Iran

A number of players submitted visa applications in person at the US embassy in Ankara ahead of their training camp.

Iran’s football team have attended visa appointments in Turkiye ahead of the World Cup, with the whole squad applying for Canadian visas and some players also submitting applications for entry into the United States.

A number of players submitted applications in the Turkish capital Ankara on Thursday, an Iranian football federation official told Reuters news agency.

The whole squad attended appointments for Canadian visas, while some players who had not applied for American visas before the US and Israel attacked Iran in February also submitted their visa applications in person at the embassy.

Some foreign-based Iranian players joined the squad in Ankara before later travelling to the team’s training camp in Antalya on Turkiye’s Mediterranean coast, the official said.

The World Cup will ⁠⁠be cohosted by the US, Canada and Mexico, with Iran due to play all three of their group-stage matches on the US West Coast.

Iran are scheduled to face New Zealand on June 15 and Belgium on June 21 in Los Angeles before taking on Egypt in Seattle five days later. They would require access to Canada if they progress to the knockout rounds.

Iran is holding a pre-tournament camp in Turkiye following the suspension of the Iranian domestic league in March, leaving many players short of match fitness.

The team trained in Antalya earlier this week as coach Amir Ghalenoei attempted to prepare his squad after most domestic-based players went seven weeks without competitive football during the suspension of the Iranian league.

Iran qualified early for the expanded 48-team World Cup, but preparations have been overshadowed by uncertainty over travel and security arrangements following the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Iran’s football federation had previously said US visa applications for the team would be handled in Turkiye after discussions with FIFA.

Iran are due to play Gambia in a friendly on May 29 before Ghalenoei names his final 26-man World Cup squad by FIFA’s June 1 deadline.

Iran says it’s reviewing Washington’s latest response to a proposed ceasefire framework following Pakistani mediation. In a panel discussion, a former US State Department official and a Qatari academic discussed what options remain on the table.

President Trump, it’s well known, is into gold. Every day brings new evidence that he’s thoroughly enjoying the “golden age” he pronounced in his inaugural address — as few other Americans are — with stock trades, crypto profiteering and much more, even a new taxpayer-financed slush fund to reward his allies.

As for me, I’ve gone into silver. That is, I constantly look for the silver linings in Trump’s heinous acts.

One silver lining, of course, is his cratering job-approval numbers in the polls, especially among the young and Latino voters who made his reelection possible. But here’s another: By his humiliating failure to bring Iran to heel, nearly three months after starting a war that he said would last weeks at most, Trump has brought new, more positive attention to what he again this week derided as “Barack Hussein Obama’s Iran nuclear deal.” (The emphasis on “Hussein” is Trump’s, always.)

The president, along with his Republican cheerleaders, counts his first-term abrogation of the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as a signature achievement. This week, yet again, he falsely claimed that had he not done so, Iran would have a nuclear weapon. In fact, his action in 2018 taking the United States out of the multinational deal subsequently led to Iran’s rebuilding of its nuclear program, the emboldening of the Iranian hard-liners now in power and the Middle East morass in which the United States is now mired.

That quagmire has left Trump seeming desperate for a deal — almost certainly a worse deal than the one Obama struck. Call it JCPOA Lite.

If he were able to get Iran’s sign-off on the sort of detailed, restrictive agreement that Obama and other world leaders won 11 years ago, he’d be trumpeting himself as the world’s greatest dealmaker. (He does that anyway, but his record proves otherwise.) Instead, by his own failure to date, Trump has invited reconsideration of the very agreement he decried as the “worst deal ever” on his march to election and reelection.

No sooner was the 2015 deal signed than Trump and Republicans succeeded in defining it as a giveaway to Iran that assured, not hindered, its development of a nuclear weapon to threaten Israel and the world. Opponents condemned the agreement for not addressing Iran’s other threats, notably its support for militant proxies throughout the Mideast. Some Democrats, notably Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, were among the foes. Other Democrats, cowed by opposition to the agreement by Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli government and pro-Israel lobbyists, were all but mute in the pact’s defense.

Now some Democrats are belatedly finding their voice (and, post-Gaza, some willingness to defy Israel). Along with nonpartisan experts, those Democrats are drawing comparisons between the 2015 agreement, flawed yet successful, and Trump’s promised yet ever-elusive alternative. What’s ironic for Israel and Netanyahu, still implacably against negotiating with Tehran, is that they could end up, under Trump, with a nuclear deal that gives Iran more leeway than the hated JCPOA did.

As Americans are being reminded, the 2015 deal wasn’t just between Iran and Obama, as Trump has long suggested; other signatories were China, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and the 27-nation European Union. Reconstituting that group would be all but impossible today.

The pact’s 159 highly technical pages and five appendices — a far cry from the short-lived one-pager that Trump officials teased earlier this month — required Iran for 15 years to limit its nuclear program to civilian purposes, forfeit more than 97% of its enriched uranium and submit to intrusive monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure compliance. In return, Iran gradually got relief from some, but not all, international economic sanctions and access to Iranian funds that were frozen after the 1979 Islamic revolution. Presumably, after 15 years, the agreement would have been extended somehow.

By all accounts, including those of Trump’s first-term intelligence and national security officials, Iran was complying when he abandoned the deal. Its “breakout time” for building a nuclear weapon was about a year — time enough for the world to intervene — instead of two to three months. Now, though the president boasts he barred Iran from having that weapon by breaking the Iran nuclear deal, he incessantly tells Americans that he went to war against Iran on Feb. 28 because it was on the brink of a bomb — never mind that he also said he had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program last summer, a program that was in a well-monitored box until he first took office.

If you’re confused, you’re paying attention.

A month ago, Trump posted online that he was close to a deal “FAR BETTER” than the 2015 accord. “I am under no pressure whatsoever, ⁠although, it will all happen, relatively quickly!” To several reporters, he suggested he in fact had a deal and that Iran had agreed both to suspend its nuclear activities and to forfeit all of its enriched, near-weapons-grade uranium.

Preposterous claims, given Iran’s current government, and Tehran promptly denied them. It was a sign of Trump’s squandered credibility that few, if anyone, believed him in the first place. Nor have folks believed his more recent talk of imminent success; oil markets, too, have learned not to trust the president, as prices at the pumps attest.

On Tuesday at the White House, amid a noisy tour of the billion-dollar-ballroom construction site, Trump told reporters he’d been “an hour away” from striking Iran again that very day but Mideast leaders asked for more time for negotiations.

Don’t hold your breath.

But for the tragic consequences, Obama might be enjoying some justifiable schadenfreude about Trump’s travails.

“We pulled it off without firing a missile. We got 97% of the enriched uranium out,” he told Stephen Colbert in an interview last week. Both U.S. and Israeli intelligence agreed that Iran was abiding by the nuclear limits, Obama added, “and we didn’t have to kill a whole bunch of people or shut down the Strait of Hormuz.”

That sure doesn’t sound like the “worst deal ever.” It wasn’t.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

While the United States backs away from threats to resume bombing Iran if it does not agree to a peace deal, Israel’s political establishment is reportedly itching for war.

Shimon Riklin, an anchor for the right-wing Israeli Channel 14, blurted out apparently confidential plans about a renewed attack on Tehran, which included the location of what he claimed was a uranium storage facility that could be targeted.

Members of the Israeli parliament roundly criticised Riklin’s supposed revelations, leading the anchor to say his comments were purely hypothetical.

Still, despite broad agreement that Israel is eager to restart hostilities, it is unlikely to be able to do so without US permission. That does not look like it will be quick in coming. Reports of a call overnight between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump over Washington’s push for a truce irrespective of Israeli concerns left the Israeli leader reportedly with his “hair on fire”.

This week, Israeli media reported that Netanyahu chaired the second meeting of his security cabinet to discuss renewing the conflict with Iran. Despite billions of dollars in Israeli and US ordnance thrown at Iran, the government in Tehran remains in place.

Iran’s deterrence strategy of striking regional states and the subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz has dented the US’s appetite for renewing a costly and perhaps unremitting war against Tehran.

Iranophobia

For Netanyahu, the April 8 ceasefire – agreed with little Israeli involvement – has proven politically costly and, analysts say, unnerved a public conditioned to view Iran as an existential threat.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett have used the ceasefire as political currency in their attacks on Netanyahu. Lapid described the truce as one of the greatest “political disasters in all of our history”, a view that appears to be in line with that of the Israeli public.

A poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute in early May showed that a majority of Israelis believed a premature end to the war ran counter to their country’s security interests, while a similar percentage thought that a resumption of the conflict is likely.

To a public and political class accustomed to viewing Iran as their number one nemesis, it is unclear what solution they want in dealing with Tehran, Haggai Ram of Ben-Gurion University told Al Jazeera.

“Both politicians and public have been inculcated into seeing Iran as their ultimate foe,” said Ram, whose book Iranophobia chronicles Israel’s longstanding fixation on Iran.

Israeli people have been effectively trained for most of their lives to see war as inevitable, Ram said, a situation evident in their approach to bomb shelters when Iranian missiles fell, with Israelis whom Ram met at the time seemingly unfazed by the experience.

“It was perfectly normal to them that they should effectively stop their lives if it prevented Iran from completing its nuclear programme, or, from their perspective, if it helped ‘free the people’,” he said.

The only question for many Israelis, Ram said, is how Netanyahu – regarded in some quarters as a “magician” – would bring Iran to its knees.

Political necromancy

Many in Israel have grown accustomed to seeing Netanyahu defy the laws of political gravity. In 2022, he won an election despite being hounded by multiple corruption charges. He has managed to distance himself from the security failures of the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, and achieved credit – even if he officially denies it – for allegedly manipulating Trump into joining the war on Iran.

The October 2023 attacks and the US-brokered truce with Iran, which Israel had no role in, will be the foremost political concerns on Netanyahu’s mind, Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera. He noted that these could serve as an incentive for resuming military operations.

“My guess is there are three interlocking reasons why Netanyahu is looking to restart the war,” Pinkas said. “Firstly, there’s the distance he wants to put between him and October 7 – he needs a big strategic victory and he’s not going to get that in Gaza or Lebanon, so this is it.

“Secondly, the war wasn’t finished. Every taxi driver or second-rate political commentator will tell you: Israel achieved nothing with its war on Iran.

“Thirdly, and you only need to look at the polls to see it, he needs a victory with Iran to take with him into the [election] later this year.”

Iran’s seizure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has thrown global markets into turmoil, as well as Tehran’s strikes on its neighbours, appear to be consequences that Netanyahu never considered when starting the conflict. Israel’s failures in the war on Iran are expected to be key debates in the general election, slated for August.

Geopolitical shizzle

A few weeks after the April 8 ceasefire, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz boasted that once the US gave the green light, Israel was ready to bomb them “back to the Stone Ages”, highlighting the government’s eagerness to restart the conflict.

“There are those in Israel who would like to cut their losses and walk away,” former Israeli government adviser Daniel Levy told Al Jazeera.

“And then there are those, like Netanyahu, and much of the Israeli political mainstream, who want to double down and use all that US hardware [assembled off the coast of Iran] in an attempt to seriously degrade Iran.”

Ultimately, despite the broad political support for a renewed war with Israel, there are still limits to what Netanyahu can do. “This stops when the US says it stops,” Levy said.

Or, as Trump said of Netanyahu after their overnight call on Tuesday, he’ll “do whatever I want him to do”.

WASHINGTON — Republicans are unhappier with President Trump’s handling of the economy than they were a few months ago, but they’re largely continuing to stand behind him as the war with Iran continues, a new AP-NORC poll finds.

About 6 in 10 Republicans approve of how Trump is handling the economy, according to the poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. That’s down from about 8 in 10 in February, before the war began.

The poll comes as the Mideast war fuels higher gasoline prices, while the U.S. and Iran struggle to move toward a permanent ceasefire. Trump’s hold on the GOP remains strong, as he demonstrated Tuesday when his handpicked candidate defeated Rep. Thomas Massie, a critic of the president, in a primary election challenge. The findings highlight Trump’s continued strength within the Republican Party, even as economic frustration grows.

Ariel Gutierrez, a 55-year-old Republican in Wisconsin, usually requires his teenage children to pay for their own gas. But with spiking gas costs, he’s helping out his 15-year-old, who’s just learning to drive.

“The whole Iran issue has just exacerbated it,” he said. “Maybe we were seeing it in groceries before, but now — with this push on gas and travel and all that — that is how people want to live the leisure part of their lives … and it is directly impacting us there now. And yes, that is, I believe from Trump’s policies, not from his predecessors.”

Trump remains unpopular outside his base. Most Americans continue to disapprove of Trump’s approach to both Iran and foreign policy. His overall approval rating in the new poll stands at 37%, up slightly from 33% in April. Nearly all Democrats disapprove of his performance as president, as do about 7 in 10 independents.

The economy remains a struggle

About one-third of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling the economy. That’s in line with an AP-NORC poll conducted in late April, but down slightly from the start of his second term, when 40% of U.S. adults approved.

The economy was a strength for Trump in his first term, but he’s struggled with skepticism about his handling of the issue since his return to the White House last year, after repeatedly promising to bring prices down. His second-term economic approval has fallen among Republicans, in particular. While a majority, 63%, still approve, that’s down from 79% in February, a few weeks before the war with Iran began.

Richard Baumgartner, a 77-year-old Republican from Las Vegas, believes higher costs are a necessary side effect of the war, which he supports.

“Unfortunately, because of the war, the economy is a little bit off-kilter,” Baumgartner said. “I think it’ll fall back into place after things resolve over there. Temporary price increases — it’s unfortunate, but it’s something that has to be confronted in a situation like this where you have a very serious problem.”

Trump regains some strength on immigration

Although economic promises were pivotal to Trump’s reelection, so were his goals of stricter immigration enforcement — and this issue may be reemerging as an asset.

Immigration emerged as one of Trump’s strengths early in his second term, with about half of U.S. adults saying they liked his approach, but approval of his handling of the issue dipped to 38% in January and February, after months of aggressive immigration enforcement that led to the shooting deaths of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis.

Now, just under half of U.S. adults, 45%, approve of how he is handling that issue.

Brenda Theiss, an independent from Cullman, Ala., doesn’t like everything Trump is doing. But she gives him credit for being willing to disrupt the status quo to reduce the flow of immigrants who are in the country illegally, compared with Democratic Presidents Obama and Biden.

“I liked Obama; I voted for Obama — but Trump was the only one that did something. All of the other presidents sat back and went, ‘Well, there’s nothing we can do,’” the 73-year-old said. “He’s closing the border. He did it. Biden didn’t do it. For that, I give him one hundred.”

Over the last few months, the Trump administration has appeared to recalibrate its approach on immigration, moving away from aggressive, public-facing tactics toward a quieter approach to enforcement.

Immigration remains one of Trump’s stronger issues among Republicans. About 8 in 10 approve of his handling of the issue, which is roughly 10 points higher than the share who say he’s doing a good job as president.

Few approve of Trump on Iran or issues abroad

Trump’s handling of the war with Iran remains unpopular.

Only about one-third of U.S. adults approve of how he is handling Iran. Roughly two-thirds of Republicans approve, though an AP-NORC poll conducted last month found that younger Republicans are more likely to disapprove of Trump’s performance on the issue than older ones.

Similarly, about one-third of Americans approve of Trump’s approach to foreign policy. Though Trump has zeroed in on a more aggressive international approach this year — including capturing the leader of Venezuela and threatening Cuba — Americans’ views of his overall handling of foreign policy have not shifted significantly in recent months.

Amanda Wylie, a 22-year-old who lives in Athens, Ga., says Iran is one of the few issues where Trump doesn’t have her support.

“I feel like we’re wasting resources over there at this point and not for the benefit of the American people,” said Wylie, who identifies as a Republican-leaning independent. “Especially if everyone is worried about gas prices and the ultimate goal of this is to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon. Yes, that’s important, but at what cost?”

Sanders and Thomson-Deveaux write for the Associated Press. The AP-NORC poll of 1,117 adults was conducted May 14-18 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.

NEW LONDON, Conn. — President Trump told the U.S. Coast Guard Academy’s graduates on Wednesday that they show “unbelievable heroism and exceptional selflessness” but that the cadets will “be tested further” as they embark on their military careers.

Trump’s remarks to the class of 2026 were the first time he has given a commencement address at one of the nation’s military academies after sending U.S. troops to fight a new war.

He told the cadets that they will be America’s “first defenders” and “first responders.”

“You’ve all been tested. You’ll be tested further and probably at higher levels as your career goes on,” Trump said.

During his address, Trump quickly touched on the war with Iran, now in its 12th week, as a sign of U.S. success from “the hottest country anywhere in the world.”

“The only question is, do we go ahead and finish it up or are they going to be signing a document? Let’s see what happens,” Trump said.

The Republican president had threatened to launch renewed strikes on Iran this week as talks with Tehran seemed to have stalled and a fragile ceasefire appeared to be teetering. But Trump on Monday said he was giving Iran a few more days because “serious negotiations” were underway.

He has not offered details and has in the past backed away from following through on threats to Iran, citing breakthroughs in talks that have not publicly materialized.

Earlier Wednesday, he told reporters that he’s “in no hurry” to strike a deal to wrap up the war because of political concerns and the November midterm elections.

The commencement was held on a day with scorching heat and there was little shade available as the crowd waited for the ceremony to begin.

At least one person required medical attention after passing out. Others pleaded with organizers for elderly attendants to sit in the shade under tents. Chilled water bottles were distributed freely but quickly became warm.

Trump, who spoke at the academy’s graduation in 2017 during his first term, said he was proud to be the first president to give two commencement addresses at the school.

“We’re going to have to try it maybe a third time, too, to keep that record intact,” Trump said Wednesday.

The president and vice president traditionally speak at one of the military service academies every year. Vice President JD Vance is set to give the commencement address on May 28 at the U.S. Air Force Academy.

Before he flew to Connecticut, Trump told reporters that his message to the cadets would be, “Just enjoy your life.”

“You know, you don’t really realize how important Coast Guard is until you have a hurricane,” Trump said as he praised the maritime service.

Price and Kruesi write for the Associated Press. Price reported from Washington.

Nearly three months after the United States and Israel launched their large-scale bombing campaign against Iran and about six weeks since the April 8 ceasefire took effect, President Trump faces an inflection point. Does he return to war? Maintain the ceasefire and U.S. blockade on Iranian ports in the hope of cutting a deal on American terms? Or drop his maximalist negotiating stance?

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), an informal foreign policy advisor for the White House, continues to press for more aggressive U.S. military action. Trump’s political advisors would prefer that the war end as soon as possible to minimize political repercussions against the Republican Party in a midterm election year.

Trump seems conflicted. Despite weeks of U.S. bombardment and an ongoing naval blockade, Tehran is as protective of its nuclear program today as it was before the war began. “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them,” Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. A day later, Trump took to the social media platform again to announce he suspended planned U.S. attacks on Iran to give talks more time.

Unfortunately for Trump, he’s proved to be his own worst enemy on this subject. Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and Tehran’s effective control of the Strait of Hormuz, the regime’s two biggest cards, are a byproduct of Trump’s own policy decisions.

The first is a clear indictment of Trump’s first-term order to withdraw the United States from the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a highly technical accord that put Iran’s nuclear work in a box by restricting the number and quality of centrifuges it could use, capped the amount of enriched uranium it could produce and compelled Tehran to ship 97% of its stockpile out of the country. When the Trump administration scrapped that hard-won deal, Iran responded by enriching more nuclear material at a faster pace and accumulating the very stockpile the Trump administration is now seeking to neutralize.

The Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s second card, would not even be an issue today if the Trump administration had refrained from going to war in the first place. On Feb. 27, the day before the conflict began, more than 150 tankers and vessels traveled through the strait. The international waterway was open for business.

Not so today. On Thursday, a grand total of three crossings were registered in the waterway. This collapse of commerce is a consequence of Iran’s ability to harass civilian tankers so much that shipping companies no longer view the journey as worth the cost. As Adm. Brad Cooper, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday: “The Iranian capability to stop commerce has been dramatically depleted through the strait, but their voice is very loud. And those threats are clearly heard by the merchant industry and insurance industry.”

By virtue of his own actions, Trump is now left with a series of policy options that range from least bad to terrible. None of them are ideal, and all of them carry some risk.

For starters, Trump could resume the war. Any renewed U.S. bombing campaign would probably expand the U.S. military’s original set of targets to include a portion of Iran’s energy infrastructure, which Trump has threatened repeatedly to hit. A U.S. invasion of Kharg Island, where 90% of Iran’s oil processing takes place, might also be up for discussion. The aim would be to destroy Iran’s remaining military capabilities and further squeeze its oil revenue until Tehran’s strategic calculus on the war shifts to Washington’s liking.

Yet there are no guarantees that doubling down on military force will work. Trump’s entire strategy has relied on a baseline assumption: The more punitive the United States is, the more likely Tehran will be to cave. Yet that simply hasn’t occurred. If anything, Iran is more dug in now than it was in the opening days of the conflict. For the regime, capitulating to Trump is as dangerous as losing the war. Why would more bombing succeed where previous bombing failed?

The risks of additional U.S. military action are considerable as well. Before the ceasefire, Iran was launching ballistic missiles and attack drones across multiple gulf Arab states, hitting Qatar’s largest natural gas processing facility, Saudi Arabia’s east-west oil pipeline and Dubai’s luxurious high-rises. As the Iranians have stated, such attacks will not only resume if Trump orders a resumption of the war but will expand to new targets, including desalination facilities and nuclear power plants. Such strikes would raise global oil and gas prices to even more absurd levels, adding to the extra $40 billion the American people are already paying for fuel since the war began.

What about continuing the status quo? While this contingency would be less costly than another round of bombing or a U.S. ground invasion, it’s unclear whether it would help or hurt negotiations toward a settlement. There’s a possibility that extending the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports could merely reaffirm the regime’s earlier decision to preserve its own shutdown of the strait. Iran is now urging Washington to end its blockade before talks on the nuclear file can be held. And it’s a mystery whether Trump’s blockade is working anyway; the U.S. intelligence community assesses that Iran could withstand this pressure point for three to four more months, which may be too long for Trump to sustain given the oil disruptions that are bound to get worse.

Striking an agreement to end the war, return the strait to open traffic and restrict Iran’s nuclear program would be the most beneficial policy for the United States with the least amount of cost attached — not quite undoing the harm from Trump’s first-term decision to scrap the nuclear deal and his second-term decision to start a war. U.S. and Iranian negotiators are passing proposals back and forth as we speak. But as of now, Trump can’t stomach agreeing to a deal that covers some of Iran’s terms, including but not limited to a shorter suspension of enriched uranium and some kind of Iranian role in the management of the strait. Even if Trump did reassess his position, he would be forced to confront the hawks in his political coalition who would consider anything short of Iran’s total surrender a failure.

In short, Trump is in an unenviable position. He’s got nobody to blame but himself.

Daniel R. DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a syndicated foreign affairs columnist.

May 20 (UPI) — In its eighth war powers resolution vote since the United States went to war with Iran, the U.S. Senate has advanced legislation seeking to curb President Donald Trump‘s ability to engage in conflict with Tehran.

Senate Democrats have repeatedly used War Power Resolution privileges to force votes on ending Trump’s use of military force in the Middle Eastern country without congressional approval and have vowed to continue to do so for as long as necessary.

In its eighth vote on the resolution Tuesday, Democrats were able to court enough Republican votes to advanced the measure in a 50-47 result, with three lawmakers not voting.

The Democratic victory is largely procedural, as it discharges the resolution from committee for floor consideration, limited debate and a final vote on whether to send it to the House for consideration.

The Democrats have slowly cobbled together a handful of Republican votes as the war and its effects on the economy drag on.

Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana cast the deciding vote to push the legislation over the threshold on Tuesday, days after thee 15-year-veteran lost the Republican primary to Rep. Julia Letlow, whom Trump endorsed in turning against Cassidy for voting to convict him during his second impeachment trial in 2021.

“While I support the administration’s efforts to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, the White House and Pentagon have left Congress in the dark on Operation Epic Fury,” he said in a social media statement, referring to the Defense Department name for its military operation against Iran.

“In Louisiana, I’ve heard from people, including President Trump’s supporters, who are concerned about this war. Until the administration provides clarity, no congressional authorization or extension can be justified.”

Since the war began on Feb. 28 with the joint U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran, Democrats have been accusing the Trump administration of waging an unlawful war, stating the Constitution mandates that only Congress can authorize such military force.

The president is required to end the use of U.S. forces after 60 days unless Congress authorizes the action or extends the deadline, which was May 1.

Trump argues the resolution effort is moot, stating the conflict is over, and pointing to the fragile cease-fire announced in April.

The cease-fire “gives you additional time,” he told reporters earlier this month, describing the Democrats behind the legislative effort as “not patriotic people.”

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., the sponsor of Tuesday’s bill, said he was grateful that “enough of my colleagues stood up for the Constitution and listened to their constituents.”

“President Trump’s deeply unpopular war of choice in Iran has imposed a tremendous cost on the American people — including deaths and injuries of our service members and soaring gas prices,” he said in a statement.

The vote, he continued, sends “a strong message” to the Trump administration “that the American people aren’t interested in more war in the Middle East.”

The other three Republicans to vote in favor of the resolution were Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania has been the lone Democrat to consistently vote with the Republicans on this war powers measure.

WASHINGTON — The Senate advanced legislation Tuesday that seeks to force President Donald Trump to withdraw from the Iran war, as a growing number of Republicans defied the president’s wishes.

Since Trump ordered the attack on Iran at the end of February, Democrats have forced repeated votes on war powers resolutions that would require him to either gain congressional approval for the war or withdraw troops. Republicans had been able to muster the votes to reject those proposals, but Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy — fresh off a primary election loss in which Trump endorsed his opponent — switched sides to deliver a crucial vote to pass the legislation.

The 50-47 vote tally demonstrated the small but crucial number of Republicans voting to halt the war with Iran. The legislation will get a vote on final passage, but the timing was not immediately clear.

Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska had all previously voted for similar war powers resolutions and did so again Tuesday. Cassidy voted for the legislation for the first time.

After his primary election loss last week, Cassidy returned to Washington saying that he was proud of his work to uphold the Constitution and would carefully consider how he would vote on several priorities of the Trump administration.

Groves writes for the Associated Press.

May 19 (UPI) — Vice President JD Vance took questions from reporters Tuesday at a White House press briefing

, reiterating President Donald Trump‘s repeated assertion that the conflict in Iran is meant to keep the country from developing a nuclear weapon but that it is “not a forever war.”

“We want to keep the number of countries that have nuclear weapons small, and that’s why Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” he said during the briefing, “on top of all the other things that we might be worried about, that they themselves could use it, that they could use it in leverage and economic control or economic negotiations.”

Vance was the second person, following U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, to stand in for White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who is on maternity leave.

Iran was a dominant topic of the briefing. Vance said the United States has made progress in negotiations despite Iran’s position being “fractured,” but that U.S. forces are ready to attack again if necessary.

“We’re going to take care of business and come home,” he said.

Rubio and Vance are both considered presidential candidate contenders for Republicans in 2028, but the vice president demurred at a question

suggesting the press briefing role could be a sort of audition for candidacy.

“I’m a vice president,” he said. “I really like my job, and I’m going to try to do as good a job as I can.”

Vance also dealt with questions about the Justice Department’s new $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund,” which was created to compensate those who say they were unfairly targeted by former presidential administrations.

Some officials have criticized the fund as a way for the government to pay Trump allies who say they were targeted during the Biden administration. Earlier Tuesday, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said he could not rule out payments to convicted Jan. 6 rioters.

“We’re not trying to give money to anybody who attacked apolice officer,” Vance said at the briefing. “We’re trying to compensate people where the book was thrown at them, they were mistreated by the legal system.”

Warning comes after Trump threatened military action against Iran and gave it ‘two to three days’ to strike a deal.

United States President Donald Trump says he has decided to pause an attack on Iran at the behest of Gulf leaders after Tehran sent a new peace proposal to Washington through Pakistan.

On Monday, Trump said there is now a “very good chance” the US could reach an agreement with Iran to prevent Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

An initial, temporary ceasefire commenced on April 8, six weeks into the war. Since then, armed hostilities have largely subsided, but a durable peace agreement remains elusive, with both the US and Iran dissatisfied with each other’s proposed terms.

Also on Monday, Saudi Arabia said it had intercepted three drones, one day after a drone attack hit the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant in the United Arab Emirates. This has raised more concerns about the potential for renewed military escalation in the Gulf as peace negotiations drag on.

What has Trump said about a new attack on Iran?

Following the reported drone attacks on the UAE and Saudi Arabia on Sunday and Monday, Trump wrote in a Truth Social post: “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!”

Then, later on Monday, Trump wrote another post, saying he had been asked by the leaders of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE to hold off on a planned attack on Iran scheduled for Tuesday since “serious negotiations are now taking place.”

He added that he had instructed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine and the US military not to carry out the scheduled attack. However, he said, he “further instructed them to be prepared to go forward with a full, large scale assault of Iran, on a moment’s notice, in the event that an acceptable Deal is not reached”.

What do we know about the latest peace plan Iran has submitted?

Iran has submitted a revised 14-point peace plan to end the war, the semi-official Tasnim news agency reported on Monday.

Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei told a news briefing on Monday that Tehran’s response to the previous US proposal had been “conveyed to the American side through mediator Pakistan”, according to Tasnim.

Washington and Tehran have exchanged multiple proposals in recent weeks amid a ceasefire that has mostly halted six weeks of fighting. However, the initial direct talks mediated by Pakistan in Islamabad in April stalled, and Trump said last week the ceasefire is “on life support”.

While the specific proposals in the latest plan from Iran have not been made public, Baghaei said demands include the release of its assets frozen abroad and the lifting of sanctions.

“The points raised are Iranian demands that have been firmly defended by the Iranian negotiating team in every round of negotiations,” he said.

Iran has also previously demanded compensation for damage inflicted by US-Israeli attacks, an end to the ongoing US naval blockade of Iranian ports and a halt to fighting on all fronts, including in Lebanon, where Israeli forces continue daily attacks and have mounted a ground invasion in the south of the country.

Washington has urged Tehran to dismantle its nuclear programme and lift a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, which, before the war, carried one-fifth of the world’s crude oil and liquefied natural gas ‌(LNG) supply.

What are the main sticking points between Iran and the US?

A major point of contention is Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium. During negotiations, Washington has urged Tehran to give away its enriched uranium, a demand Tehran has resisted.

Iran is believed to have about 440kg (970lb) of uranium enriched to 60 percent. A 90 percent threshold of enriched uranium is needed to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran has never officially declared an intention to build nuclear weapons. The US wants this stock to be handed over to it, but Iran is reportedly only willing to consider handing it to a third party – if at all.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told reporters on the sidelines of a meeting of foreign ministers from BRICS nations in New Delhi last week that Iran and the US have reached a “deadlock” on the question of Iran’s “enriched material”.

As a result, he said, the topic is being “postponed” until later stages in the talks. “For the time being, it is not under discussion, it’s not under negotiation, but we will come to that subject in later stages.”

Araghchi confirmed he had spoken to Russian officials about an offer from Moscow to store Iran’s enriched uranium. He said Iran may consider Russia’s proposal at an “appropriate time” and that he appreciates Moscow’s efforts.

“When we come to that stage, obviously we will have more consultations with Russia and see if the Russian offer can help or not,” he said.

The US and Iran are also arguing about whether Iran should be allowed to enrich uranium at all. Under the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, signed with several countries in 2015, Iran was able to continue enriching to 3.87 percent – enough for the development of a nuclear power programme. Trump withdrew the US from that agreement in 2018, despite consistent reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that Iran had stuck to its terms. Now, the US wants a moratorium on all uranium enrichment for a period of up to 20 years, it says.

Another sticking point between the two countries is the Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf.

Since early March, Iran has restricted shipping through the strait, a narrow waterway linking Gulf oil producers to the open ocean and through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped during peacetime. Iran has allowed passage by vessels from select countries, but they are required to negotiate transit with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

In its previous proposals to end the war, Iran has mentioned charging fees or tolls for vessels seeking to pass through the state. Washington has repeatedly rejected the prospect. In April, the US announced a naval blockade on ships entering or leaving Iranian ports, further adding to the disruption of global oil and gas supplies.

Iran’s state media reported, citing the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that technical teams from Iran and Oman met in Oman to negotiate a mechanism for safe transit in the Strait of Hormuz.

A third likely major point of friction – although one which may also be kicked into later discussions – is Iran’s support for a network of “proxy” armed groups around the Middle East which it calls its “axis of resistance”. These include the Houthis in Yemen, who have also caused disruption by launching attacks on Israel-linked ships in the Red Sea in the past, Hezbollah in Lebanon and multiple groups based in Iraq and Syria.

Iran has publicly outlined key elements of its latest peace proposal to the United States, demanding reparations for war damage, the withdrawal of United States forces from areas near Iran, and the lifting of economic sanctions as part of any broader agreement.

According to comments from Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, the proposal also calls for the release of frozen Iranian assets, an end to restrictions affecting Iranian trade and shipping, and a halt to hostilities across regional conflict zones including Lebanon.

The proposal emerged after United States President Donald Trump announced that he had paused a planned military strike against Iran to allow additional time for negotiations regarding Tehran’s nuclear programme and regional security issues.

Iran Pushes for Broader Regional Settlement

Tehran’s proposal reflects an effort to expand negotiations beyond nuclear issues into wider geopolitical and security concerns across the Middle East.

Iran appears to be seeking a comprehensive arrangement that addresses not only sanctions and military pressure but also the broader regional balance of power involving Lebanon, the Gulf region, and United States military deployments.

The demand for reparations is particularly significant because it frames the recent conflict as an act requiring compensation for damage caused by joint United States and Israeli military operations.

Iranian officials also continue insisting that economic sanctions and frozen overseas assets remain central obstacles to any sustainable agreement.

United States Signals Openness but Maintains Pressure

Trump stated that there was a strong possibility of reaching a deal that would prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons while avoiding renewed military escalation.

However, Washington has not publicly confirmed any major concessions in negotiations. Reports suggesting the United States may release a portion of frozen Iranian funds or allow limited peaceful nuclear activity under international supervision remain unverified by American officials.

At the same time, United States officials continue denying claims that sanctions on Iranian oil exports would be fully waived during negotiations.

The situation reflects a complex diplomatic balancing act in which Washington seeks to maintain leverage while preventing a wider regional conflict that could destabilise global energy markets and military alliances.

Regional Powers Push for De Escalation

Regional governments including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates reportedly urged Trump to delay military action in hopes that negotiations could succeed.

The involvement of regional mediators highlights growing concern across the Gulf about the economic and security consequences of another large scale conflict involving Iran.

The Strait of Hormuz remains especially important because it serves as one of the world’s most critical shipping routes for oil and energy exports. Any escalation threatening maritime trade could have severe consequences for global energy prices and economic stability.

Meanwhile, Pakistan has reportedly continued acting as a communication channel between Tehran and Washington after previously hosting peace talks between the two sides.

Ongoing Tensions Despite Ceasefire

Although a ceasefire has largely held since the suspension of major hostilities earlier this year, tensions remain extremely high across the region.

Iran and its regional allies continue facing accusations of supporting drone activity and proxy operations targeting Gulf states and Israeli interests. At the same time, Iran maintains that it has survived military pressure without abandoning its nuclear capabilities, missile programmes, or regional alliances.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump previously justified military operations as necessary to weaken Iran’s nuclear programme and reduce its influence through allied militias across the Middle East.

However, analysts note that Iran still retains significant strategic capabilities despite extensive military strikes and economic sanctions.

Analysis

Iran’s latest proposal demonstrates that Tehran is attempting to negotiate from a position of resilience rather than surrender.

By demanding reparations, sanctions relief, and troop withdrawals, Iran is signalling that it expects recognition of its regional influence and strategic endurance despite months of conflict and economic pressure. The proposal also reflects Tehran’s broader objective of reducing the long term military presence of the United States near its borders.

For Washington, the negotiations present a difficult challenge. The United States wants to prevent Iran from advancing toward nuclear weapons capability while avoiding another prolonged regional war that could damage global markets, strain military resources, and increase political pressure at home.

The talks are also shaped by wider geopolitical realities. Gulf states increasingly prioritise regional stability and economic security, making them more supportive of diplomacy than direct military confrontation. Rising energy prices and fears of shipping disruptions further increase international pressure for a negotiated outcome.

At the same time, deep mistrust continues to define relations between both sides. The United States remains sceptical of Iran’s regional ambitions, while Tehran sees sanctions and military deployments as tools of long term containment.

Ultimately, the negotiations reveal a broader struggle over the future balance of power in the Middle East. Even if temporary agreements are reached, the underlying strategic rivalry between Iran, the United States, and Israel is unlikely to disappear in the near future.

With information from Reuters.

Foad Izadi of Tehran University says US President Trump’s repeated threats of renewed full-scale war are a sign of weakness, coming after 37 days of US bombing failed to force Iran into capitulation.

Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Tehran says Iranian leaders are ‘projecting defiance’ and rejecting ‘public pressure’ from the US.

President Donald Trump on Monday said he called off a new round of airstrikes he claimed were set for tomorrow. In a post on his social media outlet, Trump said he made the decision at the best of Gulf Arab allies because of improving efforts to end the war. 

“I have been asked by the Emir of Qatar, Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, and the President of the United Arab Emirates, Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, to hold off on our planned Military attack of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which was scheduled for tomorrow, in that serious negotiations are now taking place,” Trump proclaimed on Truth Social, adding that, “in their opinion, as Great Leaders and Allies, a Deal will be made, which will be very acceptable to the United States of America, as well as all Countries in the Middle East, and beyond.”

“This Deal will include, importantly, NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS FOR IRAN!” the president emphasized. “Based on my respect for the above mentioned Leaders, I have instructed Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, The Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Daniel Caine, and The United States Military, that we will NOT be doing the scheduled attack of Iran tomorrow, but have further instructed them to be prepared to go forward with a full, large scale assault of Iran, on a moment’s notice, in the event that an acceptable Deal is not reached.”

However, as Axios reporter Barak Ravid noted, “Trump has extended deadlines and postponed planned attacks on Iran at least half a dozen times since the war began.”

So it remains to be seen whether this latest statement has any merit or if it is another effort to kick the can down the road.

Trump’s latest claim about the war highlights the ever-changing narrative of events. Earlier in the day, Axios reported that Iran had given an updated proposal for a deal to end the war, “but the White House believes it is not a meaningful improvement and is insufficient for a deal,” citing a senior U.S. official and a source briefed on the situation.

At issue is the future of Iran’s nuclear ambitions and specifically their stockpile of enriched uranium. Trump’s bottom line is that Iran needs to give up any and all future nuclear ambitions, and the enriched uranium it already has, while the Iranians maintain they have the right to enrich uranium and will not hand over any of their existing material. Tehran’s control of the Strait, its ballistic missile and drone arsenal, and support for proxies are other sticking points.

U.S. officials say Trump wants a deal to end the war, but is considering resuming it “due to Iran’s rejection of many of his demands and refusal to make meaningful concessions on its nuclear program,” Axios added. “Trump is expected to convene his top national security team in the Situation Room on Tuesday to discuss military options, two U.S. officials said.”

Axios stated that the senior U.S. official said if Iran won’t shift its position, the U.S. will have to continue the negotiations “through bombs.”

In contrast, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei on Monday told reporters that his country’s “nuclear enrichment is a right that ‘already exists,’” an indication that Tehran isn’t budging on its stance. Still, Baghaei also described how negotiations with the United States are still continuing through Pakistani mediation.

All this comes against the backdrop of reports that the U.S. and Israel have been carrying out their most intense preparations yet to renew attacks on Iran, possibly as soon as this week, two Middle Eastern officials told The New York Times on Friday.

Monday’s back and forth comes a day after Trump issued a new warning to Tehran, saying “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!”

In the wake of renewed threats from Trump, Iran claims it is prepared to defend against the U.S. and Israel if needed.

“In case of aggression against Iran again, Iran’s armed forces have new #surprises for the enemy,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei warned, according to a post on X by the official Iranian IRIB media outlet. “Contradictory behaviors and threats of the enemy do not confuse or scare us.”

The tough talk between the U.S. and Iran clearly also includes some amount of bluster as the two sides seek a way forward without appearing to have caved to the other’s demands. Trump’s claim about holding off on an attack due to improving negotiations may be another example of that. But eventually time on this kind of posturing will run out and this week could be that inflection point.

UPDATE: 5:53 PM EDT –

New satellite imagery shows damage to three Iranian ships caused by the U.S-Israeli  bombing campaign against Iran’s Navy.

Satellite imagery dated May 17 from Shahid Bahonar Port appears to show the IRIS Makran, a forward base ship of the Islamic Republic of Iran Navy, with a large hole in the deck alongside other heavy damage.

Imagery shows the IRGC Navy’s expeditionary base ship IRIS SHAHID MAHDAVI apparently sunk.

Satellite imagery dated May 12 also shows the Iranian IRIS Kordestan, an Iranian Navy forward base ship in the Persian Gulf with light to moderate damage due to the airstrikes.

Dozens of U.S. Air Force refueling jets now deployed to Ben Gurion Airport are expected to stay in Israel at least until the end of this year, Israel’s N12 News reported on X.

“The presence of the aircraft—not the U.S. military—is causing significant operational difficulties at Ben Gurion Airport, as they are parked almost everywhere possible at the port,” the outlet added.

בישראל התקבלו מסרים מהאמריקנים שלפיהם עשרות מטוסי התדלוק המוצבים בנמל התעופה בן גוריון צפויים להישאר בארץ לפחות עד סוף השנה האזרחית. נוכחות המטוסים שלא הצבא האמריקני מעוררת קשיים משמעותיים בתפעולו של נתב”ג, שכן הם חונים כמעט בכל מקום אפשרי בנמל@Dean_Fisher_

— החדשות – N12 (@N12News) May 18, 2026

UPDATES

On Monday, the country’s Supreme National Security Council said a newly formed Iranian agency, called the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), would provide “real-time updates” on operations and the latest developments in the Strait, a crucial chokepoint through which about 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas pass in peacetime.

The announcement about the PGSA follows news that Iran “started a Bitcoin-backed insurance service for shipping companies that want to transit the Strait of Hormuz,” Bloomberg News reported, citing the semi-official Fars news agency reported, which claimed it has documents obtained from Iran’s Ministry of Economy and Financial Affairs.

Dubbed Hormuz Safe, “the Iranian government says it could generate more than $10 billion in revenue for the Islamic Republic,” Bloomberg noted, adding that Fars provided no time frame or a breakdown of how the service would work.

Iran has started a Bitcoin-backed insurance service for shipping companies that want to transit the Strait of Hormuz, the semi-official Fars news agency reported https://t.co/0L0nyM3eAT

— Bloomberg (@business) May 18, 2026

The effort is widely seen as a way for Iran to get around calling any fee for crossing the Strait a toll.

“The Iranian regime is introducing a formalized toll system under the guise of maritime insurance policies and continuing to deploy incentives and threats to vessels in the Persian Gulf as part of their efforts to normalize and solidify Iranian control over the Strait,” the Institute for the Study of War posited. “This system appears designed to be more palatable than an outright ‘toll’ by framing it as a ‘maritime insurance policy.’ The insurance presumably insures the vessel against an Iranian attack.”

“As the President stated, the Strait is international water, and we are not going to let Iran toll the Strait or normalize an illegal regime where they attempt to control traffic through the Strait.,” a White House official told us.

Coinciding with its growing efforts in the Strait, PGSA unveiled an account on X on Monday.

“The Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) is the legal entity and representative authority of the Islamic Republic of Iran for managing the passage and transit through the Strait of Hormuz,” PGSA asserted. “Navigation within the introduced boundaries of the Strait of Hormuz, which were previously determined by the Armed Forces and authorities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, is contingent upon full coordination with these entities, and passage without permission will be considered illegal.”

2/
دریانوردی در حریم معرفی شدهٔ تنگه هرمز، که حدود آن پیش از این از سوی نیروهای مسلح و مقامات جمهوری اسلامی ایران تعیین شده، منوط به هماهنگی کامل با این نهاد است و عبور بدون مجوز، غیرقانونی تلقی خواهد شد.

— PGSA | نهاد مدیریت آبراه خلیج فارس (@PGSA_IRAN) May 18, 2026

Iran has divided its operational control over the Strait of  Hormuz area between the Iranian Navy and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) Navy.

“From the shores of Makran to the Strait of Hormuz, it is managed by the Iranian Navy, and the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf are managed by the IRGC Navy,” the official Iranian IRIB news outlet announced on X.

🚨A division of duties has been carried out among the Iranian armed forces.

From the shores of Makran to the Strait of Hormuz, it is managed by the Iranian Navy,
and the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf are managed by the IRGC Navy. pic.twitter.com/PU2Md8eOim

— IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) (@iribnews_irib) May 18, 2026

Despite the ongoing U.S. blockade of its ports, Iran is still loading crude into tankers, “although (not right now) in Kharg Island,” Bloomberg commodities and energy columnist Javier Blas reported on X. “Instead, it’s loading a tanker at Jask, an alternative terminal outside the Strait of Hormuz (but inside the US Navy blockade line).”

Iran is still loading crude into tankers — although (not right now) in Kharg Island. Instead, it’s loading a tanker at Jask, an alternative terminal outside the Strait of Hormuz (but inside the US Navy blockade line).

Left May 17 🛰️Sentinel-2; right, May 18 🛰️Sentinel-1 pic.twitter.com/iU2o6YXAmD

— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) May 18, 2026

In a post on X, TankerTrackers.com stated that there “are actually plenty of able, cargo-empty tankers within the US Navy blockade perimeter but Iran has already lowered its oil production to match consumption and some storage buildup on land. The storage situation does not appear to be dire for the time being.”

As we have previously reported, a major goal of the blockade is to hurt Iran economically, including by threatening its ability to store oil.

Incorrect. There are actually plenty of able, cargo-empty tankers within the US Navy blockade perimeter but Iran has already lowered its oil production to match consumption and some storage buildup on land. The storage situation does not appear to be dire for the time being. https://t.co/mmlpHIr9ZI

— TankerTrackers.com, Inc. (@TankerTrackers) May 18, 2026

Pakistan has reportedly deployed thousands of troops, jets and air defense systems to Saudi Arabia to help defend the kingdom amid a shaky ceasefire.

Pakistan’s contribution to the mutual aid pact includes Chinese weapons, Reuters explained. It “has deployed a full squadron of around 16 aircraft,” mostly JF-17 Thunder fighters, which were ​sent to Saudi Arabia in early April. Pakistan had also sent “two squadrons of drones,” Reuters reported, adding that Islamabad could also send more troops, plus a Chinese-made HQ-9 long-range surface-to-air missile system.

The equipment is operated by Pakistani personnel and financed by Saudi Arabia, the news outlet pointed out. It remains unclear exactly what this means, if it pertains to the deployment or to the hardware itself.

Earlier this year, we reported that talks about the jets were underway, potentially to be paid for by converting some of the billions of dollars of Saudi loans taken out by Islamabad. However, at the time, shortly before the war broke out, it remained unclear if the Saudis even would want a light fighter like the Thunder at all, especially considering it could cause a rift with the U.S. at a critical time. In the past months, the kingdom had been offered the U.S.-made F-35, as you can read about here, and operates advanced fighters like the F-15SA and Typhoon.

The JF-17 was developed jointly by China’s Chengdu and the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC), and the first prototype took to the air in 2003. The aircraft is powered by a single Russian-designed RD-93 turbofan engine, an improved version of the RD-33 that is found in the twin-engined MiG-29 Fulcrum. Presumably, the JF-17s will help defend Saudi skies from drone and cruise missile attacks, although that too isn’t perfectly clear at this time.

It is possible that amid the shaky ceasefire, Iran’s proxies may be carrying out attacks on Arab Gulf nations. On Sunday, both the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia said they were attacked by drones. UAE officials said the attacks were carried out by Iran or its proxies while Saudi said it was struck by drones launched from Iraq.

The UAE Defense Ministry said an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant was struck by one of three drones launched at the country. Two other drones were successfully intercepted, it said.

In its initial statement on X, the MoD said that the drones “entered the country from the western border direction,” without assigning blame. UAE officials later updated that to say the drone was “launched by Iran or one of its proxies” in what officials called a “dangerous escalation.”

The officials did not get more specific. The Houthi rebels of Yemen operate southwest of the UAE while several Iranian-backed militias operate in Iraq, northwest of the country.

The Emirate MoD “affirmed that it remains fully prepared and ready to address any threats and will firmly confront any attempts to undermine the country’s security, in a manner that safeguards its sovereignty, security and stability, and protects its national interests and gains.”

UAE air defences intercept 3 UAVs.

The Ministry of Defence announced that on 17th May 2026, UAE air defence systems intercepted three UAVs that entered the country from the western border direction.

The ministry said that two of the UAVs were successfully intercepted, while the… pic.twitter.com/Ca6JRwc8w8

— وزارة الدفاع |MOD UAE (@modgovae) May 17, 2026

In a post on X, the IAEA expressed “grave concern” about the incident and said military activity that threatens nuclear safety is unacceptable. The [director general] reiterates call for maximum military restraint near any NPP to avoid the danger of a nuclear accident.”

The IAEA has been informed by the UAE that radiation levels at the Barakah NPP remain normal and no injuries were reported after a drone strike this morning caused a fire in an electrical generator located outside the inner site perimeter of the NPP. Emergency diesel generators… pic.twitter.com/km2rg08Gvd

— IAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency ⚛️ (@iaeaorg) May 17, 2026

Pakistan on Monday “strongly condemned” the drone attack on the UAE’s nuclear power plant.

“Any deliberate targeting of nuclear facilities constitutes a grave violation of international law, including international humanitarian law, the United Nations Charter, and the fundamental principles of nuclear safety and security enshrined in the Statute and resolutions of the International Atomic Energy Agency,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said in an X post. “Nuclear installations must never be targeted under any circumstances. Such reckless actions carry potentially catastrophic and irreversible consequences for human life, the environment and regional, as well as global peace and security.”

Pakistan’s condemnation comes as it is trying to keep a flagging peace process going amid an increasingly tenuous ceasefire.

🔊 PR No.1️⃣1️⃣8️⃣/2️⃣0️⃣2️⃣6️⃣

Pakistan Strongly Condemns the Drone Attack on the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant of the United Arab Emirates

🔗⬇️https://t.co/7J7r1j6ZCH pic.twitter.com/DyMIR7bmoQ

— Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Pakistan (@ForeignOfficePk) May 18, 2026

Saudi Arabia said it too was attacked by drones on Sunday, but did not say who launched them.

The official spokesperson for the Ministry of Defense (MoD), Major General Turki Al-Maliki, “stated that on the morning of Sunday…three drones were intercepted and destroyed after entering the Kingdom’s airspace coming from Iraqi airspace,” the Saudi MoD stated on X. Al-Maliki “affirmed that the Ministry of Defense reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place, and will take and implement all necessary operational measures to respond to any attempt to infringe on the Kingdom’s sovereignty, security, and the safety of its citizens and residents on its territory.”

There are several Iranian-linked proxy groups in Iraq that have been attacking U.S. and allied facilities in that country.

صرح المتحدث الرسمي باسم وزارة الدفاع اللواء الركن تركي المالكي أنه في صباح يوم الأحد الموافق (17 مايو 2026م) تم اعتراض وتدمير 3 مسيّرات بعد دخولها المجال الجوي للمملكة قادمة من الأجواء العراقية.

وأكد اللواء المالكي على أن وزارة الدفاع تحتفظ بحق الرد في الزمان والمكان المناسبين،… pic.twitter.com/80hZw8z7BU

— وزارة الدفاع (@modgovksa) May 17, 2026

On Monday Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a phone call with his Saudi counterpart Faisal bin Farhan. According to the Iranian Foreign Ministry, the two discussed issues related to the ongoing diplomatic process and the latest regional developments, in their seventh call since the ceasefire began.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a phone call with his Saudi counterpart Faisal bin Farhan, a day after Riyadh said it was attacked by three drones originating from Iraq.

According to the Iranian Foreign Ministry, the two discussed issues related to the ongoing… pic.twitter.com/UiuEZ8RMno

— Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) May 18, 2026

The New York Times is reporting that Israel established at least a second base in Iraq to aid its air campaigns against Iran. As we previously noted, the presence of the first one was reported by The Wall Street Journal.

In its story, the Times stated the base it was writing about pre-dated the current conflict and was used during last year’s 12-Day War between Israel and Iran. The newspaper also said a Bedouin shepherd was killed by helicopter fire after stumbling on the base in an effort to keep it secret.

The Times story lines up with our earlier reporting that Israel likely created facilities in Iraq during the 12-Day War. We also predicted at the time that it would likely happen again in the future.

As we noted in the past, Israel used the base reported on by the Journal to stage troops and equipment and provide combat search and rescue service if needed for downed pilots during the current conflict. 

Israel spent over a year preparing a covert site in Iraq for its operations against Iran, regional officials say. Iraqi officials later confirmed the existence of a second base.
By @ErikaSolomon & Falih Hassanhttps://t.co/l6fIJdfTFx

— Malachy Browne (@malachybrowne) May 17, 2026

Amid its own ceasefire agreement with the Lebanese government, Israel is continuing to hit Hezbollah targets in the southern part of that country where it has a growing military presence.

חיל-האוויר וכוחות חטיבה 769 בפיקוד אוגדה 91 השמידו בסגירת מעגל מהירה מחסן נ״ט ששימש את ארגון הטרור חיזבאללה נגד הכוחות הפועלים במרחב. pic.twitter.com/WmBpY0gbdM

— Israeli Air Force (@IAFsite) May 18, 2026

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Iran’s national football team has arrived in Turkiye for a pre-World Cup training camp, but players are yet to receive visas for entry into the US. FIFA says it is confident Iran will be able to play in next month’s tournament despite the uncertainty.

A drone attack that caused a fire close to the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant in the United Arab Emirates has raised further concerns about nuclear security and military escalation in the Gulf as discussions of peace between Iran and the United States hang in the balance.

Barakah was the first nuclear power station to be built on the Arabian Peninsula. Here is what we know about it:

What is the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant?

Barakah is a nuclear energy plant located in Al Dhafra, the largest municipal region of the emirate of Abu Dhabi. It is the UAE’s only nuclear power plant.

Construction of the plant began in 2012, and its first reactor became commercially operational in 2021.

The plant is located close to the border with Saudi Arabia, about 225km (140 miles) west of the UAE’s capital city, Abu Dhabi.

The facility features four pressurised water reactors, the most common type of nuclear power reactor. The model used here is the advanced power reactor 1400, a pressurised water reactor design developed in South Korea. Each reactor of this type has the capacity to produce 1,400 megawatts (MW), which is enough to power roughly 1 million homes.

According to the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC), the plant’s reactors produce 40 terawatt-hours (TWh) each year, which is equivalent to about 25 percent of the UAE’s electricity needs. The website for the London-based World Nuclear Association also confirmed that Barakah, when fully operational, meets 25 percent of the UAE’s electricity needs.

According to a September report by the Abu Dhabi media office, Barakah had produced 40TWh of clean energy over “the past 12 months”.

Since nuclear power plants produce a lower amount of carbon dioxide emissions than conventional power plants, the ENEC said Barakah saves up to 22.4 million tonnes of carbon emissions each year, equivalent to removing 4.8 million cars from the roads.

What happened in the attack on Sunday, and how has the UAE responded?

Authorities in Abu Dhabi said a single drone strike caused a blaze to break out at an electrical generator outside the Barakah plant’s inner perimeter in the Al Dhafra region on Sunday. No injuries were reported, and officials said radiation levels remained normal.

The UAE’s nuclear regulator said operations at the Barakah facility had not been affected. “All units are operating as normal,” it said in a social media post.

In a statement, the UAE’s Ministry of Defence said two more drones had been “successfully” intercepted and the drones had been launched from the “western border”. It did not give more details.

The UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted a statement on X on Sunday saying the country condemned “the unprovoked terrorist attack” in “the strongest terms”.

The statement added: “The UAE emphasised that it will not tolerate any threat to its security and sovereignty under any circumstances, and that it reserves its full, sovereign, legitimate, diplomatic, and military rights to respond to any threats, allegations, or hostilities in a manner that ensures the protection of its sovereignty, national security, territorial integrity, and the safety of its citizens, residents, and visitors, in accordance with international law.”

There was no immediate claim of responsibility, and the statements by the ministries did not publicly blame any country.

But Anwar Gargash, an adviser to the UAE’s president, wrote in an X post on Sunday: “The terrorist targeting of the Barakah clean nuclear power plant, whether carried out by the principal perpetrator or through one of its agents, represents a dangerous escalation and a dark scene that violates all international laws and norms, in criminal disregard for the lives of civilians in the UAE and its surroundings.”

Gargash’s post appeared to blame Iran and its proxy network of allied armed groups in the region, which Tehran calls the “axis of resistance”.

The launch point of the drones remained unclear, but on Sunday, Saudi Arabia also reported it had intercepted three drones that had been launched from Iraq, where some Iran-allied groups operate. If Iranian Shahed-136 drones, which have an estimated range of 2,000km to 2,500km (1,240 to 1,550 miles), were fired from Iraqi territory, both Saudi Arabia and the UAE would fall well within their reach.

Other reactions

Neighbouring Gulf states Saudi Arabia and Qatar condemned the attack on the Barakah plant.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kuwait also issued a statement denouncing the attack, which it called “heinous”.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs condemned the attack, calling it “unacceptable”, saying it represented “a dangerous escalation” and urging a return to diplomacy.

Has Iran responded to the incident?

Iran has not claimed responsibility for the drone attacks, and there has been no public statement from Iran about the incident at Barakah.

However, in the aftermath of the drone attacks, United States President Donald Trump wrote in a Truth Social post: “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!”

Iranian Ministry of Defence spokesperson Reza Talaei-Nik said on Sunday that the military is “fully prepared” to confront any new aggression from the US and Israel.

Iran has previously warned that countries where US military assets are deployed or Israeli-linked interests are located are viewed as legitimate targets.

Iran has also accused the UAE of strengthening ties with Israel while reports have emerged that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a “secret” visit to the Gulf state during the US-Israel war on Iran. The UAE has denied this.

US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee also said last week that Israel had deployed Iron Dome air defence systems and personnel to the UAE to help defend against possible Iranian attacks.

What has the IAEA said?

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the global nuclear watchdog, said Sunday’s incident in the UAE had forced one reactor to rely temporarily on emergency diesel generators.

IAEA chief Rafael Grossi expressed “grave concern” and warned that military activity threatening nuclear facilities was “unacceptable”.

How serious could a strike on a nuclear facility be?

Attacks on nuclear power plants are especially worrying because they can risk damaging critical safety systems or reactors, which could release radioactive material into the atmosphere, not only over the country targeted but also across neighbouring states. Radiological material, specifically the hazardous isotope Caesium-137, could be released into the atmosphere.

The release of radioactive material could result in environmental contamination and poses major risks to public health. Water, if contaminated, becomes undrinkable while farmland and fisheries could become unsafe for decades, depending on the isotope released.

Short-term, acute exposure to radioactivity can cause burns and acute radiation sickness, which can be life-threatening.

Prolonged exposure, even to smaller doses, can increase the risk of illnesses such as cancer, especially thyroid cancer and leukaemia. Children and pregnant women are especially vulnerable.

Over the course of the US-Israel war on Iran, energy infrastructure has become a target.

Iran’s only functioning nuclear plant, the Bushehr power plant, has come under repeated attacks in the war. There are fears that damage at Bushehr could contaminate water across the entire Gulf region, most of which lacks groundwater and relies heavily on the desalination of seawater. Desalination plants are not specifically built to filter radioactive material, and not all plants currently are fitted with the technologies required to do so.

May 18 (UPI) — President Donald Trump has renewed his threats of mass violence against Iran, warning Tehran that “the Clock is Ticking” as the stalemate in talks to end the war shows no signs of ending.

In a statement on his Truth Social platform on Sunday night, Trump wrote: “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them.”

“TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!”

The two-sentence statement echoed the scale of violence he threatened April 7, shortly before the cease-fire was announced, when he warned Iran to make an agreement to end the war or “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.”

Trump has been seeking an agreement with Iran to end the war since the conflict was halted April 8 with a cease-fire to permit negotiations.

Those negotiations have progressed little if at all since talks broke down in Islamabad in mid-April.

An Iranian proposal recently sent to the United States was rejected by Trump, who told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday en route to Washington from China that he looked at it and found the first sentence unacceptable.

“Well, I looked at it, and if I don’t like the first sentence, I just throw it away,” Trump said.

Asked what the first sentence was, Trump replied, “An unacceptable sentence.”

Trump said he is seeking a lengthy suspension of Iran’s nuclear program, stating that two decades may comply with his demands but “it’s got to be a real 20 years.”

According to Iranian state media Press TV, Iran’s proposal calls for a comprehensive end to the war, full compensation from the United States for damages, the removal of sanctions, the release of frozen Iranian assets and recognition of Iran’s sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency reported the United States responded with five demands: no compensation, no unfreezing of assets, the handover of 881.8 pounds of uranium to the United States, only one nuclear facility remaining active and making a halt to the war on all fronts conditional on negotiations.

In response to Trump’s threat on Sunday, Brig. Gen. Abolfazl Shekarchi, senior spokesman for Iran’s Armed Forces, called Trump “delusional,” the Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

“Repeating any foolishness to compensate for America’s disgrace in the third imposed war against Iran will bring no consequence other than receiving more crushing and severe blows for that country,” Shekarchi said.

He warned Trump if the United States resumed its attacks, “the assets and decayed army of that country will face new, offensive, surprising and stormy scenarios.”

Israeli forces had been preparing the makeshift sites in western Iraq since late 2024, the US newspaper reported.

Israel built two covert military outposts in Iraq’s western desert in advance of the US-Israel war on Iran, The New York Times has reported.

The daily reported on Sunday that Iraqi officials had identified two covert Israeli-operated base in Iraq’s western desert, citing an Iraqi official and a lawmaker. It said Israeli forces had been preparing to build one of the makeshift sites since late 2024, citing a regional official.

Last week, The Wall Street Journal reported that one base was established shortly before the war began and operated with the knowledge of the United States. It said the installation housed Israeli special forces and served as a logistical hub for their air operations. It also reportedly included search-and-rescue capabilities for downed pilots.

According to the newspaper, Israeli forces launched attacks from the base against Iraqi units that came close to discovering the site in early March. Open-source analysts cited by the report identified the suspected location using satellite imagery near Iraq’s border with Saudi Arabia.

The reports have added to months of conflicting accounts over alleged Israeli activity inside Iraq. On Thursday, Lieutenant-General Qais al-Muhammadawi, Iraq’s deputy commander of joint operations, said authorities had received reports of “individuals or movement” in the Najaf desert near Karbala, about 100km (62 miles) southwest of Baghdad, according to the state-run Iraqi News Agency.

The WSJ also referenced comments made in March by Israel’s former air force chief, Major-General Tomer Bar, who said Israeli special forces had carried out “extraordinary” operations during the conflict with Iran, though he did not specify where.

Iraqi officials have publicly denied authorising any foreign military presence in the area. “There is no agreement or consent for any force to be present in this location,” al-Muhammadawi said last week, before the details of the alleged Israeli outpost were reported.

However, the WSJ report said Baghdad privately lodged a protest with Washington in late March over suspected covert military activity, calling it a violation of Iraqi sovereignty.

US officials quoted by the newspaper said Washington was not involved in the operation. On Sunday, a senior Iraqi security official again denied reports that Israel had established a military base in the desert, speaking to Turkiye’s Anadolu news agency.

On Tuesday, the commander of Iraq’s Karbala operations told Al Jazeera that an Israeli military group had been detected in the Najaf desert in March, although he said it had remained in the area for less than 48 hours.

The reports come as Iraq faces growing pressure amid escalating tensions between the US, Israel and Iran.

Washington has repeatedly urged Baghdad to curb the influence of Iran-backed armed groups operating in Iraq. In March, US forces carried out strikes against the Popular Mobilisation Forces after attacks on a US diplomatic and logistics facility near Baghdad airport.

Iran has also raised concerns over the allegations. Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday that Tehran would raise the issue with Iraqi authorities. He accused Israel of seeking to destabilise the region.

“Israel’s behaviour in the region shows that they do not respect any limits or red lines,” Baghaei said.

EXPLAINER

The fear of renewed US strikes in Iran looms while Israeli attacks continue in Lebanon despite extended ‘ceasefire’.

United States President Donald Trump has warned Iran that the “clock is ticking” to clinch a deal to end the war as reports have emerged that Washington and Israel might be planning to carry out air strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure.

“For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!”

Iranian Ministry of Defence spokesperson Reza Talaei-Nik said on Sunday that the military is “fully prepared” to confront any new aggression from the US and Israel.

Saudi Arabia on Monday said it intercepted three drones, a day after a drone strike hit the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant in the United Arab Emirates.

Meanwhile, Israel has continued its bombardment of Lebanon despite another “ceasefire” extension.

As the US-Israeli war on Iran continues for its 80th day, here is what we know:

In Iran

• Mohsen Rezaei, a member of Tehran’s Expediency Council and former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander, issued a warning to the US to lift its blockade of Iranian ports, saying the Iranian military is ready for further confrontation. Rezaei made this warning while speaking to state television.
• Talaei-Nik said the Iranian armed forces are “fully prepared to confront any new potential attack by the US and the Israeli regime against the country”.

War diplomacy

• Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia’s envoy to international organisations in Vienna, suggested in an X post that Iran appoint a special envoy to Moscow, similar to Tehran’s arrangement with China.
• In an X post, Jean-Luc Melenchon, the leading figure of France’s left-wing La France Insoumise party, condemned “European complicity” in the US-Israeli strikes on Iran, which have triggered a wider regional war.

In the Gulf

• The New York Times reported that the Israeli military has operated two “covert” outposts in Iraq’s western desert and killed a shepherd and a soldier in a bid to hide one of the sites near the town of al-Nukhaib.
• After the drone attack on the nuclear facility caused a fire, the UAE Ministry of Defence said two other drones had been “successfully” dealt with after they were launched from the “western border”. It did not elaborate.
• The drone that got through the UAE’s defences hit an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant, the Abu Dhabi Media Office said. Radiological safety levels were unaffected, and there were no injuries, it said. The UAE’s Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation later confirmed that the plant remained safe with no radioactive material released from the strike.
• Saudi Arabia said the three drones it intercepted entered from Iraqi airspace and warned that it would take the necessary operational measures to respond to any attempt to violate its sovereignty and security.

In the US

• Marjorie Taylor Greene, a former US congresswoman and a once-close ally of Trump, has warned in a post on X that any attempt to send US troops into Iran would trigger what she described as a “political revolution”.
• Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, speaking to the NBC broadcaster, urged Trump to “hurt” Iran, including launching attacks on its energy sites, until it agrees to US terms on its nuclear programme. The US and Israel have hit civilian targets multiple times during the war on Iran. Attacks on civilian facilities are considered war crimes under international law.

In Israel

• Israel’s Channel 13 reported that dozens of US cargo planes carrying ammunition from bases in Germany have landed in Tel Aviv.
• Israeli media reported that the military is preparing for renewed hostilities with Iran. The public broadcaster Kan quoted an unnamed security official as saying that Israel would join any new US strikes and target Iranian energy infrastructure.

In Lebanon

• Israeli strikes have continued in southern Lebanon, where Israel issued evacuation orders for four towns and villages and then struck two of those locations.
• Strikes were also reported in Az-Zrariyah on a moving vehicle while another raid in Tayr Debba resulted in some significant casualty numbers, Al Jazeera’s Obaida Hitto reported from Tyre, Lebanon.

Global markets

• Stalled peace efforts between Iran and the US caused oil prices to rise again on Monday. This pushed the price of the global benchmark Brent crude up to about $111 per barrel, close to its highest level in weeks.