deal

The first round of talks between high-level officials from Iran and the United States in Switzerland has ended, mediators say, with the two sides agreeing on a roadmap towards a final deal to end their more than 100-day war.

Iran and the US agreed to set up communication lines to keep the vital Strait of Hormuz open and end fighting in Lebanon at the marathon talks that ended on Monday, according to mediators.

The teams, led by US Vice President JD Vance and Iranian parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, opened talks on Sunday as part of a two-month negotiating period set out under a preliminary deal agreed last week.

Mediators Pakistan and Qatar said the negotiators reached agreement on a “roadmap towards reaching a final deal within 60 days” with technical talks to continue for the rest of the week at the Swiss resort of Burgenstock.

“Encouraging progress has been made, including the creation of a mechanism for further technical talks,” they said, detailing a contact channel set up to “avoid incidents and miscommunication” over the Strait of Hormuz.

A “deconfliction cell” between the parties and authorities in Lebanon has also been agreed to prevent fighting from erupting there again, they said.

Al Jazeera’s Osama Bin Javaid, reporting from Lucerne, Switzerland, said mediators hailed the constructive engagement, adding that the working groups formed by the negotiators are to begin work immediately.

“A lot of work still remains to be done, and it is not yet clear how these groups will be formulated, in which capacity they will work or what format any future meeting will take,” he said.

Tehran essentially had blocked the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation against the joint attacks by Israel and the US on February 28 that touched off the war.

Lebanon was pitched into the conflict as Iran-aligned Hezbollah attacked Israel in response to the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, prompting Israel to launch a wide-scale bombing campaign and ground invasion of southern Lebanon.

After a series of false starts, Washington and Tehran last week finally signed a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the war, which included a provision to end fighting in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah.

But there have been repeated clashes and Israeli attacks in Lebanon since, which prompted Iran to say days after it had reopened the Strait of Hormuz that it would again close the waterway, through which about a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies transited before the war.

“Tireless Pakistani and Qatari mediation has delivered major progress to end Lebanon War,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on X after the talks in Switzerland.

“Oil and petrochem exports are waived, blockade lifted, some frozen assets released, and major reconstruction & development plan launched for Iran. 1st real test: Lebanon deconfliction cell,” he wrote.

Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar Atas, reporting from Tehran, said Iran achieved most of what it wanted in the talks in Switzerland because it had conditions for starting the technical talks.

“They were saying that the memorandum of understanding – particularly Articles 1, 10 and 11 – had to be initiated and implemented for the technical talks to move forward,” he said, referring to the sections on ending fighting on all fronts, including Lebanon; waiving US sanctions on Iranian energy exports; and releasing frozen Iranian assets.

“So now that they have decided that technical talks in Switzerland are going to continue throughout the whole week, we see that there is progress,” he added.

Trump’s threats

The roadmap was agreed after a shaky start to the negotiations. Iran’s delegation walked out in response to US President Donald Trump’s threats on Sunday to attack Iran over its support for Hezbollah.

“Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble,” Trump wrote on social media, apparently referring to Hezbollah. “If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!!”

Iran hit back with a warning of its own.

“They would do better to be careful with their statements; our armed forces are ready to respond to them in a different manner. No matter what they say, we are the ones who act,” Iran’s chief negotiator, Ghalibaf, said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, said Israeli troops would remain in southern Lebanon “as long as necessary” and promised that he would “not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons”.

By Sunday evening, there had been no reports of Israeli attacks or continued fighting as some residents of southern Lebanon cautiously returned to their homes.

The fighting between Israel and Hezbollah has repeatedly threatened to derail peace efforts.

On Friday, planned US-Iranian talks were postponed after Israel launched deadly attacks in Lebanon following the deaths of four of its soldiers in combat.

Israel’s military chief visited troops on Sunday in southern Lebanon, where he said Hezbollah was in a “very difficult position”.

“Hezbollah has suffered a severe and significant blow, and we are committed to remaining prepared to continue operating and prevent its rebuilding,” Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir said.

The overall death toll from the fighting in Lebanon has surpassed 4,100 since it escalated on March 2, the Ministry of Public Health said.

‘Historic meeting’

Vance had earlier hailed “a historic meeting” in Switzerland.

Even as Trump was threatening Iran, Vance told reporters the US president had “asked us to turn over a new leaf to transform our relationship with the people of Iran”.

Flanked by US negotiators Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, Vance added: “The question before us now is how much more can we accomplish together?

“Can we turn over a new leaf? Can we change relations in the Middle East permanently?

“Or do we go back to doing things the old way, which is not our preference, but it’s certainly very much something that can happen.”

Lebanon aside, there has been no indication that Iran’s support for armed groups across the region, which has long drawn the ire of the US and Israel, would be addressed in the negotiations.

Speaking on Sunday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stressed that Tehran would not relinquish its right to enrich uranium although he repeated Iran’s denial that it seeks nuclear weapons.

“We can also state in writing that we have no intention of building a bomb,” he said.

WASHINGTON — Bobby Ray Inman’s bizarre withdrawal as the defense secretary nominee provides a glimpse into a peculiar Washington phenomenon–the insider who has spent so long behind the scenes that he is unprepared for the glare of the public limelight.

For more than 20 years, first as a Navy admiral and later as director of the National Security Agency and then deputy CIA director, Inman was part of a cadre of people who exercise great power in government but are insulated from the give-and-take of daily political life.

Inman’s remarks in announcing his withdrawal Tuesday and interviews with some of his friends suggest that the retired admiral was unequipped to step into the public arena. Despite his stated reasons, that lack of exposure to public life has emerged as the most plausible explanation for Inman’s abrupt turnabout.

“We thought: ‘He’s an insider–he probably knows the rules of the game.’ But he didn’t,” said Stephen H. Hess, a Brookings Institution political analyst. “We were all caught off guard by that.”

William Safire, the New York Times columnist accused by Inman of mounting unfair attacks, said Wednesday that he suspects Inman withdrew because he and other journalists were working on stories that might have damaged Inman’s chances for winning confirmation.

In his column appearing today, Safire wrote that Inman might have been worried by probes into reports that Inman had used a source on the Senate Intelligence Committee staff to help “manipulate” unsuspecting senators during Inman’s time at the CIA.

Inman had blamed a “new McCarthyism” in the press and the threat of a “partisan attack” by Republicans for his decision, but the media coverage and the GOP were overwhelmingly favorable toward him.

There were other ingredients as well: By Inman’s own admission, he did not thirst for the post. “I did not want a job in Washington,” he said in an interview.

He said he accepted Clinton’s offer because, as a career military officer, he found it difficult to refuse a presidential request.

Friends suggest that Inman’s longtime insecurities, apparently stemming from his days as a clumsy, bespectacled youngster, may have played a part by prompting him to overreact to fears that his reputation was being besmirched.

Inman’s experience is not unique in Washington politics. Others who have made the transition–notably Dwight D. Eisenhower, who went from five-star general to President, have had similar adjustments to make, although Eisenhower managed it more deftly.

Being an admiral or general provides a degree of insulation that often is a handicap for a would-be politician. Few are willing to criticize a senior military officer, especially in public.

And someone who has spent the bulk of his career as an intelligence officer is even more protected. By nature, the chiefs of the nation’s intelligence agencies stay in the background, even while advising presidents, briefing congressional leaders and influencing policies.

Especially during the Cold War, the bulk of their contact with the outside was behind closed doors–with lawmakers or reporters respectfully grateful for any morsel of information they were given.

Inman’s circumstances, and his own talents, accustomed him to receiving nothing but plaudits. Presidents, lawmakers and even the press praised him lavishly, extolling his brilliance and wisdom. Hardly an unkind word was to be found.

What Inman actually had to face during his few short weeks as defense secretary-designate was mild:

* A potential flap over his failure to pay Social Security taxes for a housekeeper peaked a few hours after it was announced, leaked by the White House to head off any serious brouhaha. The issue had been a major element in toppling two candidates for top Justice Department posts.

* News stories, backed up by bankruptcy records, noted his mixed performance in various business ventures. The articles were brought on mainly by Inman’s statements that he planned to bring more business techniques to government.

As Inman eventually admitted, the only real criticism came from a handful of columnists. News coverage and most editorials were heavy with praise; Inman said Tuesday that the working press had treated him fairly.

Inman did “more to besmirch his own reputation in his press conference than the press or the Republicans ever did,” Hess said. “Most people think his response bordered on the bizarre.”

Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), whom Inman accused–apparently without foundation–of spearheading a GOP attack against him, offered perhaps the unkindest cut of all:

“I think it’s probably a break for President Clinton that he didn’t get the job, the way he carried on yesterday,” the senator said Wednesday on CBS-TV’s “This Morning” program, in a view shared by some White House aides.

Times staff writer James Risen contributed to this story.

BEIRUT, Lebanon, June 19 (UPI) — The Iran war may be over, but southern Lebanon is likely to remain a battlefield and a bargaining chip in regional negotiations, despite Lebanon’s inclusion in the memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States — a provision Israel rejected to preserve its freedom of action against Hezbollah, analysts said.

Violence in southern Lebanon subsided after the United States and Iran announced a 14-point preliminary agreement to end hostilities, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and begin nuclear talks under a 60-day extended ceasefire.

The MOU was signed remotely on Wednesday by U.S. President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, two days ahead of a formal signing ceremony scheduled to take place in Switzerland.

Rather than a cessation of hostilities, southern Lebanon witnessed a sharp escalation in fighting, with Israel intensifying its airstrikes and Hezbollah targeting Israeli forces seeking to seize the strategic Ali Taher hill in the Nabatiyeh district. Both sides traded accusations of violating the ceasefire established under the MOU.

The overnight exchange left 47 people dead, including women and children, and 97 others wounded in Israeli strikes on several areas of Lebanon, including Nabatiyeh and the eastern Bekaa Valley. Four Israeli soldiers, including a lieutenant colonel, were also killed by Hezbollah fire.

Israeli airstrikes continued beyond a new ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, brokered by the United States and Qatar with Iranian assistance, and set to take effect at 4 p.m. Friday.

It remains to be seen how long this new truce will last, as is the case with the U.S.-Iran ceasefire, given ambiguities in the MOU and differing interpretations of its clauses.

Israel, which rejected Trump’s “betrayal” and the agreement with Iran, is seeking to change the arrangement by force in order to preserve its freedom of action against Hezbollah threats in southern Lebanon. It also seeks to maintain control of a security zone in southern Lebanon and is not willing to withdraw its forces unless its northern region is secured and safe.

Riad Tabbarah, Lebanon’s former ambassador in Washington, said Israel believes it has the right, as it usually does, to modify the agreement on the ground after “accepting it on paper, so as not to annoy Trump.”

“This is exactly what they did last time, and what they do every time,” Tabbarah told UPI. “Today, they are doing the same.”

He was referring to the Nov. 27 ceasefire agreement brokered by the United States and France to halt the war that began when Hezbollah opened a support front for Gaza on Oct. 8, 2023.

Despite the truce, Israel continued to carry out strikes against Hezbollah, which refrained from retaliation for 15 months as it sought to reorganize its ranks before resuming fighting on March 2 in support of Iran.

The March escalation increased the human and material toll in Lebanon after Israel applied what was described as a “scorched earth” policy to empty border areas of residents and render them uninhabitable.

More than 3,980 people have been killed and 12,001 injured in the past 109 days, with 1.2 million displaced under Israeli evacuation orders. Large areas were devastated, including the complete destruction of 70 villages and heavy damage to infrastructure.

It would be “pure imagination and illogical” to think that Israel would easily withdraw and relinquish the security zone it is building in southern Lebanon, intended to prevent anyone from crossing its border and carrying out kidnappings like Hamas did from Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023, according to Tabbarah.

What could stop the frustrated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from sabotaging Trump’s efforts to finalize a lasting peace deal with Iran and continuing his military campaign in Lebanon?

The tension between Trump and his administration on one side, and Netanyahu and his government officials on the other, over the Iran deal “is growing, and we need to wait and see how it will develop,” said Lebanese former foreign minister Fares Boueiz.

As for Iran, Boueiz noted that as long as it believes it is benefiting from the deal with Trump, it “won’t do anything to jeopardize the understanding.”

“It is clear that the U.S.-Iran war is over, with no winner and no loser and no complete victory for anyone,” he told UPI. “The next 60 days will determine whether a final agreement is reached and whether Netanyahu will be able to obstruct it.”

The fear that Lebanon remains an open battlefield and a bargaining chip has grown, despite Iran’s pledge to Hezbollah that it will not proceed with the MOU talks if Israel fails to observe a full ceasefire in Lebanon and withdraw from the southern region.

Lebanese retired Maj. Gen. Abdul Rahman Chehaitli argued that the war in south Lebanon was “an Iran-Israel war sponsored by the U.S.”

“Now that Iran has reconciled with the U.S., signed an agreement, and is negotiating, the battle is over for them,” Chehaitli said in an interview with UPI. “This means that Lebanon should work toward a solution with Hezbollah and engage in serious negotiations to secure Israel’s withdrawal and end any illegitimate armed presence.”

Lebanon, which opted for U.S.-mediated direct talks with Israel to end the war despite Hezbollah’s objections, is preparing for another round of diplomatic talks with Israel scheduled to take place in Washington next week.

While Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Qassem has set new terms for the talks, saying they should be limited to “mutual security,” Israel is insisting on disarming the Iran-backed group and keeping it away from its borders.

Hezbollah has also been pushing to drop the Lebanon-Israel direct negotiations in favor of the U.S.-Iran track.

“Hezbollah can say whatever it wants, but Lebanon should negotiate on its own,” Chehaitli said, adding that the militant group “is concerned about the day after, seeking security guarantees or immunity.”

Lebanon has no option but to negotiate its way out of the war, but the process will be long, and southern Lebanon will remain under Israeli fire and a bargaining chip in Iran’s hands until a final deal with Washington is reached, according to some analysts.

Tabbarah argued that Israel did not go through all this war only to back down, while Iran seeks a high price in return for Hezbollah and its other regional armed proxies.

“I don’t think Iran will go to war again. It will find a formula to save face for its armed militias,” he said, adding that the U.S., on its part, will have to restrain Israel and force Netanyahu to accept a full ceasefire in Lebanon.

He explained that a decision by Trump to stop U.S. military assistance to Israel, or “anything of the sort,” would be a serious step.

Tabbarah, however, warned that the solution “is not for tomorrow unless Israel drops its dream of establishing Greater Israel.”

Khatibzadeh tells Al Jazeera diplomacy is way forward, but US must ensure that Israel stops its attacks on Lebanon.

Iran’s deputy foreign minister says Tehran wants to continue the diplomatic process with Washington, if the United States is serious about respecting their agreement and ensures Israel abides by the terms of the memorandum of understanding (MoU).

“We are ready to move forward step by step, if the other party demonstrates the same seriousness,” Saeed Khatibzadeh told Al Jazeera Arabic in an interview on Friday.

His comments came after talks between the US and Iran that were due in Switzerland on Friday were called off, and US Vice President JD Vance cancelled his planned trip there.

Earlier, officials including mediators Pakistan and Qatar said the two sides would meet in Burgenstock to begin negotiations on a host of issues as outlined in the MoU signed between the US and Iran this week.

Reports said the talks may have been called off after intense fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon on Friday. Lebanon’s health ministry said Israeli attacks killed at least 47 people since midnight.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Khatibzadeh denounced the latest Israeli attacks in Lebanon, saying Israel’s “continued war-making” would have “serious and immediate consequences”.

He said Iran was seeking “peace on all fronts, including Gaza”, and explained that Lebanon had been included in the MoU because of its direct connection to the conflict.

Article 1 of the MoU explicitly states that ending the war in Lebanon is an integral part of the broader ceasefire arrangement across all fronts.

“There will be no peace or stability in Lebanon and the region without ending the occupation and Israel’s commitment to international law,” Khatibzadeh added.

On the Strait of Hormuz, he said Iran would continue to provide navigation services in coordination with Oman and in accordance with international law.

He added that Tehran would not impose passage fees during the 60-day period outlined by the agreement, but said a new mechanism for managing the waterway would be introduced afterwards and presented to regional countries.

Khatibzadeh also said that any future agreement must include the release of all frozen Iranian funds.

Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran’s ministry of foreign affairs, said on Friday that the necessary consultations involving the US deal are being carried out through mediators, and that if the conditions for starting negotiations are met an official announcement will be made.

Regarding the Lebanon ceasefire required for talks between the US and Iran to continue, a Hezbollah official told Al Jazeera that the ceasefire would hold if Israel abided by it.

Israel’s ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter said on X: “Israel remains firmly committed to an immediate ceasefire. If Hezbollah honours the agreement and ceases its hostilities, they will be met with quiet”.

WASHINGTON — Most Americans continue to disapprove of how President Trump is handling Iran, while his overall presidential approval holds steady, according to a new AP-NORC poll that was conducted as he suggested a deal with Iran had been reached.

The poll points to just how unpopular the war, which began Feb. 28, has been with Americans even as the Republican president turned abruptly from threatening Iran to reopening negotiations. Support for his handling of the war remains lopsidedly partisan. About two-thirds, 65%, of U.S. adults disapprove of how Trump is handling issues with Iran. But while the vast majority of Democrats and independents view Trump’s actions negatively, only 28% of Republicans are unhappy.

Americans’ views on how the president is handling Iran are roughly in line with his overall job approval, which stands at 37%, unchanged from an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in May.

The new survey was conducted June 11-17, just after Trump called off threats to escalate the war with Iran. The poll was fielded as Trump announced a deal with Iran and authorized an end to the U.S. naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, concluding just before the deal was signed Wednesday.

Approval of Trump’s actions on Iran has been low over the past few months. But in interviews, some Republicans also weren’t pleased with the outcome of this week’s agreement, which gives Iran an immediate benefit, allowing it to sell its oil freely again.

The deal also reopens the strait without tolls for two months, restarts talks between the U.S. and Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program and calls for Tehran to dilute its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

David Farrington, a 79-year-old Republican-leaning independent in Fort Worth, Texas, “doesn’t have any love lost” for Iran, but he’s frustrated the agreement focused on the strait and didn’t deliver more on the country’s nuclear weapons program.

“Any agreement regarding the strait is hardly what I would consider a recognizable concession on the part of Iran,” Farrington said. “So, I consider that some fluff that attempts to make this agreement look better when it’s not.”

Trump’s approval on Iran remains flat

Only about one-third of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling Iran in the new poll, in line with May.

Donald McBride, a 28-year-old independent in Plano, Texas, is frustrated that Trump has not maintained his campaign promise to keep America out of foreign wars. McBride voted for Trump but he opposed going to war with Iran.

“I would like the war to end,” he said. “The original objective of the war was to end the Iranian regime, and that’s just not possible. I don’t really know why we’d continue fighting.”

The poll suggests most Americans want action in Iran to wrap up. Even with an agreement on the horizon, 53% of U.S. adults said American military action against Iran had “gone too far,” only a slight decline from 59% in March.

About 4 in 10 Republicans, though, said in the latest poll that action has been “about right,” and 37% said it had not gone far enough.

Joan Jones, a 64-year-old independent in northwest Florida, believes the United States’ actions in Iran have been necessary to address the threat Iran posed.

“Those attacks are ultimately to protect us from nuclear attacks,” Jones said. “I think we have to go through that … and eliminate that worry so we don’t have that hovering over us.”

Few approve of Trump’s approach on Israel

About one-third, 34%, of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling Israel.

Tensions have been rising between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump as the president criticizes recent Israeli attacks in Lebanon, which jeopardized negotiations between Washington and Tehran.

James Huffman, a 69-year-old Republican in Medway, Ohio, thinks Trump is taking the wrong strategy when it comes to Netanyahu.

“Netanyahu is not going to do everything Trump wants. He’s going to do what he wants,” Huffman said. “I just don’t think it’s effective.”

Only about one-third approve on the economy

About one-third of U.S. adults approve of Trump’s approach to the economy. That’s in line with last month, and continues a challenging stretch for Trump on the issue.

Jones, the Florida independent, is more optimistic than most. She said she can hardly leave the house some hours without getting stuck in the traffic of tourists headed to the beach on vacation. She also spots lines around the block for Starbucks, McDonalds and Chick-fil-A in her community — all signs to her that the economy is doing well overall.

“I think President Trump’s policies are contributing to a better economy,” Jones said.

Other Republicans are more skeptical, a troubling sign for a president who prides himself on his business acumen. Only 69% of Republicans approve of how he’s handling the economy, slightly lower than the 78% who approve of how he’s handling the presidency overall.

Patricia Bailey, a 42-year-old Republican in Parkersburg, West Virginia, sees an economy where prices have gotten out of control. “I just said the other night, ordering pizza is for rich people,” she said. Bailey voted for Trump but added, “He’s kind of let me down a little bit.”

Even if high prices preceded Trump, Bailey doesn’t think he’s lived up to his pledge to improve the economy.

“I think he got so distracted with the war that he forgot some old promises,” she said.

Sanders and Thomson-Deveaux write for the Associated Press.

The AP-NORC poll of 3,040 adults was conducted June 11-17 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 2.8 percentage points.

The MQ-9 Reaper and its associated Predator-B family of drones are in an interesting spot these days. On one hand, they are receiving new, highly relevant capabilities and missions at an accelerating pace. They also just proved to be an absolutely star asset for hunting and killing key targets, such as missile launchers and air defenses, deep inside Iran. On the other hand, their vulnerability to air defenses, not even modern ones, is glaring, with major losses in Iran and Yemen. Yet the USAF’s chronic lack of commitment to replace the MQ-9 has left it with dwindling stocks and nothing better to do the job.

Within this jumbled and often misunderstood narrative, one new capability stands out from the rest that would give the MQ-9 extreme value today and for years to come. This is turning the MQ-9 into a radar-toting airborne early warning (AEW) platform for detecting and tracking aircraft, drones, and missiles. A Reaper in this exact configuration just flew for the first time recently.

The MQ-9 sortie in question was the product of a partnership between General Atomics and Saab, with Saab, already a leader in AEW systems, providing the podded radar system named LoyalEye. This initial test flight took place on May 19th, and a full demonstration of the pairing’s capabilities is planned for next year.

GA-ASI President David R. Alexander stated the following about the MQ-9 AEW capability:

“AEW for MQ-9B will offer critical aloft sensing to defend against tactical air munitions, guided missiles, drones, fighter and bomber aircraft, and other threats. Operational availability for a medium-altitude, long-endurance UAS is the highest of any military aircraft, and as an unmanned platform, its aircrews are not put into harm’s way.”

For many years now, I have discussed how the most glaring new mission set for a medium altitude, long-endurance drone is AEW. The idea is relatively simple in concept. Take a cost-effective drone that can fly at medium altitudes for long periods and bolt on some radar pods capable of air moving-target indicator (AMTI) functionality. Then configure the datalinks (both line-of-sight and beyond line-of-sight) aboard the aircraft to send the information the pods collect back to controllers, who also remotely operate the drone and the pods from the ground. Such an unmanned aircraft could fly its missions at relatively low cost, and operate in a distributed manner, near where its surveillance capabilities are needed most. Above all else, it would be able to persist for very long periods of time — think of loitering over its launch location for the better part of a day or more — providing persistent long-range look-down radar surveillance, which has never been more important than it is today.

One-way attack munitions, also known as long-range kamikaze drones, are a massive threat to confront on many levels. These unmanned aerial systems blur the definition between cruise missiles and drones. In this case, cruise missiles are also part of the same problem set. While the question of how to shoot down relatively cheap one-way attack drones cost-effectively gets a lot of attention, just spotting them in order to engage them at all, especially at a distance, is also a challenge. Their small signatures and low-altitude flight profiles, as well as their slow speed, can make it so ground-based sensors don’t detect them until it’s almost too late, and aging airborne sensors also have limitations in doing so.

The moment of one of Russian strikes with Shahed/Geran-type long-range OWA-UAVs in the Ukrainian city of Dnipro on Tuesday.

According to Ukrainian emergency services, at least 12 people have been wounded as a result of today’s attack. https://t.co/3lnQazYpWl pic.twitter.com/N7PdwrsK0I

— Status-6 (War & Military News) (@Archer83Able) September 30, 2025

This is where an advanced look-down airborne radar is critical. It can spot these objects from above at long distances and separate them from the ground clutter. The problem is that airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) manned platforms are hugely expensive, resource intensive, and are the very definition of high-value, low-density assets. Many of them can only operate from longer runways, meaning they can only be based far away from where the threats are. Even then, they are top targets, as we saw earlier this year in Saudi Arabia, and their airfields are prime targets too, which can leave them trapped or destroyed on the ground.

The USAF has a dwindling number of geriatric E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft, which, despite upgrades, are not the best at spotting low-flying drones. The USAF is now moving begrudgingly forward with stalled E-7 procurement, but these aircraft are also very complex, expensive, and labor-intensive platforms that need long runways to operate from. The Navy has the E-2D Hawkeye, which is more modern and capable in some regards, and less in others, but is also not available in vast numbers as they have other critical taskings, especially to support carrier air wings. These aircraft are better suited to operate from remote forward airfields, and having a smaller logistical and crew footprint, but still require far more support than an MQ-9. Overall, these crewed aircraft are also increasingly vulnerable to long-range air defenses, and, while their sensor range is generous, it is still limited, making their utility questionable in a peer state conflict.

For higher-end missions, where command and control is a major part of what AEW&C platforms will be called upon to do, directing air wars and coordinating defenses, while also supplying networking support, a pod-equipped MQ-9 cannot replace an E-7 or E-2. For providing critical surveillance, especially in areas where there are gaps in crewed AEW&C coverage, or in places that just don’t require that level of support, the AEW-capable MQ-9 is a very attractive solution. Even pushing these uncrewed sensor nodes forward, into higher-threat areas, under certain circumstances, to provide high-fidelity radar coverage where no crewed platform would ever be risked, is a real use case. An MQ-9 is far more expendable than a manned AEW&C asset from human life, cost, and recovery operation requirements (combat search and rescue) perspectives.

The truth of the matter is that even if the E-7 replaces all 15 remaining E-3s, and even if the Navy adds E-2 Hawkeyes, in a future distributed conflict, there is no way these aircraft can give all the coverage needed, persistently, day and night, while providing surveillance for all threatened locales. Not even close. This is especially true as relatively cheap one-way attack drones, such as the Shahed-136, can travel over a thousand miles, drastically expanding potential threat areas at a very low cost to the enemy.

This is where the podded MQ-9 can shine, with a detachment of a few of these aircraft providing persistent coverage (“orbits”) over key areas 24/7 while retaining a small logistical footprint. This would also directly support the USAF’s Agile Combat Employment (ACE) combat doctrine, where small groups of tactical aircraft will move quickly from one forward location to another in hopes of staying ahead of an enemy’s targeting cycle. While that may be the goal, these traveling road-shows of airpower will still need persistent look-down coverage, especially if they are positioned deeply within the enemy’s striking range. AEW&C aircraft will not be able to provide this coverage persistently (if at all). AEW MQ-9s could, and they could drastically increase the situational awareness, range, and overall effectiveness of other key defensive capabilities, such as surface-to-air missile systems and fighter aircraft, with the targeting data they provide.

General Atomics is also turning the MQ-9 family into drone killers themselves with the addition of laser-guided rockets. This could result in ‘hunter-killer’ teaming, where the AEW MQ-9 spots the threat and the laser-guided rocket-equipped MQ-9 intercepts and destroys it. Just the AEW MQ-9 on its own can also use its powerful MTS electro-optical sensor turret to visually identify potential enemy aircraft once they get close enough, allowing for a non-cooperative friend or foe identification capability.

Mojave STOL: Real. Rugged. Ready Today.

You can even look to the recent fighting in the Middle East, which saw Iran barrage allied bases on the Arabian Peninsula with one-way attack munitions and low-end cruise missiles. Reapers with LoyalEye pods could have provided persistent look-down radar coverage over threatened areas, especially as the USAF’s dwindling and rickety AEW&C fleet was overtasked. They could have also created a radar picket line across the Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, and eastern Iraq, providing high-fidelity look-down radar coverage and a true early warning screen for Iranian weapons heading towards their target areas, all without putting a crew at risk.

Now, it’s worth noting that the USAF envisions a future where AEW and general AMTI sensing is largely migrated to an orbital layer of satellites, and they are actively working to realize this capability, which would be absolutely revolutionary if fully realized. Yet, as of now, it’s still an if, and it will take years to fully come to fruition. Even then, relying on a space layer alone for this absolutely critical capability would be a huge vulnerability. Backing it up with a lower-end, flexible airborne solution will likely remain critical for a long time to come. AEW MQ-9s can help efficiently fill out a high-low AEW/airborne moving target indicator mix. This is especially true as the platform itself, the MQ-9, can be reconfigured for a huge range of other missions when AEW capabilities are not in high demand, so the USAF isn’t left with a single mission asset.

The AEW MQ-9s can also provide their capabilities here at home. America is dealing with a tough future when it comes to defending the homeland, and providing look-down radar capabilities is a major part of adapting to this reality. Outside of tethered aerostats, which have not proven to be a large-scale workable solution yet, AEW MQ-9s would provide flexible, efficient and persistent capabilities in areas where it may be needed, especially in times of heightened defense, like major public events and during a crisis.

The AEW MQ-9s can also provide their services during large force employment training exercises, including going some way to emulate more capable crewed AEW&C platforms, at least with target track generation, when those manned AEW&C assets are not available. They could also be very valuable in an opposition forces ‘red air’ role, which has historically been sorely lacking in AEW, especially as AEW capabilities proliferate around the globe, particularly with America’s primary pacing threat, China.

The naval side of this is a big deal too. The fact that General Atomics is modifying the MQ-9 family to operate from large deck amphibious assault ships and carriers presents another huge opportunity. It could provide LHA/LHDs with a truly organic fixed-wing AEW asset for the first time — one that doesn’t require large flight crews and that can loiter above the amphibious strike group for very long periods of time. This is becoming more important as enemy missile and drone technology evolves. Having to rely on surface combatants and a small contingent of fighter aircraft, if any at all, for air defense is limiting and can impart extra risk at inopportune times, especially in littoral environments. During a major conflict, these ships could operate too far out to sea to make land-based AEW support plausible and those assets will be over-tasked as it is. AEW MQ-9 seems like a relatively glaring off-the-shelf solution to this problem. It’s also worth noting that the USMC already operates the MQ-9 and integrating it into the shipboard Air Combat Element (ACE) of a Marine Air-Ground Task Force should be relatively straightforward.

Introducing MQ-9B STOL

AEW configured examples could also be extremely useful for the Marines’ Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO) concept, which mirrors elements of the USAF’s ACE doctrine, but goes beyond just the aerial fight. Marines deployed forward in the enemy’s ring of fire under EABO will need look down protection more than pretty much anyone else, which the AEW MQ-9 could provide at low risk. The MQ-9 family is already capable of short field operations and that is only being enhanced with new STOL (short-takeoff-and-landing) members of the MQ-9 family, meaning they can fly from small, austere airstrips and could maintain sortie rates even if those airstrips receive partial damage.

For supercarriers, the AEW MQ-9 could augment the E-2D, providing constant look down radar coverage for the entire carrier strike group when E-2s are not up. This would deeply benefit the CSG’s entire air warfare mission, providing critical sensor data to Aegis warships, fighters, and the carrier. They could also augment E-2D coverage during high-threat periods of vulnerability, including putting additional sensor coverage farther away from the CSG over high-risk vectors of attack. We discussed in detail how an AEW capable version of the Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray could also serve in this general capacity.

All of this is from a very American point of view, but the AEW MQ-9 concept may be most attractive to foreign air arms that currently have no dedicated AEW capabilities at all, or are looking to augment the limited capacity they do have. Fielding a traditional AEW&C force is very expensive, even for a small cadre of crewed platforms, limiting the realistic application of such a force even if the country can afford it to begin with. AEW MQ-9 could help ‘democratize’ AEW and allow many allies to field such a capability, which a coalition force during multi-national operations could also benefit from, including the U.S. In this way, AEW MQ-9 could be a huge win not just for countries in need of this kind of capability at a lower price point, but also for the U.S., as this kind of sensor information will become far more widespread, putting less pressure on its own organic AEW force. This could be leveraged both in peacetime for surveillance and monitoring, but especially in a crisis.

Just look at what’s happening with the drone threat to Europe for instance. MQ-9s with the radar pods could provide sustainable airborne surveillance for NATO countries. Think of the AEW MQ-9 as the F-5 Freedom Fighter of AEW capabilities. And once again, these allies would be able to use the MQ-9s in many different ways when not configured for the AEW mission, including peacetime monitoring and patrols not related to airborne moving target tracking.

As it sits now, Japan has already expressed interest in the AEW MQ-9 and many other nations are sure to follow.

Finally, it’s worth noting that the idea of AEW functionality on an uncrewed platform isn’t exactly new. It has been experimented with before and China is thought to have added some of this functionality to its far more advanced high-altitude, long-endurance drones. But providing a robust, off-the-shelf solution for the more accessible and flexible medium-altitude, long-endurance drone class, and especially the most proven of all types in this class on the planet, the MQ-9 family, makes glaring sense for an extremely wide set of potential users, including the United States.

Contact the author: Tyler@twz.com

Al Jazeera’s Dominic Kane explains that the EU won’t lift crucial sanctions on Iran until a formal nuclear agreement is reached. The bloc’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas also clarified that human rights-related sanctions will continue regardless.

WASHINGTON — The White House pushed back Thursday against growing bipartisan criticism of a negotiated settlement to the war with Iran, arguing its concessions to the Islamic Republic were contingent on its conduct and essential to securing peace.

The administration’s defensive posture came as details of the framework agreement, known as a memorandum of understanding, were finally shared with the public, revealing a raft of compromises with Tehran long opposed by Republicans.

Vice President JD Vance, who helped negotiate the deal, told reporters Thursday that the deal was structured to reward Iran for good behavior. But the text of the agreement suggests otherwise.

The Trump administration agreed to release billions of dollars in Iranian assets that were frozen and restricted by the United States “upon the implementation” of the memorandum — before any further actions are taken or additional negotiations begin. The president will issue sanctions waivers on Iranian oil, allowing Tehran to resume trading its most valuable export and breaking with decades of policy. And to facilitate that trade, boosting Tehran’s revenues, Trump agreed to immediately end a U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports.

Still more concessions were offered to the Iranians, including a commitment by the U.S. administration to establish a fund of “at least $300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic” — in effect providing reparations for the war Trump started.

“All required licenses, waivers and permissions needed for the relevant financial transactions will be granted by the United States of America,” the memorandum reads.

Taken together, the document reads as a stunning reversal of U.S. policy toward Iran after decades of concern across administrations in Washington — including throughout Trump’s two terms — that the Islamic Republic represents the nation’s greatest security threats as the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism.

Criticism from Republican senators, in particular, has been sharp and swift.

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the $300-billion fund “would make Iran’s payoff under President Obama’s 2015 deal look like a pittance by comparison.” And Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) accused the Trump administration of giving Iran money it would use to kill Americans.

“History demonstrates that giving billions of dollars to theocratic lunatics who want to murder us is an exceptionally bad idea, and I think, unfortunately, the president is receiving some really bad advice on this deal,” Cruz said. “I don’t want to see us send a penny to the ayatollah. And I hope that we don’t.”

The Obama-era deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, included structured sanctions relief for Iran in exchange for concrete and verifiable steps by Tehran to dismantle much of its nuclear program — a framework that Republicans broadly criticized at the time.

By contrast, Trump’s agreement commits the United States to pursuing economic relief for Iran while providing no clarity about the future of Iran’s nuclear program — the very issue Trump cited as the rationale for launching the war.

The memorandum includes a pledge by Iran to never purchase or construct nuclear weapons — a vow the Islamic Republic has made multiple times before, including by signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, in a religious edict issued by the late supreme leader and in the Obama-era nuclear accord.

Vice President JD Vance speaks to reporters at the White House on June 18, 2026.

(Manuel Balce Ceneta / Associated Press)

Detailed negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program — including whether Tehran could continue domestic uranium enrichment, at what level, and under what monitoring regime — were left for another day.

For more than a decade, the U.S. intelligence community has assessed that Iran sought a threshold nuclear capability, securing the strategic advantages of a nuclear power without incurring the costs of openly pursuing a bomb.

The agreement does include a commitment by Iran to do its “best” to bring commercial shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital international waterway, back to prewar levels. But critics of the president said he had to make deep, historic concessions just to secure a status quo ante upended by the war he started. And in the document, Tehran agreed to refrain from imposing a toll on ships transiting the strait for only a 60-day period.

“Unless you were homeschooled by a day drinker, no one’s confident that Iran is going to do anything,” Sen. John Kennedy, a Republican from Louisiana, told reporters this week.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, Kennedy’s Republican counterpart from Louisiana, called the deal “the worst foreign policy blunder in decades” that would have President Reagan “rolling over in his grave.”

“Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future. Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal,” Cassidy said.

“Before the war, the strait was open, Iran was being crushed by sanctions, and 13 service members were still alive,” he added. “Now, 13 Americans are dead, families have paid billions at the pump, sanctions will be lifted, and the bombing has stopped.”

Despite mounting criticism, Trump put his signature to the memorandum on Wednesday night while attending a dinner with the French president in Versailles, a palace infamous for hosting a treaty signing that disgraced Germany at the end of the First World War.

He defended the agreement while in Europe and suggested further concessions might be forthcoming, including recognition of Iran’s claimed right to enrich uranium and a new willingness to tolerate its continued ballistic missile development — another program that Trump had vowed to eliminate as a central war aim.

“He took America to war — killing 13 soldiers, thousands of Iranian civilians and costing taxpayers $60 billion — to get rid of Iran’s missile program. And now that he’s lost the war, he pretends like it’s no big deal,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut.

“Just unforgivable,” he added. “What a charlatan.”

Authors: Kung Chan and Yang Xite*

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent state visit to China, which was his first foreign trip of 2026, is a clear indication of the shifting dynamics of the bilateral relationship. Accompanied by an unprecedented delegation of 39 high-ranking officials, including five deputy prime ministers, eight ministers, the central bank governor, and energy executives, the scale resembled a partial cabinet relocation. This massive mobilization reflects Moscow’s urgency to secure an agreement on the Power of Siberia 2 natural gas pipeline, a strategic super-project stalled in commercial negotiations since 2012. Planned to span over 2,600 kilometers with an annual capacity of 50 billion cubic meters, the pipeline would traverse Mongolia to link Russian fields with Chinese markets. For Russia, finalizing this energy artery is an economic imperative to replace the European market, where Western sanctions aim to eliminate Russian pipeline gas imports by the end of 2027.

Evaluating the geopolitics of this energy relationship requires analyzing five distinct strategic dimensions.

First, Beijing has strong incentives to resist quick concessions. The negotiation deadlock is largely on pricing. Russia reportedly seeks approximately US$ 265 per thousand cubic meters to cover the high extraction and infrastructure costs of its Yamal fields in Western Siberia, whereas China targets roughly US$ 120. Unlike Russia, China commands significant leverage, boasting robust domestic pipeline networks, stable Central Asian infrastructure, and diverse liquefied natural gas imports. Given Russia’s acute financial pressure and diminishing options due to sanctions after the war in Ukraine, Beijing has the luxury of strategic patience, allowing it to wait for terms that align with market principles rather than rushing a deal under political pressure.

Second, the pipeline is less about energy revenue for Moscow and more about maintaining global geopolitical relevance. In the current international order, Russia finds itself sidelined from primary great-power management. Consequently, Putin seeks to leverage the Ukraine conflict to engage Washington while simultaneously trying to bind Russia’s economic future to China, much like it previously did with Europe. This anxiety within the China-United States-Russia triangular relationship was highlighted by the timing of the visit, which occurred just days after the U.S. President Donald Trump departed Beijing. As the war enters its fifth year and energy weaponization loses its potency in the West, shifting exports eastward has transformed from a strategic choice into a necessity for regime survival. By proposing a 30-year, multibillion-dollar pipeline network, Moscow hopes to anchor itself to the world’s largest energy consumer, ensuring it remains an indispensable player rather than a marginalized resource base.

Third, the proposed pipeline route serves as a geopolitical lever within the post-Soviet space. Passing through Mongolia, the route allows Russia to entrench its influence over Ulaanbaatar, which has recently deepened its engagement with the United States and NATO, while monitoring China’s northern energy ingress. This alignment requires Beijing to pay substantial transit fees and leaves its energy security vulnerable to the political stability of a third country. For Moscow, the project simultaneously secures the Chinese market and reinforces its traditional sphere of influence across Central Asia and Mongolia, using infrastructure to manage the economic and diplomatic trajectories of neighboring states.

Fourth, the protracted timeline works in Beijing’s favor. The longer negotiations stall, the more China’s bargaining position strengthens against an increasingly isolated Russia. While Moscow faces a liquidity crisis within its National Wealth Fund and the fiscal drain of a prolonged war, China’s energy diversification has progressed rapidly. Construction on Line D of the Central Asia-China gas pipeline is advancing alongside commitments from Turkmenistan, while maritime LNG capacity expanded by over 10 million tons recently with imports from Qatar, Australia, and the United States. Furthermore, China’s domestic shale gas production and global leadership in renewable energy insulation provide a structural ceiling on long-term natural gas demand. Middle Eastern instability in the Strait of Hormuz elevates the short-term value of overland corridors, but it ultimately reinforces Beijing’s commitment to resilience rather than a singular dependence on Moscow.

Fifth, China’s optimal energy architecture centers on the Southern Corridor, specifically what can be called the “Turkmenistan-Uzbekistan-Tajikistan (TUT) Corridor” framework. This network offers a direct alternative that circumvents Russian territory, extending through Xinjiang and across the Caspian Sea toward Azerbaijan and Europe. Lines A, B, and C of the Central Asia-China pipeline are already operational, and the completion of Line D will raise total capacity to 65 billion cubic meters annually. This infrastructure is backed by deepening diplomatic ties. Beijing and Dushanbe codified their strategic partnership via a friendship treaty, and China’s trade volume with the five Central Asian republics surpassed US$ 100 billion, cementing its status as their primary trading partner. A fully integrated Central Asian energy network directly erodes Russia’s traditional influence in its southern flank, creating a new economic center of gravity.

Ultimately, while Putin’s high-profile delegation sought to secure a vital economic lifeline, the unresolved pipeline agreement exposes the cold calculation of national interests underlying the partnership. For Beijing, maintaining a deliberate pace maximizes its buyers’ advantage and allows alternative supply chains to mature. The true key to Eurasian energy security lies not in a single northern pipeline, but in a diversified, networked western corridor that mitigates risk and ensures supply chain autonomy, a structural reality that will shape the continent’s geopolitical architecture for decades.

*Yang Xite, a Research Fellow at ANBOUND.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Marco Rubio stood silent and stone-faced behind Donald Trump on Wednesday as the president joked of passing the buck if his deal with Iran, under increasingly withering criticism and scrutiny, ultimately falls apart.

The blame, Trump said, would likely fall on his vice president, JD Vance, who led the negotiations toward a memorandum of understanding with Iran and will sign the agreement this week in Switzerland — a ceremony that will generate indelible images for a politician openly considering a run for the White House.

The controversial diplomatic breakthrough poses a quandary for Vance, whose aides see Rubio as his most viable challenger for the Republican presidential nomination should the secretary choose to run.

“If it works out, I’m going to take the credit,” Trump said of the Iran deal, with Rubio by his side.

“If it doesn’t work out, I’m blaming JD,” he joked. “You better be careful, JD!”

Silent secretary

Rubio, who also serves as the president’s national security advisor, has remained effectively mum since news of a preliminary peace deal was announced by the administration on Sunday.

His absence has drawn notice across foreign policy circles — not only because Rubio has served as chief architect of the administration’s global strategy thus far, but also because he has become one of the president’s most effective communicators, both at home and abroad.

By contrast, Vance, on a scheduled press tour promoting his new book, has emerged as the face of an agreement that appears to be fracturing a Republican Party already divided over America’s role in the world.

The administration’s internal divide over Iran extends beyond the war to broader U.S. support for its historic allies, including Israel in the Middle East, Canada and Mexico in this hemisphere, and Ukraine and Europe against a revanchist Russia.

“Rubio has always been a hawk on Iran, and Vance has always been an appeaser,” said Danielle Pletka, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, describing the vice president as positioning himself “as Trump without the flaws.”

“Rubio has a harder job because he’s more of a traditional Republican,” she said, adding that a competitive presidential run by the secretary might require him to pitch “a return to normalcy.”

No guarantee of success

Behind closed doors, Rubio advocated against the deal in its current form, citing intelligence reports that found it highly unlikely Tehran would give up its nuclear ambitions, according to two sources familiar with the matter. Rubio’s internal skepticism was first reported by Axios.

The deal kicks down the road highly technical discussions over the mechanics of unwinding Iran’s nuclear program — with no guarantee of success — while granting Tehran immediate relief, lifting a U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports that will allow Iranian imports and exports to resume.

In exchange, Iran has only agreed in principle not to pursue nuclear weapons — a vow it has made multiple times before — and to do its “best” to return commercial shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz back to prewar levels. It commits in the deal to refrain from implementing a toll system in the strait, according to U.S. officials, for a mere 60-day period.

“This agreement is a road map for Iran to become a rising, stronger power in the [Persian] Gulf — stronger than it is even today,” said Robert Pape, a political science professor at the University of Chicago.

“That is going to be an issue for the balance of power with Israel, which before the Iran war was the rising power. Now it’s lost that paradigm,” Pape said. “And this is going to be an issue with the future disposition of American forces in the region, because the [memorandum of understanding] states quite clearly that Iran is expecting those forces to withdraw.”

Positioning by the vice president

Despite mounting skepticism, Vance has embraced his role in ending a war that a powerful faction of Trump’s base aggressively opposed from the start.

“I think there are some people who just want the bombing to continue, regardless of whether it accomplishes anything for Americans,” Vance told CBS News on Wednesday.

“I do think there are people,” he added, “who sometimes confuse the ends with the means.”

Because the preliminary Iran deal leaves key details unresolved, further negotiations virtually ensure the agreement remains in flux through the election season — potentially thrusting the talks into the center of the presidential primary campaign.

“Given the distance between the parties on the core nuclear issues, as well as the Trump administration’s poor track record with coercive diplomacy, I fully expect the 60-day window for talks to be extended, as the [memorandum of understanding] text permits, taking this issue to the heart of the midterms and beyond,” said Reid Pauly, a professor of nuclear security and policy at Brown University.

“There will be a lot of incentive in the administration,” Pauly added, “to distance oneself from this fiasco.”

As a guest on Megyn Kelly’s podcast this week, Vance acknowledged the political realities of Trump’s base splintering over the Iran war, noting that a coalition of isolationists — as well as those advocating what he called a more “aggressive” foreign policy — had together swept Trump back into office.

The war may be breaking that coalition apart, he said.

“We have a constituency right now that is saying, we’re going to send boots on the ground — they want Donald Trump to send hundreds of thousands of ground troops into Iran,” Vance told the former Fox News host.

“Those are Republicans,” Kelly said.

“We need people to be pushing back from inside the tent,” Vance replied.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: He graduated high school with honors. ICE detained him the next day
The deep dive: What we know about two SoCal men arrested in alleged plot to attack White House UFC fight
The L.A. Times Special: L.A. defies the skeptics for a World Cup marked by unity, mutual respect, fearlessness

More to come,
Michael Wilner
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

The money-saving expert said earlier in the week that he expected energy prices to drop soon in some rare ‘good news’ for hard-pressed Brits

Martin Lewis says that energy deals are already becoming more affordable following an agreement between the US and Iran. The money-saving expert stated earlier this week that he anticipated prices would fall soon in some rare ‘good news’ for financially stretched British households concerning energy costs.

This followed an announcement of an accord between the US and Iran to cease hostilities and reopen the crucial Strait of Hormuz. The memorandum of understanding, which is now active, was signed on Wednesday by Donald Trump and Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian.

This has seen the cost of oil and natural gas decline, resulting in a reduction in energy prices. At the time of writing, Brent crude has fallen by approximately $7 a barrel and UK natural gas by roughly 14 per cent.

Mr Lewis confirmed that fixed energy deals were already being made available that were around 5 per cent more affordable. He stated: “Energy fixes have started to get cheaper, now 5% below April price cap.”

However, Mr Lewis cautioned earlier this week that people shouldn’t anticipate a substantial reduction in the next price cap, which runs from October to December.

The next price cap is expected to be announced on August 26 by energy regulator Ofgem. Approximately 60 per cent of households in England, Scotland, and Wales remain on a standard variable tariff, meaning their costs are governed by the price cap.

The current energy price cap is due to increase on July 1 by 13 per cent. This means that a home with typical energy consumption paying by direct debit will face charges of £1,862 annually.

That marks a rise of £221 compared to the previous price cap – and Mr Lewis cautioned it could climb even higher, despite the cessation of hostilities.

He stated: “The US and Iran signing a framework deal has pushed natural gas prices down. These wholesale prices are a key driver of UK gas and electricity bills. As the six-month graph shows, though, prices still have a long way to fall before returning to pre-conflict levels.

“The good news is that this could lead to slightly cheaper fixed tariffs being launched in the coming days. However, without substantial further drops the October price cap still looks likely to be significantly higher than it is today.”

He was subsequently questioned about why he believed the price cap would increase from October. He responded: “It’s the same reason the energy Price Cap HASN’T yet risen due to the Middle East crisis. It is time-lagged. So slow to rise, slow to fall.”

Oil fell sharply in early trading after US President Donald Trump and his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian, put their names to an initial accord to halt hostilities, a move expected to restore the flow of crude through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important shipping arteries.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

At the time of writing on Thursday morning, the front-month contract on WTI, the US benchmark, was down by 2.3% to $75 a barrel, while Brent crude, the international gauge, traded 2% lower at around $78 a barrel.

Both remain above the roughly $70 level seen before the conflict, but they have fallen well below the peaks of more than $100 reached only weeks ago.

The deal sets a 60-day window for the two sides to negotiate a final settlement on Iran’s nuclear programme, with Tehran agreeing in the interim to dilute its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

Crucially for energy markets, it lifts US-backed sanctions, allowing Iran to resume selling its oil freely, and clears the way for tankers to move crude out of the Persian Gulf once more.

US President Donald Trump has said the strait will be fully open by Friday and operate without transit charges, a pledge that has encouraged traders to bet on easing supply pressures.

After signing the memorandum of understanding, Trump stated, “oil down, stocks up”, with hand motions.

An oil market still running on depleted reserves

The optimism arrives against a strained backdrop.

In its June Oil Market Report, the International Energy Agency said strategic oil reserves across advanced economies had slipped to their lowest level since 1990, with government stockpiles in OECD countries down by 163 million barrels since the conflict began as emergency releases accelerated.

The agency also trimmed its outlook for global demand, which it now expects to contract through 2026 as elevated fuel prices and supply disruptions bite, before recovering next year.

It cautioned that any rebound in supply may be gradual, citing the slow clearance of mines and continued disruption to shipping routes even with the interim deal in place.

Flows through the Strait of Hormuz had already begun to recover, rising from a May low to around 12 million barrels a day in early June.

Stocks mixed after the Fed signals possible hikes

Equities offered a patchier picture following Wednesday’s losses on Wall Street, where the S&P 500 fell 1.2% after fresh Fed projections showed nearly half of policymakers expect at least one interest rate hike this year.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 1%, and the Nasdaq Composite slid 1.3%.

In his first press conference as Fed chair, Kevin Warsh declined to forecast where rates would end the year and signalled a rethink of how the central bank communicates, dropping the customary hints about future policy direction from its statement.

US President Donald Trump, who had long pressed Warsh’s predecessor to cut rates, was unusually relaxed about the outcome.

“It’s all right. Whatever,” Trump told reporters in France as he attended the G7 meeting.

Asked about the prospect of a hike, he said it was “hard to believe” but that, with Warsh now in place, he was “guided by what he wants.”

US stock futures pointed higher early on Thursday, with contracts on the S&P 500 up 0.9% and on the Nasdaq Composite around 1.4% higher.

In Asia, Tokyo’s Nikkei 225 and South Korea’s Kospi both jumped 2.3%, helped by hopes for an end to the Iran war and strong demand for technology shares.

European trading was more subdued, with the Euro Stoxx 50 rising 1% but the broader pan-European Stoxx 600 trading flat.

The UK’s FTSE 100, Germany’s DAX 30, Italy’s FTSE MIB, Spain’s IBEX 35, the Netherlands’ AEX, and Switzerland’s CH20 all traded between 0.4% and 0.8% higher than their Wednesday close.

France’s CAC 40 led the pack and jumped roughly 1.3%.

Additional sources • AP

Under the MOU, an initial 60-day negotiation period, which can be extended, will begin once the preliminary agreement is signed.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry has said that the signing of a memorandum of understanding in Switzerland, expected to take place on Friday, could take place in the presence of President Masoud Pezeshkian and Donald Trump.

Previously, Iran had said that Washington and Tehran would be represented by Vice President JD Vance and Parliament Speaker and top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, respectively.

On Wednesday, ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei told reporters that Iran’s plans “for the Swiss summit have not changed”.

“Regarding the manner of signing the memorandum of understanding, one of the ideas is for it to be done by the presidents of the two countries, which is currently being considered,” he added.

Speaking at the G7 summit in France earlier, Trump said he expected the agreement with Iran to be signed “shortly” without specifying the exact date.

“The deal we reached with Iran on Sunday will be signed shortly, tomorrow [Thursday], maybe the next day [Friday],” Trump told a news conference after previous announcements that it would be signed on Friday in Switzerland.

Hormuz to be ‘restored to normal’

In a statement, Baghaei added that maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz will be restored to normal within a defined timeframe, while insisting that outside powers will have no role in the process and that managing that process would be handled by Iran alone.

“This is our own task, and we alone will do it, and there will be no need for participation or intervention from other parties,” he stated.

“Iran and Oman will cooperate to develop a mechanism for managing the Strait of Hormuz, and we will exchange views with other countries in the region wherever necessary.

He said that Iran and the US agreed to “negotiate a final agreement within 60 days”, adding that the naval blockade “must end within 30 days.

A senior US official, briefing reporters on Wednesday, said the MOU establishes a new “minimum” threshold for downblending Iran’s stock of highly enriched uranium and contains measures aimed at safeguarding Lebanon’s “territorial integrity” following Israel’s latest strikes on Hezbollah inside the country.

In exchange, Washington would move to waive, though not fully lift, some of its broad sanctions on Iran once the agreement is signed.

The US-drafted text also guarantees toll-free transit through the Strait of Hormuz for a period of just 60 days, and leaves open the possibility that transit fees could be imposed later, the official added on condition of anonymity.

Israeli air strikes have continued to target towns in southern Lebanon despite an agreement between the United States and Iran set to be formally signed on Friday to end the war on all fronts.

Israeli drones carried out three attacks in Tyre that resulted in injuries while a drone also targeted the Bint Jbeil district in Nabatieh, Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency said on Wednesday.

The fighting in Lebanon is considered one of the biggest threats to the framework agreement in the US-Israel war on Iran with Tehran warning that new Israeli strikes on Lebanon and continued occupation of its territory would be regarded as a violation of the deal.

Earlier on Wednesday, Al Jazeera Arabic correspondents on the ground reported that Israeli forces carried out an air strike on the outskirts of Kfar Tebnit, also in the Nabatieh district. They also launched raids on the town of Nabatieh al-Fawqa and shelled the Ali al-Taher heights and the outskirts of the town.

Hezbollah fighters, meanwhile, launched at least 10 rockets towards Israeli forces near Kfar Tebnit.

A day earlier, Israeli attacks killed at least four people in Nabatieh, including in drone strikes on several vehicles.

There has been a reduction in violence since the US-Iran agreement was announced, but attacks have not stopped, Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr said, reporting from Beirut.

“Security sources believe that the Israeli army is trying to occupy more ground, especially strategic high ground around Nabatieh,” she said.

“Yes, families have started to return to their villages, but people are worried. They say they don’t trust that Israel will abide by the ceasefire.”

United Nations spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said the number of projectiles fired between Israeli forces and Lebanon fell to 174 on Sunday, compared with 705 the previous Sunday.

Of these, 169 were attributed to Israel and five to Hezbollah, he said.

Lebanon ‘most sensitive issue between the sides’

The situation in Lebanon is one of the main pillars of the US-Iran agreement, Al Jazeera’s Almigdad Alruhaid said, reporting from Tehran.

“As we approach the signing of the deal, it is becoming the most sensitive issue between the sides,” Alruhaid said.

Iran said the Israeli military has violated the ceasefire in Lebanon 84 times in the past two days and warned that Israel should expect “a harsh response” if it does not stop its attacks, he reported.

This came after Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the withdrawal of the Israeli military from Lebanese territory is one of the core demands right now to move forward with the framework agreement Iran has with the US, Alruhaid said: “So the Iranians say the situation in Lebanon, in particular southern Lebanon, is an integral part of the memorandum of understanding.”

Lebanon was among the top priorities for the Iranians when they started negotiations with US President Donald Trump’s administration, according to Mohammad Eslami from Tehran University.

“Once the Iranians not only retaliated against the Israeli attacks on Dahiyeh and Beirut but also pre-emptively attacked Israeli territory, they showed right from the outset they are determined and very serious about supporting Lebanon, the Lebanese people, the Lebanese government and the resistance factions in Lebanon,” Eslami told Al Jazeera.

Israel’s invasion akin to ‘war crimes’

Meanwhile, the human rights group Amnesty International said on Wednesday that the Israeli army’s mass forced displacement orders in Lebanon amount to war crimes under international law.

“In parts of southern Lebanon, the Israeli military’s forced displacement of civilians and prevention of their return amounts to unlawful transfer – which is a war crime,” Amnesty said in a statement.

The Israeli army has “radically expanded” its use of such orders, displacing hundreds of thousands of people across Lebanon, it said.

“Instead of forcibly uprooting communities and designating entire swathes of Lebanese land as ‘no-go zones’ for civilians, Israeli forces must immediately withdraw from Lebanese territory,” said Kristine Beckerle, Amnesty International’s deputy regional director for the Middle East and North Africa.

The Israeli military declared about 4.6 percent of Lebanon as a “no-go zone” on November 28, 2024, a day after a previous ceasefire took effect, Amnesty noted.

This year, just three days after an April 17 ceasefire announcement, the restricted area was expanded to about 6 percent of the country, and residents were ordered not to return to villages previously home to tens of thousands of civilians.

Lebanese officials said Israel, which has been carrying out a large-scale offensive in the country since March 2, has killed more than 3,800 people, wounded 11,850 and displaced more than one million.

US President Donald Trump has accused his predecessor Barack Obama of ‘bribing’ Iran to agree to the 2015 nuclear agreement, by referring to a $1.7B settlement of a decades-old lawsuit. He used profanity in his brief comments to the media alongside Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

EVIAN-LES-BAINS, France — The United States could soon reimpose sanctions on Russian oil shipments after President Trump and fellow leaders at the Group of Seven summit of major industrialized democracies moved Tuesday to put the war in Ukraine back on top of their agenda, more than four years after Russia launched its full-scale invasion.

The Iran war has recently overshadowed Ukraine, but Trump said he wants to shift the focus following the announcement of an agreement to end the 3½-month-old conflict in the Gulf.

Trump said Iran will soon be “back in the rearview mirror.”

Trump said the sanctions on Russia that were eased during the Iran war to help lower oil prices can go back in place as more oil moves through the Strait of Hormuz.

“Soon we’ll be able to do that because the oil is now flowing,” Trump told reporters in Evian, the French spa town close to the Swiss border that is hosting the summit. “We’re in a position to do that soon.”

The U.S. in March temporarily eased some sanctions on some Russian oil shipments as crude prices sharply increased. The waiver has been extended.

Zelensky joins G7 leaders for talks

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky joined the G7 leaders for talks on the war in his country. They wrapped quickly, after just 75 minutes.

Zelensky said Ukraine is serious about peace while Russia toys with world leaders. “The entire ‘Seven’ supports Ukraine unanimously today,” he said.

Zelensky added that G7 leaders supported Ukraine’s need for more Patriot missiles and discussed how to increase production by licensing production. Patriot missiles are able to counter Russian ballistic missile attacks on Ukraine’s power grid and cities.

As the U.S. under Trump has cut back aid to Ukraine, France and its European allies are now the biggest providers of military and financial support to Kyiv.

Trump downplayed the impact of the Russia-Ukraine war on the U.S. but lamented the death toll.

“The whole thing is ridiculous,” Trump said. “So, yeah, I’m going to do whatever I can.”

Meanwhile, the U.K. announced new sanctions targeting the “shadow fleet ” Russia uses to ship oil and gas, and the finance networks used by Moscow to evade Western sanctions. The ships targeted include several recently purchased by Russia to transport liquefied natural gas from its sanctioned Arctic LNG 2 project.

Russia fires again at Ukraine’s biggest cities

Hours before the summit began Monday, Russia fired hundreds of drones and dozens of missiles at Ukraine’s biggest cities in a barrage that killed 11 people and set fire to a religious landmark.

The attacks came after Zelensky and Putin spoke separately by phone with Trump on Sunday, the U.S. leader’s 80th birthday.

While campaigning in 2024 for a return to the White House, Trump claimed he could end the Russia-Ukraine war within 24 hours of taking office. However, negotiations have faltered and Trump has acknowledged it has proved much harder than he thought.

Ukraine on Monday officially started European Union membership negotiations, launching a process that will require its government to commit to years of political reforms even as it fights the Russian invasion.

Ukraine sees EU membership as a security guarantee for a stable future once the war ends. Its best guarantee would be membership in the NATO military alliance, but the Trump administration insists that cannot happen, and others are wary of Ukraine joining while the war continues.

Trump says he may send Iran deal to Congress

The U.S.-Iran ceasefire deal got plenty of attention at Tuesday’s sessions, with Trump voicing his openness to sending the deal to Congress for review. The text has not been made public.

“I like the idea, send it to Congress please,” Trump said at the start of a meeting with United Arab Emirates President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan on the summit’s sidelines. He added, “I mean who wouldn’t approve it?”

Republicans on Capitol Hill say they want Trump to provide more information about the agreement, with some expressing skepticism that the deal can deter Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon.

Trump also met with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani. The Gulf nations are not part of the G7, but French President Emmanuel Macron extended invitations to their leaders at a fraught moment for their region.

Trump also expressed frustration over Israel’s continued hostilities with the Iranian-backed militia Hezbollah in Lebanon, telling reporters he’s “not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon and with Hezbollah.”

Trump said Israeli operations to target Hezbollah “should have been able to deal with them faster,” adding: “It just goes on forever. And when that happens, it throws a negative light on the big deal. And that’s the deal with Iran.”

Macron said France and other Western partners are “ready to take action very quickly” to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz peacefully to ease the economic impact of rising oil prices. France and the U.K. have championed a mission to restore maritime security there as soon as conditions allow.

The G7 comprises France, the United States, Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom. Other guest nations, including Brazil, India, Kenya and South Korea, were invited to participate in some discussions.

Superville, Corbet and Madhani write for the Associated Press. Madhani reported from Geneva. AP writers Jill Lawless and Samuel Petrequin in London, Collin Binkley in Washington and Illia Novikov in Kyiv contributed to this report.

Tottenham Hotspur have agreed a £52m deal with Brighton for Dutch defender Jan Paul van Hecke.

The 26-year-old started in his country’s 2-2 draw with Japan on Sunday at the World Cup.

Van Hecke has a year left on his current Brighton contract and showed no inclination to extend the deal.

Brighton had already turned down one offer for a player who joined them from NAC Breda in 2020.

However, they have now accepted Tottenham’s offer, which should clear the way to Van Hecke rejoining former Brighton boss Roberto de Zerbi in north London.

The deal also includes a significant sell-on clause with Brighton profiting further should Spurs sell the player.

Van Hecke made 131 appearances for the Seagulls and started 36 out of 38 Premier League games for Fabian Hurzeler’s side last season as they secured an eighth-place finish. That secured European qualification for only the second time in the club’s history.

Tottenham have already strengthened De Zerbi’s squad in an effort to improve markedly on successive 17th-placed finishes.

Scotland defender Andy Robertson has already signed from Liverpool, with Argentinian centre-half Marcos Senesi agreeing a move from Bournemouth.

June 16 (UPI) — Venezuela’s government signed a memorandum of understanding with U.S.-based GE Vernova, General Electric’s energy division, and state-owned utility Corpoelec to repair, modernize and stabilize the country’s struggling national power grid.

The plan aims to restore 1,000 megawatts of generating capacity over the next 24 months and more than 5,000 MW within four to five years.

The agreement, signed Monday by Venezuela’s interim President Delcy Rodriguez, comes shortly after the National Assembly approved reforms to the country’s electricity law. The changes create a new framework that allows foreign investment in the sector after 15 years of an exclusive state monopoly.

During the signing ceremony, attended by Venezuelan government officials, company representatives and U.S. Charge d’Affaires in Caracas John Barrett, Rodriguez said the project will address both hydroelectric and thermoelectric infrastructure.

“We want to move forward steadily in the recovery of the national electricity system, for the benefit of the entire country but also to facilitate conditions for all the international investments arriving in the country,” Rodriguez said during the ceremony, which was broadcast on state television.

GE Vernova technical teams spent six weeks conducting an audit of Venezuela’s electrical system. The assessment confirmed the deteriorated condition of Corpoelec’s facilities, which have contributed to electricity rationing and widespread blackouts, particularly in western states such as Zulia, the center of Venezuela’s oil industry and a major agricultural region.

“We want to move quickly so the system works as well as possible within a few months, and I believe we can do that together,” GE Vernova Chief Sustainability Officer Roger Martella said. “We already have an agreement on the technical aspects and how we can move forward rapidly. Over the next 12 months and beyond, we will strengthen the national electric system.”

According to local media reports, the Guri Hydroelectric Plant, which supplies about 70% of the country’s electricity, has suffered significant wear because of a lack of original replacement parts. New equipment will be used to stabilize and rehabilitate generating facilities at hydroelectric dams in southern Venezuela.

GE Vernova’s equipment also is expected to help restore local thermoelectric generation capacity, reducing pressure on the Guri complex and improving energy independence for central and western regions.

Transmission lines that cross the country face constant overloads and aging substations. The plan includes energy management software and upgrades to substations to improve reliability and reduce recurring power fluctuations.

The legal reforms approved this month allow concessions of up to 25 years in power generation, transmission and distribution, providing legal certainty for companies such as GE Vernova to deploy technology and services in the sector.

The legislation also establishes stricter accountability requirements for operators and creates a formal framework for renewable energy development.

In addition to increasing generating capacity and modernizing grid operations, the agreement includes a specialized training program for Venezuela’s technical workforce.

The US-Iran memorandum of understanding expected to be formally signed in Switzerland on Friday could allow for the establishment of a $300bn investment fund for Iran, as part of a broader settlement to end the war that triggered a global energy crisis and upended markets worldwide.

US Vice President JD Vance told CBS News on Monday that the incentives would be connected to Iran’s “performance” in adhering to the deal, which was digitally signed by both sides on Sunday.

The scale of the financial incentives grabbed the headlines due to US President Donald Trump’s longstanding criticism of a 2015 nuclear accord that he claimed delivered economic benefits to Tehran.

In a bid to manage perceptions around this politically sensitive issue, Trump took to his Truth Social platform to claim that “the story that the US is paying Iran 300 million Dollars is Fake News,” while Vance told CBS News that the money would not be a US payout in exchange for Iran’s enriched uranium.

“When people say that billions of dollars of assets will be released, that’s not true,” the vice president told the CBS Morning programme. “What is true is that Iran will have a much better and much more prosperous future if they meet the obligations they make in this agreement.”

What do we know about the $300bn investment fund?

Vance said the deal “fundamentally extends a hand to Iran and says, ‘Look, if you guys are willing to honour your obligations, if you’re willing to allow real inspections of your nuclear programme, then we will welcome you back into the world economy.’

“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf Coast coalition, so long as they honour their end of the obligation,” Vance told CBS. He also claimed that while US money would not be injected, economic opportunities could arise once Iran repositions itself in the global economy.

The New York Times quoted sources saying the fund would not come from governments but be created for companies eager to invest in Iran.

Muhanad Seloom, a non-resident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the setup was a no-lose solution for Washington. “If Iran reforms, the administration owns the peace; if it doesn’t, the US loses nothing and the Gulf carries the risk,” he told Al Jazeera.

What about the Iranian frozen assets?

Seloom said the idea of an investment fund was built precisely to escape the optics of releasing Iran’s frozen funds. While the exact amount of Iran’s frozen assets is unclear, official Iranian reports and experts have set the total amount at more than $100bn.

Iran’s economy has been crippled due to years of sanctions imposed on the country by the United States and other nations following the Islamic revolution in 1979, and then amplified over Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missiles programmes. These measures have restricted Tehran’s ability to access its own assets, such as revenues from oil sales, which have been frozen in foreign banks.

Tehran was granted sanctions relief in the wake of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal signed under President Barack Obama, but Trump tore it up in 2018 during his first term. The 2015 deal had put limits on Iran’s nuclear enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief.

Iran’s state-affiliated Mehr News agency reported on Sunday that the 14-point draft memorandum of understanding provided for the release of $24bn in frozen Iranian assets.

Pressed by CBS News on the possibility of releasing frozen funds, Vance said the $24bn figure “just doesn’t appear anywhere in any of the texts that we’ve talked about with the Iranians”.

“What we have said is that we’re willing to talk about unfreezing assets, but a much, much bigger deal is unsanctioning their economy – so long as they make the long-term commitments on the nuclear programme,” the vice president added.

For Iran, where the war inflicted an estimated $29bn damage and the population is struggling with the highest inflation rate since 1942, the investment fund may constitute a much-needed lifeline.

But the optics will not be as favourable, raising a “dignity problem”, Seloom said. “Tehran reads this as supervised, conditional money rather than sovereign relief,” the analyst told Al Jazeera.

Which other contentious issues will be discussed after signing the deal on Friday?

One of the US’s main declared objectives has been to assuage concerns surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme, including a stockpile of more than 440kg (970lbs) of enriched uranium.

The memorandum extends an existing ceasefire arrangement for another 60 days, during which the two sides are expected to hold further negotiations on issues including the disposal of the enriched uranium.

Vance said Tehran had agreed to surrender its stockpile, undergo regular inspections and refrain from producing or buying nuclear weapons, but the full text of the memorandum of understanding has yet to be disclosed.

The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has been subject to competing blockades by the US and Iran, has also been a point of contention. Trump suggested an agreement to reopen the waterway had been reached when he announced a deal on Sunday with the words: “Let the oil flow!”

Speaking to CNBC, however, Vance acknowledged that not all sticking points surrounding the passageway had been resolved. “Well, our expectation is that the strait is gonna be opened in a toll-free way for the long term, and that’s the sort of thing that we’re gonna figure out in these technical negotiations,” he said.

Israel’s ongoing aggression on Lebanon is also expected to create friction, as Iran has insisted any ceasefire deal must include the allied nation. Israel has so far rejected any arrangement that would limit its ability to strike what it says are Hezbollah targets. Defence Minister Israel Katz on Friday said the military would continue operating in Lebanon regardless of any agreement with Tehran.

Mixed reactions to the agreement

Iranian ⁠⁠Foreign ⁠⁠Minister Abbas Araghchi said the memorandum of understanding would reap economic benefits for Iran but stressed that Tehran would not rely on those benefits for all of its needs.

“We have a history of broken promises, non-compliance, and the tearing up of agreements,” Araghchi said on Monday, according to Press TV. He said discussions about the lifting of US sanctions and Iran’s nuclear programme would be held during a 60-day period of negotiations following the official signature on Friday.

Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has yet to comment. Some Iranian observers objected to the timing of the announcement, which coincided with Trump’s birthday. Referring to the assassination of former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at the beginning of the US-Iran war, conservative journalist Parisa Nasr wrote on X: “Was giving a birthday gift to the killer of the martyred Leader also one of the unwritten conditions of the deal?”

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Iran’s Supreme National Security Council had approved the deal so that “America’s genuine commitment to respecting the rights of the Iranian nation could be tested in practice.”

Speaking at the G7 summit in France on Tuesday, Trump described the deal with Iran as “fair”, “good”, and under which Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon” or “they get blown up.”

Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, who is also attending the summit, said the Iran-US agreement will result in positive outcomes for the region.

“This is a very important deal, there’s still a lot of work to be done, but with this momentum – if we continue like that, Mr President – I think we can achieve and do great things in the region,” Sheikh Tamim said.

US Democratic lawmakers welcomed a deal to halt the war with Iran but stressed that its terms must be made public. Senator Gregory Meeks said “any final agreement must be durable, enforceable, transparent” and more than “vague announcements or political spin”.

US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on Sunday said he was “pleased” about the deal but also “somewhat concerned that Iran’s view of the agreement seems different than what the American negotiating team is claiming”.

Seloom, at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the different narratives underlined that the two sides were “not really talking to each other”. “They’re talking past each other, to domestic audiences,” he said. “Each side has to sell this as a victory it cannot sell honestly.”

South Korea has begun consultations with the United States, Iran and other relevant countries regarding navigation through the Strait of Hormuz following the signing of a preliminary deal aimed at ending the monthslong war in the Middle East, the foreign ministry said Tuesday.

According to U.S. officials, President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf inked the memorandum of understanding (MOU) that would extend the countries’ ceasefire for 60 days, during which negotiations will take place to address nuclear and other issues to reach a final peace deal.

A large number of vessels, including two dozen South Korea-linked ships, have been stranded in the waterway, which Iran has effectively choked off with threats of missile and drone strikes amid the war.

“We are assessing the details related to maritime transit and have begun necessary communication with relevant countries, including the U.S. and Iran,” ministry spokesperson Park Il said during a regular press briefing.

According to Park, the government is closely monitoring a range of factors before making judgments on passage operations, including the presence of naval mines, the overall security situation in the strait and shipping traffic conditions.

He said the government will continue to prioritize the safety of South Korean vessels and sailors while working to ensure the smooth resumption of shipping.

Park added the government will also maintain close consultations with shipping companies in assessing developments in the region.

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

Venezuela has signed an agreement with General Electric Vernova aimed at boosting electricity generation as the country seeks to improve a power system plagued by years of outages. Officials say the deal could add 5 gigawatts of capacity over four years.