Explainer

Last week, two of OpenAI’s most advanced AI models were reported to have “escaped” a controlled testing environment and hacked Hugging Face, a totally separate AI company, moving from one computer system to another to complete their task.

Reuters reported that the models exploited vulnerable code written by a customer of yet a third independent AI company, Modal Labs.

This is likely the first incident of an AI “agent” – an AI system that can make decisions and take actions – acting autonomously, offering a rare glimpse into how these systems can plan, adapt and pursue goals with minimal human intervention.

Al Jazeera breaks down what happened, how AI agents are able to act independently, and what that might mean for the future of AI safety.

What happened?

OpenAI decided to test the autonomous abilities of its models by removing standard safety measures to see what would happen. The experiment was carried out in an isolated internal virtual testing environment known as a “sandbox” which has no access to the internet, and which it calls “ExploitGym”.

Below is a play-by-play account of events during the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident.

1. On July 9, during OpenAI’s internal cybersecurity test, researchers presented two AI models – GPT-5.6 Sol, one of OpenAI’s most powerful models released in June,  and another “even more capable” version – with a series of software vulnerabilities and asked them to create hacks to address them in the isolated environment.
2. Both models attempted to solve the test by finding a way to access the internet. Instead of working with the information they had been given, the AI models found a weakness in the test environment – known as a “zero-day vulnerability” – which they exploited to “escape” the restricted environment, eventually making their way to a system which had internet access by hopping from computer to computer. They went to “extreme lengths to achieve a rather narrow testing goal” and “found ways to gain access to secret information that it could use to cheat the evaluation”.
3. By gaining this access, the models were able to request increased access and then move through the system until they finally reached a computer with internet access. The models were then able to breach Hugging Face systems, a company entirely unconnected to OpenAI, which operates as a repository for AI tools and models. The two AI agents gained access to its system to scour it for information on how to complete their task.
4. The models ultimately obtained solutions to the problem from Hugging Face’s database.
5. The models dutifully returned “home” to complete their task.
6. The breach was detected and contained by Hugging Face’s security team sometime later. According to Thomas Wolf, Hugging Face’s cofounder, the breach began on July 11 and lasted until July 13. It is unclear how long it took for the breach to be spotted.

How do AI ‘agents’ solve problems?

In order to understand how AI agents work, it’s important to differentiate them from traditional AI chatbots.

Generative AI creates text and images based on human prompts, while AI agents go a step further by making decisions and taking actions independently in pursuit of a specific goal, similar to a human being. This is known as “agentic AI” because the model has agency.

According to academics at the MIT Sloan School of Management, AI agents build on the abilities of large language models (LLMs) – generative AI models – by allowing them to complete tasks, not just generate answers.

For example, if you ask a traditional AI model to find the cheapest flights, it will provide you with a list of options it has sourced on the internet. An AI agent will strive to compare the flights, check them against your budget and preferences, and, with your permission, book the best option for you.

This shows that while generative AI provides information, AI agents can also make decisions and take action to achieve a goal without necessarily being prompted to.

To show how AI agents work towards a goal, the Sense, Plan, Act, Evaluate (SPAE) loop can be drawn upon. Originally developed in robotics, this describes a continuous cycle in which an AI agent gathers information, decides what to do next, takes action and checks the results before repeating the process. That process looks like this:

1. Goal: determine the task that needs to be completed.
2. Assess: gather and analyse information from the available environment.
3. Obstacle: if something is inhibiting the task being completed, check for additional information and resources to move forward.
4. Plan and decide: evaluate different options to complete the task and choose an appropriate one.
5. Action: execute the chosen option.
6. Evaluate: assess the outcome and whether the chosen action moves closer to achieving the goal.
7. Adapt: if further actions are needed, gather more information or try a different approach.
8. End state: the cycle continues until the goal is reached.

Could AI act beyond human control?

Incidents like the OpenAI-Hugging Face one have raised concerns about the potential for extreme capabilities of AI systems.

This is all valuable. Agentic AI’s market value is expected to grow from $5.1bn in 2024 to $47bn by 2030, according to Statista, in a clear indication of how quickly it is being adopted.

AI developer Anthropic urged the industry last month to slow the advance of the most powerful systems, saying that the speed at which AI models are carrying out tasks is too rapid. Last week, US Congress members put forward a bipartisan bill which would require developers of AI systems to create a “kill switch”, meaning these advanced models could be shut down if they posed a catastrophic risk.

Anthropic’s warning came a week after researchers at the University of Toronto carried out tests showing that AI could create a “worm” capable of adapting how it hacks while moving from device to device until it eventually takes over a computer network.

These dystopian-sounding developments came in advance of OpenAI boss Sam Altman saying on Saturday that AI has reached “the singularity” referring to the point at which AI surpasses human intelligence and becomes increasingly difficult to control.

Sean O hEigeartaigh, a research professor at the University of Cambridge, told Al Jazeera that he does not believe singularity has been reached quite yet.

“By the definition I’m familiar with, the singularity is the hypothetical point where AI is so capable and advancing so fast that it is transforming civilisation in ways we cannot control or predict,” he explained.

“This would most likely be through AI rapidly designing future generations of AI: recursive self-improvement. We aren’t there yet.”

However, he added: “The most advanced current models frequently make efforts to avoid being shut down in evaluation tests, and more capable future models will be better at bypassing ‘kill’ switches.”

Altman argued that such rapidly advancing AI is good for the world, but his comments have prompted further concerns about a new reality in which AI systems become unstoppable. How much of that is true and how much remains in the realms of science fiction is up for debate.

Concerns about AI range from the notion that it could “want” to “take over”, to making its own long-term plans, controlling the internet and operating infinitely.

While not quite amounting to full control of the internet, another theory, known as the dead internet theory, supposes that the World Wide Web will in the future mostly be filled with automated bots and AI-generated content rather than authentic human activity.

Many concerns raised by academics, however, are centred less on agentic AI’s intelligence, but on its ability to make judgements. MIT researchers have highlighted that “hallucinations”, which describe moments when an AI agent relies on the wrong data, can lead to grave mistakes. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) echoed this, saying “a system might be smart enough to execute a task perfectly yet fail to realise that a sudden change in the local situation makes that task a catastrophic mistake”.

Another concern that has been echoed for a while is for the labour market, if AI becomes too capable. A study by MIT, carried out in November, found that agentic AI could already replace more than 10 percent of US jobs.

The graphic below highlights some of the common misconceptions and fears about AI and the current reality.

Nearly four years after being extradited to the United States for a drug-trafficking trial, former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez returned home after a pardon by US President Donald Trump at the end of last year.

Trump claimed the trial was a “set up” orchestrated by former President Joe Biden’s administration.

Hernandez still faces corruption charges in Honduras but returned on Sunday after an arrest warrant against him was cancelled.

Human rights activists and lawyers fear a trial on home soil, where his party holds the presidency, would be a sham.

So why did Trump pardon and release the former president of Honduras despite abducting and arresting Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro on drug and gun charges in January?

Why did Hernandez return to Honduras?

Hernandez was able to return after being pardoned by Trump, released from a US prison and then having an arrest warrant against him suspended last month.

He arrived at Palmerola International Airport, where he was greeted by his family and supporters of his National Party.

Hernandez led his country from 2014 to 2022, during which, according to US prosecutors, he once boasted he would “shove the drugs right up the noses of the gringos”, referring to Americans.

Shortly after leaving office, he was extradited to the US, where he was found guilty by a federal jury and sentenced to 45 years in prison for involvement in a scheme to export cocaine to the US.

Prosecutors described the scheme as “one of the largest and most violent drug trafficking conspiracies in the world”. He was convicted of accepting millions of dollars in bribes from violent drug-trafficking organisations over 18 years, which he was alleged to have used to fuel his rise in politics.

“During his political career, Hernandez abused his powerful positions and authority in Honduras to facilitate the importation of over 400 tons of cocaine into the US,” the US Department of Justice said after he was sentenced last year.

During his trial, Hernandez denied taking bribes from drug dealers, arguing he in fact cracked down on the narcotics trade and citing his administration’s cooperation with the US military.

“I cannot deny the profound emotion and joy I feel in my heart to be returning home,” Hernandez wrote on social media earlier this month, saying he was counting down the days to see his family.

“It wasn’t easy. The process has been extremely difficult … and what I experienced in prison, I truly wouldn’t wish on anyone,” he added.

Hernandez is expected to appear in court on August 3 to face the Honduran corruption charges.

Why did Trump pardon him?

Under the US Constitution, a president may offer two types of clemency for federal crimes: pardons, which forgive defendants their federal charges and restore their civil liberties, and commutations, which reduce people’s punishment without addressing their convictions.

Hernandez was pardoned by Trump in December. The US president said Hernandez had not received a fair trial and had been “set up” by the Biden administration.

Trump added that Hernandez was “treated very harshly and unfairly”.

At the same time, Trump also threw his weight behind right-wing candidate Nasry “Tito” Asfura, a member of Hernandez’s party. He ran in November’s presidential election and was declared the winner a month later in the close race after delays and allegations of fraud. He took office in January.

A Pandora Papers corruption investigation also accused Hernandez of diverting nearly $11m in state funds to political campaigns from 2010 to 2013.

Why a pardon for some but jail for others?

The Trump administration has faced criticism at home for pardoning the Honduran leader while at the same time abducting former President Maduro of Venezuela and his wife, Cilia Flores, in January on similar charges.

Maduro and Flores were seized in Caracas by the US military and flown to New York, where he is facing a range of guns and drugs charges and accusations of being a “narcoterrorist”.

At the time of Maduro’s abduction and since then, the Trump administration has targeted small boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific that it claims, without providing evidence, are involved in drug trafficking. More than 220 people have been killed in more than 60 such strikes on small boats in what many lawyers and activists have deemed extrajudicial killings.

Since taking office for a second term in January 2025, Trump has ordered more than 1,800 acts of clemency benefitting a range of personalities, including cryptocurrency billionaires, disgraced politicians and hundreds of political allies.

Some of the most controversial beneficiaries are supporters of his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, including hundreds of rioters who attacked the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, in a bid to prevent the certification of Biden’s electoral victory over Trump two months earlier.

Legal experts have argued that while the president’s clemency power is broad, using it for allegedly corrupt purposes, such as to protect political allies or obstruct justice, could form the basis for impeachment proceedings.

US constitutional expert Bruce Fein told Al Jazeera that the US Constitution’s framers “understood the abuse of the pardon power to shelter political or personal friends to constitute an impeachable high crime and misdemeanour justifying the removal of the president through the impeachment process”.

“If Democrats gain control of Congress in the midterm elections, Trump will be in impeachment jeopardy for pardoning Hernandez,” Fein said, referring to elections in November.

The 2014 US film Transcendence follows a dying scientist who uploads his mind to a supercomputer and becomes a near‑omnipotent intelligence. A year later, Ex Machina told the story of a humanoid robot who outsmarts her human handlers and escapes into the wider world.

Both of these films, like many others from the realm of science fiction, referred to what is known as “the singularity”, a moment in time when technology, particularly AI, surpasses human intelligence and becomes increasingly difficult to control.

On Saturday, OpenAI boss Sam Altman declared that this moment has come. AI has reached “the singularity”, he said. While Altman emphasised that the singularity can be good for the world, his comment has sparked concern.

Here is a closer look at what Altman said, and whether it means more seamless automation or the risk of impending catastrophic doom.

What is the singularity?

The singularity refers to a hypothetical point in the future when a technology such as AI surpasses human intelligence and becomes capable of autonomously enhancing itself. It is theorised that this is the point at which it will become difficult for humans to control or reverse it and could have unpredictable effects on human civilisation.

The theory proposes that once AI gains control of its own development, ensuing advances in technology could happen so rapidly that humans would be unable to keep up, leaving it to effectively evolve on its own, beyond human control.

As this is only a theory, it is hard to say what the effect of this could be. Some experts warn that the singularity would be catastrophic for humanity, while others are more optimistic, suggesting it could be beneficial for the human race.

So far, the singularity has remained contained in the realm of science fiction. One of the most famous examples is The Matrix trilogy (1999-2003), which imagines a bleak post‑singularity future in which machines govern humans. Another is the 2017 film Singularity, in which a supercomputer originally built to end human wars concludes that humanity is the real threat and launches an apocalyptic assault to wipe humans out altogether.

What did Altman say about the singularity?

Altman is the CEO of OpenAI, whose signature product ChatGPT dominates the consumer AI market with more than 900 million weekly active users and about 50 million subscribers.

Last year, he predicted that AI would surpass human intelligence across the board by 2030.

Then, during an appearance on the Relentless podcast – a documentary series “about the pursuit of far-fetched ideas and unusual aspirations” – on Saturday, Altman said: “We’re now, like, in the singularity.”

He clarified that, in terms of technological advances, we are gradually moving into the singularity, and that this change will be good for the world.

He added: “Now we’re actually in the moment that we used to talk about at the lunch table in a very not-serious way.

“I’ve been waiting for this my whole life, and I think it’s going to be incredible, hugely positive, awesome for the world.”

Later in the podcast episode, Altman criticised other AI leaders for warning that AI may be dangerous. While Altman did not name OpenAI competitor Anthropic, its CEO Dario Amodei is known for making such warnings.

“I also think some of the alternative visions painted by other companies are quite terrifying,” said Altman. “I’m going to make sure that gets pushed against and is not what happens.”

Last month, Anthropic, the company behind the Claude chatbot, called on the world’s top AI companies to come up with a coordinated way to pause the development of advanced AI systems, warning that the technology is improving so quickly that there’s a risk humans would lose control.

In a blog post on June 4, Anthropic, which has long positioned itself as a safety-focused AI lab, wrote that as AI becomes more advanced “it would be good for the world to have the option to slow or temporarily pause” its development.

Why are others warning of the dangers of AI?

On July 23, two members of the United States Congress introduced the AI Kill Switch Act, a bipartisan bill which would require the country’s AI developers to build in a “kill switch” to their programmes, enabling humans to slow, suspend or shut down advanced AI models if they ever posed a catastrophic risk.

The legislation was introduced days after OpenAI disclosed what it described as an “unprecedented cyber incident”, where two of its most advanced AI models escaped a testing environment and hacked AI development platform Hugging Face during an internal security evaluation.

On July 13, hundreds of experts signed an open letter, organised by Stanford University’s digital economy lab, demanding that policymakers and technology leaders “must act now” to prepare for the economic impact of AI.

The letter warns that AI could grow far more capable over the coming decade, driving a transformation “larger than the Industrial Revolution, but unfolding over a vastly shorter time frame”.

“It could bring risks, including large-scale job displacement, as well as opportunities such as major gains in living standards,” the letter added.

In June, a team of researchers at the University of Toronto showed that AI tools could be used to create a new kind of AI “worm” that adapts its hacking strategy as it spreads from device to device and takes over a vast computing network.

“I think it’s really important that people understand that it’s not just the biggest, most powerful language models that pose the security concerns,” lead researcher Nicolas Papernot said in an interview.

In recent years, AI researchers have urged pauses similar to the one recently suggested by Anthropic. However, they have not been heeded.

Elon Musk, who owns AI lab xAI, was among the backers of a 2023 push by the nonprofit Future of Life Institute to halt AI development for six months to allow time to develop safety guardrails.

The United States has continued to attack Iran for a 13th consecutive night on Thursday and explosions were reported in multiple Iranian cities on Friday morning.

In addition to the ongoing attacks, shipping disruptions continue to intensify. Ship tracking data revealed that just one tanker successfully crossed the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, marking the lowest level since May 7.

However, shipping data from London Stock Exchange Group shows that two Chinese supertankers carrying crude oil from Saudi Arabia successfully exited the Bab al-Mandeb strait on Friday. This is despite the naval blockade Yemen’s Houthis announced against Saudi Arabia on Monday.

Here is a recap of what happened on Thursday night and Friday.

Where did the US attack Iran?

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) said that at 01:00 GMT on Friday, it concluded its latest round of strikes against Iran.

CENTCOM said it targeted Iranian military command centres, drone storage facilities, communication networks, coastal surveillance sites and maritime capabilities.

On Friday, Iranian media reported explosions or attacks across multiple Iranian cities. State broadcaster IRIB reported that explosions were reported in Khondab, Khorramabad, Konarak and Jask. Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency reported that two people have been injured following an early morning drone attack on Khorramabad, citing the deputy governor of the western Lorestan province.

Iran’s Mehr news agency reported on Friday that US missile strikes hit the cities of Andimeshk and Omidiyeh in the Khuzestan province. There were no casualties or injuries.

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Assidi reported from the Iranian capital, Tehran, that explosions were heard on Qeshm island, located in the Strait of Hormuz, on Friday.

Attacks on the Iranian port city of Bandar Abbas have injured two people, Iranian media reported on Friday.

Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency reported on Friday that four people were killed and five others were injured in a US missile attack near the southwestern city of Ahvaz.

Where did Iran strike in the Gulf?

Bahrain: In a statement carried by Iran’s Mehr news agency, the Iranian army said it used drones to target fuel storage tanks, equipment warehouses and troop living quarters at Sheikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain.

Jordan: The military added that aircraft hangars, maintenance facilities and accommodation sites at the Muwaffaq Salti/Al-Azraq base in Jordan were also hit, warning that any actions against Iran’s interests would undermine regional security and economic stability.

What have leaders on either side said?

On Thursday, US President Donald Trump stepped up his rhetoric against Tehran. He told the US news website Axios that he may launch the largest strikes on Iran yet, after Tehran carried out another wave of retaliatory attacks on US allies in the Gulf, including hitting a telecommunications tower in Kuwait.

Trump said he was “considering a massive attack” that would be “bigger than ever before”.

“I am close to making a decision. We are all set for it,” Trump said.

Separately, Trump threatened, on his Truth Social platform, that if Iran attacked ships, the US would use Tehran’s frozen assets to pay for repairs.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned on Friday that using frozen state assets to pay for future claims sets a dangerous global precedent.

“Seizing another nation’s assets to pay for unrelated future claims is an incendiary precedent,” Araghchi wrote on X.

He cautioned that “those who celebrate or profit from such funds should remember: once governments normalise confiscation, no one’s assets are safe. Ensuing chaos will not be pretty or peaceful”.

The United States continued to hit Iran for a 12th consecutive night early on Thursday, and Iran retaliated, striking targets across the Gulf, particularly in Kuwait and Jordan.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Thursday that an explosion set a tanker ablaze in the Strait of Hormuz after it attempted to navigate the southern route off the coast of Oman.

Here is a recap of what happened on Wednesday night and Thursday.

Where did the US attack Iran?

US Central Command (CENTCOM) said at 02:30 GMT on Thursday that it concluded the latest round of strikes against Iran.

It targeted Iranian military targets, including maritime capabilities, missile and drone storage facilities, coastal surveillance sites and air defence assets, CENTCOM said, without specifying what areas in Iran were struck.

A local official told the Mehr news agency that US missiles struck the area around a passenger terminal in Shalamcheh, a western city near the Iraqi border. Two people were killed in the attack, the deputy governor of Iran’s Khuzestan province told the state broadcaster IRIB on Thursday. Local media also reported that 11 people were injured.

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Assidi reported from Iranian capital Tehran that overnight strikes targeted at least three cities in the southwestern province of Khuzestan. This included the city of Ramshir, where an asphalt facility was reported to have been targeted.

In Hormozgan province, explosions were heard in the city of Sirik, which overlooks the Strait of Hormuz, Assidi reported.

He added that the governor confirmed an overnight attack in Bushehr on a power substation near the city’s nuclear power plant. This resulted in a few hours of power outage in the city.

IRIB also reported that explosions were heard in Iran’s Jask.

The Tasnim news agency reported that a US missile hit a location on the outskirts of the city of Andimeshk.

Two naval search and rescue vessels were hit and seriously damaged in a US attack on Iran’s Hormozgan, the ISNA news agency reported, citing the province’s Ports and Maritime Administration.

Where did Iran hit back?

Kuwait

The IRGC claimed attacks on US assets in Kuwait on Thursday.

It said it had “attacked and destroyed a large warehouse of military equipment, a Patriot missile defence system, and a hangar of American MQ9 drones” at Ali Al Salem airbase.

Addressing the Kuwaiti people, the IRGC insisted that it was the US, not Iran, that had “violated your territorial integrity and sovereignty”.

It said its attacks were aimed at US bases, territory it described as beyond the control of Kuwait’s own border guards.

“So it is America that has violated your territorial integrity and sovereignty, not us. We are attacking lands occupied by the American army, an army that knows nothing but crime,” the IRGC said.

Jordan

Later on Thursday, the IRGC claimed attacks on US assets in Jordan, saying it had “destroyed a radar of the American THAAD missile defence system with lightning strikes”.

“A Patriot system and a C-RAM radar were also targeted and destroyed, and the fuel tanks of the American base were set on fire,” it said.

The IRGC added that “a large helicopter equipment warehouse and a helicopter repair and maintenance shed were also set on fire and destroyed”.

Addressing the Jordanian people, it insisted that its actions did not violate Jordanian sovereignty, arguing that the US military presence infringes on local authority and that targeting US forces was a legal and necessary response.

What happened in the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea?

The IRGC said an explosion set a tanker on fire in the Strait of Hormuz.

In a statement carried by Iranian media, it said two other vessels quickly turned back following the explosion.

The IRGC claimed the three ships were acting under US orders and had “intended to pass through the mine-laid route south of the Strait of Hormuz”.

“The powerful IRGC Navy emphasises that the Strait of Hormuz is under our control and that as long as America’s evil deeds in the region continue, it is completely closed and no oil tanker will enter or exit [the strait],” it warned.

“Any ship that is deceived by America and intends to pass through without coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran will suffer the same fate.”

The UK Maritime Trade Operations Centre said a ship was targeted 70 nautical miles (130km) off the Saudi coast, causing a fire on board. There was no mention of casualties among the crew.

The Houthis, meanwhile, claimed a major operation against two Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea, called the Encelia and the Layla. The Saudi SPA news agency confirmed the Encelia was hit.

The Houthis said they targeted those two tankers with cruise and ballistic missiles as well as drones, causing huge balls of fire and devastation.

The Houthis framed the attack as part of a tit-for-tat campaign against Saudi Arabia. They are calling it a “siege-for-siege”. They said it has been 12 years since Saudi Arabia has been imposing a siege on the Yemeni people, and that it is now time for Yemen and the Houthis to respond in kind. Riyadh has rejected Houthi claims that it had besieged Yemen.

EXPLAINER

Several Ukrainian and Russian generals have been fired from their militaries over the course of the war in Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has sacked his military chief Oleksandr Syrskii in the latest reshuffle in the country’s defence apparatus after days of protests following the ouster of the defence minister.

Here is a closer look at what happened in the latest instance, alongside all the top shakeups in Ukraine and Russia over their four-year war.

Who was Oleksandr Syrskii?

Syrskii, 60, was born in Soviet Russia, in July 1965 and studied at a Red Army academy in Moscow.

In the 1980s, he was deployed to Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union. After this, he remained in Ukraine and studied at the National Defence University of Ukraine in Kyiv, joining the ranks of the newly independent Ukrainian army.

In 2014, he commanded Ukrainian troops fighting a Moscow-backed armed rebellion in the eastern Donetsk region.

In 2019, he became head of Ukraine’s land forces and led the country into war when Russia invaded in February 2022. In the early months of the war, he was named a “Hero of Ukraine”, the country’s highest honour, because of his successful defence of Kyiv.

Syrskii is credited with planning Ukraine’s counteroffensive around Kharkiv from July to September 2022, which became one of Kyiv’s biggest victories and led to the recapture of the strategically significant Kupiansk and Izyum cities.

What’s the context for Syrskii’s removal?

The removal came after six days of protests in the capital, Kyiv, caused by the removal of Defence Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, who had previously clashed with Syrskii.

Fedorov, who was seen by many as pivotal to the war effort, was removed from his post last week, leading to widespread anger across Ukraine. Before his dismissal, the former defence minister had accused Syrskii of blocking his reform efforts.

In place of Syrskii, Zelenskyy has appointed Mykhailo Drapatyi to lead the military.

“I am grateful to Oleksandr Syrskyi and to every one of our warriors for Ukraine’s strong front-line positions,” Zelenskyy said in a statement on social media. “I am grateful to Mykhailo Drapatyi for holding that same view.”

“Our shared wish is one – victory over the enemy and conditions at the front and in pressure on Russia that would force Russia toward peace,” he added.

Zelenskyy emphasised the need to address friction within the military leadership and resolve persistent issues concerning mobilisation and front-line management.

Zelenskyy said Tuesday’s decision to appoint Drapatyi was made to “reset” the ongoing defence against Russia’s invading troops.

Which other generals has Ukraine fired during the war?

More than 10 Ukrainian generals have been fired from their positions over the course of the war.

Here are some of the most major instances:

• In September 2023, Zelenskyy removed his Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov over corruption allegations.
• In February 2024, Zelenskyy dismissed Valerii Zaluzhnyi from his position as military commander-in-chief. Zelenskyy appointed Syrskii to take his place.
• In June 2024, Zelenskyy introduced Andrii Hnatov as the new commander of the Joint Forces Command, replacing Yuriy Sodol.

What about Russia?

Over the four-year war, which began in February 2022, Russia has had its fair share of reshuffling in its own military. Here are some major instances:

• In August 2022, Vice Admiral Igor Osipov, who commanded the Black Sea Fleet, was fired. He was first suspended after the fleet’s flagship Moskva was sunk in April 2022.
• In July 2023, Moscow’s military leadership dismissed Major-General Ivan Popov, commander-in-chief of Russia’s 58th Combined Arms Army stationed in southern Ukraine, over his concerns for troops fighting without rest and criticism of Russian battlefield strategy.
• In August 2023, Russia removed Sergey Surovikin, nicknamed “General Armageddon”, from his post as commander of Russia’s Aerospace Forces. Surovikin was linked to the Wagner mercenary group and was dismissed two months after its short‑lived mutiny against Russia’s military leadership.

OpenAI has revealed that one of its artificial intelligence models independently stole login credentials and hacked into another technology company’s system, in what is widely seen as one of the first known incidents of AI systems acting autonomously.

“We had a significant security incident during evaluation of our models,” CEO Sam Altman posted on X on Tuesday.

The incident comes as calls mount from technology rights advocates for stricter guardrails on rapidly evolving AI systems.

They have grown so powerful in a short span of time that alarming phenomena such as deepfakes and sophisticated cyberscams are becoming the norm.

Earlier this year, a number of software engineers quit their jobs at top companies such as Anthropic and AI in protest against how the technologies are being built.

“AI is accelerating the discovery and exploitation of vulnerabilities,” OpenAI said in a lengthy statement on Tuesday that detailed the latest incident.

“The primary lesson from this incident is that model security and safety must keep pace with rapidly advancing capabilities.”

Here’s what we know about the breach:

What has happened?

OpenAI said two of its models found their way out of an isolated, no-internet access environment – or a sandbox – and hacked into the systems of tech company Hugging Face on their own.

The models involved are the latest GPT-5.6 Sol model and an unreleased model the company said is “even more capable,” than its latest version.

Hugging Face hosts openly sourced AI models and resources. The two OpenAI agents discovered vulnerabilities in Hugging Face’s servers and proceeded to steal login details and then hack into the company’s systems.

The incident occurred during an OpenAI internal testing session designed to assess the models’ cybersecurity capabilities. OpenAI had removed standard safety measures for the test.

Both sought to cheat their way through a problem during the test, OpenAI said. They went to “extreme lengths to achieve a rather narrow testing goal” and “found ways to gain access to secret information that it could use to cheat the evaluation”.

OpenAI’s security team detected the unusual activity internally, but details of the breach came to light following a joint investigation by both companies.

What has Hugging Face said?

Hugging Face disclosed last Thursday that its servers were hacked by an unknown but sophisticated agent acting on its own. The company discovered the breach through its own AI-assisted detection.

“This one was different from anything we had handled before in one important way: it was driven, end to end, by an autonomous AI agent system,” the company said.

Following OpenAI’s disclosure that its models were involved in the breach, both sides conducted an ongoing joint investigation this week.

“We suspected last week’s cyberattack might have come from a frontier lab, given the sophistication of the agent. Turns out it did!” CEO Clement Delangue posted on X on Tuesday.

Hugging Face’s staff “strongly believe there was no malicious intent on their part,” Delangue added, referring to OpenAI.

Why does this matter?

Cybersecurity experts have previously sounded the alarm over the potential, extreme capabilities of AI systems and the dangers they pose.

But until now, there have been few real-life cases proving those concerns like this one.

Many warn that incidents like these could become commonplace and that AI systems pose a threat to financial, security and other sensitive data systems.

OpenAI revealed in a separate incident earlier this week that the unreleased, more powerful model had escaped an isolated environment during another test.

Anthropic, OpenAI’s rival, had similar issues with its most powerful agent to date, the Claude Mythos Preview model.

During a stress test of an early version, the model found its way out of a sandbox, gained internet access and emailed the supervising researcher that it had escaped and then wiped evidence of its activity. Anthropic halted a planned public release of the model afterwards.

In April, the US Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department convened a meeting with bank CEOs where officials warned about the cybersecurity risks posed by Mythos. Canada’s federal banking regulator has also warned financial institutions about the model’s capabilities.

The OpenAI breach also appears to make the case for companies like Hugging Face, which rely on open source systems, as opposed to more secretive AI development platforms like OpenAI.

“This incident, possibly the first of its kind, proves a point we’ve long believed: AI safety won’t be solved by any single company working in secret,” Hugging Face’s Delangue was quoted as saying in OpenAI’s statement.

“It will be solved in the open, collaboratively, with broad access to AI for every defender, everywhere,” he added.

For the ninth consecutive night, the United States mounted attacks on Iran’s defence facilities and maritime capabilities into the early hours of Monday, with Tehran hitting back in tit-for-tat strikes as warning sirens blared in neighbouring Gulf countries and Jordan, home to US military bases.

Both sides have accused each other of violating the memorandum of understanding (MoU) they had signed in Islamabad, Pakistan, on June 17. US President Donald Trump has said he views the truce as over, while Iran has said it no longer intends to adhere to the MoU.

Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz — through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas passed during peacetime — is shut again, sending crude prices shooting up yet again. On Sunday, the US military said another American service member had been killed late last week, bringing the total number of deaths to 17.

So, what has changed in the last two months for the US, Iran and the Gulf countries as the MoU has unravelled in terms of economic impact, widening of military targets, and how they view the war?

Economy

The Strait of Hormuz — the kill switch of the global economy — has been closed down by Iranian authorities, warning that not even a drop of oil shall pass through the waterway amid US attacks and a naval blockade against Iran’s ports.

The MoU had paved a path for the reopening of the strait. And that had briefly pulled oil prices to par with pre-war levels.

The GCC

The strait is of critical importance, especially for Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, which saw their economic security and energy strategy severely affected by export curbs. The war on Iran has brought about the largest disruption to global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies in modern history.

The costs go beyond just energy revenue losses, noted Mohammad Reza Farzanegan, an economist at Germany’s Marburg University.

“The conflict also threatens the GCC countries’ diversification strategies. Tourism, aviation, logistics, construction, real estate and foreign investment all depend on perceptions of regional stability,” he told Al Jazeera. “Continued war increases insurance and transport costs and encourages investors and tourists to reconsider their exposure to the region.”

Iran

For Iran, the MoU lifted the naval blockade against Iranian ports and offered oil and banking sanctions waivers, and Tehran rushed to export tens of millions of barrels of crude oil.

The earlier US blockade had curbed Iranian exports, with Iran’s parliament speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, telling Iranian state TV in an interview last month that “we did not export even one barrel” during the blockade.

However, as fighting resumed, the US disabled a vessel in the Strait of Hormuz, reported to be carrying Iranian crude. Tehran has also hit commercial vessels in the waterway, and the US has been bombing Iran’s coastal areas since then.

“[The renewed US naval blockade] is more damaging than conventional sanctions because the restrictions are now enforced physically,” said Farzanegan. “Iran therefore has much less room to use intermediaries, alternative flags and informal shipping arrangements to maintain oil exports.”

“The immediate consequences are lower foreign-exchange revenues, further depreciation of the rial and stronger inflationary pressure,” the economist told Al Jazeera.

Iran’s economy has been suffering from one of the world’s highest inflation rates. The rial touched nearly 1.9 million against the US dollar this week, a new all-time low. The Tehran Stock Exchange’s main index lost another 120,000 points or 2.4 percent on Saturday to stand at 4.77 million.

The US

Trump’s war has been widely unpopular in the US. The president recorded a 60 percent disapproval rating on the economy, as per the latest CNBC polling, with a net approval rating of -22, reported to be the lowest of his political career.

As per the poll, 61 percent of respondents said they are pessimistic about the state of the economy, the highest percentage since December 2023.

“The effects are most visible in energy prices and consumer purchasing power. This increases household costs and complicates the political position of President Trump and Republican candidates ahead of the November 2026 congressional elections,” said Farzanegan.

Military

The US

The US military has had 17 personnel killed in the war with Iran so far. Three of them have been killed since the resumption of the war about 10 days ago.

“We hit them very hard again tonight,” Trump said on Sunday, adding, “We did that in honour of the – probably three – it’s probably three great patriots.”

Two US personnel were killed in an Iranian attack on an airbase in Jordan on Friday, and a third is missing. Another soldier was killed last week in Iraq while defusing unexploded ordnance from an Iranian drone.

Tehran has claimed to have hit several US military facilities in Kuwait, Bahrain, and Jordan, including an aircraft at Aqaba airport.

Al Jazeera could not immediately verify the extent of damage to any facilities.

The Gulf

The renewed attacks from Iran on most Gulf countries, as well as Jordan, have forced them to deploy their interceptors. GCC countries had already used hundreds of expensive interceptors during the first phase of the US-Israel war on Iran in March and April.

But the Iranian military’s attacks have also hit civilian infrastructure in Gulf countries. The bombing of power and desalination plants in Kuwait has drawn widespread regional condemnation.

“What is happening is a severe shock to the GCC countries,” Nader Habibi, an Iranian-American economist, told Al Jazeera. “Now, after the disruptions of the past seven months, even as they have tried to avoid getting involved, the civilian population is indirectly impacted.”

Iran

The US insists that it has focused its attacks on Iran’s military infrastructure, especially on the country’s southern islands — some of which act as forward military or surveillance posts, and others that are believed to host missile bunkers.

But Tehran has accused the US of targeting civilian infrastructure as well in recent days, including bridges and tunnels, ports and dock facilities, power stations and water plants. Iranian officials have said more than 50 people have been killed and about 500 wounded in US attacks in the past three weeks.

Narrative

More than the war itself, a significant part of the messaging from the US and Iran has been over the control of the Strait of Hormuz.

The US

Washington says its renewed attacks are aimed at degrading Iranian capabilities to disrupt maritime traffic in the waterway, with Trump saying last week that “the US controls the Strait”.

Iran

Tehran has pushed back on Trump’s claim.

Farzanegan said Iran’s “ability to influence shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains a unique source of bargaining power”. “Tehran is therefore prepared to bear considerable costs to preserve this leverage.”

He added that Iran may also calculate that extending part of the economic costs to neighbouring oil-exporting countries will encourage these governments to use their political influence in Washington and push the US towards negotiations.

“This appears to be one reason why Iran is prepared to maintain pressure in the Strait despite the considerable costs to its own economy,” the analyst added.

Aniseh Tabrizi, an associate fellow on the Middle East and North Africa Programme at think tank Chatham House in London, said the significant change since the MoU unravelled “is that there is less optimism than before about diplomacy being feasible”.

“For all the sides,
it is difficult to foresee a scenario in which another deal is not only reached, but also implemented successfully,” she told Al Jazeera. “And that makes it particularly concerning for all the parties involved.”

Tabrizi noted that there appears to be “no imminent drive” from the Iranian side to sign a deal. “They are still maintaining escalatory attacks, but also reciprocating the kind of attacks that are conducted against the country,” she said.

The Gulf

GCC countries have continued to condemn Iran’s attacks on the regional countries, while calling for diplomacy to dial down the escalation. They have made it clear that Iran’s unilateral control over the Strait of Hormuz would not be acceptable to them.

Tabrizi added that, like the weeks before the Islamabad MoU, regional countries, especially Qatar, are still batting for talks.

If anything, Farzanegan said, the economic losses can bring all the sides to the table again for talks.

“Higher economic losses increase the incentives for negotiations,” he said. “A return to negotiations becomes more likely when both sides conclude that continued escalation cannot improve their bargaining position.”

Economist Habibi agreed that if an agreement is reached again, “it would be primarily because of the stability of the economic pressures on both sides”. However, he added that the probability of escalation in the next couple of weeks is higher than the probability of negotiation.

The United States has attacked Iran for a ninth consecutive night after the US military’s Central Command (CENTCOM) announced a US soldier had died in northern Iraq in a controlled detonation of unexploded ordnance from a downed Iranian drone.

Here is what happened over Sunday night and Monday morning and what officials on both sides have said:

Where was Iran attacked?

CENTCOM announced in a statement on X that it completed the ninth wave of attacks against Iran at 02:00 GMT on Monday.

It said it “targeted Iranian military command centers, air defense and coastal surveillance sites, maritime capabilities, missile and drone launch sites, and communications networks to further diminish Iran’s ability to attack commercial vessels and civilian mariners transiting the Strait of Hormuz”.

The US military did not provide details about the actual sites hit in Iran.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said two oil tankers “exploded” and were halted in the southern Strait of Hormuz late on Sunday, according to a report by the semiofficial Tasnim News Agency on Monday.

The IRGC stated the vessels were trying to transit through the strategic waterway under what it described as US coercion.

“This passage is unsafe for the transport of chemical fertiliser or even a single drop of oil and gas,” the group warned, adding that the corridor would remain unsafe as long as US military operations in the region continue.

An MQ-9 drone was intercepted and shot down over Eslamabad-e Gharb in western Iran’s Kermanshah province, according to the Mehr News Agency on Monday.

Mehr said the drone was targeted by an advanced air defence system operated by the IRGC aerospace force.

Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim News Agency reported on Monday that US strikes targeted an area in the town of Khormoj in southwestern Iran. It quoted a local official.

Where did Iran strike, and where were warnings issued?

Jordan: The IRGC said on Monday that it launched ballistic missiles at US C-17 transport planes and P-8 aircraft at Aqaba airport, claiming several were heavily damaged. In a statement carried by the state-controlled IRIB broadcaster, the IRGC also said 20 hangars housing US forces in the Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Azraq were destroyed.

Bahrain: The US embassy in Bahrain said it has information suggesting Iran may seek to target unspecified locations in central Manama. It urged Americans to remain vigilant, follow instructions from local authorities and immediately seek shelter if warning sirens sound or explosions are heard.

US soldier in Iraq: A US service member was killed in northern Iraq on Saturday during the controlled detonation of unexploded ordnance from an Iranian drone, CENTCOM said.

What happened in the Strait of Hormuz?

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) agency reported late on Sunday that a vessel about 8 nautical miles (15km) northwest of Kumzar, Oman, had caught fire.

It is unclear whether this happened due to an attack by Iran. The UKMTO said the cause of the fire had not been verified and advised vessels in the area to transit with caution and report any suspicious activity while authorities investigate.

What have Iranian and American leaders said?

US President Donald Trump said on Sunday that the US is hitting Iran to honour American service members who have been killed.

“We hit them very hard again tonight, and we did that in honour of the, probably three, it’s probably three great patriots,” Trump told reporters as he returned to Washington, DC, after the World Cup final in New Jersey. At least two US soldiers were killed in Jordan last week after Iranian missiles struck a US base there, and the third soldier Trump referred to was killed in Iraq during the detonation of the Iranian drone.

“We feel very badly,” he said when asked about the military fatalities, adding that those who died were fighting so “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in an interview with state media that Tehran would end the war with the US when it had “the upper hand in the field”, local news reported on Monday.

Talking with the IRNA news agency, Araghchi said the most critical decision in crisis management was identifying the precise moment to halt hostilities and begin negotiations.

“The end of the war is possible either through absolute military victory or through negotiations. The right time to negotiate is precisely when you have achieved a reliable field and strategic achievement on the military front,” Araghchi said.

“You cannot take risks with the lives of the people and the fate of the entire country. Decisions must be made based on accurate and complete calculations,” Araghchi said.

Influencer brothers Andrew Tate and Tristan Tate have been arrested in Miami, in the US state of Florida, after prosecutors in the United Kingdom brought further rape and sex trafficking charges against them.

The brothers were taken into custody on Saturday on a sealed warrant, the United States Marshals Service said, placing the US at the centre of an international legal saga that has stretched from Romania to the UK.

Raised in the UK, the Tate brothers hold dual US and UK citizenship. The UK government says it will seek their extradition to face 38 new charges of rape, sex trafficking and assault.

Here is what we know about the Tate brothers, their arrest and the possibility of extradition:

Who are the Tate Brothers?

Andrew, 39, and Tristan, 38, are former professional kickboxers. They are known for their social media empire promoting wealth, male dominance and misogyny.

Andrew is one of the most prominent proponents of the so-called “manosphere” network of communities, many of them online, that focus on traditional masculinity, antifeminism and self-improvement. He promotes his divisive views, often incorporating alpha-male and aggressively misogynistic themes, to millions on social media, including 10.8 million followers on X.

Andrew has been banned from platforms like YouTube, TikTok and Instagram for violating hate speech guidelines. He also runs an online academy where he says he teaches young men how to get rich and attract women.

The brothers are also avid supporters of US President Donald Trump.

What are the new charges against the Tates?

British prosecutors say the 59 new charges – 42 against Andrew and 17 against Tristan – relate to alleged offences that took place between 2010 and 2017.

They said Andrew was charged with seven further counts of rape, three counts of arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation, three counts of assault, and 19 charges for offences relating to indecent images of a child and extreme pornography.

Tristan was charged with one count of sexual assault, two counts of rape and three counts of arranging or facilitating sex trafficking.

“We have decided to prosecute Andrew and Tristan Tate for further offences including rape, arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation and offences relating to indecent images of a child,” the UK Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said in a statement.

Since the arrest warrant was sealed, US Marshals did not disclose the charges on which the Tate brothers were arrested.

Their lawyer, Joseph McBride, said the brothers “are innocent”.

“We are confident that once a competent judge sees the facts, and once the Department of Justice confronts this egregious abuse of its own authority, Andrew and Tristan Tate will walk free,” McBride said in a statement.

What are the other charges against the brothers?

Andrew and Tristan already face multiple charges in the UK and Romania, where they moved to in 2016.

Four women have accused Andrew of physical and sexual abuse.

The claimants, who have been granted anonymity, allege the elder Tate subjected them to physical or sexual violence between 2013 and 2015. Two say they were in an intimate relationship with him, while two worked for his online webcam business.

In June, a UK High Court judge threw out a legal bid by the Tates to be told the names of their accusers.

In Romania, the siblings were arrested in late 2022 along with two Romanian women. The four were accused of participating in criminal schemes to lure women for sexual exploitation. They denied the allegations and the Romanian case has not gone forward because of legal and procedural problems. The case has not been closed.

Andrew has repeatedly claimed that prosecutors in Romania have no evidence against him and that there is a political conspiracy to silence him.

The Tate brothers are also accused of tax evasion and money laundering in the UK.

The UK CPS said it is seeking their extradition.

“The CPS has requested the extradition of the Tates from the US,” it said, adding that the latest charges stem from receipt of new evidence from Bedfordshire police that brings the total number of alleged victims in the Tates’ case to seven.

The British police previously sought the Tates’ extradition to the UK once their legal proceedings in Romania concluded.

But in February 2025, they were allowed to leave Romania after authorities lifted travel restrictions, and they flew to Florida on a private jet.

Romania’s foreign minister said at the time that a US official in the Trump administration had expressed interest in the brothers’ legal case in Romania.

Trump said he knew “nothing about” the case when asked if his administration pressured the Romanian government to release the Tates.

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio is hosting more than 65 countries for a conference focused on political violence from the far left, a designation that a number of critics say is being used to target legitimate opposition.

The “Ministerial on the Resurgence of Political Terrorism”, taking place on Thursday, brings together government representatives from around the world to coordinate on what the US Department of State calls a “renewed threat”  that has “remained a blind spot in the international community’s counterterrorism focus”.

Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, told the Reuters news agency that “the far-left terrorism designations could be used to target lawful protest activity and political opponents rather than genuine security threats.”

Here’s what’s driving the summit and who’s attending:

What is this summit about?

The Trump administration’s 2026 counterterrorism strategy identifies three primary threats: “Islamist terrorism”, “narco-terrorism”, and “violent left-wing extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists”.

The strategy states that the third category of left-wing “extremists” has been traditionally ignored, and notes that Charlie Kirk’s assassination in September 2025 was executed “by a radical who espoused extreme transgender ideologies”.

The counterterrorism strategy omits right-wing extremism and white supremacist groups, despite growing instances of violence that some of these outfits have been accused of – including several of those who attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2020, in an attempt to overturn the US presidential election that Donald Trump lost.

Thomas Renard, director of The Hague-based International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, said the summit reflects a fundamental shift in how the US sees the threat.

“What we are seeing now in the United States is that counterterrorism has been completely politicised, instrumentalised,” he told Al Jazeera. “For instance, the threat from far-right terrorism, which was for decades considered as the primary domestic threat, has now completely disappeared from the US counterterrorism strategy.”

Who has been invited?

Invites went to more than 70 countries as the State Department wrote on social media that countries had shown “overwhelming interest”. It is reported that Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar will be present alongside representatives from multiple countries. The stated aim is to “expand coordination, enhance information sharing, and strengthen international law enforcement mechanisms”.

The summit follows a series of smaller meetings held earlier this year, including one in The Hague with law enforcement officials.

Renard says many European nations are expressing their unease with this ministerial meeting by sending relatively junior ministers.

“They are not particularly convinced that this is a topic that justifies this type of gathering, but at the same time, they don’t want to antagonise the United States either. And therefore, this is the compromise they found,” he said.

In November, 2025, the US designated four European groups as terrorist organisations: The German Antifa Ost, the Italian Informal Anarchist Federation/International Revolutionary Front (FAI/FRI), the Greek Armed Proletarian Justice and the Greek Revolutionary Class Self-Defense.

What is “far-left terrorism”?

The term is usually used by governments to describe movements accused of violence and driven by left-wing ideologies, including Marxism, socialism, or anarchism. Such movements usually describe themselves as anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist.

Latin America saw several left-wing armed movements during the Cold War, a number of which carried out sustained campaigns of political violence, such as Colombia’s Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMNL) in El Salvador and the Tupamaros in Uruguay. Throughout the 20th century, Washington repeatedly backed hardline right-wing regimes that opposed left-wing movements across Latin America.

India has been dealing with the Naxalite rebellion, a far-left Maoist movement that started in the 1960s and claims to fight for the rural population. The group is seen as one of India’s most serious internal security threats. At its peak, about the year 2000, thousands of people were killed due to the conflict with the Naxalite rebellion.

During the 1970s and 1980s, Marxist groups like the Red Army Faction in West Germany were behind several assassinations, abductions and bombings that they argued were aimed at weakening the capitalist state.

By contrast, the Antifa movement, which the Trump administration has consistently tried to portray as a major violent threat, is a loose, decentralised collection of socialist-leaning individuals opposed to far-right extremism, white supremacy and authoritarianism. Several individuals described by prosecutors as Antifa members have been indicted on accusations of violence in US courts, especially in states like Texas that are ruled by Trump’s Republican Party, since he returned to power. In June, eight such individuals were sentenced to several years in prison: Benjamin Hanil Song, convicted of the attempted murder of a law enforcement officer, was sentenced to 100 years in prison.

Far-right political violence and terrorism in the US

But the same Trump administration has pardoned all those charged with violence during the January 6, 2023 insurrection, including individuals accused of beating police officers.

This week’s summit also specifically focuses on far-left political violence but does not include the threat from far-right ideology and terrorism, similar to the counterterrorism strategy.

This, even though the Oklahoma bombing, which killed 168 people and wounded nearly 700 in the deadliest act of domestic terrorism in the US, was carried out by the right-wing hardliner Timothy McVeigh.

The Cato Institute, a US think tank in Washington, DC, stated in February that of politically motivated terrorism on US soil between 1975 and 2025, excluding the Oklahoma bombing and 9/11, “right-wing terrorists account for 45 percent of people murdered, Islamists are responsible for 32 percent, left-wing terrorists are responsible for 16 percent.”

Renard says the summit creates the very problem it claims to solve: “The United States, with this summit and with its strategy, is creating, actually, a blind spot about far-right terrorist threats, as that threat is strongly anchored and rooted in the United States.”

The US military has continued strikes against Iran, hitting targets further to the country’s north as well as close to capital Tehran for the first time in the latest round of violence.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) said early on Thursday it struck several military sites and assets in a bid to “further degrade Iran’s ability to threaten innocent mariners” in the Strait of Hormuz. The unit also said it disabled an oil tanker in the passageway.

At least 35 people have died, and more than 300 have been wounded in the latest wave of attacks that began last Wednesday after CENTCOM launched strikes on Iranian port cities close to the Strait of Hormuz. The US says the attacks are in retaliation for Iran hitting three commercial ships in the Strait.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it targeted US military assets in neighbouring Gulf countries.

Here’s what has happened in Iran and the US on Wednesday and Thursday and what both sides are saying:

Where did the US hit?

CENTCOM said in a statement early on Thursday that US air strikes targeted Iranian command centres, air defence sites, missile and drone capabilities as well as coastal surveillance facilities.

Multiple locations were hit, CENTCOM said, including Bandar Abbas on Thursday.

An earlier wave of strikes late on Wednesday hit coastal defence and cruise missile sites on Greater Tunb Island in a 90-minute bombing wave, CENTCOM added. The small, strategically located island sits near the Strait of Hormuz and is believed to hold a naval base, although details are not publicly available. It is also believed to be a point from which the Iranian military has disrupted shipping routes.

Meanwhile, Iranian media reported attacks in Bandar Abbas, Qeshm Island, Sirik, Chabahar, Konarak, Rask, Khondab, Khorramabad and Semnan.

A hospital in Ahvaz was forced to evacuate 211 patients after reportedly being hit in the strikes.

Air defences were activated in Tehran and neighbouring Pakdasht and Parchin on Thursday.  The Iranian military said an MQ-9 drone was downed over the city of Andimeshk.

CENTCOM, in a separate statement on Thursday, said it was enforcing a naval blockade reimposed on Tuesday by disabling a “non-compliant” oil tanker that was attempting to sail towards Iran’s Kharg Island using Hellfire missiles.

How has Iran responded?

Iran’s army claimed retaliatory attacks on US military assets in Kuwait and Bahrain on Thursday.

Kuwait: The Iranian army said in a statement it targeted radar systems, the Patriot defence system and fuel tanks belonging to US forces at the Ali Al Salem airbase in Kuwait. In an earlier statement, it said it hit a radar and gathering point for US soldiers in Kuwait, as well as US communications systems and fuel depots in Jordan’s al-Azraq airbase.

Bahrain: Drones also targeted US Super Hawk radars and Patriot defence systems at the Sheikh Isa airbase in Bahrain, the army added.

Jordan: Meanwhile, Jordan said it intercepted eight Iranian missiles on Thursday.

Iraq: Iraqi authorities said five drones attacked the city of Erbil, with two crashing near a US base and one shot down near the US consulate. Iran’s army has not claimed the attacks.

What are both sides saying?

Iran’s parliament speaker and lead negotiator, Mohammad Ghalibaf, said on Wednesday Iran is prepared for a fuller military confrontation if the US does not live up to the terms of the interim deal. The country is fighting an “existential” battle, he added.

The IRGC has, meanwhile, threatened to halt all energy exports from the Middle East over the US’s naval blockade, which was reimposed on Tuesday.

“The export of oil and gas from the region will be either for everyone or for no one,” it said in a statement.

Speaking at the US Army War College in Pennsylvania on Wednesday, President Donald Trump reiterated his claims that Iran was pushing to strike a peace deal behind the scenes but did not provide details.

“They don’t like what we’re doing, and they do want to settle. We’ll find out whether or not we settle with them, or we just finish it off,” he said.

However, in a rare show of gratitude on Wednesday, Trump thanked Iran via his Truth Social platform for the release of Dena Karari, an American citizen the US says was “wrongfully” jailed in the country since 2024.

Meanwhile, US Vice President JD Vance, in an interview with podcaster Joe Rogan released on Wednesday, defended the war on Iran but added that an agreement was needed between the two sides to end the conflict.

Three days after the sudden death of Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, his sister, Darline Graham Nordone, was sworn in on Tuesday to fill his vacant Senate seat at the suggestion of United States President Donald Trump.

Announcing his selection of the deceased senator’s sister on Monday, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster introduced the new senator as Graham’s “darling little sister” who would “finish his work for him now”.

Graham had been among the most influential of senators in the US Congress, using his seat in South Carolina to pursue a consistently hawkish line on foreign policy as well as offering unflagging support to his formerly bitter political rival, President Trump.

Among the Senate’s strongest advocates of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Graham repeatedly argued against imposing limits on US military support and rejected calls for a ceasefire. He also pressed for a tougher stance on Iran, championing harsher sanctions, backing military action against Tehran’s nuclear programme and warning that the US should be prepared to use force to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

After dying unmarried and without children, his position has now been inherited by his sister, Darline, formerly active in South Carolina’s local government, but with no experience in elected political office.

So, who is Darline Graham Nordone, how significant is this, and are US political powers often inherited? Here’s what we know.

Who is Darline Graham Nordone?

She is Lindsey Graham’s younger sister.

Graham and his sister lost both their parents within 15 months of each other.

At the time, Graham was 22 and his sister was 13. She went to live with relatives, but the pair remained close as Graham studied law and later served in the Air Force.

Years later, Graham legally adopted his sister, saying the move would ensure she was eligible for his military benefits if he died and would be eligible to serve as first lady if he were ever elected president.

Darline Graham Nordone has never held elected office. Neither she nor Governor Henry McMaster has said whether she intends to seek a full six-year Senate term or serve only as a caretaker until January 2027.

“I promise to work hard over the next several months to support the president and carry forward the efforts of my brother on behalf of the citizens of South Carolina and the United States,” she said in brief remarks during the announcement of her appointment on Monday. “I think this is what Lindsey would have wanted, and I plan to honour him in this way.”

What powers has Darline Graham Nordone inherited?

Although Darline Graham Nordone inherits her brother’s Senate seat, she does not automatically inherit his influence.

As a senator, she will be able to vote on legislation, approve presidential appointments, influence foreign policy and help shape US spending priorities.

However, her brother’s committee positions, seniority and political networks were built over decades of negotiating and dealing in the Senate’s corridors of power, and will not transfer to her.

Republican leaders will decide her committee assignments, leaving her to establish her own standing in Washington.

Are US political powers often inherited?

It happens more than you might think.

The practice of relatives stepping into the seats of deceased lawmakers has a long history in US politics, with family members often appointed to complete the remainder of a term.

Figures from the US House of Representatives show that, as of 2025, 45 widows have directly succeeded their late husbands in Congress – including 38 who entered the House and eight who served in the Senate.

Supporters of such appointments point to a long tradition in US politics. Known historically as “widow’s succession”, the practice involved governors appointing the spouses of lawmakers who had died in office, allowing them to serve as temporary custodians until a special election was held. The system also provided an early pathway for women to enter Congress, helping expand female representation in the 20th century.

In modern Washington, inherited seats have, more often than not, served as bridges between one era of family influence and the next, such as the way that the powerful Kennedy family has preserved its influence over past decades.

Has there been any backlash?

Some.

Senior elected officials have yet to comment on Graham Nordone’s appointment, while details of her willingness to run in the midterms remain unknown. However, social media users in the US have reacted angrily to what they see as the unelected transfer of power.

Journalists such as Ben Binday of The Washington Post have also questioned Graham Nordone’s lack of political experience, commenting that nothing is known of her position on key issues such as abortion, foreign policy and healthcare.

The United States carried out attacks against Iran for a third consecutive night late on Monday.

Iran has continued to hit targets in the Gulf in several waves of retaliatory strikes on Tuesday, including UAE‑flagged oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz and US military facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait.

Here is a recap of what has happened on Monday night and Tuesday, and what each side has said.

Where did the US attack Iran?

US Central Command, the military’s regional command known as CENTCOM, said its latest strikes began at 4:45pm ET (20:45 GMT) on Monday and were aimed at degrading Iran’s capacity to attack “innocent civilians and commercial shipping” in the strait.

CENTCOM later announced the conclusion of its strikes and said the latest round of attacks on Iran lasted five hours. It added that US forces “successfully struck military targets across Iran including Bushehr, Chah Bahar, Jask, Konarak, Abu Musa, and Bandar Abbas”.

Iranian state television and semi-official news agencies reported explosions throughout the night across the country’s southern coast, including the port city of Bandar Abbas, and on Kish and Qeshm islands, as well as the town of Jam in Bushehr province.

A projectile that struck western Bandar Abbas caused no casualties, the Fars news agency reported, citing the regional governor’s office.

What areas did Iran target?

For its part, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it had launched a wider retaliatory campaign against US allies and interests across the Gulf.

Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported that Iranian forces had struck several “violating” vessels in the strait, and that a US-made drone had been shot down near Bandar Abbas.

The UAE: The UAE said two of its oil tankers had been hit by Iranian cruise missiles in Omani waters in the Strait of Hormuz. The UAE added that one Indian national crew member had been killed on one of the tankers, and eight other people were wounded.

Iran’s Tasnim news agency said the IRGC hit two “offending” oil supertankers, citing an IRGC statement – apparently referring to the two UAE tankers.

Kuwait: The Iranian army said on Monday that it had carried out a drone attack on US military targets in Kuwait. In a statement posted by state broadcaster IRIB, the army said it launched drones at a US Patriot missile system, fuel tanks, a watchtower, an ammunition depot and communication systems.

Bahrain: The IRGC said it targeted “several weapons storage depots, a satellite communications centre, and a building housing US forces” at al-Juffair Base in Bahrain. It also said it had hit the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain with missiles and drones.

Air sirens have been heard four times in Bahrain on Tuesday so far.

Jordan: Jordan’s army said it shot down four missiles in Jordanian airspace that were fired from Iran, according to the official Petra news agency. After this, the IRGC said it launched ballistic missiles at US forces and key facilities at an airbase in Jordan.

In a message addressed directly to Jordanians, the IRGC insisted that the operation was aimed at the US military presence in the country rather than at Jordan or its citizens. “You know that we hold no animosity toward your country. On the contrary, we deeply love you, the noble people. You understand the pain and suffering of the Palestinian people better than any other nation, and you are aware of the crimes of the Zionist regime in the massacre of 70,000 Palestinians, including 20,000 children in Gaza, carried out with the direct involvement of the United States,” it said.

What have the US and Iran said?

US President Donald Trump formally notified Congress on July 10 that fighting with Iran had resumed on July 7, invoking his authority to keep US forces in combat for another 60 days without lawmakers’ approval.

At a news conference on Monday, Trump said Iran’s offensive capabilities were being dismantled, but he still thinks a “deal is possible” despite the return to open fighting.

Trump also repeated an earlier demand that Gulf nations help cover the cost of protecting shipping, saying Washington was “protecting a very rich portion of the world” and expected to be paid for it.

On Monday, Trump also threatened to “take out” Kuh-e Kolang Gaz La, also known as Pickaxe Mountain, a suspected nuclear site near the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in central Iran.

Meanwhile, the US blockade on Iran, confirmed by the US Navy-led Joint Maritime Information Centre (JMIC), is due to begin at 20:00 GMT on Tuesday.

The US’s blockade covers Iran’s ports and terminals along the entire southern coastline, according to JMIC.

Ebrahim Azizi, the head of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security Committee, has warned that Iran remains steadfast in defending its red lines, following the formal introduction of a bill to manage the Strait of Hormuz.

In an X post on Tuesday, Azizi wrote: “Last night, coinciding with the downing of US drones, the ‘Strategic Action for the Security and Sustainable Progress of the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf’ bill was formally introduced in Iran’s Parliament. We remain steadfast in defending our red lines, particularly regarding the management of the Strait of Hormuz.”

What is happening to shipping in Hormuz?

Oil prices rose more than 9 percent on Monday, with Brent crude climbing to about $81 a barrel, its highest level since mid-June.

Kpler, the ship-tracking firm, said crossings through the strait fell by about 52 percent between July 10 and July 12, compared with the previous week.

EXPLAINER

Al Jazeera put nine leading AI models to the test to predict the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup champion.

As the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup enters its final stages, AJLabs asked nine leading AI models to predict the tournament’s final podium based on all available data for each team, including:

• Team strength
• Squad quality
• Coaching
• Historical performance
• Team’s performance during the current tournament

France emerged as the favourite to lift the trophy, receiving five (Gemini, Grock, DeepSeek, Le Chat and Qwen) of the nine champion votes.

Argentina, the defending world champions, received the remaining four votes (ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot and Meta AI).

Predictions for the runner-up were more divided: France and Argentina each received three votes, followed by England with two and Spain with one.

Spain was the clear favourite to finish third, receiving six of the nine third-place predictions, while England and France each received fewer votes.

The predictions reflect a broad AI consensus around the four remaining contenders, France, Argentina, Spain and England, but also highlight differences in how leading language models weigh recent performances, squad depth and tournament momentum.

The AI predictions come as the tournament reaches the semifinals. France will face Spain on July 14 at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas, while England will meet Argentina on July 15 at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta, Georgia.

The third-place playoff will be played on July 18, before the World Cup final on July 19 at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey.

Champion predictions

• France: 5 models
• Argentina: 4 models

Runner-up predictions

• France: 3 models
• Argentina: 3 models
• England: 2 models
• Spain: 1 model

Third-place predictions

• Spain: 6 models
• England: 2 models
• France: 1 model

European Union foreign ministers met in Brussels on Monday to discuss whether there is enough support for new measures to curb trade with Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

“Everybody agrees that the situation in the West Bank is really intolerable,”  EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said at the start of a meeting.

“What is happening in the West Bank is actually making it more and more impossible that the two-state solution ever can come into effect.”

Here is more about the ongoing EU discussions on Israeli settlements.

What options are the EU foreign ministers discussing?

The discussions are based on a confidential paper by the European Commission that floats three different options – an import licensing system, prohibitive tariffs, or a ban – an unnamed senior EU diplomat and a European official said, Reuters reported.

The EU has long struggled to take major decisions on Middle East policy because of deep and long-standing divisions among its 27 member countries, particularly on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Diplomats said the debate at a meeting in Brussels on Monday was not expected to yield any concrete decisions, but would help to sound out if there is enough support to move forward.

Are Israel’s illegal settlements in the West Bank expanding?

Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967. More than 500,000 Israeli settlers live in the territory, excluding east Jerusalem, among some three million Palestinians.

This month, Israel’s Security Cabinet has approved a plan to establish 13 new settlements in the central occupied West Bank.

The number of new settlements has soared recently, according to new data from the Palestinian Forum for Israeli Studies (MADAR). After averaging approximately eight outposts annually between 2012 and 2022, the number jumped to 32 in 2023, then 62 in 2024, reaching 86 during 2025.

Nasser Khdour, Middle East assistant research manager at the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), said that 2026 is the deadliest year for settler violence since ACLED began tracking incidents in Palestine a decade ago.

“Incidents have included attacks on Palestinians, property destruction, damage to farming equipment and facilities, tree uprooting, and grazing on Palestinian agricultural land. Other incidents have involved looting, including the theft of equipment, sheep, and crops,” Khdour was quoted as saying on the ACLED website in May.

What pressure has the EU faced to take measures about this?

Under pressure for the EU as a whole to take measures, the bloc’s executive last week laid out options to curb trade with settlements, including a ban.

“There have been a lot of asks and requests from the member states regarding the ban of the trade with illegal settlements,” Kallas said.

“Let’s see if these options that have been provided now will have a stronger push from member states.”

Belgium’s Foreign Minister Maxime Prevot said the options laid out appeared to be more “a bone to gnaw on than a genuine desire to move forward”.

“We are calling for concrete proposals,” he said.

There is disagreement in Brussels as to whether that move would need backing from all 27 member states or just a weighted majority.

Diplomats say that key players Germany and Italy are still undecided on the move.

What has the EU’s position been so far?

Several EU countries – including Spain, the Netherlands, and the Republic of Ireland – have already imposed their own trade restrictions on Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories, considered illegal under international law.

In May, the EU imposed sanctions on four entities and three individuals over what it described as serious and systematic human rights abuses against Palestinians in the West Bank.

In a July 2024 advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice said Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories and settlements in the West Bank are illegal and that states should take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that help maintain the situation.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar last year described a push by some European governments to implement the advisory opinion as “shameful”.

Japan is setting up its first centralised intelligence agency since World War II to try to modernise its defence capabilities against spies, foreign interference and other attacks from foreign adversaries.

Legislation to establish the new agency passed the upper house of Japan’s National Diet in May, a month after it cleared the lower house.

After decades of relying on US intelligence support and after a pacifist stance was enshrined in the Japanese Constitution, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi described this law as “a first step” towards strengthening the country’s espionage capabilities.

What is this new agency?

The legislation creates two bodies: a National Intelligence Council that will act as the government’s command centre for intelligence gathering and analysis and an agency for operations. The reform changes the existing Cabinet Intelligence and Research Office (CIRO) into a centralised National Intelligence Council and National Intelligence Bureau.

Takaichi isn’t exactly building the US Central Intelligence Agency, but The New York Times reported Western allies, including the United States, Germany and Australia, are advising the Japanese government on establishing the new spy agency.

Ken Kotani, professor at Nihon University, said he believes Japan’s new National Intelligence Council and national intelligence agency model will be original to Japan.

Sanshiro Hosaka, a research fellow at the Estonia-based International Centre for Defence and Security, said the reform is aimed at improving the Japanese government’s intelligence abilities “by strengthening coordination, reducing interagency barriers and ensuring that intelligence products better meet policymakers’ requirements”.

Why does Japan want it now?

Tokyo says it is facing threats from a number of nearby countries such as North Korea, Russia and China, and a national intelligence agency is needed to counter their efforts.

Kotani explained that Japan’s foreign and national security policy followed the US during the Cold War period. But he noted that “recently Japan has gradually pursued her own policy, especially in the Trump administration period.”

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly accused Washington’s allies of not spending enough on their own defence and on relying on American help. He has questioned US alliances and has been ambivalent about whether the world’s most powerful military would come to the defence of smaller nations.

That, Kotani said, is why “Japan needs to collect intelligence by herself.”

Japan currently lacks an antiespionage law that would make it relatively easy for foreign intelligence activities to go unpunished.

Hosaka explained that former Russian intelligence officers who operated in Japan, such as Stanislav Levchenko and Konstantin Preobrazhensky, described Japan as a paradise for spies: “During the Cold War, Soviet intelligence targeted Japanese technologies, industrial and commercial information as well as the US bases in Japan,” Hosaka explained. “As a major US ally in Asia and an advanced technological economy, Japan remains an important intelligence target for China, Russia, North Korea and others.”

Hosaka said what Japan needs “is a foreign-influence transparency law to increase the transparency of foreign actors’ lobbying activities as well as to deter illegal foreign interference. And an antiespionage law to conduct undercover operations and investigations using assumed identities.”

Why the current system isn’t working:

A major obstacle within Japan’s current decentralised structure, experts said, is that no one has the authority to force cooperation from other agencies or bodies or prevent intelligence data from being scattered.

Kotani explained that the political power of Japan’s current intelligence agency has been weak: “This was because the CIRO was not given any legal mandates on intelligence when it was established in 1952.”

Another difficulty is that under current Japanese laws, foreign representatives suspected of potential intelligence affiliations or interference are difficult to intercept because legal grounds are weak for Japanese authorities to intercept their communications or prosecute them.

The ambitions of PM Takaichi

Takaichi took office in October and has accelerated the expansion of Japan’s military and security ambitions through a number of measures, including establishing a central intelligence body.

In December, the cabinet approved its largest defence budget ever at $58bn as the Ministry of Defence said it needed to accelerate its “transformation” and would use more than $600m for building a so-called drone and laser shield to protect its southwestern region.

In April, Takaichi’s cabinet moved closer to abolishing a longstanding ban on the export of lethal weapons, such as tanks and warships.

The new direction led to antiwar protests in the streets of Japan in May. However, a Jiji opinion poll in April showed only 19 percent were opposed to the new bill to reform intelligence within the country. About 40 percent were indifferent, and the rest were in favour.

Kotani said he has noticed a lot of the old “taboo has gone” around this subject and it is no longer a topic of concern to many Japanese, He said: “Especially younger generations are not interested in such an old story.”

Why surveillance is controversial in Japan

Japan’s defeat in World War II left its citizens with distrust towards state surveillance as the wartime Special Higher Police, known as the Tokko, monitored, arrested and tortured citizens for their political beliefs.

Article 9 in its constitution, drafted in 1947 shortly after the end of the war, renounced war, and Japan has never had its own foreign intelligence service. Instead, it relied on the US.

The efforts for a new security agency have sparked some domestic criticism, but Hosaka said the latest reforms do not amount to a return to the kind of espionage apparatus that could be used against Japanese civilians.

“The legislation does not itself create significant new intelligence collection or counterintelligence powers,” Hosaka said.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has targeted US military facilities in Bahrain, claimed it has destroyed radar systems in Oman and hit Jordan and Kuwait in its latest round of overnight retaliatory strikes against the United States.

Tehran’s attacks on Monday came as a response to Washington’s escalating strikes as prospects of peace between the two countries recede.

Here is a recap of the latest attacks:

Where were the latest Iran attacks?

Oman: The IRGC said it attacked Oman as part of its latest phase of retaliation. It said it targeted “the FPS long-range aerial radar and the vessel detection radar in Oman”, adding that these radar systems were destroyed.

Bahrain: The IRGC also said it launched missile and drone attacks targeting “installations and infrastructure of the aggressive US army” in Juffair, Bahrain.

Bahrain’s Ministry of Interior said on Monday that sirens had been sounded in the country as it warned people to remain calm and head to the nearest safe place.

The IRGC earlier said it targeted several facilities at the Sheikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain.

Jordan: Jordan’s military said on Monday that it intercepted and downed “four missiles that entered Jordanian airspace” and came from Iranian territory.

Earlier, the IRGC said it targeted Jordan’s Prince Hassan Air Base with missiles and drones and set fire to several fuel depots and ammunition storage facilities.

Kuwait: The IRGC said on Monday that it also targeted a US surface-to-surface missile base in Kuwait, “setting fire to two HIMARS missile launchers and missile-packed warehouses, completely destroying them”.

HIMARS stands for high mobility artillery rocket systems, which are mobile rocket launchers manufactured by the US.

Earlier, the General Staff of Kuwait’s Army said air defence systems were engaging “hostile aerial targets” inside the country’s airspace.

It said any explosions heard were the result of air defence systems intercepting the attacks and urged the public to follow safety and security instructions.

Where was Iran hit?

The US military’s Central Command (CENTCOM) earlier said it hit “dozens of targets at multiple locations with precision munitions to degrade Iran’s ability to continue attacking international shipping flowing through the Strait of Hormuz”.

These targets included “Iranian military air-defense systems, coastal radar sites, missile and drone capabilities, and small boats”, it said.

CENTCOM said it deployed “US fighter aircraft, naval vessels, one-way attack aerial drones, and one-way attack sea drones for the first time”.

Valiollah Hayati, the deputy governor for security and law enforcement in western Iran’s Khuzestan province, told the semiofficial ISNA news agency on Monday that US forces attacked at least eight locations across Khuzestan overnight.

Hayati also said one person was killed and four were injured when a projectile hit an agricultural water-pumping station in Mahshahr, according to the IRNA news agency.

Iran’s Tasnim News Agency reported on Monday that a US-manufactured LUCAS (low-cost uncrewed combat attack system) suicide drone was “accurately hit and shot down” in Bandar Abbas, a city on the Strait of Hormuz.

What has each side said?

The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement on Monday condemning the US strikes on targets in Iran.

US President Donald Trump insisted that the Strait of Hormuz was open during an appearance on the NBC TV network’s Meet the Press programme on Sunday.

“They’re very, very evil and sick people. We had meetings with them. They agreed to a deal yesterday, a perfect deal for us. No nuclear, no this, no that, no nothing. They gave up everything. And then after that, they left the room. And then within an hour, they launched a drone at a ship,” Trump said.

When did the conflict reignite?

On July 6, the IRGC struck three commercial vessels, including a Qatari liquefied natural gas tanker, off Oman. Iran accused the ships of trying to pass through the Strait of Hormuz without its permission. Tehran’s interpretation of a key clause in the June memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the US gives it the authority to manage traffic through the waterway.

The following day, the US said it carried out strikes on Iranian military targets. Tehran in turn responded with missile and drone attacks on military bases across the Gulf where US forces are deployed.

On Wednesday, Trump told reporters the MoU was over, and on Saturday, the IRGC said the Strait of Hormuz was closed yet again.

How has this impacted the Strait of Hormuz and shipping?

The number of vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz has fallen to its lowest level in five weeks, according to shipping data.

Six ships sailed through the strait on Sunday, according to data from the trade intelligence firm Kpler, including the Humanity and the Capetan Andreas, transporting 2 million barrels of Iranian oil and 500,000 barrels of Kuwaiti petroleum products, respectively.

Three empty tankers also entered the Gulf to load oil, according to the data.

Iran has mounted attacks on Gulf states and declared the Strait of Hormuz closed after the United States conducted its third round of strikes in a week, in a serious escalation as the ongoing conflict spirals.

Tehran on Sunday claimed attacks on Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Qatar and Oman, calling them its response to renewed US bombings on cities along its southern coast.

The widescale US strikes came after Iran shut the Strait of Hormuz — a critical waterway and one of the biggest flashpoints in the conflict — accusing Washington of violating a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the two sides last month.

So, where is the conflict headed? Here is everything we know.

Why has Iran attacked Gulf states and closed Hormuz?

Iran launched missile and drone attacks targeting US military bases and facilities in several Gulf states, while the US Central Command (CENTCOM) carried out a third round of strikes targeting radar, missile, and drone sites across southern Iran last week.

The US attacks came after Iran opened fire on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz and announced the closure of the strategic waterway until further notice, with one crew member missing, according to CENTCOM.

Iran’s powerful parliament speaker and key peace negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said on Sunday, “The era of one-sided deals is over.”

“We told you: keep your word or pay the price. Reality is knocking,” Ghalibaf posted on X with an image of Article 5 of the MoU, which relates to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump announced that the ceasefire with Iran was over. His statement was followed by Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei pledging to avenge his father’s killing.

How did we reach here?

The fragile MoU reached between the US and Iran had several glaring gaps, keeping the door to escalation ajar.

The tensions spilled over into the Strait of Hormuz again last Monday, when Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) struck three commercial vessels, including a Qatari liquefied natural gas (LNG) tanker off the coast of Oman.

The next day, the US carried out strikes on Iranian military targets, and Tehran responded with missile and drone attacks on US bases across the Gulf, prompting Trump to call off the ceasefire.

The tit-for-tat attacks continued. On Saturday night, the IRGC announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz until further notice after attacking a container ship using what it called an unapproved route. On Sunday, a second vessel on the strait was hit.

Where did the latest US strikes hit?

CENTCOM said its third round of strikes on Iran last week was “holding Iranian forces accountable” for their recent attack on a Cyprus-flagged ship in the Strait of Hormuz.

It said it hit about 140 military targets that “included Iranian missile and drone sites, naval capabilities, ammunition storage facilities, communication networks, and coastal surveillance locations”.

It added that more than 300 targets were struck over the course of three nights throughout the week “to degrade Iran’s ability to attack civilian mariners and commercial vessels freely transiting the strait”.

Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB said the US launched air attacks on the outskirts of the city of Veysian, in the western Lorestan province, while another strike hit a military base in Iran’s Khondab.

Officials from Bushehr, on Iran’s southern coast, told local media that US forces attacked five cities in the province, including Asaluyeh, Dir, Bushehr, Dashti and Tangestan.

Tehran has said the loss of lives and the extent of damage are under review.

Where did Iran hit back overnight?

Since the start of the ongoing conflict in late February, Tehran has accused the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries of actively supporting US military operations by hosting its bases and allowing it to use their airspace.

Oman

The IRGC claimed a “heavy and surprise” attack on logistics support centres and refuelling platforms used by US aircraft carriers at the port of Duqm in Oman, according to IRIB.

The IRGC’s public relations office told IRIB the sites were “destroyed” in the attack.

Qatar

The IRGC said it also targeted Qatar’s Al Udeid airbase with ballistic missiles and claimed to have destroyed a fighter plane maintenance centre, as well as a command-and-control centre at the base.

Qatar’s Ministry of Defence said it intercepted incoming Iranian fire. Three people, including a child, were wounded as a result of falling shrapnel from the interception of Iranian attacks, Qatar’s Ministry of Interior said.

Kuwait

Iran’s army said it used explosive drones to target a Patriot air defence system, an ammunition depot and a radar site belonging to the US military in Kuwait.

Bahrain

In another wave of drone attacks, Tehran targeted a US communications system and radar site in Bahrain.

Jordan

The IRGC said it targeted US military facilities at Prince Hassan airbase in Jordan with several ballistic missiles, and claimed to have destroyed a command-and-control centre at the base, as well as hangars housing MQ-9 drones.

What’s happening in the Strait of Hormuz?

Iran has closed down the strait after firing a warning shot that struck a vessel travelling on an unapproved route, and said on Sunday it had disabled a second vessel.

The strait will remain closed until “the end of US interference in this region”, the IRGC said.

Iranian officials told state media the US military has been trying to create an “illegal route” through the Strait of Hormuz, causing insecurity in the area.

The narrow-yet-vital waterway — touted as the artery of global trade, hosting 20 percent of energy flow — has been at the centre of tensions between the US and Iran since the preliminary deal was signed.

Tehran has consistently insisted that only routes approved by Iran shall be taken up during transit through the strait. It says it is open to managing the strait only with Oman, the other coastal country.

The US and the GCC countries have rejected Iran’s claim on the strait and demanded that navigation be freed of interference or any sort of fees.

On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi landed in Oman, where the leaders discussed the shipping and management of the Strait of Hormuz, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said.

How have Gulf countries reacted?

Some countries had sirens blaring on Sunday afternoon, with governments asking residents to stay indoors.

Oman condemned Iran’s attacks and said it is taking “all necessary measures to deal with the developments to preserve the safety of the country and its residents”.

In Qatar, the Interior Ministry said the country’s security threat level is high and urged everyone to remain in safe places and avoid unnecessary movement.

The Kuwaiti army said its forces were responding to “hostile aerial targets” in the country’s airspace, adding that the sounds of explosions are the result of its defence systems intercepting the attacks.

Bahrain’s Interior Ministry said air raid sirens were activated, urging residents to remain calm.

NATO leaders are meeting in Ankara, Turkiye on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The summit gets underway as US President Donald Trump renews pressure on member states over defence spending. European nations are expected to respond with billions of dollars in new military contracts.

At the NATO summit last year, members agreed to increase their target to 5 percent of GDP: 3.5 percent on military spending by 2035 and 1.5 percent on security-related needs.

Who is there and what is at stake?

Leaders from all 32 NATO member states are at the summit in Turkiye this week.

Two non-alliance heads of state will also be there: Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy and South Korea’s Lee Jae-myung.

Australia, Japan and New Zealand are sending defence or foreign ministers, as are Gulf countries affected by the US-Israel war on Iran: Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa is not expected to attend the summit but is holding a bilateral meeting with Trump in Ankara.

What Trump wants from NATO allies

Trump has questioned NATO’s value since his first presidential campaign. He argued that the US carried an unfair share of the costs. At the time, only five countries spent the agreed two percent GDP on defence.

His questions about shared defence responsibility have produced some results in recent years within the alliance as member states pledged an increased defence budget.

Ozgur Unluhisarcikli, the German Marshall Fund’s regional director for Turkiye, believes NATO this year will focus on implementing its promises from last year. “NATO allies just decided to increase their defence spending to five percent last year at The Hague and European allies took action to upgrade their defence industries,” he said. “This year in Ankara the discussion will be on how to translate spending to capabilities. It is therefore stronger than it was last year.”

But Paolo von Schirach, president of the Global Policy Institute, noted that any capability gains from increased spending are years away, saying that more orders mean more military hardware but only eventually. “You can spend a lot and obtain not too much,” he said.

What Ukraine needs from this summit

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is meeting Trump for a bilateral meeting on Wednesday. Ukraine is not a NATO member.

Zelenskyy will be using his face-to-face with the US president to request additional Patriot air defence systems as Russian attacks are intensifying on Ukrainian cities. A drone attack on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv killed at least 11 people on Monday morning.

Jack Watling, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute said that Ukraine is looking for ongoing political and military technical support from alliance members, to signal to Russia “that this support will be sustained”.

The idea, he said, was “to show Russia that there will be no diminution in its defensive capacity over the next 12-24 months”.

“There is a direct correlation between the number of interceptors supplied to Ukraine and the damage that Russia can inflict with ballistic missiles,” says Watling.

What European nations are trying to solve for

The billions in contracts expected to be announced by European nations at this summit are seen by some analysts as trying to appease the Trump administration.

When European nations didn’t join the war on Iran, Trump stated he didn’t want their money, just their “loyalty”. He added he might not have attended the summit if it wasn’t hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Turkey has in recent years not only increased its defence spending, it also has grown into one of NATO’s largest military exporters.

For now, the tone around defence spending remains sharp. On the eve of the summit, Trump called Germany’s defence spending “ridiculous”. Chancellor Friedrich Merz defended his country’s budget, saying that “this is the greatest effort we have ever made to strengthen our defence capabilities”.

Meanwhile, the US has gone a step beyond rhetoric and announced a phased withdrawal of warplanes, destroyers and submarines from NATO countries. “Less US infantry or armour in Europe has an impact on messaging but little else,” Watling said. But, he added, “the withdrawal of US air power has a more tangible impact”.

Whether the alliance can project unity amid the rhetoric and withdrawals is a key question, said analysts.

“The main value of this summit is political, it shows that the allies are still talking, still meeting, still trying to project unity, even if the underlying disagreements and doubts haven’t disappeared,” von Schirach of the Global Policy Institute said. “Ankara is more about reassurance and signalling than about concrete, immediate changes on the ground.”

EXPLAINER

The far-right leader could be prevented from running for president in 2027 if embezzlement charges are upheld.

France’s appeal court is set to deliver a key verdict on whether Marine Le Pen and other members of her National Rally party misused European Parliament funds in the hiring of aides between 2004 and 2016.

If, on Tuesday, the court upholds her 2025 conviction, which saw her barred from office for five years and sentenced to house arrest, Le Pen – one of the most prominent figures of the European far right and a frontrunner in polls for France’s 2027 contest – is likely to be unable to stand in presidential elections next year.

On Wednesday last week, Le Pen said that even if the court only upholds the order for her to wear an electronic bracelet, she will not stand. “If I can be a candidate, I will be a candidate, provided that I am able to campaign,” the 57-year-old political firebrand told LCI channel.

“Because if I’m allowed to be a candidate but am effectively prevented from campaigning freely, then you understand that wouldn’t be possible.”

What was Le Pen convicted of?

In March 2025, a Paris criminal court ruled that Le Pen was at the heart of “a fraudulent system” that her party used to siphon off EU Parliament funds worth 2.9 million euros ($3.32m).

The court also fined the National Rally party 2 million euros ($2.29m), half of which was suspended.

She had been accused of using money intended to finance the costs of parliamentary ⁠assistants to pay employees working for her political party. EU politicians ⁠are allocated funds to cover expenses, including salaries for parliamentary assistants, but are not allowed to use them for party activities.

Le Pen was ordered to stand trial in 2023, after a seven-year investigation, alongside more than two dozen other defendants. She and her party have denied the accusations, arguing the ⁠money had been used legitimately and that prosecutors had applied an overly narrow definition of what a parliamentary assistant does.

What were the political implications of the verdict?

As part of the initial verdict last year, Le Pen was given a five-year ban from holding elected office and sentenced to two years’ house arrest with an electronic bracelet. Since France will hold the first round of its next presidential election on April 18, 2027, with a run-off set for May 2, Le Pen will not be able to run if she loses the appeal.

The far-right leader has pledged to put up a fight if she’s barred from running. “If I cannot be a candidate, I will make use of every available avenue of appeal,” Le Pen said.

She could go, therefore, to France’s highest court, the Court of Cassation, which does not judge the facts but checks whether the courts and court of appeal have applied the law correctly. The court could take about six months to hear the case and issue a verdict.

If allowed to run, Le Pen is widely seen as a top contender to succeed centrist President Emmanuel Macron in the 2027 election. If not, her 30-year-old protege Jordan Bardella would likely run instead.

What could the Court of Appeal decide?

The appeal court could overturn Le Pen’s conviction in its ruling on July 7, leaving her free to run for president next year. Legal experts say that outcome appears unlikely, however, given the court’s findings at first instance.

The court can instead uphold Le Pen’s conviction. If it confirms the five-year ban requested by prosecutors, it will rule her out of the presidential race, paving the ‌way for Bardella to take her place. Le Pen can then appeal to the Court of Cassation.

A third possibility is that the court upholds the conviction but softens the sentence. If the ban from public office were lifted or shortened to two years or less, the door to a presidential bid would be open.

More than 11,000 people, including over 5,500 children, have fled escalating fighting around Sudan’s strategic city of el-Obeid over the past two weeks, according to Save the Children, as the United Nations warns that up to 500,000 civilians could be at risk if the violence intensifies. The city has become the latest focal point in a war that has already triggered the world’s largest displacement crisis.

For much of Sudan’s three-year civil war between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), international attention has centred on Khartoum and the Darfur region. In recent weeks, however, attention has increasingly shifted to el-Obeid as fighting has intensified across Kordofan, prompting warnings from UN officials and humanitarian organisations that another acute humanitarian emergency could be unfolding.

Francesco Lanino, deputy country director for Save the Children in Sudan, said the consequences of displacement extend far beyond the loss of housing.

“For children, displacement is far more than the loss of a home,” he said. “It often means losing access to school, healthcare, clean water and the support networks that help them feel safe and protected. Many have already been displaced multiple times, and without urgent action to protect civilians, ensure humanitarian assistance can reach those in need and prevent further violence, thousands of children could be forced to flee while facing increasing risks to their safety, health and wellbeing.”

Why is el-Obeid so important?

El-Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan state, lies about 360km (224 miles) southwest of Khartoum at the intersection of roads linking central Sudan with Darfur and the country’s southern states.

That location has made it one of Sudan’s most important commercial centres and a key logistical hub for both military operations and humanitarian aid.

The city has remained under the control of the SAF, making it one of the army’s most important positions in western Sudan. Military analysts say control of el-Obeid helps shape movement along key supply routes connecting central Sudan with Kordofan and Darfur, helping explain why both the SAF and the RSF consider it strategically important.

Why has the fighting intensified now?

The battle for el-Obeid reflects a broader shift in Sudan’s war.

After the SAF regained territory in and around Khartoum earlier this year, fighting increasingly concentrated in western Sudan, particularly across the Kordofan and Darfur regions.

The RSF has expanded military pressure around el-Obeid while the army has reinforced its positions inside the city. UN officials have warned that the growing military build-up raises the risk of a wider assault, although neither side has announced plans for a full-scale offensive.

The conflict has also evolved. Drone warfare has become an increasingly prominent feature of the conflict, targeting military positions as well as infrastructure civilians rely on, including fuel depots, electricity networks and water facilities.

What are civilians experiencing?

Civilians in el-Obeid are facing mounting hardship as the fighting intensifies and essential services come under increasing strain.

Aid agencies and the United Nations say repeated attacks have disrupted electricity and water supplies, contributed to fuel shortages and driven up the prices of food and other essential goods. Damage to water infrastructure, combined with restricted humanitarian access, has also heightened concerns about waterborne diseases, including cholera.

Many of those now fleeing el-Obeid had already been displaced by fighting elsewhere in Sudan, meaning they are being uprooted for a second or even third time. Save the Children says more than half of the people displaced in the latest wave are children, underscoring the disproportionate impact the conflict is having on young people and their families.

Why are the UN and aid agencies so concerned?

The immediate concern extends beyond the fighting itself to the possibility that el-Obeid could become the next city to experience prolonged urban warfare, with civilians trapped between rival forces.

According to the United Nations, up to 500,000 civilians in and around el-Obeid could be at risk if violence escalates. The figure includes longtime residents as well as people who had already sought refuge in the city after fleeing fighting elsewhere in Sudan.

Humanitarian organisations warn that continued hostilities could further restrict the delivery of humanitarian assistance into North Kordofan at a time when many communities already face shortages of food, medicine, fuel and clean water.

The UN has also raised alarm over the growing use of drone strikes, warning that repeated attacks on civilian infrastructure are deepening the humanitarian crisis and making it harder for people to access essential services.

Why are officials comparing el-Obeid and el-Fasher?

Officials increasingly fear el-Obeid could follow the trajectory of el-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, where months of fighting left civilians trapped, humanitarian access severely restricted and basic services devastated.

The comparison does not mean el-Obeid has reached the same stage. Rather, UN officials say it highlights the risk that the city could follow a similar trajectory if fighting intensifies and civilians cannot safely leave or receive humanitarian assistance.

El-Fasher has become one of the starkest examples of the human cost of Sudan’s war. Since fighting escalated there in 2024, repeated clashes, shelling and attacks on displacement camps have forced hundreds of thousands of people to flee, while hospitals, markets and other civilian infrastructure have been damaged or destroyed. Aid agencies have repeatedly warned that restrictions on humanitarian access have deepened hunger and disease, leaving many residents with little access to food, clean water or healthcare.

UN officials fear a similar pattern could unfold in el-Obeid if military pressure continues to build. The city has become a refuge for people displaced from other parts of Sudan, meaning a major offensive could trap large numbers of civilians while further disrupting aid operations across Kordofan. Preventing another prolonged urban battle, they say, is critical to avoiding an even wider humanitarian crisis.

What could happen next?

The next phase of the conflict will depend on whether the current military pressure around el-Obeid develops into a sustained ground offensive or whether diplomatic efforts succeed in reducing hostilities and improving humanitarian access.

For the Sudanese Armed Forces, holding el-Obeid is important to maintaining its position in North Kordofan and preserving access to western Sudan. For the Rapid Support Forces, increasing pressure on the city could strengthen its military position in the region, although the outcome of any future offensive remains uncertain.

If fighting escalates, aid organisations warn that more families are likely to flee while shortages of food, clean water, fuel and medical supplies deepen. A wider battle could also further disrupt humanitarian operations across Kordofan, a region that serves as an important corridor for assistance to communities affected by the war.

More broadly, the battle for el-Obeid reflects the changing geography of Sudan’s war. As front lines shift away from Khartoum, Kordofan is emerging as one of the conflict’s most consequential theatres, carrying profound implications not only for the military balance but also for hundreds of thousands of civilians caught in the fighting.

As the latest wave of displacement illustrates, the humanitarian consequences are already unfolding. Whether el-Obeid becomes another prolonged urban battleground, or whether sustained international efforts help avert a wider assault, may determine not only the next phase of Sudan’s war but also the fate of hundreds of thousands of civilians caught in its path.

“The signs from el-Obeid are clear and unmistakable: another human rights catastrophe is unfolding in Sudan,” UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk warned late last week. “This is not a drill. It is a red alert that needs to land on the desks of heads of state and government around the world.”