been killed in Iran, and the US has confirmed the deaths of six of its service members. More deaths have been reported in countries like Lebanon, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.

The UK government has increased its involvement in the war on Iran, widely considered illegal under international law.

The UK Defence Ministry, for instance, said on Saturday that the government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer had allowed the US to use its military bases for what it termed “limited defensive purposes”.

The bases include RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and the Diego Garcia site in the Chagos Islands, located in the Indian Ocean. Initially, there had been reports that Starmer had blocked the US use of the bases.

In the immediate aftermath of the initial US-Israeli strike, Starmer appeared to blanche at the prospect of joining the war.

He and the leaders of France and Germany issued a joint statement, underscoring that any actions they might take would be defensive in nature.

“We will take steps to defend our interests and those of our allies in the region, potentially through enabling necessary and proportionate defensive action to destroy Iran’s capability to fire missiles and drones at their source,” the joint statement said.

“We have agreed to work together with the US and allies in the region on this matter.”

But Starmer has had to push back on domestic criticism both for and against joining the war.

On Monday, he told the UK Parliament, “We are not joining the US and Israeli offensive strikes”, citing the need to protect “Britain’s national interest” and “British lives”.

The war in Iran remains largely unpopular in the UK. The polling firm Survation conducted a survey over the last week of 1,045 British adults, in which 43 percent of respondents called the war not justifiable.

When asked if they supported Starmer’s initial decision not to allow the US to use UK bases, 56 percent of respondents approved. Only 27 percent said it was the wrong choice.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside the US Embassy in London on Saturday to call for an end to the ballooning conflict.

The US president, meanwhile, has upped his criticism of Starmer over the past week, further fraying relations with the UK government.

On March 3, for instance, Trump held an Oval Office meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, in which he said repeatedly he was “not happy with the UK”.

Of Starmer, Trump said, “This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with.”

Trump has long admired Churchill, and last year installed a bust of the late UK wartime leader in the Oval Office, just as he had during his first term.

By contrast, Trump has issued a flood of criticism against Starmer, particularly for his 2024 decision to transfer control of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

The transfer came after the International Court of Justice found the UK acted unlawfully in 1965 by separating the islands from Mauritius to create a separate colony.

The deal with Mauritius allows the US and the UK to maintain a military base on Diego Garcia, part of the archipelago.

However, Trump has repeatedly slammed the transfer, writing on social media that “giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY”.

Tensions between the US and UK also rose in January after Trump told Fox News that NATO allies had “stayed a little off the front lines” during the US war in Afghanistan.

Starmer had responded that he found Trump’s comments “to be insulting and frankly appalling”.

The Trump administration has signalled it is pivoting away from its traditional European allies in favour of more politically aligned countries.

At a summit on Saturday with right-wing Latin American leaders, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared to praise the attendees while casting shade on other allies.

“At a time when we have learned that, oftentimes, an ally, when you need them, maybe may not be there for you, these are countries that have been there for us,” Rubio told the summit.