conflict

F1’s bosses are caught in the middle of this debate, recognising the superficial appeal of the back-and-forth racing, but concerned about what the new cars are doing to the sport they grew up loving because they were attracted by its essence as the ultimate test of driver and machine.

Andrea Stella, team principal of world champions McLaren, said: “In qualifying, there’s some aspects of driving that could be counterintuitive.

“Like, occasionally there are comments from our drivers that once they make a mistake, actually save some energy, you go faster overall in a sector, because the energy you saved with the delay on the throttle because you had a problem is going to reward you at the end of the straight.”

Mercedes F1 team principal Toto Wolff said: “From an entertainment perspective, I believe that what we’ve seen today between Ferrari and McLaren was good racing. Many overtakes.

“We were all part of Formula 1 where there was no overtake, literally. Sometimes we’re too nostalgic about the good old years.

“But I think the product is good in itself. We saw quite some racing in the midfield also. And that is, I think, the positive.

“Now, from a driver’s standpoint, when it comes to the qualifying lap, that is different. Clearly, lift and coast in the qualifying, I’m sure for someone like Max, who is a full-attack guy, it’s difficult to cope and digest.

“Qualifying flat-out would be nice. But when you look at the fans and the excitement that is there, live, the cheering when there’s overtakes and also on social media, the younger fans, the vast majority, through all the demographics, like the sport at the moment.

“So, yes, we can always look at how we’re improving it. But at the moment, all the indicators and all the data say people love it. And I spoke with Stefano (Domenicali, the F1 president). He says that, too.”

The cancellation of the Bahrain and Saudi Arabia Grands Prix gives the sport a little more breathing space to consider all this.

There is a meeting of team bosses with F1 and governing body the FIA this week, and another race in Japan in two weeks’ time before a five-week break before the next Grand Prix in Miami at the beginning of May.

A number of ideas to reduce the degree to which the purity of the driving experience has been polluted are already in the mix, such as removing a lower limit for energy recovery currently in force in a certain phase of the straights. And others may yet emerge.

Stella says: “Do we want to be faithful to the DNA of racing in a traditional sense? Do we accept that this counterintuitive situation belongs to the business or not? This is a high-level philosophical question.”

The fixture, part of the Qatar Football Festival, has been cancelled amid the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran.

The ‘Finalissima’ match between Spain ‌and Argentina that was scheduled to be held in Qatar later this month has ⁠been cancelled due ⁠to the conflict in the Middle East, UEFA said in a statement.

“It is a source of great disappointment to UEFA and the organisers that circumstances and timing have denied the teams of the chance to compete for this prestigious prize in Qatar,” UEFA said in a statement on Sunday.

The US-Israeli strikes on Iran have affected countries throughout the Gulf, disrupting travel ⁠in some of the world’s busiest transit hubs and forcing several sporting events to be cancelled due to safety concerns.

The contest between European champions Spain and Copa America winners Argentina was ⁠scheduled for March 27 at Doha’s Lusail Stadium, where fans would have had the opportunity to watch Lionel Messi go head-to-head with Lamine Yamal.

UEFA said they held discussions with the organising authorities in Qatar and concluded that the match could not take place due to the “current political situation” in the ‌region.

The Spain vs Argentina game was part of the Qatar Football Festival, as promoted by local organisers.

The five-day festival also included Egypt vs Saudi Arabia and Qatar vs Serbia on March 26; Egypt vs Spain and Saudi Arabia vs Serbia on March 30 and Qatar vs Argentina on March 31.

Serbia will now play Spain away instead.

“Serbia will face the current European champions, Spain, on away turf on March 27, and four ⁠days later they will host the Saudi Arabian national team,” the ⁠Football Association of Serbia said in a statement.

UEFA said they explored other feasible alternatives to play the Finalissima but they proved to be ‘unacceptable’ to the Argentinian Football Association (AFA).

UEFA first offered to stage the match ⁠at the Santiago Bernabeu with a 50:50 split of supporters in the stadium.

A second option was to stage the Finalissima over two legs – ⁠at the Bernabeu on March 27 and the second leg ⁠in Buenos Aires during an international window before the next Euros and Copa America.

However, the AFA rejected both options. UEFA said Argentina made a counter offer to play the game after the World Cup but Spain had no available dates.

“Ultimately, ‌UEFA sought a commitment from Argentina that, if a neutral venue in Europe could be found, the game could go ahead on 27 March… or on the alternative date of 30 ‌March. ‌This proposal was also rejected,” UEFA added.

The 2022 edition of the Finalissima was held at Wembley Stadium in London where Argentina beat Italy 3-0.

WASHINGTON — After two weeks of war with Iran, the Trump administration is being forced to temper its expectations of a swift end to the conflict, with U.S. intelligence and defense officials expressing doubt it can achieve the overthrow of Iran’s government and the destruction of its nuclear program through military means.

It was an outcome forewarned by analysts at the State Department, the CIA and the Pentagon, who together alerted the administration to the pitfalls full-scale war with Iran would bring before President Trump decided to proceed, two U.S. officials told The Times, granted anonymity to speak candidly.

Certain military goals of Operation Epic Fury laid out at the start of the war are still seen as achievable at the Pentagon, with U.S. and Israeli strikes making steady progress degrading Iran’s ballistic missile infrastructure, its drone program and its navy.

But a prewar U.S. intelligence assessment, that an air assault was unlikely to topple the Islamic Republic, still holds, with the intelligence community now casting doubt the assault had any more political effect than to radicalize a government already devoted to the destruction of Israel and harming the United States.

A military procession in Tehran carries the casket of Ali Shamkhani, political advisor to Iran’s last Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was also killed in U.S.-Israeli attacks.

(Atta Kenare / AFP/Getty Images)

Concern has only grown that Iran’s new government will make the fateful strategic decision to build a bomb after the war, unless Trump decides to escalate the conflict with a perilous ground invasion. And the White House now contends with a new mission imperative, created by its decision to launch the war itself, of reopening the Strait of Hormuz to vital shipping traffic that carries 20% of the world’s daily oil and liquid natural gas supply.

The foreign policy strategy Trump publicly laid out as his playbook for the conflict — to come down hard on the government, decapitating its leadership, and hope the remnants would seek mercy — has not worked, with Tehran looking for new ways to expand the war and maximize pain for the U.S. administration.

Trump has minimized the conflict as an “excursion” that would end “very soon,” while also calling it a war, vowing to take the time he needs to “finish the job.” He says it will conclude whenever he decides to end it.

It remains possible that a declaration from Trump that the fighting is over results in a ceasefire, as it did in June of last year, when Trump demanded an end to 12 days of war between Iran and Israel. But the Iranians have a vote, too — and senior leadership in the Islamic Republic have made plain they plan to continue fighting this time whether Trump likes it or not.

On Friday, the Pentagon announced that an additional expeditionary unit of 2,500 Marines was being deployed to the region to support the effort.

“Starting wars is an easy matter,” Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, wrote on social media. “Ending them does not happen with a few tweets.

“We will not leave you until you admit your mistake and pay its price,” he added.

It is a sore lesson for a president whose decade in public life has been distinguished by an exceptional ability to warp reality to his liking.

“The White House has created a dilemma for America: If it declares victory and ends the war, it leaves in place a weakened Iranian government with the means and renewed motivation to pursue nuclear weapons,” said Reid Pauly, a professor of nuclear security and policy at Brown University.

“If it presses on with the war,” Pauly added, “it risks the kind of mission creep that may eventually find American boots on the ground.”

In a news release last week, the White House said that, “from the opening hours of this historic campaign, the objectives were clear: obliterate Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal and production capacity, annihilate its navy, sever its support for terrorist proxies, and ensure the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism will never acquire a nuclear weapon.”

Yet, at the start of the operation, Trump issued a promise to the people of Iran that, at the end of the U.S.-Israeli campaign, Iran’s military and paramilitary infrastructure would be so badly hobbled that a rare, generational opportunity would emerge for them to take their government back.

“To the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand,” Trump said. “Stay sheltered. Don’t leave your home. It’s very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere. When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations.”

Trump said in the days that followed he would need to have a say over the next ruler, after assassinating the country’s longtime supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But the Iranian system of clerics and militants defied the president, selecting in Khamenei’s son a man viewed as even more hostile to the West than his father was.

Israeli leadership, too, set out regime change as a goal of the war. Yet even their officials now say that a substantial leadership change in Tehran is an unlikely result.

Trump would go on to insist on the “unconditional surrender” from the Iranian government, a demand that he later said would be satisfied by the incapacitation of Iran’s military.

Repeating his conviction that the war will end soon, Trump told Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade in an interview Friday that he would order an end to the fighting “when I feel it. When I feel it in my bones.”

“The problem with the administration’s approach is that it has constantly shifted its goals. Some are achievable, such as degrading Iran’s conventional force. Others are not, such as picking the next leader of Iran,” said Ray Takeyh, a scholar on Iran at the Council on Foreign Relations.

“The mixed messages have led to confusion at home,” Takeyh added, “and lack of planning for oil shortages and getting the Americans out of the region shows that process and personnel can actually matter.”

Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the joint U.S.-Israeli campaign was always designed to unfold in three phases: degrading Iran’s ability to wage war, reducing Iran’s ability to repress democratic forces inside the country, and finally, encouraging the Iranian people to rise up.

“The president controls the strategy, but no president fully controls the endgame because the regime gets a vote,” Dubowitz said. “The endgame is not a scripted political transition directed from Washington. It is a regime under simultaneous military, economic, and internal pressure — to strip of its war-making and repression capabilities — and whether that produces succession, fracture, or collapse will ultimately be decided in Tehran.”

Whether the conflict will achieve the destruction of Iran’s nuclear program is an equally grave question in Washington, where officials are debating over a list of stark options on how to physically destroy, bury or retrieve the fissile material that Tehran could use to build a nuclear weapon — a threat seen as only more grave under the stewardship of an angry and vengeful government.

“The war was publicly justified, to the extent it was justified at all, in terms of destroying Iran’s nuclear program. Very few strikes have been directed against nuclear-related targets, however — almost certainly because those that survived last June’s attacks are invulnerable to air attack,” said James Acton, co‑director of the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“Unless the U.S. and Israel attempt high-risk special forces operations or a ground incursion,” he added, “Iran will end the war with its surviving nuclear infrastructure largely intact and greater incentives to build the bomb.”

Pauly agreed it is unrealistic to expect the United States and Israel can destroy Iran’s nuclear program through air power alone. The U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency believes Iran has roughly 440 kilograms — about 970 pounds — of 60% highly enriched uranium, possibly spread across multiple facilities.

“Securing this material will require either U.S. ground troops or, after some coercive bargain is reached, international inspectors,” Pauly said.

In an exchange with reporters last week at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had few details to offer on what U.S. options were to remove or eliminate an accessible uranium stockpile, enriched to near weapons grade, that had been buried in a U.S. operation last year intended on obliterating the nuclear threat.

Diplomacy, he suggested, might be required to secure the material.

“I will say we have a range of options, up to and including Iran deciding that they will give those up,” he told reporters, “which of course we would welcome.”

The Qatar GP, scheduled for April 10-12, has been rescheduled for November 8 amid the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran.

The Qatar Grand ⁠Prix ⁠that was scheduled to be held next month has ⁠been postponed due to the ongoing conflict ⁠in the Middle East, the sport’s governing body announced.

“MotoGP confirms that the Qatar Grand Prix, originally ⁠scheduled for April, has been ⁠postponed to November ⁠8 due to the ongoing geopolitical situation in the Middle East,” ‌MotoGP said on Sunday.

The Lusail International Circuit was set ‌to host the fourth round of the 2026 championship from April 10-12 but it has now been rescheduled for ⁠November 8, organisers said ⁠in a statement.

“Following extensive ⁠scenario planning and calendar analysis, the ⁠revised date has been chosen to ensure minimal disruption to the wider MotoGP schedule.”

The Portuguese Grand Prix will now take place on November ⁠22 and the season finale in Valencia will move to November 29, ⁠organisers added.

Aprilia’s Marco Bezzecchi leads the ⁠championship after the first round in Thailand. The next two races will be held in Brazil (March 20-22) and the United States (March 27-29).

Earlier on Sunday, Formula One and its governing body, FIA, said the Grands Prix races in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia will not happen in April due to safety concerns related to the Iran war.

Both countries have been hit during Iran’s retaliatory attacks after the United States and Israel launched a wave of strikes on Iran.

The announcement was made in Shanghai ahead of the Chinese Grand Prix.

“Due to the ongoing situation in the Middle East region, the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Grands Prix will not take place in April,” F1 said. “While several alternatives were considered, it was ultimately decided that no substitutions will be made in April.”

F1 was due to race in Bahrain on April 12 and in the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah on April 19.

“While this was a difficult decision to take, it is unfortunately the right one at this stage considering the current situation in the Middle East,” said Stefano Domenicali, president and CEO of F1.

“The FIA will always place the safety and well being of our community and colleagues first. After careful consideration, we have taken this decision with that responsibility firmly in mind,” FIA’s president, Mohammed Ben Sulayem, said.

The FIA did not explicitly rule out rescheduling the races and, along with F1, did not use the words “cancel” or “postpone” in announcing that the series would not be in Bahrain or Saudi Arabia next month.

Iran has held a funeral for the country’s most influential defence figure, Ali Shamkhani, who was killed in Israeli-US strikes on February 28. Shamkhani was a key figure in Iran nuclear talks, chief of the country’s Defence Council and advisor to the late Supreme Leader. He lost a leg in an Israeli assassination attempt last June.

Islamabad hits Kandahar facility after Taliban drones strike civilian areas and military sites as conflict intensifies.

Pakistan has carried out strikes on an Afghan military facility in Kandahar after Taliban drones targeted civilian areas and military installations across the country.

The strikes on Saturday came after Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari condemned the overnight drone attacks, warning Kabul it had “crossed a red line by attempting to target our civilians”.

Pakistan’s military said the drones, described as locally produced and rudimentary, were intercepted before reaching their targets, though falling debris wounded two children in Quetta and civilians in Kohat and Rawalpindi.

A security source told the AFP news agency that airspace around the capital, Islamabad, had been temporarily closed when the drones were detected.

Islamabad said the Kandahar facility had been used both to launch the drone attacks and as a base for cross-border rebel activity.

The exchange marks the sharpest single escalation yet in a conflict that has been building since late February, when Pakistan launched military operations against what it said were Pakistan Taliban fighters sheltering on Afghan soil.

Islamabad also accuses Kabul of harbouring fighters from the ISIL (ISIS) group’s Khorasan province affiliate.

The Taliban government has denied both charges.

The drone attacks followed Pakistani strikes on Kabul and eastern border provinces in Afghanistan overnight on Thursday into Friday. The Pakistani attacks killed four people in the capital, women and children among them, and two more in the east.

In the Pul-e-Charkhi neighbourhood of Kabul, one resident described being buried under rubble after his home was hit, saying he lay there believing it was his “last breath” before neighbours pulled him free.

A local representative told AFP that those killed were “ordinary people, poor people” with no involvement in the conflict.

Pakistani aircraft also struck a fuel depot belonging to the private airline Kam Air near Kandahar airport, which an airport official said supplied aid organisations, including the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

The official added that there were “no military installations” at the site.

Afghanistan’s Ministry of Defence claimed that its forces had captured a Pakistani border post and killed 14 soldiers.

Islamabad dismissed the assertion as baseless, with the prime minister’s spokesman accusing the Taliban of “weaving fantasies” rather than dismantling rebel networks on Afghan territory.

The UN mission in Afghanistan says at least 75 civilians have been killed and 193 injured since hostilities intensified on February 26, a toll that includes 24 children.

According to the UN refugee agency, about 115,000 people have been forced from their homes.

The crisis is unfolding as the wider region remains engulfed by the US-Israeli war with Iran, which began just two days after the Pakistan-Afghanistan clashes escalated.

Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi has urged both sides to pursue dialogue, warning that further force would only deepen the crisis, though his appeal came as Pakistani jets were already in the air over Kandahar.

Iranian media report the deaths in central Iran as Tehran launches new missile salvoes at Israeli targets.

A missile strike on an industrial area of the central Iranian city of Isfahan has killed at least 15 people, with workers having been inside a factory at the time of the attack, Iranian media reports.

The strike hit a factory producing heating and cooling equipment on Saturday, a working day in Iran, according to the semi-official Fars news agency, which attributed the attack to US and Israeli forces.

It came on the 15th day of a conflict that Iran’s Ministry of Health says has now killed at least 1,444 people and wounded more than 18,500 since the US-Israeli attacks began on February 28.

Cities across Iran have been repeatedly targeted following the onset of hostilities.

On March 8, shelling damaged Russia’s consulate in Isfahan, injuring staff, with Moscow calling the strike a “blatant violation” of international conventions.

Iran’s Ministry of Culture said on Saturday that 56 museums and historic sites had been damaged, including Naqsh-e Jahan Square, a 17th-century centrepiece of Isfahan, and the UNESCO-listed Golestan Palace in Tehran.

UNESCO said it was “deeply concerned,” noting that four of Iran’s 29 World Heritage Sites had been affected.

Separately on Saturday, Iran’s army confirmed that Brigadier General Abdullah Jalali-Nasab had been killed in an Israeli attack, saying he was “martyred while defending the country”.

Earlier, US forces also struck Kharg Island, which handles roughly 90 percent of Iran’s crude exports, though a regional official said operations were continuing normally, and there were no casualties.

US President Donald Trump had previously threatened to target the island’s oil infrastructure if Tehran continued to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz.

Any prospect of negotiations appears remote. The Trump administration has rebuffed regional efforts to broker a ceasefire, with a senior White House official telling the Reuters news agency the president is focused on pressing ahead.

“He’s not interested in that right now, and we’re going to continue with the mission unabated,” the official said.

Iran has equally ruled out talks while the attacks continue, Reuters reported, citing an anonymous Iranian official.

Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi struck a defiant tone on Saturday, saying the US security framework in the region had “proven to be full of holes” and calling on neighbours to “expel foreign aggressors”.

Israeli Minister of Defence Israel Katz said the war was entering a “decisive phase”, which would “continue as long as necessary”.

Iran launched new missile salvoes at Israel on Saturday, with explosions heard over Jerusalem, according to reporters from the AFP news agency.

Six waves of missiles, some carrying cluster bomb warheads, struck wide areas of the country, the Israeli army said. In Eilat, a cluster munition impact injured three people, including a 12-year-old boy, according to The Times of Israel.

Brits heading to Greece have been urged to check the latest travel advice as tensions linked to the Iran conflict raise wider security concerns across the region

Brits planning a Mediterranean getaway are being urged to check official travel guidance before heading abroad. Experts say no trip can ever be guaranteed completely safe amid growing tensions linked to the Iran conflict.

The latest reminder comes from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, which publishes travel advice for British holidaymakers. Its guidance for Greece stresses that travellers should read all advice carefully before departure.

On the UK Government travel advice website, officials warn: “No travel can be guaranteed safe.” It urges visitors to research destinations carefully and make sure they have comprehensive travel insurance before travelling.

The guidance also highlights passport rules that travellers must meet before entering the country. Greece follows Schengen Area rules, meaning passports must have been issued within the last 10 years and remain valid for at least three months after leaving the region.

British tourists can visit Greece without a visa for short trips. According to the government, travellers can stay in the Schengen area for up to 90 days within any 180-day period for tourism, family visits or business meetings.

However, new border procedures are also on the horizon for travellers heading to Europe. The European Union is introducing its Entry/Exit System, which will require visitors to register biometric details such as fingerprints or a photo when entering the bloc.

The system is expected to become fully operational from April 10. Officials warn the process could add several minutes to border checks for each passenger.

It comes as tensions continue to grow in the Middle East following the ongoing conflict involving Iran. The crisis has raised wider regional security concerns across parts of the eastern Mediterranean.

Neighbouring Cyprus, which lies roughly 800km from mainland Greece and around 300km from parts of the Middle East, has already been monitoring the situation closely. The island has previously served as an evacuation hub for foreign nationals during regional crises.

According to reports cited by international media and the United Nations, the latest escalation has fuelled fears of broader instability across the region. Military exchanges between Iran and its rivals have already heightened security alerts across several neighbouring countries.

The UK has also stepped up its military presence in the region. The HMS Dragon has been deployed to Cyprus as a precautionary measure. The Royal Navy says vessels may be deployed to support British nationals and regional security as required.

Despite the geopolitical tensions, Greece remains one of Europe’s most popular holiday destinations. Data from the Greek National Tourism Organisation shows the country welcomed more than 36 million international visitors in 2024.

Officials say the key message for travellers is to stay informed. Checking the latest government advice and ensuring documents meet entry requirements can help avoid problems when travelling abroad.

Mukalla, Yemen – A reported decision to impose thousands of dollars in fees on shipping headed for Yemen has experts worried that the price of imported goods and food will increase in the war-torn country, as it starts to feel the economic impact of the United States and Israel’s conflict with Iran.

Local traders and officials have said that international shipping companies informed importers earlier this month of the imposition of new fees of about $3,000 on each container bound for Yemen, described as “war risk” fees. The surprise move prompted government officials to scramble to assess and address its potential repercussions.

Because Yemen imports nearly 90 percent of its food and other essential commodities, economists and humanitarian organisations warn that the rise in shipping and insurance costs could quickly translate into higher prices for fuel, food and other goods, further worsening an already dire humanitarian situation.

Mohsen al-Amri, transport minister in Yemen’s internationally-recognised government based in the southern city of Aden, said he had instructed that the fees not be paid by ships already docked at Yemeni ports or those bound for the country, insisting that the ports remain safe.

“Our ports are far from the areas of geopolitical tension in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, making the imposition of ‘risk’ fees on shipments to these relatively safe areas unjustified from both operational and security perspectives,” he said in a social media post last week.

Al Jazeera has reached out to shipping companies to confirm details of the fee, but has yet to receive responses.

For more than a decade, Yemen has been gripped by a bloody war between the Saudi-backed government, based in Aden, and the Iran-aligned Houthi movement, which controls the capital, Sanaa. The conflict has killed and wounded thousands of people and displaced millions, creating what the United Nations once described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. Hostilities have significantly declined since April 2022, when the warring parties agreed to a temporary United Nations-brokered truce.

‘High-risk’

Abdulrab al-Khulaqui, deputy chairman of the Yemen Gulf of Aden Ports Corporation, said Yemeni ports have long been classified as high-risk, prompting shipping companies to impose war-risk surcharges. These can reach about $500 per each 20-foot container and $1,000 per each 40-foot container, on top of regular shipping costs.

Al-Khulaqui said that the $3,000 fee now being demanded was “very high and unusual”, but was justified by shipping companies because they regard Yemeni ports as unsafe, despite their distance from Iran.

Although the Houthis are allied to Iran and previously attacked shipping in the Red Sea following Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, the Yemeni group has yet to intervene in the US-Israel-Iran conflict. Other Yemeni parties are also not involved, making Yemen one of the few regional countries yet to see any violence related to the fighting.

In addition to barring local traders from paying the new charges, the Yemeni government is considering other measures to pressure shipping companies to cancel the fees, including threatening to stop vessels belonging to those companies from docking at Yemeni ports. Authorities may also allow traders to contact exporters directly in countries of origin to negotiate any additional charges.

The new surcharges come as the United Nations has again sounded the alarm over Yemen’s worsening humanitarian situation, saying nearly 65.4 percent of the population – about 23.1 million people – will require urgent humanitarian assistance and protection services this year. This marks an increase of roughly 3.5 million people compared with 2025.

“Yemen continues to face an escalating food security crisis entering 2026,” the World Food Program said in its February Yemen Food Security Update, released on March 5. “January data revealed that 63 percent of households nationwide are struggling to meet their minimum food needs, including 36 percent facing severe food deprivation.”

Bypassing Yemen’s ports

In addition to rising insurance fees on shipments to Yemen, the war in Iran and potential disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz could cut vital supply routes from regional hub ports such as Jebel Ali in the United Arab Emirates.

Mustafa Nasr, head of the Studies and Economic Media Center, told Al Jazeera that shipping companies may begin seeking alternative hub ports to deliver goods to Yemen, which could increase costs and cause delays.

“The closure of Jebel Ali port would force shipping lines to seek alternative ports that may be farther away and involve significantly higher transportation costs,” he said.

Nabil Abdullah Bin Aifan, manager of the government-run Maritime Affairs Authority in Hadramout province and a maritime researcher, said most goods arriving at Mukalla port – the province’s main seaport – are transported on wooden dhows from Dubai.

He said that if disruptions occur in the Strait of Hormuz, traders may turn to alternative regional hub ports such as Salalah in Oman or Jeddah in Saudi Arabia.

“Large ships come to Dubai to unload their containers, and traders then unload the goods from the containers and load them onto those primitive ships, which have no insurance,” Bin Aifan told Al Jazeera.

For now, wheat shipments from Ukraine and goods transported from China to Yemen may see price increases due to rising insurance costs, while products imported from Gulf countries could disappear from the market.

Shipping lines may also consider routing cargo through the Cape of Good Hope rather than the Gulf, Bin Aifan said.

“Even before the recent developments involving Iran, ports in our region were considered high risk. However, after the relative calm that followed the halt to Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, confidence gradually returned and ships began sailing back to the region. Now, the war has brought the problem back again,” he said.

All of this means that Yemenis, already struggling with poverty and hunger after years of war, will likely have to pay more for imported food and goods.

Abdullah al-Hadad, an English teacher from the city of Taiz with 40 years of experience in the profession, said that his monthly salary – less than $80 – is already not enough to cover his basic needs. Meat and fish have become luxuries for his family, and he still owes nearly one million Yemeni riyals (about $670) to a local grocery shop.

To make ends meet, he works additional jobs as a taxi driver and in a grocery store, while his children also work after school to help support the family and pay for medication for his 10-year-old son, who has autism.

“What I suffer from as a government employee is the extremely low salary, which does not even cover basic necessities such as bread, tea, salt and sugar,” al-Hadad told Al Jazeera.

“Other foods that are essential for a healthy diet, like meat or fish, have become a distant dream.”

March 13 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s Unification Minister Chung Dong-young warned Friday that preparing for war could increase the likelihood of conflict on the Korean Peninsula, emphasizing that “peace itself is the path forward.”

Chung made the remarks during the third meeting of the Korean Peninsula Peace Strategy Advisory Group held at the Inter-Korean Talks Headquarters in Seoul.

“People often speak lightly of war and repeat the phrase that if you want peace, you must prepare for war,” Chung said. “But preparing for war only raises the chances of war.”

Chung also pointed to growing global instability, citing the upcoming U.S.-China summit and tensions related to the Iran crisis.

“The Korean Peninsula sits on unstable ground and tends to sway whenever global events shift,” he said.

Noting the global interconnectedness of security issues, Chung said the distance between Seoul and Tehran is about 6,700 kilometers but developments in the Middle East can still affect the Korean Peninsula.

“A war 6,700 kilometers away is shaking the Korean Peninsula,” he said, adding that the situation underscored the importance of maintaining peace and stability in the region.

Experts attending the meeting suggested that North Korea’s recently proposed “two-state theory” should be reinterpreted in light of current conditions.

They proposed linking it to the inter-Korean confederation stage of South Korea’s long-standing National Community Unification Plan and called for the creation of a new peace roadmap for the Korean Peninsula reflecting changing security dynamics.

Participants also urged the government to shift from a “pace-maker” role to a more proactive “peace-maker” role by expanding diplomatic engagement.

They recommended exploring multilateral approaches involving neighboring countries and international organizations in addition to dialogue between the United States and China.

— 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=20260313010004062

GREECE is the latest holiday destination seeing a drop in holiday bookings amid the Iran crisis.

In a statement released this week, On The Beach confirmed a number of popular holiday destinations including Greece had seen a drop in demand as a result of growing tensions in the Middle East.

The announcement came as the online package holiday provider made a statement that it was suspending its profit forecast.

The group said: “Whilst the group has limited exposure to destinations in the Middle East, it has experienced a significant slowdown in demand following the onset of conflict in the region, particularly to destinations such as Turkey, Greece, Cyprus and Egypt.

“The timing of when the conflict will end and the shape of recovery in demand to these destinations are unknown.”

Despite this, the Government currently has no warning against travel to Greece.

Read more on travel inspo

CHEAP BREAKS

UK’s best 100 cheap stays – our pick of the top hotels, holiday parks and pubs

TAKING OFF

I’ve visited 50 countries & this much-loathed budget airline is the world’s best

And there are other companies, such as TUI, that have seen increased interest in Greece (along with Portugal and Spain)as “customers opt for familiar destinations”, reports The Times.

Taking to Reddit, travellers currently in Greece have shared what it is like.

One person commented: “I’m in Athens currently and it’s very crowded, also it feels perfectly safe.”

Another person said: “I live in Peloponnese, southern tip on the coast of Greece.

“We’ve been hearing a ton of military planes flying around us the last few days.

“They are definitely preparing for the worst but we are not scared at all.”

Earlier this month, the RAF Akrotiri base on Cyprus was hit by an Iranian drone.

As a result, there was a temporary closure of Paphos Airport, with flights being cancelled.

Despite this, Cyprus remains on the safe to travel list with the Foreign Office warning: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption.”

Current guidance includes monitoring local and international media and signing up for local information alerts and resources.

However, similar to Greece, Cyprus has also seen a drop in tourism.

Local businesses have expressed how people are “thinking twice” about visiting, with a number of hoteliers saying that bookings are down across March and April.

Cyprus’ foreign minister Constantinos Kombos told the BBC: “I don’t think that anyone should be in two minds, given the fact that the situation, as I have been describing right now as we speak, has been perfectly normal.

“All activity is normal. Air traffic is going back to 100 per cent what it was before the incident.

“So I don’t think this is something that should be affecting people’s decisions.

“And the security factor in terms of people feeling that everything is being done that is humanly possible to protect both citizens, residents, and visitors to Cyprus.”

A number of European cruises have also been cancelled as a result of the crisis, including two Greek sailings.

Plus, now might be the best time to book your holiday to Spain – here’s why.

Women and children were among those killed in the attacks, according to the Taliban.

Afghanistan’s Taliban government has accused Pakistan of targeting civilian homes in overnight air attacks in the capital Kabul and the southern province of Kandahar, as fighting between the two neighbours entered its third week, overshadowed by the United States-Israel war on Iran igniting the middle East.

Women and children were among those killed in the attacks, according to the Taliban.

Government spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said on X Friday that Pakistan’s aircraft also struck fuel depots belonging to the private airline Kam Air near Kandahar airport.

There was no immediate comment from Pakistan’s military or government.

Calls for restraint from the international community have gone unheeded by both sides.

On Thursday, the Taliban government said four members of the same family, including two children, were killed by Pakistani artillery and mortar fire in eastern Afghanistan.

The deaths reported on Thursday brought the toll to seven people killed in Afghanistan since Tuesday in cross-border clashes, according to authorities in Kabul. That could rise with the latest attacks on Friday.

Fighting between the two countries intensified on February 26 when Afghanistan launched an offensive along their shared border in retaliation for earlier Pakistani air attacks on the Pakistan Taliban, just two days before the US and Israel attacked Iran, starting a sprawling regional war.

Pakistan maintains that it does not target civilians, and casualty claims from both sides are difficult to verify independently.

Islamabad accuses Kabul of harbouring fighters from the Pakistan Taliban, which has claimed responsibility for a series of deadly attacks inside Pakistan, and from the ISIS (ISIL) affiliate in Khorasan province. Afghan authorities deny the charge.

The United Nations mission in Afghanistan has said 56 civilians have been killed there, including 24 children, by Pakistani military operations from February 26 to March 5.

Pakistani officials have confirmed about 12 soldiers were killed and 27 wounded in the latest bout of fighting, while the Taliban claims to have killed more than 150.

About 115,000 people have been forced to leave their homes, according to the UN.

Occupied East Jerusalem – Basema Dabash sheds tears daily for the home she and her husband, Raed, were forced to demolish in Sur Baher, in the south of occupied East Jerusalem.

For years, the couple lived under the spectre of losing their home, ever since the Israeli authorities issued a demolition order in 2014. In January of this year, the eviction notice came. And then, on February 12, the family were forced to demolish their home. If they didn’t, they would have been forced to pay the municipality to carry out the demolition.

“We were forced to start demolishing the house ourselves to avoid the municipality’s demolition fees, which can reach 100,000 shekels [$32,000],” Basema, 51, said. “We started by breaking down the inside of the house and sent the municipality photos to confirm that we had begun the demolition, but they demanded that we demolish it from the outside as soon as possible.”

The family soon completed the demolition of the two houses where eight people, including three children, lived. However, this didn’t waive the fine of 45,000 shekels ($14,600), which will continue to be paid in instalments until 2029.

‘Self-demolition’ haunts Palestinians living in East Jerusalem, which has been controlled by Israel since 1967, and illegally merged with West Jerusalem under one Israeli-run administration.

The choice between self-demolition and paying a further fee to the municipality is a simple one – the vast majority of Palestinians can’t afford to pay the exorbitant amount, and resort to demolishing their own homes, despite the immense pain and profound psychological impact it causes.

‘How did we come to this?’

Basema’s troubles started in 2014, when she received a building violation notice from the Israeli municipality in Jerusalem for the building she and her husband shared with their married son, Mohammed, and his family. They appealed at the time to an Israeli court in an attempt to freeze the demolition order.

For more than a decade, the family was forced to pay accumulated fines in an attempt to keep their home. Then, on January 28, they received an eviction notice, giving them a deadline to vacate the house and have it demolished.

The house slated for demolition was 45 square metres (485sq feet), an extension Basema had added to her existing 45-square-metre home. She had also built a similar-sized residence for her married son on top of the extension. The demolition order targeted both the extension and her son’s residence.

The Dabash family tried to obtain a building permit for the house several times, but their requests were rejected by Israel. Despite this, the municipality fines Palestinians and demolishes their homes under the pretext of lacking permits.

“We chose to demolish our own house not only to avoid the fine, but also because the municipal crews show no mercy to anything around the house and deliberately vandalise the entire area under the pretext of demolition, breaking trees and causing extensive damage that we could have done without,” Basema said.

Basema, along with her husband and one of her sons, Abdelaziz, now lives in what remains of their home. Mohammed has also moved in with them, while his wife and children live in her family’s home. The demolition has thus scattered her son’s family, who haven’t yet been able to find a small house to rent due to the high cost of housing.

The family also incurred significant expenses removing the rubble and redesigning the older section of the house to accommodate everyone, not to mention the psychological toll, which has been devastating.

“I stand to wash the dishes and find my tears falling on their own. How did we come to this? Why are we being subjected to this injustice? The house has become cramped and barely fits us. My grandchildren visit us and then cry bitterly when they leave for their grandfather’s house because we have no space,” Basema said sadly.

Increased demolitions

As illegal Israeli settlements continue to expand in East Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank, with building permits easily obtained, Palestinians say the double standards are obvious.

Human Rights Watch has found that Israeli authorities make it “virtually impossible for Palestinians to obtain building permits”, and the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem said planning policies in East Jerusalem make it “very difficult for residents to obtain building permits”.

Marouf al-Rifai, spokesperson for the Palestinian Authority’s Jerusalem Governorate, told Al Jazeera that 15 self-demolitions were carried out last February, five in January, and 104 in December.

Demolitions, in general, escalated to unprecedented levels after October 2023, when Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began. Al-Rifai said that 400 demolitions were carried out in 2025 in East Jerusalem and its surrounding area, either by municipal crews or by homeowners themselves. Prior to that, the number of demolitions had reached a maximum of 180 per year.

The United Nations has reported that demolitions in 2025 displaced 1,500 Palestinians.

“Even the method of carrying out demolitions changed after the war on Gaza,” al-Rifai said. “Previously, demolitions were only carried out after exhausting all legal avenues and giving residents the opportunity to appeal to the courts and freeze the demolitions.”

But Israeli authorities have taken a more punitive position since demolition policy fell under the influence of far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who began pushing for Israeli army bulldozers to carry out demolitions without even notifying the homeowners, al-Rifai said.

In addition, the Palestinian Authority official said, demolition notices for Palestinian homes in Jerusalem increased from 25,000 before the war to 35,000. The town of Silwan alone has received 7,000 demolition notices since 1967.

Fakhri Abu Diab, a member of the Committee for the Defence of al-Bustan Neighborhood in East Jerusalem, told Al Jazeera that self-demolition is a double punishment and pain for the homeowner after the effort and hardship involved in building the house.

“Israel’s goal is to break the morale of the Palestinians and to brainwash them into becoming tools for implementing its plans to demolish homes. When we demolish our own homes, it’s as if we are demolishing a part of our own body,” he explained.

Israel can only demolish a limited number of Palestinian homes annually due to logistical, financial, budgetary, and logistical constraints. Demolition by Palestinians multiplies the number of homes demolished, thus turning the victim into a “demolition contractor”, as he put it.

“I refused to demolish my house myself because of the negative consequences that I and my family would have to live with for the rest of our lives, and the Israeli bulldozers demolished it. If I had done it myself, it would have remained a nightmare that would haunt me.”

No alternative

But the cost of a demolition carried out by Israeli municipal crews ranges between 80,000 and 120,000 shekels ($26,000-$39,000).

Saqr Qunbur couldn’t pay that, and was forced instead, on December 26, to demolish his 100-square-metre (1,076sq-foot) house in Jabal al-Mukabber under the pretext of lacking a permit. He had built it in 2013 and was immediately issued a building violation notice.

Saqr told Al Jazeera that he had lived in the house with his wife and four-year-old child. Since building the house, he has received a total of 80,000 shekels ($26,000) in fines that he’s still paying despite his home being demolished.

Saqr had nowhere to live after being forced to demolish his house, so his neighbour gave him a dilapidated room to live in while he found a place to rent.

“My child has been suffering psychologically since we demolished the house. Every day he asks me why I demolished it, and I don’t know what to tell him. I say it’s so I can build him a better house, but deep down I know I won’t even be able to rent a suitable place,” he explained with anguish.

Saqr chose to demolish his house himself after he says an Israeli officer threatened him, saying, “Demolish it, or I’ll demolish it over your head”. He also wanted to avoid the humiliation that accompanies demolitions carried out by Israel, where police sometimes fire live ammunition and tear gas at family members and carry out assaults, as documented by human rights groups.

“I developed diabetes and high blood pressure after my house was demolished. The doctor said it was due to anger and grief. This is an occupation that wants to expel us from our land, and we want to stay,” he concluded.

The Israeli military has dropped charges against five soldiers, whose alleged sexual abuse of a Palestinian detainee was caught on camera. The video caused international outrage but also led to protests in support of the soldiers in Israel.

ideo from northern Israel captured the moment an Iranian missile impacted in a residential area early Friday morning. The aftermath shows a fire and scattered debris next to damaged vehicles and buildings.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has laid out terms for ending the war with the United States and Israel in what analysts say is a possible sign of de-escalation from Tehran as the US-Israel war on Iran entered its 13th day on Thursday.

In a post on Wednesday on social site X, Pezeshkian said he had spoken to his counterparts in Russia and Pakistan, and that he had confirmed “Iran’s commitment to peace”.

“The only way to end this war – ignited by the Zionist regime & US – is recognizing Iran’s legitimate rights, payment of reparations, and firm int’l guarantees against future aggression,” Pezeshkian wrote.

This is a rare posture from Tehran, which has maintained a defiant stance and initially rejected any possibility of negotiations or a ceasefire when war broke out nearly two weeks ago.

Pezeshkian’s statement comes as pressure mounts on the US to halt what has become a very costly mission. Analysts say speculation from Washington that Iran would quickly submit after the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were misguided.

Tehran is likely going to determine the end of this war, not the US or Israel, because of its ability to inflict economic pain broadly, they say.

Amid a military pummelling by the US and Israel, Iran has launched heavy retaliatory strikes at US assets and other critical infrastructure in Gulf countries, upsetting global supplies. It has also adopted what analysts call “asymmetric” tactics – such as disrupting the critical Strait of Hormuz and threatening US banking-linked entities – to inflict as much economic pain on the region and wider world as it can.

This is what we know about Pezeshkian’s stance and what the pressures are on both sides to draw the conflict to a close, quickly.

What has the war cost so far?

Economically, both sides have weaponised energy. Israel first targeted Iran’s oil facilities in Tehran on March 8, prompting an outcry from global health experts over the potential risk of air and water pollution.

Iran has, meanwhile, tightened its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz shipping route – the only route to open sea for oil producers in the Gulf – with its military promising on Wednesday that it has the capabilities to wage a long war that could “destroy” the world economy.

Attacks on ships in the strait, through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas traffic normally passes, have effectively closed the route.

Oil prices rocketed above $100 per barrel late last week, up from around $65 before the war, with ordinary buyers feeling the increases at pumps in the US, Europe and parts of Africa.

On Wednesday, Iran upped the ante, saying it would not allow “a litre of oil” to pass through the strait and warned the world to expect a $200-per-barrel price tag.

“We don’t know how quickly it’ll revert back,” Freya Beamish, chief economist at GlobalData TS Lombard, told Al Jazeera. “We do think it’ll revert back to $80 in due course, but the ball is to some degree in Iran’s court,” she said, adding that because Iran needs oil revenue, the price hikes are expected to be time-limited.

The International Energy Agency agreed on Wednesday to release 400 million barrels from the emergency reserves of several member states but it is not yet clear what impact that will have, nor how quickly this quantity of oil can be released.

Tehran has also been accused of directly attacking oil facilities in neighbouring countries this week. Iraq shut all its oil port operations on Thursday after explosive-laden Iranian “drone” boats appeared to have attacked two fuel tankers in Iraqi waters, setting them ablaze and killing one crew member.

A drone was filmed striking Oman’s Salalah oil port on Wednesday, although Tehran has denied involvement.

What are Iranian officials saying about ending the war?

There has been conflicting messaging from the Iranian leadership.

Iran’s elite army unit and parallel armed force, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), continues to show defiance, issuing threats and launching attacks on Israel and US military assets and infrastructure in neighbouring Gulf countries.

However, the political leadership has appeared more inclined towards diplomacy, analysts say. On Wednesday, President Pezeshkian said that ending the war would take the US and Israel recognising Iran’s rights, paying Iran reparations – although it’s unclear how much is being asked for – and providing strong guarantees that a future war will not be waged.

In a video recording last week, he also apologised to neighbouring countries for the strikes and promised that Iran would stop hitting its neighbours as long as they do not allow the US to launch attacks from their territory.

“I personally apologise to the neighbouring countries that were affected by Iran’s actions,” the president said, adding that Tehran was not looking for confrontations with its neighbours.

However, it is not known how much sway the political leadership has over the IRGC. Hours after the president’s apology last week, air defence sirens went off in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE and Bahrain, as strikes continued on the Gulf.

So, what is Iran’s actual position?

“Iran wants to go to the end to make sure that the United States and Israel never attack Iran again … so this has to be the final battle,” Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar Atas explained.

Indeed, the IRGC sees this as an existential war, but the timing of Pezeshkian’s statement about ending the conflict also shows Tehran is pressured economically, politically and militarily, Zeidon Alkinani of Qatar’s Georgetown University told Al Jazeera.

“These differences and divisions [between IRGC and political leaders] always existed even prior to this war but we may notice it now more, given the fact that the IRGC believes that it has the right to take the front seat in leading this regional war, which is why a lot of the statements and positions are contradicting with the official ones from Pezeshkian,” he said.

The IRGC reports directly to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and not to the country’s political leadership. That council is led by Ali Larijani, a top politician and close aide to the late supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who analysts describe as a “hardliner”.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Larijani responded to threats from Trump about attacks on the Strait of Hormuz, saying: “Iranian people do not fear your hollow threats; for those greater than you have failed to erase it … So beware lest you be the ones to vanish.”

The newly elected supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, was once in the IRGC and was put forward by the unit as the next ayatollah after his father was killed on the first day of the war, analysts say. He is thus not expected to follow the reformist, diplomatic ideals of President Pezeshkian and other political leaders which his father managed to marry with the IRGC militarised stance, they say.

What do the US and Israel say about ending the war?

There have also been conflicting messages from the Trump administration and Israel regarding when the war mission on Iran, codenamed Operation Epic Fury, is likely to end.

Trump told US publication Axios on Wednesday that the war on Iran would end “soon” because there’s “practically nothing left to target”.

“Anytime I want it to end, it will end,” he added. He had said earlier on Monday that “we’re way ahead of our schedule” and that the US had achieved its goals, even as speculation mounts about a possible US ground mission.

On the other hand, Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that the war would go on “without any time limit, for as long as necessary, until we achieve all the objectives and decisively win the campaign”.

Analysts say Trump’s stance that the conflict will be quick reflects increasing pressure on his administration ahead of upcoming mid-term elections in November.

Trump’s advisers privately told him this week to find a quick end to the war and avoid political backlash, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal. That came as polls from Quinnipiac University and The Washington Post suggested that most Americans are opposed to the war in Iran.

In his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump promised to lower prices, and inflation had stabilised at 2.4 percent ahead of the war, according to government data released on Wednesday. Analysts speculate the conflict will likely push it back up.

The US spent more than $11.3bn in the first six days of the war, Pentagon officials told lawmakers in a classified briefing on Tuesday, Reuters reported this week – nearly $2bn a day.

The Washington-based think tank, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), estimated that the war cost Washington $3.7bn in its first 100 hours alone, or nearly $900m a day, largely due to its expenditure on costly munitions.

“It’s quite ironic that [Trump] chose a war that would make affordability worse, not better,” Rebecca Christie, a senior fellow at the Bruegel think tank, told Al Jazeera’s Counting the Cost.

“Every time the US loses even one object, air defence or a plane or something like that, that represents an awful lot of money that could have been used on some of these issues that have an impact on people’s day-to-day lives in the United States.”

British Armed Forces assets continue to flow into Cyprus, as the United Kingdom bolsters its military presence in the eastern Mediterranean in response to the war in the Middle East. While the British government has not taken part in direct military action against targets within Iran, the expanding conflict has also put Cyprus under direct threat. Meanwhile, the rush to bolster the U.K.’s military capabilities in the region has highlighted some glaring deficits in the British Armed Forces.

The British military response to the conflict in the Middle East has centered on the island of Cyprus in the eastern Mediterranean, which has long been home to a U.K. Armed Forces presence. As well as providing a ‘landing pad’ for British forces operating in the region, for example, during the counter-ISIS mission, Cyprus has long been used by the British for training and exercises. The so-called Sovereign Base Areas on Cyprus comprise the airbase of RAF Akrotiri and Dhekelia Station (a former airfield), which have been in British hands since the Republic of Cyprus was established in 1960.

Fighter assets

Before the Iran war began, eight Royal Air Force Typhoon multirole fighters were already deployed to Akrotiri, where they were still operating on the U.K. counter-ISIS mission, Operation Shader. Other U.K. Armed Forces personnel were also in Iraq under Shader.

In the wider region, there was also an existing RAF Typhoon footprint in Qatar, where a squadron of the jets is operated jointly with the Qatar Emir Air Force. This unit was strengthened in January, when another four Typhoons deployed there from the United Kingdom, specifically for air defense.

In February, six RAF F-35B Lightnings were sent to Akrotiri in Cyprus, joining the Typhoons already deployed there.

As Iran and its proxies have launched drones and missiles at countries across the region, the U.K. Armed Forces have been active in intercepting drones (and potentially also cruise missiles).

The real wakeup call came overnight on March 1, when a drone launched by Hezbollah in Lebanon hit Akrotiri. There were no reported casualties and only “minimal damage,” although this was, significantly, an impact that tore a hole in the hangar used by the U.S. Air Force U-2 Dragon Lady spy planes that are also regularly detached to Cyprus. Two more drones heading toward Cyprus were reportedly intercepted the same day.

Another two drones heading for Cyprus were intercepted on March 4, according to a Cypriot government spokesperson.

The U.K. Ministry of Defense has confirmed that the four Typhoons in Qatar, as well as the Cyprus-based F-35Bs, have since been active in bringing down hostile drones. The F-35B achieved its first air-to-air victories in British hands when one of the fighters shot down a pair of Iranian drones, announced on March 3.

The pilot involved in that historic engagement was a Royal Navy aviator embedded within the RAF’s joint-force No. 617 Squadron, the “Dambusters.”

The pilot fired two infrared-guided Advanced Short-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (ASRAAM) in the space of 20 minutes, each from a range of less than a mile, to destroy the Shahed-type drones over Jordan. They subsequently told The Telegraph:

“Your adrenaline is pumping pretty hard, you’re working down low at night above the desert in unfamiliar terrain. Emotionally, those things get pushed aside in the moment. It’s not until after landing that it begins to settle in.”

Lt. Col. Mike Carty, commanding officer of No. 617 Squadron, added: “The tempo of flying here is greater than anything the Lightning Force has embarked upon before. The sheer amount of sorties and flying hours is quite high. People are being stretched and working incredibly hard, but nobody is under any particular strain. We are set up here to be able to sustain this.”

The continued threat posed by Iranian drones and cruise missiles has also seen the decision made to send another four Typhoons to Qatar. RAF Typhoons have also successfully shot down drones targeting Bahrain, Jordan, and Qatar.

Destroyer deployment

The United Kingdom has also elected to beef up its defensive capabilities in the eastern Mediterranean with the deployment of a Type 45 destroyer. This was the subject of considerable debate before it was finally announced that HMS Dragon would sail for the region. The warship departed yesterday for a voyage that will take around 10 days.

However, the Type 45 is the United Kingdom’s most balanced and capable air defense platform, at least against drones and cruise missiles.

HMS Dragon has begun her journey to the eastern Mediterranean to join the UK’s defensive operations in the region.

Hundreds of well-wishers, including loved ones of the ship’s crew, lined the seawall as the ship sailed from Portsmouth.

🔗https://t.co/xQqazM6Mcd pic.twitter.com/ScskyAu0CF

— Royal Navy (@RoyalNavy) March 10, 2026

The basic Type 45’s weapons fit includes Aster 30 missiles fired from the Sea Viper system, which represents the Royal Navy’s outer air defense layer. According to the Royal Navy, the Sea Viper is able to track “hundreds” of potential threats to an individual ship or task group at ranges up to 250 miles, using Aster 30 missiles to eliminate them when they close to “around 70 miles.” Other sources suggest the Mach-3 missile has a range of more than 75 miles.

There is also the Aster 15 with a range of around 18 miles, optimizing it for close-in and local-area and point defense. For aerial threats even closer to the warship, the Type 45 can call upon a pair of Phalanx close-in weapon systems (CIWS) armed with 20mm ‘Gatling’ cannons, 30mm guns, and various machine guns.

When it comes to ballistic missile defense, the Type 45 is much more limited, however.

While HMS Diamond did shoot down one of the Houthis’ anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs) in 2024, this is an easier threat to deal with than the medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) that Iran is currently launching toward Israel.

“Smoke” (infrared) decoy employment aftermath seen from HMS Diamond’s bridge during the ballistic missile engagement. One of the decoy launchers can be seen beneath the 30mm gun sponson, loaded with the by now familiar mix including Chemring Large Payload Carriers. pic.twitter.com/1TgWrgrDzP

— Gabriele Molinelli (@Gabriel64869839) April 26, 2024

Also in 2024, the U.K. Ministry of Defense announced that it would invest around $515 million to upgrade Sea Viper, making it “even more lethal against new and growing threats from hostile drones and missiles.”

Under the upgrade, the Aster 30 missile will be modernized to improve its capabilities against ASBMs, with an enhanced warhead plus new guidance and seeker software. The upgrade will also address the Sampson multi-function radar as well as the command-and-control system and combat management system.

A second phase will see the evaluation of a new missile, the Aster 30 Block 1NT, currently under development by France, Italy, and the United Kingdom. This missile features a new seeker, which would further improve the ballistic missile defense capabilities of the Type 45. In particular, Block 1NT will be better equipped to intercept MRBMs carrying maneuverable reentry vehicles (MaRVs), which you can read more about here.

However, these upgrades are yet to be fielded.

More generally, there have long been questions about the availability of the Type 45s, despite their undoubted capabilities. These six vessels are still very modern, but they have spent a notably long time in maintenance. Typically, only two are actually available to deploy at any given time. With one of the warships normally earmarked for the North Atlantic and Russia, and another needed to escort one of the U.K. aircraft carriers when that is at sea, there is very little capacity left to play with.

This also brings us to the question of the two British aircraft carriers of the Queen Elizabeth class. With the war entering its second week, HMS Prince of Wales appeared poised to deploy, with the crew at five days’ notice to sail. Earlier this week, however, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman gave the following statement: “HMS Prince of Wales has always been on very high readiness. The MoD is increasing the preparedness of the carrier — reducing the time it would take to set sail for any deployment — but there is no decision taken to deploy her.”

Critics of the hugely costly aircraft carrier program might ask why these warships, which are designed to respond to just this kind of crisis, are being held back.

U.S. President Donald Trump also used the lack of carrier deployment as a stick with which to beat the U.K. government. On his Truth Social platform, Trump said that the United States did not need Britain’s carriers in the conflict and suggested they would have been useful had they deployed before the war began.

Short-range air defense

To help cover short-range air defense over Cyprus, the United Kingdom has deployed two Royal Navy Wildcat helicopters armed with Martlet missiles. On the plus side, each helicopter can carry up to 20 of these missiles, which are ideal for bringing down drones. On the other hand, the missiles have a range of only around five miles, and with just two ‘cabs’ available, the Wildcat deployment is really only capable of providing limited point defense.

With that in mind, it’s somewhat surprising that the British Army hasn’t deployed any of its Sky Sabre short-range air defense systems to Cyprus, or anywhere else in the region. The Sky Sabre is intended to bring down aircraft, as well as drones and cruise missiles. However, it’s unclear how many batteries are currently deployable. One is stationed in the Falkland Islands, and another has been deployed on NATO’s eastern flank, in Poland, and the 12 batteries on order are still being delivered.

The Sky Sabre fires the Common Anti-Air Modular Missile, or CAMM, also known as the Land Ceptor. The same CAMM missile is also used in naval applications — including aboard Royal Navy warships — as the Sea Ceptor. Fitted with an active-radar seeker, the CAMM is derived from the aforementioned ASRAAM. The CAAM has a reported range of more than 15 miles and is said to be able to tackle a wide range of threats, including low-observable targets, high-speed missiles, drones, and precision-guided air-to-ground weapons.

Meanwhile, the ability to surveil the airspace around Cyprus received an upgrade yesterday with the arrival of a Royal Navy Merlin HM2 Crowsnest helicopter, with airborne surveillance and control (ASaC) capabilities.

The Merlin brings a look-down sensor capability, making it something of a ‘pocket’ version of the E-7 Wedgetail. From altitude, the radar has an excellent field of view to spot low and slow-flying targets, even if they are relatively small. This makes it especially useful for tracking drones and cruise missiles.

Other British counter-drone units have also been active in the wider region.

Few details have been provided, but these are likely to consist of non-kinetic systems (like the ORCUS) and man-portable air defense systems (like the Starstreak missile) used by troops who have a limited presence in Jordan and Iraq, where they have been since before the Iran war began.

Overall, though, the conflict has highlighted the somewhat limited nature of U.K. ground-based air defense capabilities.

More generally, the deployments so far, in a purely defensive capacity, have raised concerns about the breadth, depth, and readiness of U.K. military power and its relevance in international affairs.

The question of “going kinetic”

The United Kingdom initially denied permission for the U.S. military to use its airbases — including Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean — for strikes against Iran, as we discussed at the time. This was soon revised, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer saying his government had agreed to a U.S. request to use British military bases for “defensive” strikes.

Were the British stance to change, it is questionable whether RAF jets, as currently deployed, would be able to make a significant contribution, based on their small numbers, their other taskings, and the long distance to targets in Iran.

According to an assessment by the U.K.-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank, realistically, the fighter force at Akrotiri would only have been able to fly 28 strike sorties against Iran, had they been committed to Operation Epic Fury. This is very much a best-case scenario, and would also have required significant tanker support.

A British offensive campaign against Iran would otherwise rely primarily upon the Royal Navy, which operates nuclear-powered attack submarines that can launch Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM). However, this is a capability that has suffered from poor availability in recent years. Currently, only one of five in-service Astute class submarines, HMS Anson, is at sea, and it was in the Indo-Pacific region as of January.

So far, however, the U.K. government has held back from committing to any kind of direct offensive action against Iran, although there have been voices raised across the political spectrum urging that the United Kingdom should back the United States more actively, including taking part in strikes. Kemi Badenoch, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, berated Starmer this week for not doing more to “stop the people who are attacking us” and said the U.K. Armed Forces should “do more than catch the arrows” and should “catch the archer” — a reference to striking missile and drone facilities directly.

For the time being, the U.K. Armed Forces, ravaged by decades of post-Cold War cuts, are bringing some useful but fairly limited in capacity air defense capabilities to the region. Should the U.K. government’s policy regarding Iran become aligned with that of the United States, then much more serious questions will be answered about the relevance and resilience of British military power in an operation of this kind.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Gaza City, the Gaza Strip – Shortly before the call to sunset prayer, Islam Dardouna stretches her hand towards a pot hanging over a makeshift stove fashioned from a battered metal can, with scraps of paper and pieces of wood feeding the fire beneath it.

Then she pauses. She turns her face away from the rising tongues of smoke. Her face stained with a thin layer of soot and her clothes steeped in the lingering smell of fumes, she takes a deep breath but does not immediately lift the lid.

In her right hand, Dardouna holds an asthma inhaler as though it were a ladle or tongs. With her other hand, she tries to prepare food for her three children.

“I can no longer tolerate the fire at all,” the 34-year-old says in a strained voice as she raises the inhaler to her mouth.

“We heat water on it, cook on it … everything. It completely destroyed my health,” she said, pointing to her chest.

Dardouna has been displaced from Jabalia in northern Gaza since the start of Israel’s genocidal war against Palestinians in the territory in October 2023.

She now lives with her husband – 37-year-old Muath Dardouna – and their children in Sheikh Ajleen, west of Gaza City.

A year and a half ago, their home was destroyed. Since then, the family has moved from place to place until they eventually settled in this camp alongside other displaced families.

Everything changed after the war began. But for Dardouna, having to cook daily over an open fire in the face of cooking gas and fuel ranks among the worst.

“Our entire life now is a struggle, searching for wood and things we never imagined we would need one day,” she says. “There is no cooking gas and no gas cylinders. We lost all of that during displacement.”

What makes the situation even harder is that she suffers from asthma and chronic chest allergies, conditions she says began during Israel’s 2008 war on Gaza when she inhaled the smoke of a phosphorus bomb that dropped on her house. Her situation improved over the years, but has dramatically worsened during the current war.

“I developed airway obstruction, and recently there were masses found in my lungs,” said Dardouna, who in January was hospitalised for six days after suffering from oxygen shortage.

“The doctors prescribed an oxygen cylinder for me,” she says, quietly. “But unfortunately, I cannot afford it.”

A prolonged shortage

Like so many others across Gaza, Dardouna is struggling amid a prolonged shortage of cooking gas and fuel that has persisted since the start of the war.

Supplies have remained severely limited even after a “ceasefire” came into effect in October that included provisions allowing the entry of fuel and essential goods into the territory.

However, the quantities that have entered since then remain far below the population’s actual needs, according to official sources in Gaza and United Nations agencies.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says the availability of cooking gas in Gaza remains “critically constrained”, with the limited quantities entering the territory covering less than three percent of what is required.

As a result, many families have been forced to rely on alternative and often hazardous cooking methods.

UN data indicates that about 54.5 percent of households rely on firewood for cooking, roughly 43 percent burn waste or plastic, and only around 1.5 percent are able to cook with gas.

Humanitarian groups warn that such unsafe alternatives endanger people’s health and the environment due to prolonged exposure to smoke and toxic fumes produced by burning plastic and other waste.

Amid these conditions, cooking over open fires made from wood, scrap materials or plastic has become a daily reality across displacement camps and neighbourhoods throughout Gaza.

The crisis has intensified during the Muslim holy month Ramadan, when families must prepare both suhoor meals before their daily fast and iftar meals afterwards.

Firewood has become expensive, requiring a daily budget. Lighting the fire before dawn is also often difficult due to the lack of lighting and unfavourable weather conditions, so the family often skips the pre-dawn meal entirely.

“Today, for example, it’s raining and windy. I couldn’t light the fire,” said Darduna’s husband, Muath, who is also helping out with the daily cooking.

“Even when we break our fast, we wish we could drink a cup of tea or coffee afterwards, but we can’t, because lighting the fire again is another struggle.”

A former psychosocial support worker for children, Muath says it pains him to see his children fasting without suhoor.

“Every detail of our lives is literally suffering,” he says. “Fetching water is suffering. Cooking is suffering. Even going to the bathroom is suffering. We are truly exhausted,” he added.

“Our lives are covered in soot,” Muath says, pointing to the black smoke stains left by the fire.

He describes gas as “one of our dreams”, recalling how “it felt like Eid day” when the family got a gas cylinder a few months ago. “But we don’t even have the stove to use it, and many families are like us,” he said.

“We are living on the edge of nothing. Displacement and war stripped us of everything,” he adds. “We are willing to live with the simplest rights in tents. But there is no heating, no gas, no lighting. It feels like we are living in open graves on Earth.”

Serious implications

In a statement on Wednesday, the General Petroleum Authority in Gaza warned of the “catastrophic and dangerous consequences of the continued halt in cooking gas supplies” to the territory, stressing that the crisis “directly affects the lives of more than two million residents” amid already dire humanitarian conditions.

The authority said Gaza had already been facing a shortfall of about 70 percent of its actual gas needs compared with the quantities that entered after the “ceasefire” announcement.

It added that the “complete suspension of gas supplies places the Gaza Strip before a looming disaster that threatens food and health security”, particularly during Ramadan.

The authority also said that preventing gas from entering the enclave constitutes a “clear violation of the ceasefire understandings”, calling on mediators and international actors to intervene urgently to ensure the regular flow of cooking gas into Gaza.

Across Gaza, many families now rely on ready-made meals from aid distributions and charity kitchens because of economic collapse and the difficulty of cooking.

“Even when food arrives ready hours before iftar,” Muath says, “heating it becomes another problem.”

The frustration of daily survival pushes Muath to the brink.

“As a father now, I cannot even provide the most basic things,” he says. “Imagine my son simply wants a cup of tea … even a little wind can stop me from making it.”

‘The fire suffocates you’

In a nearby tent, Amani Aed al-Bashleqi, 26, sits watching food being cooked over an open fire for iftar while her husband stirs the pot.

She said cooking on fire makes food taste “flavourless” – not because the taste changes, but because “exhaustion and suffering have become part of every bite”.

“We start cooking early so we can finish by iftar, and after breaking the fast, my husband and I are completely exhausted and covered in soot.”

Like Dardouna, al-Bashleqi says the smoke causes severe headaches and health problems.

“The fire suffocates you. All the women in the camp suffer health problems from cooking on fire,” she says. “But we have no choice.”

She has a seven-month-old baby, and her biggest worry is boiling water for his milk.

“Sometimes I boil water and keep it in a borrowed thermos, but I don’t always have one,” she says. “And sometimes when he wakes up at night, I mix the milk with water without boiling it, even though I know that’s not healthy. But what can I do?”

Nearby, Iman Junaid, 34, displaced from Jabalia to western Gaza City, sits with her husband Jihad, 36, in front of the fire preparing food.

Junaid blows on the flames while she pushes an empty plastic oil bottle under the fire.

Behind them, bags full of plastic bottles are piled up. The family collected them to fuel the fire because cooking gas has been unavailable for months.

A mother of six, Junaid says she knows the health dangers of burning plastic, but has “no other choice”.

“My little daughter is one year old, and her chest always hurts because she inhales the smoke,” she says. “Our life is collecting and burning plastic and nylon.”

“With the price of wood rising, we now wish we could even find wood. Gas has become almost impossible … we’ve forgotten it.”

She said there were many promises that gas would enter Gaza after the “ceasefire”, but “nothing happened”.

For Dardounah, the solution is not simply bringing cooking gas into Gaza. “What we need is for life to become possible again,” she says.

“Let gas enter. Let goods enter at reasonable prices. Let there be basic necessities for a normal life.”

The Bahraini interior ministry released footage of a massive blaze at a fuel storage facility following an Iranian attack. Bahrain hosts the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet and has been consistently targeted amid the US-Israeli initiated war.

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.