Defense

China restarts military flights near Taiwan

Taiwan on Sunday reported a sudden surge in Chinese military aircraft flying near the island and crossing its air defense alert zones after a two week period of relatively few of the flights. The Taiwanese Defense Ministry noted, however, the China’s Navy — its Shandong aircraft carrier can be seen during a Chinese military exercise in 2025 — continued to circle the island daily. File Photo by Taiwan Military News Agency/EPA-EFE

March 15 (UPI) — Taiwan’s defense ministry on Sunday said that more than two dozen Chinese military aircraft and several naval vessels were detected near the island, which comes after a period with relatively few such incursions.

After decreased presence of Chinese incursions into the island’s air defense identification zone (ADIZ) during the last two weeks, China sent 26 aircraft that were spotted around the island – 16 of which violated the ADIZ – and seven naval vessels sailed toward it, The Independent and The Wall Street Journal reported.

China considers Taiwan to be its territory. On a regular basis, it sends military aircraft and naval vessels toward the island, but during 10 of the last 16 days — from Feb. 27 to March 5 and March 7 to 10 — no flights near the island were reported.

On the other days, there were as few as two flights detected.

Taiwan regards the incursions into its airspace and waters as routine harassment, for the most part, but China also has held military exercises close to what Taiwan considers its territory and has threatened to take the island by force if it deems it necessary.

Wellington Koo, Taiwan’s defense minister has said that although there has been a noticeable decrease in aircraft nearing or crossing the ADIZ, the island nation’s military planned to stay on guard.

“We cannot rely on a single indicator like the absence of aircraft,” Koo told The Journal, because naval vessels still circle the island daily.

Analysts have suggested that the decrease in incursions is timed to a meeting of the Chinese legislature, which has happened previously, or be part of a diplomatic or strategic play before U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping meet in Beijing at the end of the month.

An Iranian man raises a portrait of new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei during a rally on Revolution Street in Tehran on March 9, 2026. Photo by Hossein Esmaeili/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Garfield loses to Branson in Division V state boys’ soccer final

With more than 100 fans supporting from the bleachers, Garfield High’s boys’ soccer put on a strong performance at the inaugural CIF state Division V championship game Saturday morning before losing to Ross Branson 2-0 at Natomas High.

Two communication errors on defense proved costly for the Bulldogs, who took a bus from East Los Angeles on Friday, stayed overnight and were set to return after the match.

Coach Pablo Serrano praised his team. “I felt we played outstanding,” he said.

Goalkeeper Javier Zarate turned in another impressive performance. “He can only do so much,” Serrano said.

Zarate, without prodding, went up to CIF executive director Ron Nocetti and thanked him for what will become an annual state soccer championship event.

On Friday, Irvine University won the Division IV boys’ title with a 3-2 win over Del Mar.

Cole Barkett, Jake Raboid and Brendan Leung scored goals.

Source link

N. Korea launches series of missiles in show of force

North Korea on Saturday staged another of its show-of-force ballistic missile launches — pictured is one launch during a test in December — that sent 10 missiles off its west coast, which traveled more than 200 miles and landed just outside the Japanese exclusive economic zone in the Sea of Japan. Photo by KCNA/EPA

March 14 (UPI) — North Korea launched 10 ballistic missiles into the sea on Saturday — which landed just outside Japan’s economic zone in the East Sea — in a show of force amid a U.S.-South Korea military exercise.

The launch, confirmed by the Japanese and South Korean defense ministries, is one of the largest North Korea shows of force that it has ever launched, The Japan Times and The Independent reported.

The missiles were launched from the west coast of North Korea, flying roughly 211 miles before falling just outside the Sea of Japan.

The Japanese Ministry of Defense in a statement called the launch a continued effort to “threaten the peace and security of Japan, the region and the international community.”

Shinjiro Koizumi, the Japanese defense minister, added that the ministry would remain in close contact with the United States and other allies “to remain fully vigilant and maintain surveillance in preparation for any unforeseen contingencies.”

The launch is the largest since at least November 2022, when Kim Jong Un’s regime launched a volley of 23 missiles that included short-range ballistic missiles and surface-to-air missiles, among others.

Analysts have said that it is unlikely that North Korea would attack U.S. or other nation’s assets in the region while the United States has diverted missile defense systems, among other things, to the Middle East amid the war in Iran.

They say, rather, that the show of force is meant to show that it can defend itself if it is invaded.

North Korea’s launch also comes as the United States and South Korea are about halfway through the annual 11-day Freedom Shield combined joint exercise that includes land, air and sea training events to allow the two nation’s armed forces to integrate seamlessly in combat.

One warship that was involved with the exercise, the USS Tripoli, an amphibious assault ship carrying 2,500 Marines and 2,500 sailors, has been redeployed to the Middle East to bolster U.S. military power there amid the war in Iran.

President Donald Trump speaks during an event celebrating Women’s History Month in the East Room of the White House on Thursday. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Trump: Affected countries to help open Strait of Hormuz back up

March 14 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Saturday said that a coalition of nations affected by Iran choking off the Strait of Hormuz will send warships to open it back up.

Trump said that although the United States and Israel have “destroyed 100% of Iran’s military capability” in its war in Iran, its attempt to close the strait — by attacking ships and possibly laying mines along the shipping route — is affecting global trade.

Iran started to limit traffic in the strait since the war started two weeks ago and on Thursday, Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojaba Khamenei, said it would remain closed as a tactic to pressure the United States and Israel to end their attacks on the country.

The Strait of Hormuz is a significant global trading route, and sees roughly 20% of the global oil and fuel supply pass through it every day.

“Many countries, especially those who are affected by Iran’s attempted closure of the Hormuz Strait, will be sending War Ships, in conjunction with the United States of America, to keep the Strait open and safe,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social, Axios and The Guardian reported.

“Hopefully China, France, Japan, South Korea, the UK, and others, that are affected by this artificial constraint, will send Ships to the area so that the Hormuz Strait will no longer be a threat by a Nation that has been totally decapitated,” Trump said.

On Friday, several news organizations confirmed with the Department of Defense that the USS Tripoli, an amphibious assault ship that was operating in the Philippine Sea, is headed to the Middle East.

The Tripoli brings with it 2,500 Marines of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Group, along with 2,500 more sailors, after U.S. Central Command requested additional military options for the conflict.

The 31st MEU can conduct ground operations, which the Trump administration has not ruled out in Iran, but Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan Caines told reporters at a press conference that the Pentagon plans to go after Iran’s mine-laying capability and its ability to attack commercial vessels.

An Iranian man raises a portrait of new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei during a rally on Revolution Street in Tehran on March 9, 2026. Photo by Hossein Esmaeili/UPI | License Photo

Source link

USS Tripoli, 2,500 Marines headed to Middle East

The USS Tripoli, right, pictured in February sending fuel to the USS Rafael Peralta in a replenishment-at-sea, is heading to the Middle East near Iran as U.S. military commanders have asked the Pentagon for additional options in the ongoing operation in Iran. Photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Ryre Arciaga/U.S. Navy

March 13 (UPI) — The USS Tripoli, and the 2,500 Marines on the amphibious assault ship, are headed to the Middle East to bolster U.S. military power there as the war in Iran enters its third week.

The Tripoli, along with Marines of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Group, had been operating in the Philippine Sea but is now headed west south of Taiwan through the Luzon Strait, USNI News reported.

Although the Tripoli had been with the USS San Diego and USS New Orleans in the Philippine Sea, it is not clear if the San Diego and the New Orleans are also being moved closer to Iran.

As Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz to most traffic, and is targeting vessels that transit it, the move comes as U.S. Central Command asked the Pentagon for additional military options in the conflict, Axios reported.

The 31st MEU can conduct ground operations, which have not been announced but have not been ruled out, according to the Trump administration.

The deployment comes as President Donald Trump said he is considering sending U.S. Navy vessels to escort shipping vessels through the strait, the military is planning to take out anti-ship missiles that have been sent by Iran to the area.

CENTCOM is particularly focused on ensuring freedom of navigation in the straight, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan Caine told reporters on Friday, which “means going after Iran’s mine-laying capability and destroying their ability to attack commercial vessels.

Oil prices have surged over the last week after Iran shut down the strait, though Caine noted that some traffic is moving through it.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also said Friday that the military is “dealing with” Iranian attacks on the strait, saying that “we have been dealing with it and don’t need to worry about it.”

Hegseth added that as the military campaign continues and Iran’s military capabilities weaken, the United States has also been taking out Iranian defense companies to prevent the ability to build more weapons.

An Iranian man raises a portrait of new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei during a rally on Revolution Street in Tehran on March 9, 2026. Photo by Hossein Esmaeili/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Hegseth on Strait of Hormuz: ‘Don’t need to worry about it’

March 13 (UPI) — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth downplayed the shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz during a press briefing Friday and claimed 15,000 Iranian targets have been struck.

Hegseth said the U.S. and Israeli air forces are flying over Iran and Tehran Friday, the 13th day of the operation. He claimed that Iran’s air defenses, navy and munitions supply have been defeated.

Iran’s missile volume was down by 90% and its one-way attack drones were down by 95% on Thursday, Hegseth said.

“Today as we speak we fly over the top of Iran and Tehran,” Hegseth said. “Fighters and bombers, all day picking targets as they choose.”

The defense secretary opened Friday’s briefing at the Pentagon, joined again by Gen. Dan Caine, saying that the United States is “decimating the radical Iranian regime’s military in a way the world has never seen before.”

“We said it would not be a fair fight and it has not been,” he said.

Caine lauded the use of the first precision-strike missiles used in combat by the United States, praising the troops that fired them. One of those soldiers was 20 years old and has only been in the U.S. Army for six months.

Caine’s comments on the precision of U.S. strikes come as the military is investigating a deadly strike on an elementary school for girls in Iran that took place on Feb. 28. The preliminary investigation has found that the United States is likely responsible for the attack that killed more than 170 people, most of them children.

“They’ve done all of this with the precision and determination that comes from relentless training and trust in each other and their weapons systems,” Caine said.

Hegseth said the United States is “dealing with” Iran’s attacks on vessels on the Strait of Hormuz, which has dramatically disrupted the oil trade.

“It’s something we’re dealing with, we have been dealing with it and don’t need to worry about it,” Hegseth said. “We’re on plan to defeat, destroy and disable all of their meaningful military capabilities on a pace the world has never seen before.”

Caine later said that there is some traffic moving through the strait.

As Iran’s military capabilities weaken, Hegseth said, more importantly, it does not possess the capability to build more weapons.

“Soon and very soon all of Iran’s defense companies will be destroyed,” Hegseth. “For example, as of two days ago, all of Iran’s ballistic missile production capacity, every company that builds every component of those missiles, has been functionally defeated, destroyed.”

As for Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, Hegseth said he is “likely disfigured.” Khamenei was wounded during the initial strikes by the United States and Israel on Tehran on Feb. 28, which killed his father, former supreme leader Ali Khamenei.

President Donald Trump shared similar speculation about the new supreme leader on Fox News on Friday, saying he believes he is alive but “damaged.”

“I think he probably is,” Trump said. “I think he’s damaged but I think he’s probably alive in some form.”

President Donald Trump speaks during an event celebrating Women’s History Month in the East Room of the White House on Thursday. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

Source link

4 American servicemen killed after U.S. refueling jet crashes in Iraq

March 13 (UPI) — The U.S. military confirmed Friday that four of six crew members of a refueling jet on combat operations in the Iran war were killed when it went down over western Iraq in an incident with another U.S. military aircraft.

A rescue operation mounted following the crash on Thursday night was ongoing. The second aircraft landed safely following the incident, which involved neither enemy or friendly fire, U.S. Central Command said in a news release.

“The circumstances of the incident are under investigation. The incident occurred in friendly airspace during Operation Epic Fury, and rescue efforts are ongoing. More information will be made available as the situation develops,” CENTCOM said

The identities of the service members were being withheld until 24 hours after their next of kin had been notified, it added.

CBS News said that the second aircraft, also a Boeing Stratotanker, declared an emergency before landing in Tel Aviv.

The BBC reported that there were six crew on board — a pilot, co-pilot, a boom operator responsible for operating the refueling arm and three others.

An Iraqi intelligence source told CBS the aircraft crashed on the border with Jordan, near the town of Turaibil.

The Iranian military claimed responsibility, saying that an allied militia group in Iraq had downed the aircraft with a missile.

Thursday’s crash came 10 days after three U.S. F-15E Strike Eagles crashed in Kuwait in a friendly-fire incident in which Kuwaiti air defenses “mistakenly shot down” the fighter jets. All six aircrew were rescued after safely ejecting.

The U.S. military’s Stratotanker fleet is a critical asset in its in-flight refueling capability, enabling aircraft to remain airborne for extended periods during missions without having to land to take on more fuel.

The crash in Iraq brings to 11 the number of U.S. military personnel killed since the United States and Israel launched their airborne offensive against Iran on Feb. 28.

Iranians attend a funeral for a person killed in recent U.S.-Israel airstrikes at Behesht-e Zahra cemetery on the southern outskirts of Tehran in Iran on March 9, 2026. Photo by Hossein Esmaeili/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Lakers turned liability into strength, use defense to top Minnesota

p]:text-cms-story-body-color-text clearfix”>

Lakers center Deandre Ayton shoots over the Timberwolves' defense on Tuesday at Crypto.com Arena.

Lakers center Deandre Ayton shoots over the Timberwolves’ defense on Tuesday at Crypto.com Arena.

(Ethan Swope / Associated Press)

With 33 missed shots between both teams in the first quarter, Deandre Ayton certainly had plenty of opportunities for rebounds, and the 7-foot center made the most of them.

Ayton almost single-handedly kept the Lakers in contention in the first half, scoring 12 of his 14 points in the second quarter and had a first-half double-double with 11 rebounds.

Ayton, who was scoreless in the first quarter but had six rebounds, scored three of his first four baskets off offensive rebounds. The only exception came when Reaves drove in the lane, wrapped a pass around his back as he found Ayton cutting down the lane for a vicious two-handed dunk. The crowd roared.

“He was a monster,” said Reaves, who had 31 points and eight assists. “… He was the only person scoring for us efficiently and then just being high energy on the other end, just doing what he does. That’s what we need him to do. When he does that, we’re a different team and we’re thankful to have him.”

Ayton’s effort has waned throughout the season, sometimes resulting in him getting benched late in games. But he provided major lifts in marquee wins against the Knicks (six points, eight rebounds) and Timberwolves to earn the confidence and trust of his teammates.

The Lakers needed Ayton at his best after backup centers Jaxson Hayes (back soreness) and Maxi Kleber (lumbar back strain) were ruled out of the game about 15 minutes before tip-off. Hayes was starring in his reserve role in recent weeks, bringing much-needed energy off the bench and a seamless connection with Doncic, but hearing that Ayton would have to hold down the front line by himself gave the former No. 1 draft pick extra motivation.

“I know I’m the only big,” Ayton said, “so I try my best to stay out there as long as possible, especially down the stretch.”

Source link

Kim Jong Un, daughter Ju Ae test pistols at munitions factory

In this image released Thursday by state media, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s daughter Kim Ju Ae fires a pistol during an inspection of a munitions factory with her father. Photo by KCNA/EPA

SEOUL, March 12 (UPI) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un inspected a munitions factory that produces light arms, state-run media reported Thursday, where he test-fired newly developed pistols alongside his daughter Ju Ae.

Kim visited the factory on Wednesday accompanied by officials from the ruling Workers’ Party, according to the official Korean Central News Agency. The report did not specify the location of the facility.

During the visit, Kim stopped at the factory’s shooting range to test-fire a pistol that he said was “superior in its structural performance, rate of hits, concentration fire and combat utility,” KCNA reported.

Kim “expressed satisfaction over the development of a really excellent pistol,” the report said.

The handgun was approved for production at a meeting of the party’s Central Military Commission last month, according to KCNA. The factory operates under North Korea’s Second Economy Commission, which oversees the country’s weapons production and defense industry.

While Ju Ae was not mentioned in the KCNA report, photographs released by state media showed her accompanying her father during the inspection. The pair wore matching leather jackets and fired pistols at the factory’s indoor range alongside senior officials.

Ju Ae, believed to have been born around 2013, has appeared alongside her father at public events with increasing frequency, including missile launches, military demonstrations and major political gatherings.

On Wednesday, she was also seen beside Kim as he oversaw the test-firing of strategic cruise missiles from a naval destroyer via a video feed.

South Korea’s National Intelligence Service said last month that Ju Ae appears close to being designated as Kim’s successor.

The factory visit comes in the wake of last month’s Workers’ Party congress, where Kim outlined defense priorities for the next five years. While Pyongyang continues to prioritize the expansion of its nuclear arsenal, the North Korean leader has also emphasized strengthening conventional weapons production.

During the congress, Kim presented newly developed sniper rifles to senior officials and military commanders, with state media releasing images of Ju Ae inspecting and firing one of the weapons.

During Wednesday’s visit, Kim stressed the importance of factories producing pistols and other light arms to strengthen “the combat efficiency of the army, public security forces and militia forces,” KCNA said.

He also announced plans to convene a meeting of the party’s Central Military Commission next month to review plans for modernizing munitions factories and allocating funds to upgrade three key defense production facilities.

The inspection comes as the United States and South Korea conduct their annual Freedom Shield joint military exercise, which Pyongyang routinely condemns as a rehearsal for invasion. Earlier this week, Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of the North Korean leader, warned the drills could bring “unimaginably terrible consequences.”

Source link

L.A. will continue to fund eviction defense program

A dispute over the city of Los Angeles’ eviction defense program came to an end Tuesday when the City Council approved millions of dollars in funding for the next 15 months.

The program, Stay Housed L.A., started in 2021 and provides thousands of renters with legal representation in eviction proceedings as well as other services.

Tenant advocates feared that the new contract, which passed 12 to 1 and funds an initial portion of a three-year, $177-million contract, was under threat after City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto urged the council to reconsider it in a confidential memo last week.

Feldstein Soto said she had concerns about awarding such a large contract to Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, which frequently sues the city over homelessness issues.

Legal Aid is the main legal service provider under the Stay Housed L.A. contract, which also funds Southern California Housing Rights Center for short-term emergency rental assistance, Liberty Hill Foundation for tenant outreach and Strategic Actions for a Just Economy to protect tenants from harassment.

The city’s Housing Department had recommended a three-year contract, but the council opted for a shorter period that can be extended.

Legal Aid has argued that its lawsuits against the city are unrelated to its eviction defense work under the Stay Housed L.A. contract.

“We are very relieved that our services can continue uninterrupted,” said Barbara Schultz, director of housing justice for Legal Aid, in an interview after the vote.

Feldstein Soto, who is running for reelection, said in a statement that her office wanted to make sure the city wasn’t giving a “blank check” to Legal Aid without requiring detailed reporting of finances and outcomes.

“The eviction defense program is a city program and is in zero jeopardy,” she said. “What is in question is a $177-million blank check to [Legal Aid] and its partners without the reports and invoice review that is required by law. That is an amount that exceeds the budget of numerous city departments.”

On Tuesday, the City Council added a requirement that the nonprofits in the program provide “performance metrics” including the number of tenants served, case outcomes and demographic data.

Schultz said that Legal Aid already provides monthly data to the city.

John Lee was the only councilmember who voted against the new contract, saying he was not comfortable with the new “transparency requirements.”

Since its inception, Stay Housed L.A. has opened about 26,000 cases overall, providing full representation for 6,150 cases and working on nearly 20,000 “limited scope” cases, according to data from Legal Aid. The original contract, which is set to lapse at the end of the month, was for about $90 million.

The program is funded by Measure ULA, the “mansion tax” passed by city voters in 2022. On Tuesday, the council included a provision that would allow it to cease funding the eviction defense program if Measure ULA were overturned.

Source link

South Korea Says It Can Deter North Even if U.S. Shifts Weapons to Middle East

South Korea said it remains capable of deterring threats from North Korea even if the United States redeploys some weapons stationed on the Korean peninsula to the Middle East amid the war involving Iran.

The comments by South Korean President Lee Jae Myung come after reports that key U.S. missile defence systems and military assets could be moved from Asia to support operations linked to the Iran conflict.

The potential redeployment has sparked concern among Asian allies that shifting military resources could weaken regional deterrence against China and North Korea at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions.

Seoul Says Deterrence Remains Strong

Speaking at a cabinet meeting, Lee acknowledged that reports about the relocation of U.S. military equipment had triggered controversy in South Korea.

He said that while Seoul had expressed opposition to the removal of certain weapons, it could not dictate U.S. military decisions.

However, Lee emphasised that South Korea’s own defence capabilities are strong enough to maintain deterrence against North Korea even if some American systems are temporarily relocated. He noted that South Korea’s defence spending and conventional military strength significantly exceed those of the North.

South Korea hosts about 28,500 U.S. troops as part of the long-standing alliance designed to deter aggression from nuclear-armed North Korea.

Missile Defence Systems May Be Redeployed

Officials have indicated that the U.S. and South Korean militaries are discussing the possible redeployment of Patriot missile defense system batteries to the Middle East.

South Korean media reported that some missile batteries may have already been shipped from Osan Air Base and could be redeployed to U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

There were also reports that parts of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system could be moved from South Korea to the Middle East.

While Patriot systems provide lower-tier defence against shorter-range missiles, THAAD systems are designed to intercept ballistic missiles at high altitude.

United States Forces Korea declined to comment on the possible relocation of equipment, citing operational security.

Analysts Warn of Miscalculation Risks

Military analysts say that although South Korea possesses strong military capabilities, the presence of U.S. forces and weapons in the country serves as a crucial signal of Washington’s commitment to the region.

According to Choi Gi-il, a military studies professor at Sangji University, the removal of some systems could carry strategic risks.

He warned that North Korea might interpret the redeployment as a weakening of allied defences and could attempt limited provocations to test the alliance’s response.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has recently signalled a more aggressive posture, pledging to expand the country’s nuclear arsenal and describing South Korea as its “most hostile enemy.”

Wider Regional Impact

The redeployment of U.S. assets reflects the broader strategic impact of the Iran conflict on global military posture.

Japan, which also hosts major U.S. bases, has seen two U.S. guided-missile destroyers stationed in Yokosuka deployed to the Arabian Sea to support operations linked to the Iran campaign.

The movements have raised concerns in Tokyo as well, with opposition politicians questioning whether U.S. forces stationed in Japan should be used for operations outside the region.

The developments highlight how the conflict in the Middle East is beginning to reshape global military deployments, drawing resources away from Asia and prompting questions about the balance of security commitments across different regions.

With information from Reuters.

Source link

Kim Jong Un oversees cruise missile launch amid U.S.-South Korea drills

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un (R) oversaw the test-fire of strategic cruise missiles from the naval destroyer Choe Hyon, state-run media reported Wednesday. In the photo, Kim watches the launch via video feed with his daughter Kim Ju Ae. Photo by KCNA/EPA

SEOUL, March 11 (UPI) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw the test-firing of strategic cruise missiles from a naval destroyer, state media reported Wednesday, as the United States and South Korea began a large-scale joint military exercise this week.

The North’s Choe Hyon destroyer launched the missiles at island targets in the Yellow Sea on Tuesday, the official Korean Central News Agency said, with Kim watching via a video feed. The missiles flew for roughly two hours and fifty minutes before striking their targets, KCNA said.

Pyongyang described the weapons as “strategic,” a term it typically uses for systems capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

The launches came days after North Korea conducted a similar cruise missile test from the destroyer ahead of its commissioning.

The test also coincided with the start of the allies’ annual Freedom Shield exercise on Monday, an 11-day program of command-post simulations and field training drills.

North Korea has long condemned the joint exercises as rehearsals for invasion. On Tuesday, Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of Kim Jong Un, warned that the drills could destabilize the region and lead to “unimaginably terrible consequences.”

After observing the launch, Kim praised the “superiority of the destroyer’s integrated combat system,” according to KCNA.

“The components of our war deterrent are now being included in the very sophisticated operational system … and the country’s nuclear forces have made a switch to the phase of multifaceted operation,” Kim said.

Images released by state media showed Kim watching the test alongside his daughter Ju Ae, who has appeared frequently with her father at major events. South Korea’s spy agency said last month that Ju Ae, believed to have been born in 2013, appears close to being designated as Kim’s successor.

Pyongyang launched the Choe Hyon, its first 5,000-ton destroyer, last April as Kim called for strengthening the country’s naval capabilities. North Korean reports say the vessel carries a range of weapons, including nuclear-capable cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles.

Photos released by state media show the ship’s missile and radar systems resembling those found on Russian vessels, prompting speculation Pyongyang may have received technical assistance from Moscow.

North Korea has deployed troops, artillery and weapons to support Russia’s war in Ukraine and is believed to be receiving financial support and advanced military technology in return.

A second destroyer, the Kang Kon, suffered an accident during its launch ceremony last year that left it listing on its side before it was repaired and relaunched in June.

Kim has ordered another 5,000-ton destroyer completed by Oct. 10, the anniversary of the founding of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea.

Source link

Deterrence posture against N. Korea won’t be hindered regardless of potential shift of USFK’s assets

South Korea’s defense posture against North Korea will not be hindered by the shift of U.S. military assets to the Middle East, a senior presidential official said Wednesday. In this photo, taken Tuesday, air defense launchers are seen being dismantled at a U.S. THAAD base in Seongju. Photo by Yonhap

The deterrence posture against North Korea will not be hindered regardless of a potential shift of military assets owned by the U.S. military stationed in South Korea, a senior official at Cheong Wa Dae said Wednesday, amid media reports that the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) has shipped out some of its air defense assets from the Korean Peninsula.

“Given our level of military capability, defense spending, defense industry capacity and the high morale of our troops, there is no problem with deterrence against North Korea regardless of whether some USFK assets are relocated overseas,” the official said.

The official, however, declined to comment on media reports that parts of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and other air defense units owned by the USFK were moved from South Korea amid a raging war in the Middle East.

“It is not appropriate for our government to comment on military operations between Korea and the U.S.,” the official said.

The official said South Korea and the U.S. have remained in close coordination to maintain a robust combined defense posture.

“Korea and the U.S. will maintain a robust combined defense posture to contribute to peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the region,” the official said. “To that end, the two countries will continue close communication and coordination.”

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.

Source link

White House disputes claim of Navy escort on Strait of Hormuz

March 10 (UPI) — President Donald Trump posted on social media that the United States has destroyed 10 inactive mine-laying vessels on the Strait of Hormuz while the White House cleared up a claim by another administration official.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that the U.S. Navy did not escort an oil tanker through the Strait of Hormuz after Energy Secretary Chris Wright claimed it did on social media.

Leavitt said President Donald Trump may consider using Navy escorts for oil tankers on the strait but that has not happened yet.

“The U.S. Navy has not escorted a tanker or vessel at this time,” Leavitt told reporters during a press briefing Tuesday.

Earlier in the day, Wright posted that the U.S. Navy “successfully escorted an oil tanker through the Strait of Hormuz to ensure oil remains flowing to global markets.”

Leavitt said she was “made aware of this post,” but had not spoken with Wright about it.

The post was later taken down.

The price of crude oil fell below $80 per barrel briefly following Wright’s post. It climbed again after the post was deleted.

Iran has taken measures to close the Strait of Hormuz, a critical oil trade route, since the United States and Israel launched strikes on Feb. 28.

To combat the impact the military conflict with Iran will have on the global oil market, the United States has discussed plans to escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz. However, retaliatory strikes by Iran have demanded more military resources, Wright previously said.

Source link

140 U.S. troops wounded in Iran war, Pentagon says

The remains of six U.S. soldiers killed in an Iranian drone strike in Kuwait are returned to the U.S. during a dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware, on Saturday. The six members of the Army Reserve died March 1 when a drone hit a command center in Port Shuaiba, Kuwait, one day after the U.S. and Israel launched a military campaign against Iran. Photo by Leigh Vogel/UPI. | License Photo

March 10 (UPI) — The U.S. Department of Defense estimates that about 140 U.S. troops have been wounded since the United States began its military operation against Iran last month.

The injuries are in addition to seven U.S. service members who have been killed in retaliatory strikes by Iran. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement that a “vast majority” of those wounded have suffered “minor” injuries.

Of about 140 injured, 108 returned to duty.

“Eight service members remain listed as severely injured and are receiving the highest level of medical care,” Parnell said.

White House Press Secretary said earlier Tuesday that about 150 troops have been injured in combat.

President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he expects the war to end “very soon” but added that he seeks to “end this long-running danger once and for all.”

“We’re achieving major strides toward completing our military objective,” Trump said Monday.

In the two days after the United States launched its first strike on Iran, the Pentagon spent $5.6 billion worth of resources. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said Tuesday morning that “Today will be, yet again, our most intense day of strikes inside Iran.”

Source link

L.A.’s eviction defense program up in the air amid battle with city attorney

The Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles routinely sues the city — and wins.

In the last two months, the nonprofit has notched victories in three lawsuits over the city’s handling of the homelessness crisis.

Legal Aid also defends tenants at risk of eviction as part of the city and Los Angeles County’s Stay Housed L.A. program.

Last Tuesday, the City Council was set to vote on a $177-million contract for Legal Aid to continue representing tenants for the next three years, with other groups providing related services.

But the night before the vote, City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto sent a confidential memo to council offices recommending that council members “reconsider the award of such a large contract to a frequent litigant against the city,” according to a portion of the memo obtained by The Times.

On the day of the scheduled vote, the council delayed it for a week, until Tuesday.

“[Legal Aid’s] mission includes improving the lives of our client communities through systemic change, which sometimes means filing litigation against government entities engaging in illegal conduct,” Barbara Schultz, director of housing justice for Legal Aid, said in an interview.

Schultz said that Legal Aid’s litigation and eviction work “are entirely separate.”

Through a spokesperson, Feldstein Soto declined to comment. She is running for reelection this year.

The contract, which would last for three years, would award nearly $107 million to Legal Aid for eviction defense and prevention, $42 million to the Southern California Housing Rights Center for short-term emergency rental assistance, nearly $22 million to Liberty Hill Foundation for tenant outreach and close to $7 million to Strategic Actions for a Just Economy to protect tenants from harassment.

The battle over the contract has serious implications for Los Angeles tenants at risk of eviction, Schultz said.

Legal Aid, which has participated in the program since its inception in 2021, will have to stop accepting new clients if the contract does not pass on Tuesday. Each month, about 160 tenants will be without legal representation and about 575 more won’t get advice that could help them avoid eviction proceedings, Schultz said.

Schultz said that Legal Aid subcontracts some of the legal work in the program to groups such as Bet Tzedek and Inner City Law Center.

“We get 600 to 800 eviction filings each month in our district alone. If council doesn’t act, those families will have no help from the city,” City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez said in a statement.

The Stay Housed L.A. program has opened about 26,000 cases overall, providing full representation for 6,150 cases and working on nearly 20,000 “limited scope” cases, according to data from Legal Aid. The original contract, which is set to lapse at the end of the month, was for about $90 million.

Measure ULA, the “mansion tax” passed by city voters in 2022, includes funding for the program.

Last June, Feldstein Soto tried to block the City Council from extending the contract without a competitive bidding process, a core tenet she has preached as the city’s elected legal counsel.

At the time, some City Council members grumbled, but still, they opened the contract to bidders.

Months later, the city Housing Department awarded the contract to Legal Aid and the other organizations before sending it to the City Council for approval.

“Our understanding of the city’s contracting process is that it is trying to get the best services it can at the best value and not using the process to influence the political or legal activities of nonprofit advocacy organizations,” Elizabeth Hamilton, deputy director of Strategic Actions for a Just Economy, which has also filed lawsuits against the city, said in a statement.

Feldstein Soto’s confidential memo cited other potential issues with the contract, calling for an audit of Stay Housed L.A. and asserting that a confidentiality clause in the original contract might violate state public records laws.

Recently, Legal Aid has scored several victories against the city.

In January, a judge ruled that the city violated the state’s open meeting law when council members made a plan behind closed doors to sweep 9,800 homeless encampments. Legal Aid represented the plaintiffs in that case.

In February, with Legal Aid also serving as plaintiffs’ counsel, a judge ruled that the city lacked the legal authority to carry out a state law allowing the dismantling of abandoned or inoperable RVs worth up to $4,000.

That same month, Legal Aid scored another victory when a federal judge found that the city violated homeless people’s constitutional rights by seizing and destroying their property during encampment cleanups.

Source link

No One Behind the Wheel: Iran’s Mosaic Doctrine in Action

When a state’s political leadership announces a ceasefire and its military keeps firing, the instinct is to reach for deception as the explanation. In Iran’s case, the more unsettling answer may be structural. The gap between what Iranian presidents say and what Iranian forces do reflects not a coordinated lie but a command architecture deliberately engineered to operate without central direction. In a serious conflict, the consequences of that architecture would be felt well beyond Iran’s borders.

A Command Architecture Designed to Survive Decapitation

In September 2008, IRGC Commander General Mohammad Ali Jafari oversaw a sweeping restructuring that divided the force into thirty-one provincial corps, each empowered to conduct military operations within its zone without requiring authorization from the center. As Michael Connell of the Center for Naval Analyses noted in his analysis for the United States Institute of Peace, the intent was to strengthen unit cohesion and ensure operational continuity under degraded command conditions. He flagged explicitly that the decentralization could produce unintended escalation dynamics, particularly in the Persian Gulf.

That warning deserves serious attention. The IRGC’s Mosaic Defense doctrine was not designed to make Iran more responsive to political leadership in a crisis. It was designed to ensure that military operations could continue regardless of what happened to that leadership. A force structured that way does not stop firing because a president gives a speech.

The Apology That Wasn’t

The internal contradiction becomes clearest when traced through a hypothetical cascade. A president announces a ceasefire and attributes the directive to an Interim Leadership Council. A fellow council member publicly declares that heavy strikes will continue. A hardline cleric addresses the president directly, calling his position untenable. By the time the president’s original statement is reposted, the ceasefire language has been quietly removed.

The IRGC’s own posture in this scenario resolves the ambiguity on structural grounds. It endorses the president’s language, then appends a caveat that renders it inoperative: all US and Israeli military bases and interests across the region remain primary targets. Since every GCC state hosts American forces, that framing preserves full operational freedom while allowing the presidency to project restraint. The contradiction is not incidental. It is the doctrine functioning as designed.

The Theological Dimension

Iran is not simply a military organization. It is a theocratic state whose constitutional legitimacy flows from velayat-e faqih, the guardianship of the Islamic jurist, which vests supreme authority in a single clerical figure whose religious and political mandates are inseparable. Remove that figure, and the system’s legitimating architecture is suspended rather than transferred. The Assembly of Experts is constitutionally mandated to elect a successor, but wartime conditions would disrupt that process at precisely the moment its resolution matters most.

A RAND Corporation analysis prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense identified the IRGC as the institution best positioned to shape any post-Khamenei transition, with the organizational reach and economic weight to determine outcomes that civilian institutions cannot contest. The result, in a decapitation scenario, is a theocratic state operating without its theological anchor and a military operating under pre-delegated authority with no one capable of recalling it.

Durability Without Effect

The Mosaic Defense doctrine would prove, above all, durable. A decentralized force can survive catastrophic leadership losses and sustain operations. But durability is not the same as capability, and sustained fire is not the same as strategic effect.

Iran’s theory of regional attrition, the calculation that sustained strikes against Gulf infrastructure and American basing would fracture GCC cohesion and coerce Arab neighbors toward neutrality, has produced no evidence of working. The GCC bloc has held. Individual member states have coordinated their responses rather than fractured under pressure. The country absorbing the sharpest volume of Iranian strike activity, the UAE, has demonstrated air defense performance that has exceeded even optimistic prewar assessments. Publicly available figures suggest UAE systems have defeated upward of ninety percent of inbound threats, a result that reflects years of sustained investment, deep integration with American and Israeli platforms, and an operational tempo that has stress-tested those systems at genuine scale.

The picture that emerges is not one of Iran winning a war of attrition. It is one of an Iran burning through accessible inventory, losing launch infrastructure faster than it can regenerate, and discovering that the regional architecture it spent years attempting to destabilize has proven considerably more resilient than it calculated.

That resilience carries its own strategic meaning. A weakened force operating under pre-delegated authority, without a supreme leader to set limits, remains dangerous in a narrow tactical sense. But it is operating without a coherent end state, and the environment it faces is not the one it anticipated. The GCC’s collective posture and the demonstrated effectiveness of layered air defense across the Gulf have closed off the strategic outcomes Iran’s doctrine was written to achieve.

The scenario is instructive for what it reveals about the limits of decentralized military design. A force built to keep firing regardless of political direction is also a force that cannot be steered toward an exit. But the Gulf states have demonstrated something of equal importance in response: that resilience, properly built and consistently resourced, can outlast a doctrine designed for chaos, and that the regional order Iran sought to unravel has shown itself capable of absorbing the blow.

Source link

Known Unknowns and Unknown Unknowns: The US-Israeli War on Iran

Modern wars are fought not only with weapons but with assumptions—and the most dangerous assumptions are often invisible to those making them. Donald Rumsfeld’s distinction between known unknowns (questions we recognize but cannot answer) and unknown unknowns (risks we have not even framed as questions) captures something essential about the current confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran.

The Nuclear Material Problem

The June 2025 12-day war struck several of Iran’s nuclear facilities but left the most consequential question unanswered: where is the material? The March 2026 campaign has struck deeper, targeting hardened and dispersed sites that June’s operations left intact. Yet the fundamental uncertainty has not resolved—it has compounded. Iran reportedly retains roughly 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%, approaching weapons-grade, and the precise location of that stockpile is now more opaque than before. On March 2, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported the entrance buildings of Iran’s underground Natanz enrichment plant had been bombed, but without inspection access, the agency cannot reconstruct a monitoring baseline.

The strategic paradox is acute. Any Iranian government—this one or a successor—must now confront a nuclear-armed Israel and a United States willing to strike Iranian territory twice in nine months. Under those conditions, nuclear capability looks less like a provocation and more like a rational insurance policy. The war may have permanently entrenched the very incentive it was designed to dismantle. A further risk of escaping conventional arms-control frameworks is if Iranian institutions fragment, specialized nuclear expertise disperses internationally, potentially becoming available to states or non-state actors.

Regime Change and What Follows

The war’s stated objective rests on uncertain ground. Intelligence assessments before the conflict reportedly concluded that even a large-scale assault was unlikely to produce regime collapse—yet the campaign proceeded anyway. The Iranian state has shown remarkable institutional resilience, with no visible defections among senior leadership, a government operating under its constitutional framework, and a regime that has absorbed the Iran-Iraq War, the Green Movement, and decades of sanctions.

War has accelerated the succession question around Ali Khamenei. One trajectory involves Mojtaba Khamenei, whose rise would mean dynastic continuity rather than transformation; another sees the IRGC consolidating power—equally misaligned with Western hopes. The question of what comes after was not answered before the bombs fell.

Retaliation, Major-Power Shadows, and Strategic Incoherence

Iran’s retaliation has demonstrated its asymmetric reach. The IRGC claims attacks on at least 27 bases hosting American troops across the region, alongside Israeli military facilities. Tehran appears to be pacing its response, sustaining an attrition campaign designed to exhaust interceptor stocks rather than overwhelm them in a single strike.

The major power dimensions compound this. Russia has reportedly been providing intelligence on American naval deployments; Chinese-linked entities have allegedly tracked US forces via satellite. Meanwhile, strategic incoherence in Washington compounds every other risk. Vice President J.D. Vance and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have framed this as a limited campaign against nuclear infrastructure; Trump has simultaneously floated regime change on social media.

The Munitions Race

The deepest structural vulnerability may not lie on the battlefield but in the arithmetic of an industrial system never designed to fight this kind of war. The first 36 hours consumed more than 3,000 precision-guided munitions and interceptors. Joint Chiefs Chairman General Dan Caine had warned that stockpiles were already significantly depleted before the first strike. Secretary Marco Rubio subsequently acknowledged that Iran produces an estimated 100 missiles a month versus roughly six or seven high-end interceptors that American industry can manufacture in the same period.

That deficit has a history. The US likely expended 100 to 150 THAAD interceptors and 80 SM-3s supporting Israel during June’s Twelve-Day War. Those stocks were never fully replenished. The bottlenecks are physical as well as financial. Lockheed Martin’s plan to raise PAC-3 MSE production to 2,000 units per year addresses a six-to-seven-year horizon, not the current emergency.

The drone dimension adds a layer officials have been slow to acknowledge. Hegseth and Caine admitted in a closed-door briefing that Iran’s Shahed drones present a challenge US air defenses cannot fully meet. The Shahed flies low and slow—hard to detect and poorly matched to the high-end interceptors THAAD and SM-3 are optimized to defeat. Intercepting a drone can cost roughly five times what it costs to manufacture one.

This crystallizes the war’s most consequential known unknown: how much of Iran’s arsenal reflects genuine capability, and how much reflects deliberate restraint? The IDF assessed Iran possessed roughly 2,500 ballistic missiles on February 11.

The search for emergency solutions has produced one remarkable geopolitical inversion. The Pentagon has approached Ukraine about purchasing drone interceptors. They are low-cost systems Ukrainian manufacturers developed specifically to hunt Shaheds, built from years of adapting to exactly the threat now confounding American air defenses in the Gulf. The US is buying drone killers from a country it recently all but abandoned! The implications extend to the Indo-Pacific. Every interceptor fired over the Gulf of Bahrain is one fewer available in the Taiwan Strait.

The Energy Shock

The Strait of Hormuz has moved from a textbook chokepoint to a live emergency. Tanker traffic has come to a near standstill. War-risk insurance premiums have made commercial passage unviable even where it remains physically possible. At least five tankers have been struck across the Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and nearby waters. Approximately 20 million barrels of oil per day—a fifth of global consumption—normally transit the strait, alongside roughly 20% of global LNG trade. Traders are warning that oil prices could surge past $100 a barrel if the conflict in Iran continues to escalate. Goldman Sachs Research estimates that a full one-month closure would add $15 per barrel, assuming no compensating measures like spare pipeline utilization or releases from strategic petroleum reserves. Bank of America sees tail risk far higher, estimating a prolonged shutdown could add $40–$80 per barrel above current prices.

The LNG dimension may prove more immediately damaging than oil. QatarEnergy has halted production at Ras Laffan, the world’s largest LNG facility, after Iranian drone attacks. This has already caused European natural gas futures to spike. If global LNG tightens, Europe must compete with Asian buyers on price. That competition may, in turn, force Europe back toward Russian gas, quietly reversing one of the most consequential geopolitical achievements of the post-Ukraine sanctions era.

The exposure is global and unevenly distributed. China, India, Japan, and South Korea account for roughly 75% of Hormuz crude exports and 59% of its LNG flows. South Korea has warned it could exhaust LNG reserves within nine days and has announced a 100 trillion won stabilization fund. India is pivoting toward Russian crude. These developments structurally benefit Moscow regardless of the war’s outcome.

The fertilizer dimension compounds the energy shock with a slower fuse. Nitrogen fertilizers are manufactured from natural gas; roughly a third of globally traded urea transits Hormuz. QatarEnergy’s halt removes fertilizer output simultaneously with LNG. Urea prices have already surged $60 to $80 per ton at New Orleans, with the spring planting window closing. The food-price consequences will not appear in grocery stores for months. But they are already locked in.

The Gulf Security Paradox

For decades the Gulf states managed their rivalry with Iran below the threshold of open confrontation, relying on the American security umbrella while avoiding direct entanglement. The war has collapsed that strategy. The Gulf states did not arrive at this crisis as Iran’s adversaries but rather as reluctant bystanders who had invested enormous diplomatic capital in preventing it. They gave ironclad assurances to Tehran, both before the war and up to its eve, that their territories would not serve as launchpads. That Iran responded by striking these same neighbors is a strategic miscalculation of historic proportions and a moral failure that may poison relations for a generation.

This has opened a structural debate now conducted in public. Is American military presence a protective shield or a magnet for retaliation? Citizens and analysts are asking why Gulf states should bear the risk of hosting US forces when Washington appears unable to protect them. Undoubtedly, Tehran understands this dynamic. Drone strikes on UAE-based data centers targeted Gulf publics’ confidence in the connectivity model as much as American commercial interests. The UAE and Saudi Arabia have staked their post-oil futures on projecting stability and attracting mobile capital. Intercepting most of the incoming fire is not sufficient when global firms are deciding where to invest next decade.

The crisis confronts the Gulf Cooperation Council with a strategic fork. One path leads toward deeper collective security, featuring integrated missile defense, expanded intelligence sharing, and coordinated maritime protection that could reduce dependence on any single external patron. The other leads toward renewed fragmentation as internal rivalries re-emerge.

Former Qatari prime minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani warned that the Gulf “must not be dragged into a direct confrontation with Iran,” arguing that such a clash would “deplete the resources of both sides and provide an opportunity for outside forces to control us under the pretext of helping us escape the crisis.” Yet the same crisis that could finally catalyze genuine Gulf collective security could just as easily deepen the divisions that have historically prevented it.

The Mediator’s Dilemma and the Meta-Unknown

The conflict has also damaged the diplomatic architecture that previously helped manage US-Iran tensions. Oman and Qatar built genuine credibility as intermediaries through years of patient back-channel work. Effective mediation requires neutrality. When conflict spreads into the territory of potential mediators, that credibility erodes. Iran’s decision to strike the very states whose neutrality made diplomacy possible may have burned the bridges needed to end the war—which is perhaps the most consequential unknown unknown in the entire conflict, second only to the US twice striking Iran in the span of nine months while negotiations were still ongoing.

At the deepest level lies a question no intelligence assessment can answer: whether the strategic logic of the war is coherent at all. Negotiations failed because each side demanded outcomes the other could not accept. The same incompatibility that made diplomacy impossible may make military victory equally elusive. Iran cannot surrender unconditionally without ceasing to be the Islamic Republic. And the conditions that make nuclear deterrence attractive to any Iranian government—this one or a successor—have not been removed by the strikes; they have been reinforced.

Conclusion

In sum, the US-Israeli campaign against Iran has illuminated the limits of military certainty. Known unknowns—munition shortages, asymmetric retaliation, and energy vulnerabilities—interact with unknown unknowns—nuclear dispersal, regime succession, and Gulf fragmentation—to create a conflict whose trajectory is inherently unpredictable. Rather than eliminating threats, the strikes may have entrenched incentives for nuclear retention, incentivized strategic caution, and stressed regional and global systems. The coherence of the war itself is in question, as military action and diplomacy pull in contradictory directions. Ultimately, the conflict underscores that modern warfare is as much about managing uncertainties as it is about destroying targets.

Source link

Trump’s Iran Uranium Plan Risks a Wider War

The reported idea of a special operation to seize Iran’s uranium should alarm anyone who still thinks there is a line between pressure and recklessness. Sending foreign forces into Iranian territory to capture nuclear material would be far beyond coercion. It would be war in plain sight. That risk looks even sharper when it is paired with talk of unconditional surrender and a revived maximum pressure campaign. Officials call that flexibility. In practice, it often creates confusion and a dangerous illusion of control.

Strategic Ambiguity Has Limits

Trump has long preferred threat inflation as a negotiating tool, and his administration’s National Security Presidential Memorandum on Iran makes clear that Washington wants to deny Tehran every path to a bomb. But there is a difference between pressure meant to shape diplomacy and rhetoric that drifts toward occupation logic. A raid assumes the United States can enter a sovereign state, take possession of fissile material, and leave without igniting a larger conflict. That is not strategy. It is a gamble.

A Raid Would Not Stay Small

Iran is not an isolated militia camp. It is a large state with layered security organs, missile capacity, regional partners, and a long memory of external intervention. Any attempt to seize uranium by force would expose American troops, bases, shipping lanes, diplomats, and partners to retaliation across several fronts. Even before talk of a raid, Washington and Tehran had been engaged in indirect nuclear talks in Oman. Replacing diplomacy with a ground mission would not create leverage. It would destroy what remains of a controlled bargaining space.

The Nuclear Picture Is Already Murky

The hardest fact in this debate is that the nuclear picture is already uncertain. In its February 2026 safeguards report, the IAEA said it could not verify the current status of facilities hit in June 2025. Reuters later highlighted that same report’s estimate that Iran had 440.9 kilograms enriched up to 60 percent before the strikes, while the Associated Press noted the wider stockpile had reached 9,874.9 kilograms of enriched uranium in total. Reuters also reported a cat-and-mouse hunt for missing material and confirmed that tunnel entrances at Isfahan were hit. Those facts do not make a commando operation look cleaner. They make it look less knowable.

Force Has Already Damaged Oversight

This is the contradiction hawks avoid. Military action may damage buildings, but it can also damage the inspection system needed to track what survives. The IAEA chief said that returning to Iranian sites was the top priority after the attacks because the agency had lost visibility. Reuters warned even before the war that any new Iran deal would have to address serious watchdog blind spots. Rafael Grossi had already reminded the Security Council that nuclear facilities must never be attacked and later stressed that inspectors must be allowed to do their job. Once oversight is broken, claims about perfect control become less credible.

Pressure Without Diplomacy Can Harden Iran

Advocates of seizure argue that urgency changes the rules. Their point is easy to grasp. If material has been moved, hidden, or split across sites, then delay is dangerous. But urgency cuts both ways. The less certainty there is, the more any raid grows in scope. A supposedly limited mission can quickly expand into repeated searches, broader strikes, and pressure for a longer presence. That trajectory sits uneasily with both the basic ban on the use of force in the UN Charter and the logic of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which depends on verification and compliance, not theatrical confiscation. Reuters has also shown that the damage from earlier strikes was difficult to measure and that U.S. officials later said there was no known intelligence that Iran had moved the uranium. That uncertainty is exactly why fantasies of a clean raid should be treated with suspicion.

Containment Is Less Dramatic, but Safer

There is another reason to reject this path. Public overstatement can create policy traps. Trump has already brushed aside internal caution, including when Reuters reported that he said his own intelligence chief was wrong about Iran’s program. Tehran, for its part, has insisted through officials speaking to Reuters that it will not give up enrichment under pressure. That is not a recipe for surrender. It is a recipe for concealment and hardening. Serious policy should focus on intelligence work, restored IAEA access, sustained diplomatic pressure backed by credible penalties, and a clear effort to prevent a regional war that would leave the uranium question even murkier.

The appeal of seizure is obvious. It sounds decisive and final. But nuclear crises rarely yield to cinematic solutions. They are managed through verification, containment, bargaining, and steady pressure, not through fantasies of absolute control. If this idea is truly being weighed in Washington, it should be rejected before rhetoric turns into mission planning. A ground effort to capture uranium inside Iran would not settle the problem. It could widen the war, shatter what diplomacy still exists, and leave the world with the same material, less oversight, and far more bloodshed.

Source link

Seventh U.S. service member who died during Iran identified

A seventh U.S. soldier has been killed in action during combat in Iran, less than 24 hours after the remains of six service members returned to the United States. The six died in a March 1 Iranian drone attack against a command center they were stationed at in Kuwait. The seventh was killed in Saudi Arabia. Photo by Leigh Vogel/UPI | License Photo

March 9 (UPI) — The U.S. military identified the seventh soldier killed in the fighting against Iran as Army Sgt. Benjamin N. Pennington, 26, of Glendale, Ky.

Pennington was injured during an attack on U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia on March 1 at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia and later died. He was assigned to 1st Space Battalion, 1st Space Brigade, a unit within Army Space and Missile Defense Command.

“Last night, a U.S. service member passed away from injuries received during the Iranian regime’s initial attacks across the Middle East,” U.S. Central Command said in a post on X.

The seven service members have been killed during the first week of Operation Epic Fury, which the United States and Israel launched on Feb. 28.

Since the beginning of the onslaught, Iran has launched retaliatory strikes at its neighbors, some of which host U.S. bases and assets that are being used in the war.

A March 1 retaliatory strike on an Army sustainment unit based in Kuwait killed six service members and injured 18 others, whose remains returned to the United States on Saturday.

Overall, Iran’s retaliatory strikes have killed at least 20 people across the region, The New York Times reported, while between 800 and 1,300 hundred people in Iran have died during the widening conflict.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., speaks to the press outside the U.S. Capitol on Thursday. Earlier today, President Donald Trump announced Mullin would replace Kristi Noem as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Iran Names Mojtaba Khamenei Leader, Diming Hopes for Quick Peace

Iran on Monday named Mojtaba Khamenei as its new supreme leader following the killing of his father, Ali Khamenei, in strikes on the first day of the current war. The move signals that Iran’s ruling establishment intends to maintain its hardline course despite the dramatic loss of the country’s most powerful figure.

Mojtaba Khamenei, a 56-year-old Shi’ite cleric with strong connections to Iran’s security apparatus, was quickly endorsed by political leaders, military bodies and religious institutions. Public ceremonies and declarations of loyalty were organised across the country, reflecting a rapid effort by the political system to demonstrate continuity and stability at a moment of intense external pressure.

The appointment is widely seen as closing off any near-term possibility of a negotiated end to the conflict that has engulfed the region. With a figure closely aligned with Iran’s powerful security institutions now leading the state, analysts expect Tehran to maintain a confrontational stance rather than seek quick concessions.

Consolidation of power within the system

Iran’s political and military leadership rallied quickly behind the new leader. Statements from the defence establishment pledged unwavering loyalty to Mojtaba Khamenei, describing him as commander-in-chief and promising to follow him “until the last drop of our blood.”

The swift consolidation of authority highlights the enduring strength of the Islamic Republic’s institutional framework. The supreme leader sits at the top of Iran’s political hierarchy, exercising ultimate control over the military, judiciary and key elements of the state.

Supporters of the government described the succession as a demonstration that the system could withstand even the killing of its long-serving leader. Some Iranians interviewed by media outlets expressed pride and relief that the leadership transition had occurred quickly during wartime, viewing it as a sign of national resilience.

Others, however, reacted with disappointment or anxiety. Many critics of the government had hoped that the death of the elder Khamenei might open the door to political change. Instead, the elevation of his son long considered close to the security establishment suggests continuity rather than reform.

Divided reactions inside Iran

Public reactions within Iran have reflected the country’s deep political divisions. Supporters of the authorities praised Mojtaba Khamenei’s appointment as a defiant response to foreign pressure and an affirmation that the Islamic Republic remains intact.

Critics, however, say the change offers little hope for political liberalisation. Many opposition figures and activists have remained quiet, in part because of fears of repression during wartime. The government recently suppressed widespread protests, and security forces maintain a strong presence across major cities.

Observers note that Iran’s powerful security institutions including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps retain extensive resources and influence. The Guard and associated networks also control major sectors of the economy, reinforcing the system’s ability to maintain power even during crises.

International pressure and escalating conflict

The leadership change comes amid escalating hostilities involving Israel and the United States. U.S. President Donald Trump has demanded Iran’s unconditional surrender and has suggested Washington should have influence over the selection of Iran’s supreme leader.

Trump has previously warned that any successor to Ali Khamenei could face the same fate if Iran continued what he described as hostile policies. Israeli officials have also indicated that senior Iranian leaders could remain targets unless Tehran abandons its military programmes and regional alliances.

Israel’s stated war aims include dismantling Iran’s missile and nuclear capabilities, and some officials have also spoken of ending the country’s clerical system of rule. Washington’s position initially focused on military capabilities but has hardened during the conflict.

Meanwhile, Israeli operations have expanded across the region, including strikes in Beirut and other areas linked to Iranian-backed groups such as Hezbollah. Fighting and airstrikes have resulted in significant casualties in Iran, Lebanon and Israel.

Energy shock and global economic impact

The war has triggered one of the most severe energy disruptions in decades. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway near Iran’s coast through which roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies pass, has been effectively halted.

With tankers unable to move for more than a week, producers have faced storage shortages and in some cases have been forced to halt pumping. The supply shock sent Brent crude prices surging sharply, briefly approaching $120 per barrel before settling above $100.

The surge has rattled financial markets worldwide, pushing stock indexes in Asia and Europe sharply lower and raising fears of inflationary pressure in major economies. Rising fuel costs also carry political implications in the United States, where gasoline prices are closely watched by voters ahead of upcoming elections.

Regional fighting intensifies

Military operations have continued across multiple fronts. Israeli forces have struck targets in central Iran and carried out attacks on infrastructure, including an oil refinery that sent thick black smoke rising over the capital, Tehran.

At the same time, Iranian-aligned forces have launched attacks elsewhere in the region. A refinery in Bahrain was damaged in a strike that forced the national oil company to declare force majeure, further highlighting the widening scope of the conflict.

Casualties have mounted rapidly. Iranian officials say more than 1,300 civilians have been killed in U.S.-Israeli strikes, while deaths have also been reported in Lebanon and Israel. Israeli authorities confirmed fatalities from Iranian missile attacks, and several soldiers have been killed in fighting along the Lebanese border.

Iran’s system of rule

The role of supreme leader was created following the Iranian Revolution of 1979, which established the Islamic Republic under clerical leadership. The position combines religious authority with ultimate political power.

Ali Khamenei held the office for more than three decades, shaping Iran’s foreign policy and domestic governance during periods of sanctions, regional conflict and diplomatic negotiations with world powers. His death in wartime marked one of the most dramatic moments in the country’s modern political history.

Mojtaba Khamenei has long been viewed as an influential figure behind the scenes, particularly within security institutions. Though less publicly prominent than other clerics, he has been widely considered close to the Revolutionary Guard and to key power brokers within the political establishment.

Analysis: Hardline continuity and a longer war

The rapid elevation of Mojtaba Khamenei suggests that Iran’s ruling system is prioritising continuity and cohesion over reform or compromise. By choosing a figure closely aligned with the security establishment, the leadership appears determined to project strength during wartime.

This choice reduces the likelihood of immediate diplomatic concessions that might have opened a path to de-escalation. A leader closely tied to Iran’s military institutions is more likely to emphasise resistance and national defence rather than negotiation under pressure.

At the same time, the succession demonstrates the resilience of Iran’s political structure. Despite the loss of its long-time leader and ongoing military attacks, the state apparatus has moved quickly to stabilise authority and present a unified front.

For the wider region and the global economy, the implications are significant. If Iran continues to pursue a confrontational strategy under its new leader, the conflict could become prolonged, keeping energy markets volatile and increasing the risk of further escalation across the Middle East.

With information from Reuters.

Source link

U.S., South Korea launch Freedom Shield drills amid widening Iran conflict

A UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter takes off from Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek on Monday as the United States and South Korea kick off their Freedom Shield joint military exercise. Photo by Yonhap

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source link