front

The woman jumped out of her seat as soon as the plane hit the tarmac and ignored flight crew instructions to return to her seat while the seatbelt sign was still on

A pilot has been praised as a “hero” for ridiculing an entitled woman who rushed down the aisle in an attempt to be the first passenger off the aircraft. A fellow traveller recounted how the woman leapt from her seat the moment the plane touched down and bolted towards the exit.

Despite the seatbelt sign remaining illuminated, she disregarded the cabin crew’s requests to return to her seat until the aircraft had come to a complete stop. Recounting the incident on Reddit, the passenger explained: “The woman in the back unbuckled and darted to the front of the plane to get off first.

“She did not make any eye contact and felt that she was special. I’m talking about going from the very last seat on the plane, down the whole row, and past first class, basically standing at the little kitchen thing in the front.

“The seat belt sign was still on and we were still rolling down the runway. The flight crew had asked her to return to her seat until we reached the gate but she was not even responding.”

The passenger went on to describe how everyone aboard shifted their focus to the woman following the gruelling eight-hour journey. But that’s when the pilot chose to intervene personally.

“Suddenly the captain announced we had a special guest onboard and he would be coming out to greet them after we were settled at the gate,” they continued.

“The woman stood there awkwardly until we did the whole rolling into the gate thing, and whatever planes do when they land, for about 15 to 20 minutes.”

They went on: “Everyone sat there waiting to see what the captain was talking about. Eventually, the captain came out and asked the lady to please move back a little to get to his special guest, then a little more, then a little more.

“He was looking from row to row trying to find a specific person. Everyone is watching and looking around to see who it could be. “

The pilot kept ushering her back one row at a time until she reached the very back of the plane.

Finally, as they approached the rear of the plane he asked her to sit for a second while he grabbed the intercom at the rear of the plane.

The person recalled: “The pilot said: ‘Ladies and gentlemen, I’d like to announce our special guest sitting in seat 42C. Let’s give her a round of applause’. The whole plane went wild with laughter and applause. I loved every moment of that.”

Responding to the pilot’s power move, one user remarked: “That pilot is a hero to the people.”

Another user added: “I was hoping that the special guest was a federal marshal coming onboard to arrest the woman for refusing to follow safety-related commands given by members of the flight crew.”

One passenger said: “Sometimes when a plane is late getting in there are people that have a connecting flight that will be very tight to make. They need to get off the plane quickly to have any chance at their connection.

“The best way to handle that is to inform the stewardess and they can make a general announcement. Of course, sometimes people ignore that announcement and block the aisle for those people anyway.”

The Houthis in Yemen have launched their first attacks on Israel, opening a new front in the month-long regional war. Al Jazeera’s Virginia Pietromarchi explains why the move could raise new risks for oil shipping, and civilians in Yemen.

Yemen’s Houthis have attacked Israel for the first time, a month after US and Israeli forces began striking Iran, opening up a new front in a rapidly escalating conflict that has killed thousands of people, displaced millions and rattled the global economy.

The Houthis, who control much of northern Yemen, entered the fray on Saturday with two missile and drone attacks on Israel in the space of fewer than 24 hours. The Israeli army said the attacks were intercepted, but the Iran-aligned group pledged to continue fighting in support of “resistance fronts in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran”.

The Houthis had sat out of the hostilities until now, in contrast with their stance during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, when their attacks on shipping vessels in the Red Sea upended commercial traffic worth about $1 trillion a year.

Their widely anticipated involvement in the latest conflict comes just as Iran has throttled traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital chokepoint for about a fifth of the world’s oil, raising fears that the Yemeni group will again disrupt Red Sea traffic by blocking the Bab al-Mandeb Strait.

Reporting from Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, Al Jazeera’s Yousef Mawry described Bab al-Mandeb as the group’s “ace”.

“They want to make Israel pay economically. They want to disrupt their trade routes. They want to disrupt the imports and exports in and out of Israel,” he said.

‘Civilians bearing brunt of war’

The Houthi attacks came after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Washington expected to conclude its military operations against Iran within weeks, even as a new deployment of US Marines has begun to arrive in the region, so US President Donald Trump would have “maximum” flexibility to adjust the strategy as needed.

With no immediate diplomatic breakthrough in sight as both the US and Iran harden their positions, many fear that the US-Israel war on Iran, which started on February 28 and has since engulfed the region, will spiral out of control.

The US and Israel continued their bombardment over the past 24 hours, with the Israeli military claiming it had struck an Iranian research facility for naval weapons, while a series of loud explosions rattled Tehran as night fell on Saturday.

Iranian media said at least five people were killed in a US-Israeli attack on a residential unit in the northwestern city of Zanjan. In Tehran, authorities said the University of Science and Technology was the latest educational facility to be struck, prompting Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to issue a threat against Israeli and US universities in the region.

Separately, Iran’s Fars news agency said a water reservoir in the city of Haftgel, located in western Khuzestan province, had also been attacked.

The Iranian Ministry of Health announced that 1,937 people have been killed since the start of the conflict, including 230 children. Iran’s Red Crescent Society said US-Israeli strikes had damaged more than 93,000 civilian properties.

“Civilians are bearing the brunt of this war,” Al Jazeera’s Mohamed Vall, reporting from Tehran, said.

Devastation in Lebanon

Meanwhile, Israel’s devastation of Lebanon continued apace, as the Lebanese Ministry of Health reported that 1,189 people had been killed in Israeli attacks since March 2.

The death toll has been mounting as Israeli troops have pushed further into the south, advancing towards the Litani River in their stated bid to wipe out Hezbollah and carve out a buffer zone along the lines of the “Gaza model”.

Among Saturday’s killings, an Israeli strike killed three journalists in southern Lebanon. In parallel, the Health Ministry announced that Israel had also killed nine paramedics, bringing the death toll among healthcare workers in the latest war to 51.

Lebanon’s Public Health Emergency Operations Centre said an Israeli attack on the town of al-Haniyah, in the Tyre district of southern Lebanon, killed at least seven people, including one child.

An Israeli air raid on the southern Lebanese town of Deir al-Zahrani killed a Lebanese soldier, Lebanon’s National News Agency reported.

Hezbollah, which attacked Israel amid a ceasefire that Israel kept violating in retaliation for the assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, claimed dozens of operations against Israeli forces in the past 24 hours.

Mixed messages

Trump has threatened to hit Iranian power stations and other energy infrastructure if Tehran does not fully open the Strait of Hormuz. But he has extended the deadline he had imposed for this week, giving Iran another 10 days to respond.

With the US midterm elections coming up in November, the increasingly unpopular war is weighing heavily on the president’s Republican Party.

Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, said on Friday that he believed Tehran would hold talks with Washington in the coming days. “We have a 15-point plan on the table. We expect the Iranians to respond. It could solve it all,” Witkoff said.

Pakistan, which has been a go-between between US and Iranian officials, will host foreign ministers from regional powers Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Egypt in Islamabad for talks on the crisis.

Pakistan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Ishaq Dar spoke with his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, late on Saturday, urging “an end to all attacks and hostilities” in the region.

In a statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Dar had told Araghchi that Pakistan remains committed to supporting efforts aimed at restoring regional peace and stability.

Dar also announced that Iran had agreed to allow 20 Pakistani-flagged vessels to transit the Strait of Hormuz, calling it a meaningful step towards easing one of the worst energy crises in modern history.

As the United States-Israeli war on Iran rages on, schools across Israel have been closed, cultural venues shuttered and large gatherings cancelled under police orders.

Dissent against the war, if there is much at all, has little chance of being aired.

A few demonstrations against the war, such as those staged by the Israeli-Arab activist group Zazim, still flicker through central cities, but they do so under heavy supervision, with officers warning crowds to disperse when sirens sound or when assemblies grow beyond what commanders deem safe.

The effect is a public sphere constrained less by decree than by the constant threat hanging overhead.

“Kids aren’t going to school, while employers are insisting their parents go to work,” Zazim’s co-founder and executive director, Raluca Ganea, says. Everyone is too overwhelmed by the daily grind to voice any dissatisfaction, she adds.

“We’re enduring multiple missile attacks daily, which means people aren’t sleeping. It’s like a manual for tyrants. It’s how you suppress protest or opposition and it’s working so far,” she added.

“We’ve attempted a couple of protests, but people are just too tired to engage,” Ganea says of Zazim’s efforts to resist the war. “It’s not so much that people are telling you that you can’t so much as protesting becomes impossible when a missile attack could happen at any time.”

Support for the war on Iran has remained strong in Israel, a fact borne out by polls. But as exhaustion grows and resentment builds over having their fates decided by often distant leaders such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump, who have shown little investment in their welfare, the societal fractures that came to define the war on Gaza are almost inevitable, she warns.

“It’s depressing,” she says. “The only response people have is to feel helpless when their fate is in the hands of people like Trump and Netanyahu, who really don’t care about them.”

Those who have put their heads above the parapet to object openly to the war are shunned anyway, as 19-year-old Itamar Greenberg knows only too well. People spit at him in the street.

“It comes in waves,” he says of the criticism he faces for his opposition to the war on Iran on the streets of his hometown, near Tel Aviv. “Sometimes they follow me, shouting ‘traitor’ or ‘terrorist’.”

Itamar is clear enough that he isn’t a terrorist, though he seems ready to accept the label of traitor if it means halting the war on Iran.

“At my university, everywhere, they say my opposition to the war on Iran is somehow crossing a red line. For instance, because of the [danger to the Israeli] hostages, some people could understand opposition to the genocide on Gaza, but opposing the war on Iran, the great evil, is somehow too much,” he says.

Rising censorship

Across Israel, journalists and activists like Itamar describe a pervasive atmosphere of self-policing and censorship that, they say, has left people less informed about the consequences of the war than the citizens in Iran, whom many in their media encourage them to pity.

In a country largely unified against a threat that, for generations, politicians have told them is existential, criticism, dissent or opposition is, for the majority, beyond the pale.

This way of thinking is baked into Israeli society. The systems employed by the country’s military censor today to curtail media reporting predate the establishment of Israel in 1948.

Furthermore, new wartime restrictions on what can and cannot be broadcast of the Iranian missile barrages targeting Israel, where they land and what damage they have done – introduced on March 5 – mean these largely go entirely unreported, Israeli journalists say.

Reporting on the new media restrictions in mid-March, the Israeli magazine +972 documented one instance when journalists were permitted to report on debris that had hit an educational facility, but did not mention the actual strike by an Iranian missile, which had successfully hit its intended target nearby. Nor were they allowed to examine the site.

In another case reported by +972, journalists photographing damage to a residential block said they were approached by a man they believed to be linked to a security agency. He asked police to stop reporters from recording the real target of the attack, which was located behind them. The police officer replied that the journalists would not have noticed that site at all had it not been pointed out, since the visible destruction was concentrated on the civilian building.

The censorship, which had been growing more relaxed in recent years, had been tightened once more during the current war, Meron Rapoport, an editor at +972’s sister paper, Hebrew language Local Call, told Al Jazeera, “We don’t really know what is being or with what explosives,” he said, “The IDF [Israeli army] announcements always refer to strikes being on ‘uninhabited areas,’ which is peculiar, because there aren’t that many uninhabited areas in Tel Aviv. It’s a very compact city.”

Indeed, Iran has launched multiple missiles at Tel Aviv, some of which have resulted in damage and injuries – either by the missiles themselves or by debris falling following interception. Most recently, on Tuesday, missiles triggered air raid sirens in the city, where gaping holes were ripped through a multistorey apartment building.

Israel’s Magen David Adom emergency medical service said: “Six people were lightly injured at four different sites.”

“It’s curious,” Rapoport says. “Israeli commentators are always saying how the Iranian public has no real idea how badly they’re being hit. The irony is that they probably have a better idea of how hard Israel is being hit than most Israelis.”

MOLLY-Mae Hague was left speechless after boyfriend Tommy Fury called her a “piece of a***” in front of their daughter Bambi.

The Love Island icon, 26, is currently pregnant with their second baby after the couple got back together last year.

The couple are getting ready to welcome baby number two, after their daughter Bambi, three, was born in 2023.

Molly-Mae and Tommy often keep fans up-to-date with their family life at home, since reuniting after their split.

Today they shared a hilarious moment in the boxer’s latest YouTube vlog called: “Spend a weekend with me.”

In the video the couple were seen in the car with Bambi in the backseat.

BALM GOOD

Molly Mae’s go-to cleanser is slashed on Amazon — it left my skin glowing

PERRIE EXCITING

Perrie Sian reveals four property empire with £1.1 mansion & Spanish villa

The conversation then turned to Molly saying that she “never looked worse”.

Tommy then quickly said that he “disagreed”.

“I think you look very beautiful. All of your luscious long blonde locks.” the boxer told Molly.

“And it’s very nice to have a piece as good as you in the front seat of the car.”

Molly then quickly asked; “A piece? What do you mean a piece?

To which Tommy replied with a grin: “One piece of a**!”

Molly then chuckled: “Babe, I’m your pregnant missus!”

She then added: “Terrible!”

It comes as Molly-Mae and Tommy quietly broke their baby news to family and close pals months ago, but shared a surprise video with fans in February.

The mum posted a sweet black and white clip on Instagram filmed on January 23, captioning it: “Soon to be four.”

It included Bambi who was wearing a “big sister” jumper.

Molly had previously expressed her desire to expand her family with Tommy in scenes aired on her Amazon Prime documentary in January.

Opening up about the future, she revealed: “All I want in this life is to be with him, and to have another baby with him, and to grow old as a family.

“And to live in a nice house together and have a nice life together. That’s all I want.”

Molly also dropped various clues about her pregnancy before announcing her joyous news, which is said to have strengthened her relationship with boxer Tommy.

A source told The Sun: “Finding out Molly is pregnant has really helped bring them close together again.

“Tommy is determined to do things right this time he has cancelled all of his summer trips with his friends, as he wants to stand by Molly every step of the way.

“Their new home is in a better place for both of them and has more than enough space for two children.”

The couple co-parented Bambi following their messy split in August 2024 – following reports Tommy cheated on her during a lads’ holiday.

Molly-Mae and Tommy Fury’s relationship timeline

From Love Island to a diamond ring and baby – we look at how Molly and Tommy have got to where they are today.

The United Nations is warning that rapidly escalating drone warfare in Sudan has killed more than 200 people in little over a week as schools, hospitals, and civilian infrastructure become targets.

PHOENIX — Unable to ramp up through the first month of spring training because of lingering shoulder soreness, Dodgers left-hander Blake Snell took a step toward readiness Thursday, throwing his first bullpen session.

Two hours before Thursday night’s Cactus League game, Snell threw off the mound in front of a group of reporters and fans at Camelback Ranch. Snell threw 15 pitches — all fastballs — sitting between 87 to 89 mph.

“I feel good,” Snell said after his bullpen. “I was very excited to throw off the mound again and pitch. I’ve been looking forward to this for a while. This being like the first one where I actually could have the catcher down. I was still limited to what I could throw. I was throwing 87 to 89 [mph]. It felt effortless, easy, could command the ball, so [I’m] happy with that. [I’m] just happy to continue to grow and get better.”

The two-time Cy Young Award winner says he’s targeting an April return, and that he’s hoping to get back faster than initially expected.

“I want to pitch in April,” Snell said. “That’s my goal. So, I’ve kind of been the one pushing it, and they’re being more cautious. I think we’re just talking a little back and forth, but I think them seeing me throw a pen today, hopefully that just gives them more confidence to keep it going. I think we won’t really know until I throw a live [batting practice], I think that’s when we’ll really know. How do I recover from that? How do I feel? And then that will be like, ‘OK, let’s get him into games.’ That’s what I would envision. I’m not the front office or Dave, but that’s what I would think.”

Dodgers manager Dave Roberts, however, isn’t ready to give a timetable for Snell’s return.

“I think honestly, to think about when he’s going to come back, we’re just a ways away from even really having that conversation,” Roberts said, noting that six weeks is “the floor” when you also account for a potential rehab assignment.

Thanks to the depth of their pitching staff, the Dodgers can afford to be patient with building up Snell. Right-handers Emmet Sheehan and River Ryan, along with left-hander Justin Wrobleski, are all possibilities for starting assignments early in the season.

“We still need him to pitch, and I know he understands that,” Roberts said of Snell. “But we do have the luxury of trying to err on the side of caution. … We are certainly better when he’s pitching for us, when he’s active.”

Snell, for his part, is thankful to be throwing again without shoulder pain.

“The whole offseason, I mean, every throw kind of hurt,” Snell said. “It was just every throw, I could feel my shoulder. It was just cranky and I couldn’t get it going. And I thought I was doing everything I needed to, and I believe I was, and ultimately, I’m feeling better.”

Lakers star Luka Doncic was fined $50,000 on Tuesday for directing an “inappropriate and unprofessional gesture toward a game official” during the Lakers’ win over the New York Knicks on Sunday, the NBA announced.

The moment came during the third quarter when Doncic didn’t get the charge call after stepping in front of Knicks forward Mohamed Diawara in transition. Diawara dumped off a pass to Josh Hart for an easy layup, while Doncic, lying flat on his back under the basket, looked at the closest official and rubbed his fingers together as if flashing money.

Doncic was not penalized during the game, which the Lakers won 110-97, but he has had his battles with referees this season. With 15 technical fouls, he is just one away from a mandatory one-game suspension. He is one technical foul behind league leader Dillon Brooks.

Doncic did later draw a charge in the game. He has drawn a career-high 12 charges this season, which ranks third on the team. The Lakers lead the NBA in charges drawn with 53, led by Marcus Smart’s 16 and Austin Reaves’ 14.

“Just trying to copy Marcus and AR,” Doncic said.

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

A Command Architecture Designed to Survive Decapitation

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

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

The Apology That Wasn’t

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

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

The Theological Dimension

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

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

Durability Without Effect

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

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

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

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

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

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

Strategic Ambiguity Has Limits

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

A Raid Would Not Stay Small

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

The Nuclear Picture Is Already Murky

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

Force Has Already Damaged Oversight

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

Pressure Without Diplomacy Can Harden Iran

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

Containment Is Less Dramatic, but Safer

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

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