Iran

US Vice President JD Vance is leaving Pakistan after 21 hours of talks with Iran, saying Tehran chose not to accept their ‘final and best offer’. Here’s his full press conference in Islamabad.

US President Donald Trump says ‘we win regardless of what happens’ in Iran talks. His comments outside the White House came as US and Iranian delegations continue negotiating late into the night in Islamabad.

The Strait of Hormuz is believed to be a key sticking point as Iran and the US continue negotiations in the Pakistani capital.

Former Pakistani diplomat to the US Maleeha Lodhi says expectations from the Islamabad talks between the US and Iran should be realistic, stressing that “we should recognise that diplomacy is not an event, it’s a process, it takes time.”

A negative political and public reaction in Israel to the ceasefire with Iran, despite the respite it brings.

No pause for Israel’s army, however – or its victims. Hundreds have been killed in Lebanon, with more dead in Gaza.

Is Israel a society effectively on a permanent war footing?

Presenter: Tom McRae

Guests:

Ilan Pappe – Historian and professor at Exeter University

Gideon Levy – Columnist at Haaretz newspaper in Tel Aviv

Haim Bresheeth – Professor at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London

Lebanon’s Health Ministry says more than 2,000 people have been killed in Israeli attacks since March 2.

Israeli strikes have killed at least 18 people across southern Lebanon, as Lebanese authorities reported that the overall death toll from the war that began last month between Israel and Lebanese group Hezbollah has surpassed 2,000.

Israeli strikes on a village near Sidon in southern Lebanon killed at least eight people and wounded nine others, Lebanon’s Health Ministry said on Saturday.

Earlier, it said that at least 10 people, including three emergency workers, had been killed in Israeli strikes in the Nabatieh district.

In its latest tally, the Health Ministry reported that at least 2,020 people have been killed and 6,436 others wounded since Lebanon was drawn into the US-Israel war on Iran on March 2. Hezbollah launched rocket fire at Israel in support of its backer Iran, sparking massive Israeli strikes and a ground invasion.

Meanwhile, Israeli media reported that two Israeli soldiers were wounded during clashes with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon on Saturday.

Israel’s Channel 13, citing the military, said the two soldiers from the Paratroopers Brigade sustained moderate injuries from shrapnel during the confrontation.

The violence comes as Iran-backed Hezbollah renewed its rejection of direct negotiations between Israel and Lebanon aimed at ending the war.

President Joseph Aoun’s office said on Friday that officials from Lebanon, Israel and the United States would meet next week in Washington “to discuss declaring a ceasefire and the start date for negotiations between Lebanon and Israel under US auspices”.

Hundreds of people gathered on Saturday near the government headquarters in central Beirut in support of Hezbollah and to protest against the talks with Israel, some waving the group’s yellow flags or the Iranian standard.

Demonstrator Ruqaya Msheik said the protest was a message that Lebanon “will not be Israeli”.

“Whoever wants peace with Israel is not Lebanese,” she said, adding: “Those who shake hands with the enemy … are Zionists.”

Hezbollah and its ally, the Amal Movement, issued a statement calling on supporters to avoid demonstrating “at this delicate stage”, citing interests of “stability, the protection of civil peace and avoiding any division that the Israeli enemy seeks”.

Earlier, Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah said the decision to hold direct talks with Israel was “a blatant violation of the [national] pact, the constitution and Lebanese laws”.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that any peace agreement reached with Lebanon must “last for generations” and also call for Hezbollah’s disarmament.

After a ceasefire was announced between the US and Iran this week, Washington and Tehran have been at odds over whether it also applies to Israel’s bombardment and invasion of Lebanon.

The dispute arose during the historic in-person ceasefire talks held in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, between the US and Iran on Saturday afternoon.

Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem, reporting from Tehran, said that Iran was able to secure “a kind of guarantee from the US that Israel is going to decrease its attacks on Lebanon”.

However, he said that “nothing [has] been confirmed … from Israel, with respect to Lebanon.” While “there have been fewer attacks on Beirut and the southern suburbs,” nothing has been “announced with respect to a ceasefire”, he said.

April 11 (UPI) — Talks between the United States and Iran began Saturday morning between the two delegations in Islamabad, Pakistan.

Vice President JD Vance arrived at 10:30 a.m. PKT. At Nur Khan air base, Vance walked down a red carpet and met with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. Sharif said Friday that the United States is at a “make or break” moment in a national address Friday.

It’s not clear if the talks are direct or indirect, but CNN reported the talks are a mixture of both.

Though there was heavy security, with road closures and checkpoints, the mood in Pakistan was jubilant, The Washington Post reported.

Both sides have repeatedly accused the other of violating the fragile cease-fire that began last week. The United States has said Iran is violating the agreement because the Strait of Hormuz is not open. Only two ships passed through it on Friday, The New York Times reported. Iran is angry that Israel continues to attack Lebanon, though Israel and the United States say they never agreed to stop fighting in Lebanon.

Israel has hit more than 200 targets in Lebanon affiliated with Hezbollah in the past 24 hours, The Times reported the Israeli military said.

Iran can’t find all the mines it set in the strait, The Times reported that U.S. officials said Friday, causing a snarl in Iran’s ability to comply with American demands.

Saturday morning, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that the United States is “clearing out” the strait.

“We’re now starting the process of clearing out the Strait of Hormuz as a favor to Countries all over the World, including China, Japan, South Korea, France, Germany, and many others. Incredibly, they don’t have the Courage or Will to do this work themselves. Very interestingly, however, empty Oil carrying ships from many Nations are all heading to the United States of America to LOAD UP with Oil.”

He didn’t clarify what “clearing out” of the strait means.

On Friday, he said that Iranians must negotiate.

“The Iranians don’t seem to realize they have no cards, other than a short term extortion of the World by using International Waterways. The only reason they are alive today is to negotiate!” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

The U.S. delegation includes envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. The Iranian side has more than a dozen senior officials, including Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, along with senior security officials and Iran’s central bank governor, The Post reported.

Both sides seem motivated to see the war come to an end, but they remain at odds on several issues. Control of the Strait of Hormuz, war reparations, Iran’s enriched uranium and withdrawal of the U.S. military in the region are some of the sticking points.

ISLAMABAD — The United States and Iran began face-to-face negotiations Saturday in Pakistan, days after a fragile, two-week ceasefire was announced, as the war that has killed thousands of people and shaken global markets entered its seventh week.

The White House confirmed the direct nature of the talks, a rare instance of high-level U.S. government engagement with the Iranian government.

Iran’s state-run news agency said three-party talks including Pakistan had begun after Iranian preconditions, including a reduction in Israeli strikes on southern Lebanon, were met, and after U.S. and Iranian officials met separately with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

The U.S. delegation led by Vice President JD Vance and the Iranian delegation led by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf were discussing how to advance the ceasefire already threatened by deep disagreements and Israel’s continued attacks against the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Since the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, the most direct U.S. contact had been in September 2013 when President Obama called newly elected President Hassan Rouhani to discuss Iran’s nuclear program. The recent highest-level meetings were between Secretary of State John Kerry and counterpart Mohammad Javad Zarif during negotiations over the program.

Iran sets ‘red lines’ including compensation for strikes

Iran doubled down on parts of its earlier proposal, with its delegation telling Iranian state television it had presented some of the plan’s ideas as “red lines” in meetings with Sharif. Those included compensation for damage caused by the U.S.-Israeli strikes that launched the war on Feb. 28 and releasing Iran’s frozen assets.

The war has killed at least 3,000 people in Iran, 1,953 in Lebanon, 23 in Israel and more than a dozen in Gulf Arab states, and caused lasting damage to infrastructure in half a dozen Middle Eastern countries. Iran’s chokehold on the vital Strait of Hormuz has largely cut off the Persian Gulf and its oil and gas exports from the global economy, sending energy prices soaring.

Reflecting the high stakes, officials from the region said Chinese, Egyptian, Saudi and Qatari officials were in Islamabad to indirectly facilitate the talks. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.

In Tehran, residents told the Associated Press they were skeptical yet hopeful about the talks after weeks of airstrikes left destruction across their country of some 93 million people. Some said the path to recovery would be long.

“Peace alone is not enough for our country, because we’ve been hit very hard, there have been huge costs,” 62-year-old Amir Razzai Far said.

Meanwhile, Israel pressed ahead with strikes in Lebanon after saying there is no ceasefire there. Iran and Pakistan have disagreed. The Lebanese state-run news agency reported at least three people killed.

Officials posture over key issues ahead of talks

Ahead of the talks, President Trump accused Iran of using the Strait of Hormuz, a key artery for global energy supplies, for extortion, and told reporters Friday it would be opened “with or without them.”

Iran’s closure of the strait has proved its biggest strategic advantage in the war. Around a fifth of the world’s traded oil had typically passed through on over 100 ships a day. Only 12 have been recorded transiting since the ceasefire.

Iran has floated the idea of charging ships, though the idea has been widely rejected by countries including the United States and Iran’s neighbor Oman.

On Saturday, Trump said on social media that the U.S. had begun “clearing out” the strait, but it was unclear whether he was referring to the reported use of mines there or Iran’s broader ability to control the area.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had said Tehran was entering negotiations with “deep distrust” after strikes on Iran during previous rounds of talks. Araghchi, part of Iran’s delegation in Pakistan, said Saturday that his country was prepared to retaliate if attacked again.

Iran and the United States outlined competing proposals ahead of the talks.

Iran’s 10-point proposal called for a guaranteed end to the war and sought control over the Strait of Hormuz. It included ending fighting against Iran’s “regional allies,” explicitly calling for a halt to Israeli strikes on Hezbollah.

The United States’ 15-point proposal includes restricting Iran’s nuclear program and reopening the strait.

Israel and Lebanon will have direct negotiations

Negotiations between Israel and Lebanon are expected to begin Tuesday in Washington, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun’s office said Friday, after Israel’s surprise announcement authorizing talks despite the countries lack of official relations.

Israel wants the Lebanese government to assume responsibility for disarming Hezbollah, much like was envisaged in a November 2024 ceasefire. But it is unclear whether Lebanon’s army can confiscate weapons from the militant group, which has survived efforts to curb its strength for decades.

Israel’s insistence that the ceasefire in Iran does not include a pause in its fighting with Hezbollah has threatened to sink the deal. The militant group joined the war in support of Iran in the opening days. Israel followed up with airstrikes and a ground invasion.

The day the Iran ceasefire deal was announced, Israel pounded Beirut with airstrikes, killing more than 300 people in the deadliest day in Lebanon since the war began, according to the country’s Health Ministry.

Energy pressures grow

The spot price of Brent crude, the international standard for oil prices, was above $94 on Saturday, up more than 30% since the war started.

And new pressures emerged in Europe for travelers.

The head of Airports Council International-Europe, Olivier Jankovec, warned the European Union that a ″systemic jet fuel shortage’’ could come within three weeks because of the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz.

Jankovec said in a letter obtained by the Associated Press that the crunch could impact the summer travel season and ″significantly harm the European economy.’′

Ahmed, Metz, Castillo and Magdy write for the Associated Press. Metz reported from Jerusalem, Castillo from Beijing and Magdy from Cairo. Associated Press writer Josh Boak contributed to this report.

US Vice President JD Vance and officials Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner have met Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif in Islamabad ahead of possible direct talks with Iran. If confirmed, they would be the highest-level in-person talks between the US and Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

War has a way of curtailing imagination. When the news breaks of faraway civilian casualties — an erroneous air strike on a school that relied on outdated intelligence, for example — the mind takes refuge in abstractions and statistics.

Grief isn’t an infinite resource. There’s only so much distant suffering anyone can take in. Yet our moral health as a society depends on the recognition of our common humanity. We share something with the inhabitants of those countries whose civilization our government has threatened to destroy.

This is an important moment to experience “English,” Sanaz Toossi’s Pulitzer Prize-winning drama, set in an English-language classroom outside of Tehran in 2008. The play, now having its L.A. premiere at the Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts, reminds us of the lives — the hopes, the dreams, the sorrows — on the other side of the headlines. (As I write this, the New York Times homepage has a story that stopped me dead in my tracks: ”Iranian Schools and Hospitals Are in Ruins, Times Analysis Shows.”)

Babak Tafti, left, and Marjan Neshat in “English” at The Wallis.

(Kevin Parry)

“English” isn’t trying to win any political arguments. Its focus is on the characters, who are in a Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOFL) prep class. The exam will have an oversize effect on the future possibilities of this small, mishmash group of students.

Elham (Tala Ashe) needs a high score to pursue her medical education in Australia. Roya (Pooya Mohseni) wants to join her son in Canada to be part of her granddaughter’s life, but Persian is frowned upon in her son’s assimilated, English-language household. Omid (Babak Tafti), whose English is far beyond anyone else’s level in the class, has a U.S. green card interview coming up. And Goli (Ava Lalezarzadeh), the youngest of the students, wants at the very least to be fluent in the lingua franca of American pop culture.

Marjan (Marjan Neshat), the teacher whose love for the English language is infused with longing and regret, harks back nostalgically on her years in Manchester before she returned to Iran. She insists for pedagogic reasons that the students only speak English in the classroom. But Elham, a contentious and fiercely competitive student, suspects that Marjan’s zeal for anglophone culture, including Hollywood romantic comedies, masks a resentment for the Iranian life she is now stuck with. (Neshat and Ashe are gracefully reprising their Tony-nominated performances.)

Tala Ashe, left, and Pooya Mohseni in “English” at The Wallis.

(Kevin Parry)

Mastering English can open doors, but what if you wish you didn’t have to walk through them? Elham is angry that she has to leave to pursue her medical dreams. When she speaks English, she feels like a diminished version of herself. She calls her accent “a war crime,” and grows frustrated in class that she can’t easily explain what she’s thinking and feeling in her halting English.

The other students might not be as truculent as Elham, but they are just as ambivalent about the necessity of learning English. Toossi doesn’t grapple explicitly with the fraught internal politics of the Iran of the period. The conversation in the classroom doesn’t turn to the repressive regime or the state requirement of headscarves or the geopolitical strategies that have alienated the Islamic Republic of Iran from the global community.

When I saw “English” in 2024 at the Old Globe in San Diego, I was acutely aware of what the playwright was not addressing. At the Wallis in 2026, in the wake of Operation Epic Fury and the blitzkrieg of unhinged rhetoric from President Trump, whose rationales and goals for the war seem to change with every public utterance, I was intensely appreciative of what Toossi was putting front and center — the variegated humanity of her characters.

Tala Ashe and Marjan Neshat in “English” at the Wallis.

(Kevin Parry)

This Atlantic Theater Company & Roundabout Theatre production, directed by Knud Adams, had a critically touted Broadway run, receiving four Tony nominations, including best play. The physical staging, featuring a rotating cube from set designer Martha Ginsberg, shows us the classroom from different vantages, bringing the play’s shifting perspective to three-dimensional life.

Toossi follows the interplay of the differing viewpoints and lived experiences. She’s not as concerned with settling differences as with understanding the thoughts and emotions animating the clashes of her divergent characters. The actors relish the pesky, droll, frequently adorable, sometimes incendiary individuality of their roles.

The play does something unique with language. When a character speaks English, an accent is employed and the manner is often a bit stumbling. When a character speaks Persian, the English that is heard is natural and relaxed, the sound of a native speaker.

The result is that these Iranian characters, when talking among themselves in their native tongue, sound awfully like Americans having a conversation in the mall or at a nearby table at a restaurant. We are no longer separated by language. The notion of the Iranian “other” falls by the wayside.

The cast of “English” at the Wallis.

(Kevin Parry)

It’s hard not to wonder if one of those missiles raining down on schools in recent weeks hit when Marjan was showing “Notting Hill” or another favorite rom-com to one of the students she was hoping might realize her dreams of living abroad. Omid, whose English surpasses Marjan’s own level, has excited such hopes, and the touchingly Chekhovian quasi-romance between them adds a gentle note of amorous wistfulness.

Adams’ production creates a cinematic penumbra through the projections of Ruey Horng Sun, a soundscape by Sinan Refik Zafar that lyrically underscores the actions and the emotionally attuned lighting of Reza Behjat. The effect heightens the romanticism of characters who are no longer lost to us in translation.

But the destination of the play is less about what these students sound like to an American audience than what they sound like to themselves. And that is a universal journey that transcends even the starkest barriers of language, culture and politics.

US Vice President JD Vance has landed in Pakistan for talks with Iranian officials on a deal to end the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Pakistan’s ambassador to the US has told Al Jazeera that weeks of intense diplomatic efforts have led to a shared commitment from all sides to pursue a negotiated settlement, as US-Iran talks are set to begin in Islamabad.

NEW YORK — Calls inside Congress for investigations into the prediction market platform Polymarket are increasing after the latest instance in which groups of anonymous traders made strategic, well-timed bets on a major geopolitical event hours before it occurred.

On Wednesday, the Associated Press reported that at least 50 new accounts on Polymarket placed substantial bets on a U.S.-Iran ceasefire in the hours, even minutes, before President Trump announced it late Tuesday. These were the sole bets made on Polymarket through these accounts.

In January, an anonymous Polymarket user made a $400,000 profit by betting that Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro would be out of office, hours before Maduro was captured. In the hours before the start of the Iran war, another account made roughly $550,000 in a series of trades effectively betting that the U.S. would strike Iran and that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would be removed from office.

Such prescient wagers have raised eyebrows — and accusations that prediction markets are ripe for insider trading. And the issue goes beyond these three geopolitical events, according to at least one report.

Researchers at Harvard University released a paper last month in which, using public blockchain data, they estimated that $143 million in profits have been made on Polymarket by individuals who potentially had insider information about events ranging from Taylor Swift’s engagement to the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize last year.

Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y who sits on the House Financial Services Committee as well as the subcommittee on digital assets and financial technology, sent a letter Thursday to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission demanding the regulator review and investigate these well-timed trades. The CFTC regulates the derivatives markets, which includes prediction markets.

“This pattern raises serious concerns that certain market participants may have had access to material nonpublic information regarding a market-moving geopolitical event,” Torres wrote. The letter was shared exclusively with AP.

“What is the statistical likelihood that of anyone other than an insider trader placing a winning bet 12 minutes before a market-moving presidential announcement?” Torres said in an interview with AP. “There are two answers: God, or an insider trader. And something tells me that God is not placing bets around Donald Trump’s posts on Truth Social. “

Prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket allow users to bet on everything from whether it will rain in Phoenix, Ariz., next week to whether the Federal Reserve will raise or lower interest rates.

Americans have limited access to Polymarket, which was banned from the U.S. in 2022. The company has moved to reenter the country by acquiring a CFTC-licensed exchange and clearinghouse, giving it a legal pathway to start offering contracts domestically. The company has begun a limited rollout in the U.S.

Polymarket also operates a separate, crypto-based platform offshore that remains outside U.S. jurisdiction. That platform accounts for most of its activity.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., sent a letter to Polymarket on Thursday demanding the company explain why it continues to allow trades on war and violence as well as whether the company is making efforts to keep insiders from trading on the platform.

“Polymarket has become an illicit market to sell and exploit national security secrets unlike any in history, and by extension a potential honeypot for foreign intelligence services watching for those same suspicious bets and wagers,” Blumenthal wrote.

Republicans also have criticized these platforms and called for bans on these sorts of bets. There are at least two bills pending in Congress co-signed by both parties, one in the House and one in the Senate.

“We don’t want to imagine a world where America’s adversaries use prediction markets to anticipate our next move,” Rep. Blake Moore, R-Utah, said after the release of AP’s findings on the ceasefire wagers.

Polymarket did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The stakes are high for both Polymarket and Kalshi as they seek approval to operate nationwide, particularly in the lucrative sports betting market.

Kalshi, which already is regulated in the U.S., and its executives have a goal of making the company the nation’s dominant prediction market. Kalshi has leaned heavily into sports, which critics have said effectively makes it a sports betting platform that dabbles in event-based contracts on the side. Both companies also announced partnerships with sports teams and even news organizations to broaden their reach as well. AP has an agreement to sell U.S. elections data to Kalshi.

The competition also carries political overtones. Donald Trump Jr. is an investor in Polymarket through his venture capital firm, 1789 Capital, and separately serves as a paid strategic adviser to Kalshi.

Sweet writes for the Associated Press.

A two day ceasefire between the United States and Iran has paused direct large scale strikes, but key flashpoints across the region remain active.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz and escalating violence in Lebanon highlight the limited scope of the truce, exposing gaps in its coverage and enforcement.

Strait of Hormuz Remains Closed

Despite expectations that the ceasefire would stabilise energy markets, the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively shut.

This chokepoint normally handles a significant share of global oil shipments, with around 140 vessels passing through daily under normal conditions. In the first 24 hours after the ceasefire, only a handful of ships were able to transit the route.

The continued disruption has driven immediate delivery oil prices sharply higher, with some refiners in Europe and Asia reportedly paying near record levels.

Donald Trump publicly criticised Iran for failing to uphold what he described as an agreement to allow oil flows, while also signalling that shipments could resume soon without detailing mechanisms.

Disputed Scope of the Ceasefire

A central point of contention is whether the ceasefire extends beyond direct US Iran hostilities.

Iran maintains that the truce should include theatres such as Lebanon, where Hezbollah is engaged in conflict with Israel.

The United States and Israel reject this interpretation, arguing that Lebanon falls outside the agreement’s framework. This divergence has created parallel narratives of compliance and violation, undermining the credibility of the ceasefire.

Escalation in Lebanon

Fighting between Israel and Hezbollah has continued, with both sides exchanging strikes.

Israeli forces carried out large scale attacks shortly after the ceasefire announcement, while Hezbollah resumed missile launches following earlier indications it would pause operations.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has since signalled a shift by expressing willingness to begin separate negotiations with Lebanon, focusing on disarming Hezbollah and establishing more stable relations.

Meanwhile, Lebanese officials are attempting to broker a temporary ceasefire as a stepping stone toward broader negotiations, indicating a parallel diplomatic track separate from US Iran talks.

High Stakes Talks in Islamabad

The first direct peace talks between the United States and Iran are scheduled to take place in Islamabad, which has been placed under heavy security lockdown.

Pakistan’s role as mediator underscores its diplomatic positioning, with tight security arrangements including restricted zones and controlled access around the negotiation venue.

The Iranian delegation is expected to be led by Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, while the US side will be headed by JD Vance.

Competing Strategic Objectives

The talks are shaped by fundamentally different goals

The United States seeks

• Limits on Iran’s nuclear programme
• An end to uranium enrichment
• Curtailment of missile capabilities
• Withdrawal of support for regional allies

Iran, by contrast, is expected to demand

• Removal of economic sanctions
• Recognition of its authority over the Strait of Hormuz
• Compensation for wartime damage

Iran’s leadership, now under Mojtaba Khamenei, has adopted a defiant posture, signalling that concessions will come at a high price.

Economic Fallout

The disruption in the Strait of Hormuz is already feeding into global economic indicators.

Oil price volatility is expected to influence inflation data, particularly in the United States, where upcoming consumer price figures may reflect the early economic impact of the conflict.

While futures markets have shown some optimism following the ceasefire, spot prices remain elevated, indicating persistent uncertainty about immediate supply conditions.

Military and Strategic Reality

Despite the ceasefire, the broader strategic objectives of the war remain unresolved

Iran retains missile and drone capabilities capable of targeting regional adversaries
Its nuclear programme continues, with a significant stockpile of enriched uranium
The political system has remained intact despite internal unrest

For the United States, initial goals such as dismantling Iran’s nuclear capacity and weakening its regional influence have not been fully achieved.

Analysis

The current situation reflects a fragmented ceasefire architecture in which the absence of a unified framework allows multiple conflicts to persist simultaneously. The continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz demonstrates how economic leverage can be maintained independently of formal military de escalation, reinforcing Iran’s bargaining position ahead of negotiations.

At the same time, the divergence over whether Lebanon is included in the truce highlights the limitations of narrowly scoped agreements in complex regional conflicts involving multiple state and non state actors. The persistence of Israel Hezbollah hostilities illustrates how parallel wars can undermine broader diplomatic efforts, creating a layered conflict environment.

The decision to proceed with talks in Islamabad despite ongoing violations suggests that both the United States and Iran view negotiations as strategically necessary, even in the absence of full compliance on the ground. This indicates a shift toward diplomacy driven not by stability but by mutual recognition of the costs of prolonged confrontation.

With information from Reuters.

WASHINGTON — Vice President JD Vance departed Friday for Islamabad, Pakistan, to open the first direct negotiations aimed at ending the war between the United States and Iran.

Together with a delegation of deeply mistrusting negotiators from Tehran, Vance is tasked with striking a lasting peace between rival nations which have failed to keep promises made days ago in a delicate last-minute ceasefire. Ongoing military activity in the Middle East and disagreements over Iran’s control of key shipping routes have left the diplomatic effort vulnerable to collapse before the talks even begin.

“If the Iranians are willing to negotiate in good faith, we’re certainly willing to extend the open hand,” Vance told reporters before boarding Air Force Two. “If they’re gonna try and play us, then they’re gonna find that the negotiating team is not that receptive.”

On Tuesday, President Trump called off his plans to unleash “hell” on Iran based on assurances that it lift its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, but traffic through the vital waterway was still at a trickle Friday, as more than 600 ships remained stranded in the Persian Gulf, according to marine tracking data. Trump accused Iran on Thursday of doing a “very poor job, dishonorable some would say,” of allowing oil through the strait.

“The Iranians don’t seem to realize they have no cards, other than a short term extortion of the World by using International Waterways. The only reason they are alive today is to negotiate!” he wrote on Truth Social Friday.

Meanwhile, Lebanon has emerged as the central dispute threatening to derail the talks before they begin.

Hours after the ceasefire took effect, Israel launched what Lebanese officials described as its heaviest wave of strikes since the war began, killing at least 303 people, according to local health officials.

Jerusalem argues the Lebanese front is still on the table, but Iran and Pakistan disagree.

“The Iran–U.S. Ceasefire terms are clear and explicit: the U.S. must choose — ceasefire or continued war via Israel. It cannot have both,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said earlier this week. “The world sees the massacres in Lebanon. The ball is in the U.S. court, and the world is watching whether it will act on its commitments.”

Vance has acknowledged a “legitimate misunderstanding” over whether Lebanon was included in the ceasefire terms, telling reporters Washington never made that promise.

Separate negotiations regarding Lebanon are expected next week in Washington, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun confirmed Friday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also OK’d the talks, but said a ceasefire is not possible.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf and the Iranian delegation arrived early Saturday in Islamabad, Iranian state media reported. Hours earlier he said a ceasefire in Lebanon “must be fulfilled before negotiations begin.”

Bagher Qalibaf added a second condition — the release of frozen Iranian assets — which he suggested must be returned before Tehran takes its seat at the bargaining table. Little is known about the halted Iranian funds overseas, but such assets are typically held back as a result of U.S.-imposed sanctions.

The vice president’s role in peace talks has grown in recent weeks. Administration officials have cast Vance as one of the few leaders Tehran would be willing to engage with directly. With a global economy upended by Trump’s far-reaching military ambitions, a victory in Islamabad could spike Vance’s standing as a prospect to lead the GOP post-Trump.

That’s if he’s able to take pressure off American wallets with an agreement that liberates Iran’s grip over the strait, which has choked much of the world’s oil supply,

Americans have continued to feel the fallout at the gas pump and grocery stores, as U.S. inflation climbed to 3.3% in March, the highest annual rate in nearly two years, according to the data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Monthly prices rose 0.9%, a sharp increase from February’s 0.3% monthly rise, when annual inflation sat at 2.4%, the new data showed.

The White House characterized the rising inflation as a short-term disruption caused by the Iran war, while noting that the administration is “diligently working to mitigate” rising costs.

“As the Administration ensures the free flow of energy through the Strait of Hormuz, the American economy remains on a solid trajectory thanks to the Administration’s robust supply-side agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, and energy abundance,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai wrote on X.

Britain announced a meeting next week with dozens of countries to coordinate efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The summit will focus countering Iran’s proposal to charge transit tolls to allow ships through the waterway.

In a televised address to the nation, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke of a “devastating storm of inflation,” if peace talks don’t succeed in liberating the Middle East’s oil supply. He characterized the current stage as a “make-or-break moment.”

“We will make every possible effort to ensure the success of the peace process,” he said.

Islamabad, Pakistan – With key differences in the Iranian and American positions seemingly intact, Pakistan is aiming for what officials describe as a realistic – if modest – outcome from the negotiations between the two warring nations set to commence in Islamabad on Saturday.

The aim: to get the United States and Iranian negotiators to find enough common ground to continue talks.

On Friday, US Vice President JD Vance left Washington for Islamabad, where he will lead the American team, which will also consist of President Donald Trump’s chief negotiator Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner. While Iran has not formally confirmed its representatives at the talks, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf are expected to lead Tehran’s team.

These high-level talks follow days after the US and Iran agreed to a Pakistan-mediated two-week ceasefire, and will be held exactly six weeks after the US and Israel launched their war on Iran with the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on February 28.

Experts and sources close to the mediation effort said there was little expectation that a major breakthrough would be reached on Saturday. But by setting a more realistic ceiling – an agreement in Islamabad to continue deeper negotiations aimed at finding a lasting peace deal – Pakistan is hopeful it can help build on a truce that led to a collective sigh of relief globally.

“Pakistan has succeeded in getting them together. We got them to sit at a table. Now it is for the parties to decide whether they are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to reach an eventual solution,” Zamir Akram, Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United Nations, told Al Jazeera.

Now, he added, it will aim to secure an agreement for the US and Iran to continue dialogue.

The ‘proximity format’

The US and Iranian delegations will land at the Nur Khan airbase outside Islamabad and then drive to the Serena Hotel, where they will stay, and where the talks will be held.

Though the two teams will be in the same hotel, they will not come face to face for the negotiations, officials said.

Instead, they will sit in two separate rooms, with Pakistani officials shuttling messages between them.

In diplomatic jargon, such negotiations are known as proximity talks.

Pakistan’s experience with such a dialogue is not new. In 1988, Islamabad itself participated in the Geneva Accords negotiations on the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, where UN-mediated indirect talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan produced a landmark agreement.

Akram, who has represented Pakistan at the UN in Geneva from 2008 to 2015, said that history was relevant.

“Proximity talks have been used before. Pakistan itself participated in one in Geneva in 1988 on the Afghan issue,” he told Al Jazeera. “If the parties did not trust Pakistan, they would not be here. The metric of success should be an agreement to continue this process in search of a solution. It will not happen in a couple of days.”

Building diplomatic momentum

In the days between the ceasefire announcement on April 7 and the arrival of the delegations in Islamabad, world leaders moved quickly to register support.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed the ceasefire and expressed appreciation for Pakistan’s role. Kazakhstan, Romania and the United Kingdom also issued statements endorsing Islamabad’s mediation.

French President Emmanuel Macron called Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to congratulate him, while Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan also spoke to the Pakistani leader.

Analysts say these calls were not only expressions of goodwill but signals of international backing, aimed at strengthening Pakistan’s hand in pushing both Washington and Tehran to deliver results.

Sharif spoke with eight world leaders, including the emir of Qatar, the presidents of France and Turkiye, the prime ministers of Italy and Lebanon, the king of Bahrain and the chancellors of Germany and Austria.

Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who is also deputy prime minister, engaged with more than a dozen counterparts over the past two days and held an in-person meeting with China’s ambassador in Islamabad.

In total, Pakistan’s leadership made or received more than 25 diplomatic contacts in roughly 48 hours.

Salma Malik, a professor of strategic studies at Quaid-i-Azam University, said the scale of engagement reflected confidence in Pakistan’s role.

“The two main parties showed confidence in Pakistan to act as a neutral agent, that is the first and most critical litmus test for any mediating country, and Pakistan passed it,” she told Al Jazeera.

The Lebanon problem

The most immediate threat to Saturday’s talks lies outside the negotiating room.

Iran has framed Israeli strikes on Lebanon as a direct challenge to the ceasefire. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who spoke to Sharif earlier this week, warned that continued attacks would render negotiations meaningless.

Hours after the ceasefire was announced, Israel launched its most widespread bombardment of Lebanon since the start of the conflict, killing more than 300 people across Beirut and southern Lebanon in a single day.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran could abandon the ceasefire entirely if the strikes continued.

Sharif, in a call with Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on April 9, strongly condemned Israel’s actions.

Whether Lebanon is covered by the ceasefire remains contested. Pakistan has maintained that the truce extends across the wider region, including Lebanon, as reflected in Sharif’s statement earlier this week.

Washington has taken a different view. US Vice President JD Vance, who will lead the American delegation, said in Budapest that Lebanon falls outside the ceasefire’s terms, a position echoed by President Donald Trump and the White House.

Seema Baloch, a former Pakistani envoy, said the issue ultimately rests with Washington.

“Lebanon is key and Israel will use it to play the spoiler role,” she told Al Jazeera. “It is now the US decision whether it will allow Israel, which is not seated at the negotiating table, to play that role.”

There are, however, signs of limited de-escalation.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday that Israel was ready to begin direct negotiations with Lebanon “as soon as possible”, focusing on disarming Hezbollah and reaching a peace agreement.

The announcement followed US pressure. Trump told NBC he had asked Netanyahu to “low-key it” on Lebanon.

However, Netanyahu made clear there was no ceasefire in Lebanon, saying Israel would continue striking Hezbollah even as talks proceed.

Salman Bashir, a former Pakistani foreign secretary, said Lebanon remains within the ceasefire’s scope.

“Lebanon is very much part of the ceasefire, as was mentioned in the prime minister’s statement,” he told Al Jazeera. “The Israelis may be inclined to keep the pressure on Lebanon, but not for long if the US is keen on a cessation of hostilities, as it seems.”

Stumbling blocks

Beyond Lebanon, several other obstacles remain.

Washington is expected to push for verifiable restrictions on Iran’s nuclear programme, including limits on enrichment and the removal of stockpiled material.

Tehran, in turn, is demanding full sanctions relief, formal recognition of its right to enrich uranium and compensation for wartime damage.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and gas passes in peacetime, remains a key pressure point, with Iran retaining the ability to disrupt maritime traffic.

Bashir said there could be movement on some of these issues.

“There may be an opening on the Strait of Hormuz, under Iranian control. Iran will not give up on the right to enrichment. If nothing else, there should be an extension of the ceasefire deadline,” he told Al Jazeera.

Muhammad Shoaib, a professor of international relations in Islamabad, said progress would depend on movement on core issues.

“Both parties agreeing on the need to continue or even extend the ceasefire, while in principle agreeing on crucial points such as the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s right to enrichment and respect for sovereignty, will suggest that the first round is meaningful and successful,” he told Al Jazeera.

The regional atmosphere has also been shaped by sharp rhetoric from some of Iran’s Gulf neighbours.

The United Arab Emirates, which faced hundreds of missile and drone attacks during the conflict, has been among the most vocal.

Its ambassador to Washington wrote in The Wall Street Journal that a ceasefire alone would not be sufficient and called for a comprehensive outcome addressing Iran’s “full range of threats”.

Bahrain, meanwhile, presented a United Nations Security Council resolution on April 7 calling for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The measure received 11 votes in favour but was vetoed by Russia and China, with Pakistan and Colombia abstaining.

Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Egypt are not expected to have a formal presence at the talks, despite being closely involved in pre-negotiation diplomacy. The four countries held meetings in Riyadh and later in Islamabad aimed at securing a pause in hostilities.

Israel, a party to the conflict, will also not be represented. Pakistan, like most Muslim-majority countries, does not recognise Israel and has no diplomatic relations with it.

A slight easing

There are, however, tentative signs of easing tensions ahead of Saturday’s talks.

On Friday, as he was departing from Washington, Vance said that the US team was “looking forward to the negotiations”.

“We think it’s going to be positive. We’ll, of course, see. As the president of the United States said, if the Iranians are willing to negotiate in good faith, we are certainly willing to extend an open hand,” the US vice president said. “If they try to play us, they’re going to find that the negotiating team is not that receptive. So we’ll try to have a positive negotiation.”

He also said that Trump had given the US team “some pretty clear guidelines”.

Earlier this week, Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister spoke with his Iranian counterpart for the first time since the war started.

And Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said on April 8 that discussions could continue for up to 15 days, suggesting readiness for a prolonged process.

Akram, the former envoy, said the benchmark for success was clear.

“What they need to agree is that they will find a solution, and that in itself would be a step in the right direction,” he told Al Jazeera. “Finding a long-term solution will take time. It will not happen in a couple of days.”

Malik, the academic in Islamabad, said Pakistan’s expectations remained modest.

“What Pakistan expects is breathing space, an opportunity for peace. It is not expecting anything big. It is a small wish, but realising it will be very difficult,” she told Al Jazeera.

AIRPORTS in Europe are at risk of running out of fuel in just weeks, experts have warned, sparking fears for half term holidays.

The conflict in Iran continues to cause chaos across the world, with the latest seeing President Donald Trump slam the regime for breaking the short-lived ceasefire.

This came after Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz just hours into a two-week ceasefire agreement.

Travellers are now being warned that flights could be cancelled and prices could soon rise as fuel reserves are expected to run out due to ongoing closure.

And it could mean chaos for Brits heading abroad for the school May half-term holidays.

According to ACI Europe (the lobby group for airports in Europe), fuel reserves are expected to run out in less than three weeks unless the Middle East increases supplies.

SI YA

Can I cancel my Spain holiday? Latest Canaries advice after snow & cancelled flights

GROUNDED

Another European airline cancels all flights to Dubai until summer

ACI Europe warns: “If the passage through the Strait of Hormuz does not resume in any significant and stable way within the next three weeks, systemic jet fuel shortage is set to become a reality.”

It added that the shortage of fuel supply is likely to “severely disrupt airport operations and air connectivity”.

Around 140 ships usually pass through the Strait of Hormuz – yet has dropped to just seven ships today.

For Brits, this could mean travel chaos for May half-term getaways including popular destinations such as Spain, Italy and France.

The announcement comes as a number of airports in Italy already warned that they were running out of fuel.

According to local reports earlier this week, Brindisi-Casale Airport confirmed that Jet A1 fuel was not available for a short period of time.

While this didn’t result in any flight cancellations, airlines were warned to fly with enough fuel for the return journey.

This is because any remaining fuel was being reserved for emergency situations including medical flights.

A statement said at the time: “Jet A1 fuel is temporarily unavailable at Brindisi Airport.

“Refueling is permitted only for state, emergency medical services, and medical flights.

“Pilots are advised to refuel at previous stopovers to cover subsequent flights.”

Restrictions were also in place at other airports in Italy including Milan Linate, Venice, Bologna and Venice temporarily.

Despite this, Antonio Maria Vasile, president of Aeroporti di Puglia, commented regarding the news of the alleged fuel shortage.

He said at the time: “Fuel supplies continue regularly, and there is no risk of an imminent shortage.”

And it isn’t just Italian airports being hit by the fuel crisis.

The Australian government has warned that the country only has around 30 days of jet fuel left.

The announcements also come as some Asian countries are grounding flights and European airlines are making plans to deal with shortages.

Back in March, United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said: “It’s entirely possible that parts of Asia are just going to run out of fuel.”

Both Scandinavia’s SAS and Poland’s Lot have already cancelled flights.

Air New Zealand has cancelled thousands of flights due to fears of fuel shortages.

And UK airline Skybus announced that it was stopping all flights between Cornwall and London due to a huge rise in fuel costs and a drop in new passenger bookings.

Even Michael O’Leary, chief executive of Ryanair, has also warned of “the risk of supply disruptions in Europe in May and June” unless the war ends quickly.

Fuel prices have soared compared to what they were before the war in the Middle East broke out.

Last week, the cost of filling up an average diesel tank broke through the £100 mark for the first time since December 2022.

And the Iran conflict has taken Dubai off the holiday list, with the UK Foreign Office still warning against non-essential travel.

Hundreds of thousands of travellers were left stranded abroad when the conflict resulted in airspace closures and Dubai Airport closing.

While limited flights have returned, most airlines are still axing flights to Dubai, as well as other destinations in the Middle East.

This has also had a knock-on effect of airlines that travel via the Middle East, such as Thailand, Vietnam and Australia.

British Airways has axed more flights to the Middle East this week as the crisis continues.

And some airlines are even hiking the cost of baggage due to rising fuel costs.

Donald Trump is accustomed to criticism from coast to coast — Democrats, disaffected Republicans, late-night comedians, massive protests. Yet in his second presidency, Trump’s most influential American critic doesn’t live in the country but at the Vatican.

It’s an unprecedented situation, with the first American pope directly assailing the American president over the war in Iran, where a fragile ceasefire took hold this week. The announcement came after Pope Leo XIV declared that Trump’s belligerence was “truly unacceptable.”

Never before has the relationship between Washington and the Vatican revolved around two Americans — specifically, a 79-year-old politician from Queens and a 70-year-old pontiff from Chicago. They come from the same generation and share some common cultural roots yet bring jarringly distinct approaches to their positions of vast power. And the relationship comes with risks for both sides.

“They’re two white guy boomers but they could not be any more different in their life experiences, in their values, in the way they have chosen to live those values,” said theology professor Natalia Imperatori-Lee of Fordham University. “This is a very stark contrast, and I think an inflection point for American Christianity.”

Polar positions on Iran among U.S. Christians

Experts on the Catholic Church emphasized that Leo’s opposition to the war reflects established church teachings, not the reflexive politics of the moment.

“For the last five centuries, the church has been involved in a project of helping develop strong international norms,” including the Geneva Conventions in recent centuries, said Catholic University professor William Barbieri. “It is a very long-standing tradition rooted in Scripture and theology and philosophy.”

Yet the U.S. administration, which has close ties to conservative evangelical Protestant leaders, has claimed heavenly endorsement for Trump’s war on Iran.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth urged Americans to pray for victory “in the name of Jesus Christ.” When Trump was asked whether he thought God approved of the war, he said, “I do, because God is good — because God is good and God wants to see people taken care of.”

The Rev. Franklin Graham, son of iconic Baptist evangelist Billy Graham, said of Trump that God “raised him up for such a time as this.” And Graham prayed for victory so Iranians can “be set free from these Islamic lunatics.”

Leo countered in his Palm Sunday message that God “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.” He referenced an Old Testament passage from Isaiah, saying that “even though you make many prayers, I will not listen — your hands are full of blood.”

While it’s not unusual for popes and presidents to be at cross purposes, it’s exceedingly rare for the leader of the Catholic Church to directly criticize a U.S. leader, and Leo later named Trump directly and expressed optimism that the president would seek “an off-ramp” in Iran.

An even stronger condemnation came after Trump warned of mass strikes against Iranian power plants and infrastructure, writing on social media that “an entire civilization will die tonight.” Leo described that as a “threat against the entire people of Iran” and said it was “truly unacceptable.”

Experts: Leo doesn’t see himself as a Trump rival

Imperatori-Lee said Leo’s direct criticism stands out from the church’s more general critiques of political and social systems. For example, Pope Francis urged U.S. bishops to defend migrants without specifically mentioning Trump or his deportation agenda. Leo also previously called for humane treatment of migrants.

“Popes have critiqued unfettered capitalism before, very robustly. The popes have critiqued the Industrial Revolution, right? Things that the U.S. has been at the forefront of,” Imperatori-Lee said, “but it’s never been this specific and localized.”

She said Leo’s commentary resonates in the U.S. — with Catholics and non-Catholics — because he is a native English speaker.

“There’s no question about his inflection and meaning,” she said. “It removes any ambiguities.”

Trump welcomed Leo’s election last May as a “great honor” for the country, and he hasn’t responded to the latest criticisms. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

“What Pope Leo and Donald Trump have in common is they both lived through the post-war polarization,” including the political upheaval of the Civil Rights Movement and Vietnam War, said Steven Millies, a professor at Chicago’s Catholic Theological Union, one of the pope’s alma maters.

He noted that Leo is a subscriber to The New York Times, plays the “Wordle” game, keeps up with U.S. sports and talks regularly with his brothers, including an avowed Trump supporter.

“In some ways he’s just like us,” Millies said, someone “who understands where our domestic political crisis came from,” unlike the Argentinian Francis, “who did not fully understand the peculiarities of the United States” even as he offered implicit criticism.

Barbieri said Leo’s American savvy still does not change an underappreciated reality of Catholicism and the papacy. “The Catholic Church doesn’t neatly fit into either right or left boxes as they’re understood in U.S. politics,” he said.

Leo’s global focus vs. Trump’s ‘transactional’ politics

Leo spent much of his pre-papal ministry, including all his time as a bishop and cardinal, outside the U.S.

He was educated in Rome as a canon lawyer within the church. He was a bishop in poor, rural swaths of Peru. He led the Augustinian order and served as Francis’ prefect for recommending bishop appointees around the world.

Imperatori-Lee said that global reach gave him a first-hand perspective on how Washington’s economic and military policies — including backing dictators in Latin America — have negatively affected less powerful nations and their citizens.

His varied experiences made then-Cardinal Robert Prevost uniquely suited to be elected pope despite the College of Cardinals’ traditional skepticism toward the U.S. and its superpower status. Millies argued that Trump and his advisers, even Vice President JD Vance, a Catholic convert, may not appreciate those distinctions.

“This is an administration that seems to think only in terms of transactional politics — who’s for us and who’s against us,” he said.

Polarization poses risks for Leo and Trump

Relations between Washington and the Vatican have become so strained that a report of an allegedly contentious meeting involving Pentagon and Catholic Church officials sent shockwaves through both cities.

According to the report in The Free Press, a member of Trump’s administration warned the church in January not to stand in the way of U.S. military might.

The Vatican on Friday issued a statement rejecting the report’s characterization of the meeting, saying it “does not correspond to the truth in any way.”

The U.S. Embassy to the Holy See also pushed back, writing on social media that “deliberate misrepresentation of these routine meetings sows unfounded division and misunderstanding.”

Millies, meanwhile, questioned whether anything the pope or U.S. bishops say can sway individual Catholics. Trump is likely to lose support among Catholics as he loses support across the broader electorate, Millies said, but that’s not necessarily because members of Leo’s flock are applying church doctrine.

“Partisan preferences always trump the religious commitments,” Millies said, describing a “disconnect” between church leaders and many parishioners who look to other sources, politicians included, when shaping their views of faith and politics.

“The icon of Catholicism in American politics now is JD Vance, and it’s more about winning an argument,” he said. “It’s a very different emphasis, but it’s one that may suit the Trump administration very well.”

Barrow writes for the Associated Press. AP reporters Nicole Winfield in Rome and Konstantin Toropin in Washington contributed to this report.

A war for the soul of the world is happening right now that’s straight out of the Bible — and I’m not just talking about the Middle East.

In one corner are President Trump and his minions, who insist that everything they do is divinely mandated. They have consistently invoked a violent version of God as they deport undocumented immigrants, try to make the United States whiter, rip up long-standing treaties with allies, rain down bombs like a biblical plague on supposed narco boats and choke nations they deem a threat or whose resources they covet.

They’re the ones who lecture religious leaders on what Jesus stood for, demanding blessings for Trump’s actions — or else.

Just check out the recent allegations in The Free Press that senior defense officials dressed down the Vatican’s ambassador to the U.S. in January over Pope Leo XIV’s lack of enthusiasm for Trump’s imperialist ambitions. Or Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, he of the tattoos hailing the blood thirst of the Crusades (another Middle Eastern forever war that the “civilized” side lost), who compared the rescue of a downed American aviator in Iran over Easter weekend to the resurrection of Jesus.

It’s a playbook straight out of the Book of Revelations, which describes a Beast in the End Times with “a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies” in its quest to hold dominion over the earth.

In the other corner of this existential fight is an actual man of God: Pope Leo XIV.

Rather than cower before a despot who makes the Pharaoh in the Old Testament seem as stable and kind as St. Francis, the first American pope has resisted Trump like a protester at a “No Kings” rally. He has yet to denounce by name anyone in the president’s sordid orbit — but Pope Leo has returned to their actions again and again in his first year as head of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics.

He began his papacy by greeting a cheering crowd with “Peace be with you all” — what Jesus told his disciples after his Resurrection and a brilliant, biblical way to telegraph where he stands in our bellicose times.

On Palm Sunday a few weeks ago, the pontiff proclaimed during Mass in St. Peter’s Square that God “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war” — a not-so-subtle rebuke to Hegseth, who prayed shortly after the U.S. launched the Iran war for “every round [to] find its mark” and for “overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”

For his first Easter message, Pope Leo wrote, “Let those who have the power to unleash wars choose peace! Not a peace imposed by force, but through dialogue!”

Meanwhile, President Trump told a reporter that God supports the destruction he’s inflicting on Iran because “God is good. God wants to see people taken care of.”

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks to reporters at the Pentagon, July 16, 2025, in Washington.

(Julia Demaree Nikhinson / Associated Press)

According to the Free Press article, the Vatican declined an invitation from Vice President JD Vance for Pope Leo to visit the U.S., for fear that Trump would use him as a political pawn. Instead, the man born in Chicago as Robert Prevost plans to spend July 4 — America’s 250th birthday — on a Mediterranean island that has long served as a gateway for migrants trying to make it to Europe.

Critics will accuse Pope Leo of Trump Derangement Syndrome and call him particularly short-sighted, since he stands athwart the desires of many American Catholics.

Though he isn’t Catholic, Trump has favored Catholicism far above any other mainline Christian denomination, from acknowledging feast days to packing his administration and the Supreme Court with adherents in a way that even Joe Biden — a lifelong Catholic — never did.

About 55% of Catholics voted for Trump in 2024, per the Pew Research Center. A survey last year by The Catholic Project at The Catholic University of America found “a clear generational shift away from liberal self-identification” among younger priests. Dioceses across the country are reporting the highest amount of converts in decades, many of them drawn in by orthodox Catholic influencers.

But Trump’s embrace of Catholicism, like everything else in his life, has been conditional on fealty to him. His administration pulled tens of millions of federal funds from Catholic charities because they assisted migrants regardless of legal status — something the American Catholic church has done for over a century. Vance, himself a Catholic convert, accused bishops of being “worried about their bottom line” for daring to criticize the move and his boss’ deportation Leviathan.

The Free Press also reported that Trump’s lackeys invoked the Avignon Papacy — when 14th century French kings exiled a succession of popes from the Vatican and made them their puppets — during their browbeating of the Vatican ambassador.

Re-litigating history is an obsession of the Trump regime, so bringing up a medieval episode amounted to a threat to Leo to shape up — or else.

That’s what makes Pope Leo’s stance against a modern-day Babylon even braver. A pope’s main role is to bear witness to the words of Christ, who said far more about taking care of the meek and turning the other cheek than he did about waging war.

The best popes, from John XXIII to John Paul II, know that their words stand as a challenge for all people, believers and not, to create a better world that paves the way for the world to come. Trump wages war for himself; Pope Leo urges us to stand for something other than ourselves.

At this point in his reign, Trump is a dead ringer for the Antichrist, described in the Second Book of Thessalonians as a “man of sin … the son of perdition who opposeth and exalteth himself above all.”

Pope Leo would never characterize his opposition to Trump in such apocalyptic terms, of course. But his stance against the president’s tyranny is a call to action in the same vein as John Paul II’s exhortation to the free world to oppose the Soviet empire.

“Let us abandon every desire for conflict, domination, and power,” Pope Leo stated on Easter, “and implore the Lord to grant his peace to a world ravaged by wars and marked by a hatred and indifference that make us feel powerless in the face of evil.”

Amen, amen, amen.