Iraq

Police source tells Al Jazeera the attack hits positions of the Iran-aligned PMF, which the US has increasingly targeted.

An aerial attack on a military base in western Iraq’s Anbar province has killed seven fighters and wounded 13, according to Iraq’s Ministry of Defence.

The strikes on Wednesday targeted the military healthcare clinic at the base in Habbaniyah, according to the ministry. It called the attack “a heinous crime” that violated “all international laws and norms”.

An Iraqi police source told Al Jazeera the attack targeted positions of the Iraqi military’s Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF), a paramilitary force that includes some Iran-aligned brigades and reportedly shares the base with members of Iraq’s regular army.

“What we understand from the military here is that air strikes were carried out and then further strikes carried out on that same position,” said Al Jazeera’s Assed Baig, reporting from Baghdad. He said it appeared to be the first time the PMF was hit alongside the broader Iraqi military.

Iraq has denounced the attack as the country has been dragged into the United States-Israeli war on Iran. On Tuesday, Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani’s office said Baghdad would summon the Iranian and US ambassadors over the recent strikes.

‘Right to respond’

A security official quoted by the AFP news agency said the strike occurred at the same base that suffered a deadly attack the day before.

Tuesday’s strike, which the PMF blamed on the US, was the deadliest in Iraq since the start of the war on Iran on February 28, It killed 15 fighters, including a commander.

The attack prompted Iraq’s government to grant the PMF a “right to respond” to any attack against it, a position Baghdad reaffirmed on Wednesday.

“We reserve our full right to take all necessary measures to respond to this aggression within the established legal frameworks,” the Defence Ministry said.

Since the war began, pro-Iran armed groups have claimed responsibility for attacks on US interests in Iraq and across the region while strikes have also targeted these groups, including at government-linked positions.

The US Department of Defense has acknowledged that combat helicopters have carried out strikes against pro-Iran armed groups in Iraq during the current conflict.

Baig said the latest strikes demonstrate “an escalation in terms of the PMF being targeted”.

“Increasingly, Iraq is becoming a battlefield between Iraqi armed factions and the United States,” he said.

Video shows the aftermath of an airstrike in Iraq’s Anbar province on a headquarters of the pro-Iran Popular Mobilisation Forces, where at least ten people were killed during a commanders’ meeting.

Millions of people have rung in the ancient Persian New Year, Nowruz, as war grips the Middle East. The 3,000-year-old Zoroastrian-rooted celebration marks the beginning of spring in the northern hemisphere and is celebrated by 300 million people in Iran and Central Asia.

Al Jazeera’s Nicolas Haque recorded his journey on the long road from Amman, Jordan to Baghdad, Iraq as he deploys to cover the US-Israeli war on Iran. Along the 900km drive he found tight security and people largely unfazed by the conflict.

Trump calls NATO cowardly over lack of support for Iran war, says Strait of Hormuz should be protected ‘by other nations who use it’.

Air strikes come hours after pro-Iran armed group Kataib Hezbollah announces conditional suspension of US embassy attacks.

Air strikes have killed two fighters from the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) in northern Iraq, the paramilitary group says from one of the fronts in the sprawling war engulfing the Middle East.

The two attacks targeted PMF positions early on Thursday in the Nineveh region, where Mosul city is located, and a military airport in Salah al-Din province, according to statements from the PMF, a predominantly Shia group that is part of Iraq’s security apparatus and includes several groups aligned with Iran.

The PMF blamed the attack on Israel and the United States. Iraq has been drawn into the US-Israeli war on Iran, now in its third week.

The PMF was formed in 2014 as a volunteer force supporting Iraqi security forces in the fight against ISIL (ISIS).

Strikes have targeted Iran-backed groups, which in turn have claimed near-daily attacks on US interests in Iraq and across the region.

Elsewhere, a fire broke out at a naval base in southern Iraq when it was hit by a drone overnight. An Iraqi security source told Al Jazeera that a drone crashed into a water treatment station at the Umm Qasr naval base near the border with Kuwait.

Footage from the scene circulating on social media and verified by Al Jazeera showed flames and smoke rising from the site.

US embassy attacks to be suspended

Hours before the attacks on PMF fighters, the pro-Iranian armed group Kataib Hezbollah said its secretary-general had “issued orders to suspend operations targeting the US embassy in Baghdad for a period of five days”.

Designated by Washington as a “terrorist organisation”, Iraq’s Kataib Hezbollah listed several conditions of the suspension, including Israel ceasing its bombardment of the southern suburbs of Beirut.

Kataib Hezbollah also demanded “a commitment to refrain from bombing residential areas in Baghdad and other provinces”.

Whenever “the enemy violates” the truce, “the response will be immediate”, the group said, warning of more strikes after the five-day period.

The US embassy has been targeted by drone and rocket attacks several times in recent days. Air defences have intercepted most of the projectiles.

The embassy is in the Green Zone, a heavily fortified district in central Baghdad that houses Iraqi government institutions and embassies.

A US diplomatic and logistics centre at Baghdad International Airport that houses military personnel has also been regularly targeted.

Islamabad, Pakistan — The war launched by the United States and Israel on Iran has already killed more than 1,400 people, set off retaliatory attacks by Tehran targeting Gulf nations and Israel, and pushed global oil prices above $100 a barrel.

Now, eighteen days into the conflict, aid agencies and countries neighbouring Iran are increasingly concerned about a potential refugee crisis.

The United Nations refugee agency, UNHCR, estimates that 3.2 million people have already been displaced in Iran since US-Israeli strikes began on February 28. For now, the number of people physically crossing Iran’s borders remains comparatively modest. But this is what could happen next, and has put Iran’s neighbours on high alert.

Iran borders seven countries: Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkiye and Turkmenistan. Iraq shares the longest frontier, stretching for almost 1,600km (994 miles).

Each of these states faces its own political pressures, economic limitations and security concerns.

But pressure on the ground in Iran is mounting. The country’s Red Crescent Society reports that more than 10,000 civilian sites have been damaged since the war began, including 65 schools and 32 medical facilities, while more than 1,400 people have been killed in the US-Israel attacks. Strikes have hit residential areas in Tehran, Shiraz and Isfahan.

Meanwhile, commercial flights out of Iran have been suspended as airspace is closed.

Eldaniz Gusseinov, head of research at the geopolitical advisory firm Nightingale International, noted that because strikes have so far been concentrated largely on Tehran and western and southwestern Iran, other parts of the country — especially provinces bordering Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan are absorbing much of the internal displacement.

“If the strike pattern remains the same, internally displaced people inside Iran will increasingly concentrate in provinces located near those states, creating the preconditions for cross-border movement,” the Almaty-based analyst told Al Jazeera.

And things could get worse. If Tehran, a city of about 10 million people, were to lose its electricity grid or water supply in a US-Israel attack, for instance, residents could be forced to leave en masse.

“Infrastructure destruction does not produce the gradual, manageable flows that the Syrian war initially generated. It produces sudden, massive displacement, driven by the collapse of basic urban services,” Gusseinov said.

Turkiye fears repeat of Syrian migration crisis

Among Iran’s neighbours, only Turkiye, Iraq and Pakistan have extensive experience of hosting large refugee populations.

Imtiaz Baloch, an independent researcher focusing on conflicts in Pakistan and Central Asia, said that if the crisis in Iran deepens, many Iranians could seek refuge in neighbouring states, particularly Iraq and Turkiye.

Analysts say no country faces greater political exposure than Turkiye.

“Turkiye is currently hosting many refugees from Syria and other countries. A new influx of Iranian migrants would likely intensify the humanitarian burden and create new challenges for both host countries and international relief agencies in the coming days,” Baloch said.

Turkiye shares a 530km (329-mile) border with Iran and allows visa-free entry for Iranian citizens. It already hosts the world’s largest refugee population, including roughly 3.6 million Syrians, and anti-immigrant sentiment has hardened within domestic politics over the past decade.

Turkiye’s interior minister, Mustafa Çiftçi, said earlier in March that the government had prepared three contingency plans for the war in Iran.

The first involves intercepting migration flows within Iranian territory before they reach the border. The second proposes establishing buffer zones along the frontier. The third would allow refugees to enter Turkiye under controlled conditions as a last resort.

Turkish authorities say they have already strengthened the border with Iran, adding 380km (236 miles) of concrete wall, 203 optical towers and 43 observation posts – undertaken, according to a Turkish Ministry of National Defence statement issued in January, as the US was building up its armada in the Gulf late last year.

“Although there is currently no mass migration detection at our borders, additional measures have been taken on the border line, and these measures will be implemented if needed,” the Defence Ministry stated on January 15.

So far, this has not been necessary. According to Turkish government data on the movement of people from Iran, 5,010 entered Turkiye from between March 1 and 3, while 5,495 exited.

But Turkiye has felt the effects of the war’s spillover in other ways. On March 9, NATO confirmed it had intercepted an Iranian ballistic missile over Turkish airspace. The debris landed near Gaziantep, in the western-most part of the country, about 50km (31 miles) from the Syrian border. Iran denied that it was behind the attack on Turkiye.

Crisis on an unprecedented scale?

What makes the current situation in Iran particularly urgent is the scale of its population, say analysts.

Syria had approximately 21 million people at the start of its civil war. Iran has roughly 90 million. The Syrian conflict caused more than 13 million people to be displaced, including more than 6 million who fled the country.

A proportionate displacement from Iran would represent a humanitarian crisis with few modern parallels. To put it into perspective, if a country of 90 million experienced the exact same scale of crisis as Syria, nearly 56 million people would be forced to flee their homes, and nearly 26 million of them would become international refugees.

Gusseinov said such a scale of displacement and the capacity of international aid agencies is “fundamentally mismatched”.

Furthermore, Iran itself hosts one of the world’s largest refugee populations: about 3.7 million displaced people, most of them from Afghanistan.

“Any mass displacement from Iran, therefore, creates a dual crisis: Iranian civilians fleeing outward, and Afghan and Iraqi refugees who were already in Iran being displaced a second time, or pushed back to countries that cannot absorb them,” he said.

Iraq and the South Caucasus face difficult choices

Although most population movement is still taking place within Iran rather than across its borders, Iran’s neighbours do have cause for concern, analysts say.

“Iran’s neighbouring countries are already dealing with their own crises, which limits their ability to absorb a potential refugee influx. Countries such as Syria, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are facing varying degrees of economic, political, or security challenges. These internal pressures make it difficult for them to accommodate a large influx of refugees,” Gusseinov told Al Jazeera.

Iraq, which shares Iran’s longest border, faces a particularly complex situation.

The country is not only a potential destination for Iranian refugees, but has also been caught in military exchanges between Washington and Tehran. US forces have targeted armed groups operating from Iraqi territory, while Iran and pro-Iran armed groups have struck – or attempted to strike – US military and diplomatic positions inside the country.

The UN’s International Organization for Migration says disruptions on the Iranian side of the border have led to the closure of several crossing points, although Iraqi crossings remain technically open. Meanwhile, the UNHCR says it is monitoring developments closely, and that the Iraqi government would lead any emergency refugee response.

The semi-autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, which, unlike the rest of the country, still allows visa-free entry for Iranian passport holders, adds another layer of complexity.

The region hosts several Kurdish armed groups, some of which have reportedly been in discussions with Washington about receiving military support in return for joining the war against Iran. The development has prompted Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to strike Kurdish positions inside Iraqi territory.

Baghdad has publicly stated that it will not allow its territory to be used to infiltrate Iran, but experts on the region say its ability to enforce the position is limited.

Further north, the South Caucasus states of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia have each expressed concern while attempting to carefully balance relations with both Washington and Tehran.

Azerbaijan has closed its land borders to routine traffic, requiring government approval for any crossing, while Armenia’s border with Iran, which is just 44km (27 miles) long, remains open.

“Armenia is a small economy already absorbing Russian and Ukrainian migrants,” Gusseinov said.

Pakistan and Afghanistan confront overlapping crises

To Iran’s east lie Pakistan and Afghanistan, each grappling with existing refugee pressures.

According to the UNHCR, since October 2023, about 5.4 million Afghans have returned to Afghanistan from Iran and Pakistan, many not by choice.

Following the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, a huge wave of Afghans sought refuge across the country’s borders, fearful of economic collapse and security threats.

The UN and international migration agencies estimate that between 1 and 1.5 million Afghans fled to Iran in the immediate aftermath of the US withdrawal, pushing the total Afghan population in Iran to upwards of 5 or 6 million.

Concurrently, hundreds of thousands of newly displaced Afghans crossed into Pakistan, joining a long-established refugee community there and swelling the total number of Afghans in the country to more than 3 million.

In response to this influx and citing domestic economic and security pressures, both Pakistan and Iran initiated aggressive mass deportation campaigns, forcing millions back into Afghanistan. Between late 2023 and the end of 2025, between 2.8 million and 3.5 million Afghans are thought to have been sent back.

Pakistan’s stringent repatriation plans pushed out more than 1.3 million people, while Iran drastically accelerated its expulsions, deporting nearly 2 million individuals in 2025 alone.

According to the UNHCR, in 2026 so far, more than 232,500 Afghans have returned to their country, including 146,206 from Pakistan and 86,253 from Iran.

The primary concern now is that the war in Iran could accelerate these returns, pushing people into communities already struggling to cope and potentially triggering further onward migration. The UNHCR has also warned that largescale and hurried returns of refugees could trigger further instability in the region.

Further complicating the situation, Pakistan and Afghanistan have been engaged in fighting, as Islamabad claims that Afghanistan is providing a safe haven to armed groups launching attacks at Pakistan. Kabul has consistently denied the presence of any such groups on its soil.

Another bout of hostilities in October 2025 led Pakistan to close its borders with Afghanistan. Since then, Afghanistan’s trade and economic ties with Iran have deepened.

“Destabilisation of the Iranian economy, therefore, hits Afghanistan through two channels simultaneously: reduced trade flows and refugee return surges,” Gusseinov said.

Meanwhile, Pakistan faces its own geographical and security challenges.

The country’s border with Iran runs through Balochistan, its largest but most volatile province, where separatist sentiment has simmered for decades. The province has seen an increasing number of attacks by armed groups seeking independence from Pakistan. In February this year, Pakistan’s military concluded a weeklong security operation in the province, and claimed it had killed 216 fighters in targeted offensives.

While Balochistan’s provincial officials say they have sufficient resources to accommodate refugees if large numbers begin arriving across the southern border, researcher Baloch said the reality was more complicated. Any refugee crisis, he said, could make the situation in Balochistan difficult for Islamabad to manage.

“Balochistan’s porous border is next to Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan province, a region that has historically been home to various separatist groups. Any significant influx of refugees across this border could impose additional security and economic costs on Pakistan,” Baloch said.

‘For 40 years, we’re protecting you’: US President Donald Trump criticises allies’ reluctance to commit forces to open the key waterway for Gulf oil exports.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attacks, which took place amid the escalating Israel-US war on Iran.

A prominent hotel in central Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone was struck by a drone, amid reports that Iraqi air defences intercepted an attack over the United States Embassy.

The strike on Monday evening hit the top floor of Al-Rasheed Hotel, causing damage but no casualties, according to two Iraqi security officials cited by The Associated Press (AP) news agency.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Security sources told the Reuters news agency that two Katyusha rockets had been intercepted that evening near the US Embassy in the Green Zone, which houses diplomatic missions as well as international institutions and government offices.

Earlier Monday, the Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah announced that Abu Ali Al-Askari, a prominent security official with the paramilitary group, had been killed, without giving details on the circumstances.

Kataib Hezbollah is one of the largest groups in the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) operating in Iran, which was founded in 2014 to stop lightning advances by ISIL (ISIS).

On the same day, AP reported that six PMF fighters were killed in a strike on a checkpoint in western Iraq’s Anbar province, and two others were killed in a separate strike on the headquarters of a PMF brigade in the same area.

Two Iraqi security officials told AP that the Majnoon oilfield in Iraq’s southern Basra province was targeted by two drones. No casualties were reported, and it was not immediately clear if there was damage to the facilities.

Iraq’s oil industry has been severely impacted by the US and Israel’s war on Iran and Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil trading corridor.

Iraqi Minister of Oil Hayan Abdul-Ghani said in a video statement on Monday that a pipeline from the northern city of Kirkuk to Turkiye would be operational within a week, allowing the country to resume its oil exports, which have been interrupted by the ongoing war.

Also on Monday, air defences intercepted and shot down a drone near Erbil airport in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, according to security sources.

The Pentagon said the airmen on board the KC-135 plane were: John Klinner, 33, from Alabama; Ariana Savino, 31, from Washington; Ashley Pruitt, 34, from Kentucky; Seth Koval, 38, from Indiana; Curtis Angst, 30, from Ohio; and Tyler Simmons, 28, also from Ohio.

A strike on the heavily fortified United States embassy compound in Baghdad caused a fire and damage to the complex. It is the second attack on the embassy since the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran on February 28.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has been refreshing its travel advice for nations across the globe amid ongoing conflict in the Middle East, continuing to wreak havoc on international movement.

Beyond severely disrupting travel plans, the ongoing crisis is set to have far-reaching consequences for inflation, interest rates and commodity markets. British citizens have already been airlifted from Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and neighbouring regions, with Whitehall organising charter flights to repatriate nationals safely.

Those most at risk will receive priority booking on these evacuation flights, with the Foreign Office pledging to reach out to anyone who has registered their whereabouts in the affected zone, reports the Liverpool Echo.

In its guidance covering numerous Middle Eastern nations, the Foreign Office said: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption. Stay away from areas around security or military facilities. Follow the instructions of the local authorities and monitor local and international media for the latest information.”

The advice went on: “If local authorities advise you to take shelter, stay indoors or move to the nearest safe building immediately. The greatest risk is from falling debris caused by intercepts, and you are safest inside a secure structure.

“Choose an interior stairwell or a room with as few external walls or windows as possible for additional protection.”

Political strife, natural calamities and safety issues are among the factors leading the UK Foreign Office to advise Brits against travelling to certain locations.

Afghanistan

Travel to Afghanistan is strongly discouraged. The security climate is unpredictable, with previous tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan resulting in violent skirmishes in border areas.

Travelling across Afghanistan poses extreme risks, and several border crossings are currently closed.

The likelihood of British nationals being detained in Afghanistan is significantly high. If you’re a Brit and find yourself detained in Afghanistan, you could be looking at a lengthy prison sentence spanning months or even years.

The FCDO’s capacity to assist you is severely restricted, and in-person support in Afghanistan is not feasible.

Belarus

The FCDO strongly advises against all travel to Belarus. If you’ve ever participated in activities now deemed illegal by the Belarusian regime, you run a substantial risk of arrest.

There’s also a minor risk that direct conflict related to the war in Ukraine could spill over into Belarus.

In the unlikely event of conflict breaking out, the FCDO’s ability to aid British nationals will be drastically limited. Ignoring advice from the FCDO could invalidate your travel insurance.

Burkina Faso

The FCDO advises against all travel to Burkina Faso due to the threat of terrorist attacks and kidnappings, coupled with the country’s unstable political situation.

There is no British Embassy in Burkina Faso and all consular support is provided from the British Embassy in Accra, Ghana. They cannot provide in-person assistance.

If there is serious violence, unrest or a deterioration in the security situation, it could be difficult to leave safely.

Haiti

The FCDO advises against all travel to Haiti owing to the unstable security situation. There are currently no British consular officials in Haiti and its ability to provide consular assistance is severely limited and cannot be delivered in person in Haiti.

If you choose to travel to or remain in Haiti against FCDO advice, attempt to avoid all crowds and public events, and take appropriate security precautions.

Iran

The FCDO advises against all travel to Iran. If you are a British national already in Iran, either resident or visitor, the Foreign Office said: “carefully consider your presence there and the risks you take by staying”.

British and British-Iranian dual nationals face significant risk of arrest, questioning or detention. Possessing a British passport or links to the UK can be reason enough for the Iranian authorities to detain you.

Iraq

The FCDO advises against all travel to Federal Iraq and the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. This is due to recent escalation in regional conflict.

There is significant risk of further escalation, and events are fast-moving and unpredictable. The Foreign Office said: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption. The border crossing from Iraq into Kuwait is closed.

“British nationals wishing to cross into Kuwait must contact the British Embassy in Kuwait 24 hours in advance. The British Embassy will share names and passport details with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who will determine entry.”

Israel

The FCDO advises against all travel to Israel and Palestine: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption. Stay away from areas around security or military facilities.”

Britons should inform the UK government of their presence in Israel, and register if they’re in the region for ongoing updates. You should adhere to instructions from local authorities and keep abreast of local and international media for the most current information.

Mali

The FCDO advises against all travel to Mali in its entirety owing to volatile security conditions. If you’re currently in Mali, you should depart “immediately” via commercial flight if you deem it safe to do so.

“The international airport in Bamako is open, and commercial flights are available. Do not try to leave Mali by overland routes to neighbouring countries as this is too dangerous. This is due to terrorist attacks along national highways.”

There remains a significant threat of abduction and criminal behaviour throughout Mali, including within the capital city of Bamako.

The Foreign Office warned: “If you choose to remain in Mali, you do so at your own risk. You should have a personal emergency plan that does not rely on the UK government.”

Niger

The FCDO advises against all travel to Niger. Officials said: “This is due to the rise of reported terrorist and criminal kidnappings of foreign nationals which have taken place this year in Niger. There is an ongoing risk of terrorist attacks throughout Niger including in the capital, Niamey.”

Support for British nationals is extremely limited in Niger. Assistance is delivered remotely from the British Deputy High Commission in Lagos.

Face-to-face help is unavailable. Should serious violence, civil unrest or a worsening security situation occur, departing safely could prove challenging.

Palestine

The FCDO advises against all travel to Israel and Palestine. UK citizens currently in the region should inform the Government of their whereabouts in Palestine and register their presence to receive ongoing updates.

Should you determine it’s safe to proceed and intend to use commercial departure options, verify the latest information from your airline or tour operator, alongside guidance from local authorities and the status of border crossings prior to travelling.

The Foreign Office cautioned: “The situation could escalate quickly and poses significant risks. Regional tensions may cause international borders (air and land) to close.”

Russia

The FCDO warns against all travel to Russia owing to the dangers and threats stemming from its ongoing invasion of Ukraine, including security incidents such as drone strikes and Russian air defence operations, a shortage of flights back to the UK, and restricted capacity for the UK government to offer assistance.

The Foreign Office said: “There is an increased risk of British nationals being detained in Russia, including if the Russian authorities suspect you of engaging in or supporting activities against Russian law, even if activities took place outside Russia.”

South Sudan

The FCDO warns against all travel to South Sudan due to the threat of armed violence and criminal activity.

“The political and security situation remains unpredictable. Political tensions are high and the security situation across the country could deteriorate rapidly and unpredictably.

“If the unstable security situation deteriorates, routes into and out of South Sudan may be blocked. Juba airport may close or be inaccessible. Flights may be cancelled at short notice.”

Syria

The FCDO warns against all travel to Syria owing to volatile security conditions and the risk of terrorist attacks. Consular support is unavailable from the British government within Syria.

The FCDO may learn of assistance offered by other organisations which can be shared with British nationals. Should you require help, contact the FCDO in London on +44 (0)20 7008 5000.

Yemen

The FCDO warns against all travel to Yemen in its entirety owing to unpredictable security conditions. The guidance states: “If you’re in Yemen, you should leave immediately.”

Assistance for British nationals is extremely restricted in Yemen. The British Embassy in Sana’a has suspended operations, with all diplomatic and consular personnel evacuated.

The UK government is unable to assist British citizens departing Yemen. No evacuation arrangements are currently in place.

Should you decide to stay in Yemen, you ought to keep movement around the country and within urban areas to a minimum, stay informed about changes in the local security landscape and observe other safety measures.

Videos posted by social media users showed smoke rising from the US embassy in Baghdad after a reported attack. Iraqi officials said a helipad at the embassy was hit by a missile.

Twenty-three years ago, the Oscars were in turmoil. President George W. Bush had just begun an invasion of Iraq after the Sept. 11 attacks, and as the nation’s TV screens filled with the “shock and awe” campaign, many did not know quite how to proceed with Hollywood’s biggest night.

ABC wanted to postpone, presenters begged off, Jack Nicholson urged his fellow actor nominees to boycott (animated feature winner Hayao Miyazaki did), documentary winner Michael Moore attempted to directly shame Bush from the stage (to loud boos) and many of the acceptance speeches acknowledged the war and included pleas for peace.

President Trump’s recent decision to attack Iran is not precisely the same — American troops have thus far not invaded and the Bush administration’s media blitz of rockets lighting up the sky is absent. No one expected the Oscars to be canceled or delayed and there has been no talk of boycotts; whether the war and (if polls are to be believed) its general unpopularity are noted, either by host Conan O’Brien (who has already said he will not be mentioning Trump) or the winners, remains to be seen.

But if recent history is any indication, it could go unmentioned. Which would be something of a political statement in itself: It would be terrible if the false notion that awards shows have become too political had a chilling effect on anyone who wanted to use their platform to speak about something important they care about.

Thus far, film and television awards winners have stayed away from the issues that have prompted widespread public outrage and protests this year — including the often brutal methods of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the ongoing concern over the war in Gaza and the endless revelations of the Epstein files.

Despite complaints from certain quarters, awards shows, particularly the Oscars, rarely have more than one or two truly political moments. But this year, the absence has been notable.

Compared with the Grammy Awards, where Trevor Noah, in his final stint as host, roasted Trump and anti-ICE sentiment reigned in speeches and on pins, this year’s Golden Globes (which aired three weeks before the Grammys) appeared to exist in another world. A few stars wore similar pins and spoke on the red carpet, but aside from a few digs about Epstein and CBS News from host Nikki Glaser, there was no mention of the many issues roiling the nation. (As he was beginning to make late-in-speech remarks about this being an important time to make films, Kleber Mendonça Filho, Brazilian director of the non-English language film winner “The Secret Agent,” ran over time and was played off.)

Has Hollywood lost its spine? Or, having been beset for years by grievances that the Oscars have become “too political” and “too woke,” are filmmakers and actors saving their outrage and passion for social media and bowing to pressure to keep their acceptance speeches grateful and celebratory?

“I know that there are people who find it annoying when actors take opportunities like this to talk about social and political things,” said Jean Smart on the Golden Globes red carpet, adding, when she won for actress in a TV comedy: “There’s just a lot that could be said tonight. I said my rant on the red carpet, so I won’t do it here.”

It was an echo of Jane Fonda’s famous 1972 Oscar speech: “There’s a great deal to say, and I’m not going to say it tonight.” And, perhaps, a response to more recent “shut up and dribble” criticism, as distilled by 2020 Golden Globes host Ricky Gervais, who cautioned the audience: “If you do win an award tonight, don’t use it as a platform to make a political speech. You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world.”

Indeed, as Oscars ratings have plummeted over the last 20 years, some have suggested that political speechifying is to blame. This is patently absurd. Viewership for just about everything except the Super Bowl has dropped dramatically, and the Oscars ratings do not take into account the millions who watch portions of the show on social media. (We’ll see what happens when the Oscars move to YouTube in 2029.)

And the Oscars have never been particularly political.

Speeches that deviate from the ubiquitous laundry list of thank yous always get more attention, whether they’re political or not, for the simple reason that they’re so dang unusual. But taken as a whole, either by decade or particular telecast, the Oscars is mostly, and consistently, apolitical. As in, almost every minute of a three-hour-plus show, year after year after year.

Unless, of course, you consider thanking God to be political. Which I do not. Nor do I categorize as such any speech that underlines the fact of a historic win (as Halle Berry did in 2002), encourages Hollywood to tell more diverse stories (as Cate Blanchett did in 2014) or reminds audiences in a general way that systemic oppression and war are bad (as Adrian Brody did amid his ramblings in 2025).

Many of the speeches that have been branded as “political” are simply underscoring the themes of the films being honored — in 2009, both Dustin Lance Black and Sean Penn advocated for gay rights when accepting Oscars for “Milk,” which chronicled the life of assassinated gay rights activist Harvey Milk. Likewise, John Irving supporting abortion rights and Planned Parenthood after winning for “The Cider House Rules” in 2000 and John Legend and Common speaking passionately about civil rights, past and present, after winning for “Glory,” a song from the civil rights drama “Selma,” in 2015 was only natural.

Sacheen Littlefeather refuses the lead actor Academy Award on behalf of Marlon Brando in 1973.

(Bettmann Archive)

A purely political speech, to my mind, directly calls out specific leaders, policies or crises, which may or may not have anything to do with the film being awarded. The most famous are, of course, Marlon Brando’s decision to send Sacheen Littlefeather to accept his Oscar for “The Godfather” and protest the treatment of Native Americans, and Vanessa Redgrave’s 1978 denunciation of “Zionist hoodlums” who were demonstrating against her involvement in a pro-Palestinian documentary even as she accepted for supporting actress in “Julia.”

In 1993, while many Oscars attendees wore red ribbons to honor those living with HIV/AIDS and call for government assistance, then-couple Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins took it further, using their time as presenters to ask the U.S. government to allow HIV-positive Haitians being held at Guantanamo Bay to be let into the country. That same year, presenter Richard Gere used the fact that “1 billion people” were watching to send “sanity” to Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in the hopes that he would allow the people of Tibet to “live free.” (Then-Oscars producer Gil Cates quickly denounced the three presenters; Gere did not return to the Oscars until 2013.)

A year after Moore blasted Bush over Iraq, Errol Morris, winning for “The Fog of War,” briefly compared the war in Iraq to the “rabbit hole” of Vietnam (which was the subject of his film). In 2015, “Boyhood” star Patricia Arquette used most of her supporting actress speech to demand equal wages for women. That same year, “Birdman” director Alejandro G. Iñárritu dedicated his award to his fellow Mexicans, with the hope that they would be treated by Americans “with dignity and respect” so that together, they could build a “great immigrant nation.” (Which frankly plays more purely political now than it did at the time.) A year later, Leonardo DiCaprio spoke about climate change after winning for “The Revenant.”

In 2019, Spike Lee, accepting for adapted screenplay (“BlacKkKlansman”), called on voters in the upcoming election to mobilize and “be on the right side of history” and in 2024, “Zone of Interest” director Jonathan Glazer, accepting for international film, riled many by comparing the dehumanization required for the Holocaust to occur with events in Gaza.

Even now, the most notable examples of political speeches, the ones that are always mentioned, are from the freaking ‘70s. Which certainly obliterates the idea that the Oscars have grown more political and undermines the argument that it is a Big Problem.

Put these relatively few moments next to the endless hours of acceptance speeches that, with varying degrees of emotion, honor the art of movie-making and the legions that support those who are doing it (including God, parents, spouses, children, some random but heaven-sent teacher) and it’s difficult to see much “wokeness.”

The people who gather at the Oscars are storytellers, and many of the stories they tell deal with uncomfortable truths about our collective past, present and future (including best picture front-runners “One Battle After Another” and “Sinners”). Of course nominees and winners have opinions about politics, science, social issues, international conflict and those suffering without recourse or voice — that’s why they make movies. So if a few of them decide to skip thanking their manager or the studio head and say a few words about climate change or whatever current law/policy/presidential action they believe is making lives worse for a lot of people, that’s their choice. They just won an Oscar!

For those uncomfortable watching it, just use the 45 seconds to grab a snack and by the time you’re back, the host will be moaning about how long the show is and the next five winners will inevitably cry and smile; praise their fellow nominees; thank the producers; say something sweet about their cast, crew and mamas; before telling their kids they love them and it’s time to go to bed.

And that’s OK too.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A drone attack on a joint French-Kurdish base in northern Iraq has killed one French soldier and wounded several others. Iran-aligned armed groups have been carrying out attacks against US and coalition forces in the region.

Heavy Israeli strikes have hit Tehran, Iran, as its allies launch attacks across Gulf states, and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has been severely disrupted, sending global oil prices soaring.

Meanwhile, political pressure is mounting in Washington as the conflict spreads across the region.

Here is what we know about what has been happening in the past 24 hours:

In Iran

Supreme leader speaks: Appointed last week following the assassination of his father, Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has issued his first statement, warning that attacks on Israel and US military assets and infrastructure in the Middle East will continue unless bases hosting US forces in the region are closed.

Heavy strikes on Tehran: The Israeli military has launched a new “extensive wave” of air attacks on Iran’s capital, Tehran, leaving the city covered in thick smoke on Friday morning.

Strait of Hormuz closure and surging oil prices: The Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, is closed, causing Brent crude oil prices to surge past $100 per barrel. The strait, which falls into the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, is the only waterway to the open sea available to oil and gas producers in the Gulf. Iran has stated that the strait is under Iranian control and US-and Israel-linked ships are banned. Other vessels must receive Iranian permission to pass.

Civilian casualties: Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, said at least 1,348 civilians have been killed, with victims ranging in age from eight months to 88 years old.

In Gulf countries

Regional retaliation and attacks: Iran has launched waves of drones and missiles towards Gulf countries that host US military assets and troops, and has targeted oil tankers and facilities.

Bahrain: The nation has reported intercepting 114 missiles and 190 drones since the war began on February 28.

Saudi Arabia: The country intercepted 10 drones over its eastern region and later destroyed an additional 28 drones that breached its airspace.

Attacks on the UAE: The country has strongly condemned Iranian strikes on the region, and said they have hit Dubai International Airport and some hotels.

Evacuations: Australia has ordered all “non-essential” officials to leave the United Arab Emirates and Israel, and urged its citizens to evacuate the Middle East while it is still safe to do so

Qatar’s response: Qatar’s airspace is officially closed, but Qatar Airways has scheduled more than 140 special flights to help repatriate stranded residents and citizens.

Qatar has strongly rejected Israeli media claims that it intentionally paused liquefied natural gas (LNG) production to manipulate US energy prices; officials clarified that the suspension was actually forced by an Iranian drone attack.

In the US

Trump claims war moving ‘rapidly’: US President Donald Trump told reporters the war against Iran was moving “very rapidly”.

“It’s doing very well, our military is unsurpassed,” he said at the White House, not directly responding to the latest comments from Iran’s new supreme leader.

Domestic opposition: More than 250 US organisations have signed a letter calling on Congress to halt funding for the war. They argue the $11.3bn spent in the first six days of the conflict is diverting crucial funds from urgent domestic needs, such as food benefits.

No ‘need’ for ground troops in Iran: US Senator Lindsey Graham has played down the possibility of US troops being deployed to Iran, but suggested the war could continue for some time. “I don’t see this conflict ending today,” the Republican senator told reporters in Washington, DC.

In Israel

New missile wave launched at Israel: The Israeli military said early on Friday that Iran had fired a new barrage of missiles towards Israel, and instructed people in affected areas to head to shelters.

Israel strikes Basij force: Israel’s military said it had struck checkpoints set up in Tehran by the Basij force of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as part of efforts to undermine control by the authorities.

Regime change: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel can create conditions for regime change, but it is up to Iran’s people to take to the streets. He also said Israel is aiming to stop Iran from moving nuclear and ballistic projects underground.

In Lebanon, Iraq

Downed US aircraft: A US KC-135 refuelling aircraft crashed in western Iraq. While the Islamic Resistance in Iraq claimed it shot the aircraft down using air defence systems, US Central Command (CENTCOM) stated the aircraft went down in “friendly airspace” and was not the result of hostile fire.

Iraqi port closures: Iraq has shut its port operations after an Indian crew member was killed during an attack on a US-owned oil tanker in Iraqi waters.

Six French soldiers hurt: A drone attack wounded six French soldiers in Erbil, in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region, President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday.

Deadly attacks in southern Lebanon: Israeli bombardments continue on southern towns and villages. A strike on the village of Arki, near Sidon, killed nine people, including five children.

Mounting death toll and mass displacement: Lebanese officials have reported that at least 687 people have been killed in Israeli attacks on Lebanon since last Monday, including 98 children. The intense bombardments have displaced an estimated 700,000 to 750,000 people from their homes.

A KC-135 Stratotanker that was taking part in Operation Epic Fury has crashed in Iraq, U.S. Central Command announced.

“U.S. Central Command is aware of the loss of a U.S. KC-135 refueling aircraft,” the command stated Thursday afternoon in a media release. “The incident occurred in friendly airspace during Operation Epic Fury, and rescue efforts are ongoing. Two aircraft were involved in the incident. One of the aircraft went down in western Iraq, and the second landed safely.”

“This was not due to hostile fire or friendly fire,” the CENTCOM statement added. “More information will be made available as the situation develops. We ask for continued patience to gather additional details and provide clarity for the families of service members.”

Three American crewed aircraft are known to have been lost during Operation Epic Fury prior to today’s KC-135 loss. These were F-15Es that were shot down in a bizarre friendly fire incident.

This is a developing story. We will update this post with new information as soon as we get it.

UPDATE: 6:15 PM EDT –

The Times of Israel has reported that the second aircraft involved was another KC-135. That outlet also says that the KC-135 in question was one that landed at Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport earlier in the day after declaring an in-flight emergency. Online flight tracking data shows that tanker is a KC-135RT variant, one of a small subset of KC-135Rs that are themselves capable of being refueled in flight. This, in turn, allows them to make use of tanker support themselves to remain on station longer or to conduct longer-distance missions. You can read more about these “receiver-tankers” in this past TWZ feature.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has laid out terms for ending the war with the United States and Israel in what analysts say is a possible sign of de-escalation from Tehran as the US-Israel war on Iran entered its 13th day on Thursday.

In a post on Wednesday on social site X, Pezeshkian said he had spoken to his counterparts in Russia and Pakistan, and that he had confirmed “Iran’s commitment to peace”.

“The only way to end this war – ignited by the Zionist regime & US – is recognizing Iran’s legitimate rights, payment of reparations, and firm int’l guarantees against future aggression,” Pezeshkian wrote.

This is a rare posture from Tehran, which has maintained a defiant stance and initially rejected any possibility of negotiations or a ceasefire when war broke out nearly two weeks ago.

Pezeshkian’s statement comes as pressure mounts on the US to halt what has become a very costly mission. Analysts say speculation from Washington that Iran would quickly submit after the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were misguided.

Tehran is likely going to determine the end of this war, not the US or Israel, because of its ability to inflict economic pain broadly, they say.

Amid a military pummelling by the US and Israel, Iran has launched heavy retaliatory strikes at US assets and other critical infrastructure in Gulf countries, upsetting global supplies. It has also adopted what analysts call “asymmetric” tactics – such as disrupting the critical Strait of Hormuz and threatening US banking-linked entities – to inflict as much economic pain on the region and wider world as it can.

This is what we know about Pezeshkian’s stance and what the pressures are on both sides to draw the conflict to a close, quickly.

What has the war cost so far?

Economically, both sides have weaponised energy. Israel first targeted Iran’s oil facilities in Tehran on March 8, prompting an outcry from global health experts over the potential risk of air and water pollution.

Iran has, meanwhile, tightened its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz shipping route – the only route to open sea for oil producers in the Gulf – with its military promising on Wednesday that it has the capabilities to wage a long war that could “destroy” the world economy.

Attacks on ships in the strait, through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas traffic normally passes, have effectively closed the route.

Oil prices rocketed above $100 per barrel late last week, up from around $65 before the war, with ordinary buyers feeling the increases at pumps in the US, Europe and parts of Africa.

On Wednesday, Iran upped the ante, saying it would not allow “a litre of oil” to pass through the strait and warned the world to expect a $200-per-barrel price tag.

“We don’t know how quickly it’ll revert back,” Freya Beamish, chief economist at GlobalData TS Lombard, told Al Jazeera. “We do think it’ll revert back to $80 in due course, but the ball is to some degree in Iran’s court,” she said, adding that because Iran needs oil revenue, the price hikes are expected to be time-limited.

The International Energy Agency agreed on Wednesday to release 400 million barrels from the emergency reserves of several member states but it is not yet clear what impact that will have, nor how quickly this quantity of oil can be released.

Tehran has also been accused of directly attacking oil facilities in neighbouring countries this week. Iraq shut all its oil port operations on Thursday after explosive-laden Iranian “drone” boats appeared to have attacked two fuel tankers in Iraqi waters, setting them ablaze and killing one crew member.

A drone was filmed striking Oman’s Salalah oil port on Wednesday, although Tehran has denied involvement.

What are Iranian officials saying about ending the war?

There has been conflicting messaging from the Iranian leadership.

Iran’s elite army unit and parallel armed force, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), continues to show defiance, issuing threats and launching attacks on Israel and US military assets and infrastructure in neighbouring Gulf countries.

However, the political leadership has appeared more inclined towards diplomacy, analysts say. On Wednesday, President Pezeshkian said that ending the war would take the US and Israel recognising Iran’s rights, paying Iran reparations – although it’s unclear how much is being asked for – and providing strong guarantees that a future war will not be waged.

In a video recording last week, he also apologised to neighbouring countries for the strikes and promised that Iran would stop hitting its neighbours as long as they do not allow the US to launch attacks from their territory.

“I personally apologise to the neighbouring countries that were affected by Iran’s actions,” the president said, adding that Tehran was not looking for confrontations with its neighbours.

However, it is not known how much sway the political leadership has over the IRGC. Hours after the president’s apology last week, air defence sirens went off in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE and Bahrain, as strikes continued on the Gulf.

So, what is Iran’s actual position?

“Iran wants to go to the end to make sure that the United States and Israel never attack Iran again … so this has to be the final battle,” Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar Atas explained.

Indeed, the IRGC sees this as an existential war, but the timing of Pezeshkian’s statement about ending the conflict also shows Tehran is pressured economically, politically and militarily, Zeidon Alkinani of Qatar’s Georgetown University told Al Jazeera.

“These differences and divisions [between IRGC and political leaders] always existed even prior to this war but we may notice it now more, given the fact that the IRGC believes that it has the right to take the front seat in leading this regional war, which is why a lot of the statements and positions are contradicting with the official ones from Pezeshkian,” he said.

The IRGC reports directly to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and not to the country’s political leadership. That council is led by Ali Larijani, a top politician and close aide to the late supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who analysts describe as a “hardliner”.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Larijani responded to threats from Trump about attacks on the Strait of Hormuz, saying: “Iranian people do not fear your hollow threats; for those greater than you have failed to erase it … So beware lest you be the ones to vanish.”

The newly elected supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, was once in the IRGC and was put forward by the unit as the next ayatollah after his father was killed on the first day of the war, analysts say. He is thus not expected to follow the reformist, diplomatic ideals of President Pezeshkian and other political leaders which his father managed to marry with the IRGC militarised stance, they say.

What do the US and Israel say about ending the war?

There have also been conflicting messages from the Trump administration and Israel regarding when the war mission on Iran, codenamed Operation Epic Fury, is likely to end.

Trump told US publication Axios on Wednesday that the war on Iran would end “soon” because there’s “practically nothing left to target”.

“Anytime I want it to end, it will end,” he added. He had said earlier on Monday that “we’re way ahead of our schedule” and that the US had achieved its goals, even as speculation mounts about a possible US ground mission.

On the other hand, Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that the war would go on “without any time limit, for as long as necessary, until we achieve all the objectives and decisively win the campaign”.

Analysts say Trump’s stance that the conflict will be quick reflects increasing pressure on his administration ahead of upcoming mid-term elections in November.

Trump’s advisers privately told him this week to find a quick end to the war and avoid political backlash, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal. That came as polls from Quinnipiac University and The Washington Post suggested that most Americans are opposed to the war in Iran.

In his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump promised to lower prices, and inflation had stabilised at 2.4 percent ahead of the war, according to government data released on Wednesday. Analysts speculate the conflict will likely push it back up.

The US spent more than $11.3bn in the first six days of the war, Pentagon officials told lawmakers in a classified briefing on Tuesday, Reuters reported this week – nearly $2bn a day.

The Washington-based think tank, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), estimated that the war cost Washington $3.7bn in its first 100 hours alone, or nearly $900m a day, largely due to its expenditure on costly munitions.

“It’s quite ironic that [Trump] chose a war that would make affordability worse, not better,” Rebecca Christie, a senior fellow at the Bruegel think tank, told Al Jazeera’s Counting the Cost.

“Every time the US loses even one object, air defence or a plane or something like that, that represents an awful lot of money that could have been used on some of these issues that have an impact on people’s day-to-day lives in the United States.”

One the UK’s biggest tour operators has suspended its profit guidance after revealing impact of Middle East war on bookings

Spooked Brits are putting their holiday plans on hold because of the Middle East crisis.

Leading holiday firm On the Beach revealed a “significant” drop in demand from British families to Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, and Egypt. “The timing of when the conflict will end and the shape of recovery in demand to these destinations are unknown,” it said.

At the same time, there are are warnings that the cost of a summer getaways could jump after a spike in jet fuel prices. It comes as many UK families would be booking sunshine trips for the Easter holidays.

The scale of the hit to bookings was enough for On the Beach to suspend its full year profit guidance. Boss Shaun Morton said: “Following the onset of the conflict in the Middle East, our operational teams have been working round the clock to support directly impacted customers in resort and to enable a return home as soon as possible.”

READ MORE: Saudi oil giant warns of ‘catastrophic consequences’ to global fuel suppliesREAD MORE: Mortgage rates hit 5% and deals slump after latest Iran war fall-out

The fall-out from the Iran war has already seen fuel prices jump and the cost of fixed rate mortgages rise. Industry experts Moneyfacts said the average two-year fixed rate mortgage had risen again, from 5.01% 5.04%. The average five-year fixed deal went up from 5.09% to 5.13%.

It came as oil prices remained at around $100 on Thursday – as two tankers were ablaze in Iraqi waters after what appeared to be Iranian strikes.

The latest wave of attacks on oil and transport facilities across the Middle East came as Iran warned the world should be ready for oil to hit $200 a barrel.

The conflict has spread across the region and prompted the International Energy Agency to recommended releasing 400 million barrels from reserves to dampen one of the worst oil shocks since the 1970s, the biggest such intervention in history.

Iran has made clear it intends to impose a prolonged economic shock.

Oil prices, which shot up earlier in the week to nearly $120 a barrel before retreating, jumped almost 10% back above $100 amid renewed fears about supply disruption.

Iranian explosive-laden boats appear to have attacked two fuel tankers in Iraqi waters setting them ablaze and killing one crew member.

Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG, said: “Overnight attacks on shipping off Iran are the stuff of nightmares for investors, confirming that one of the world’s key waterways is closed to shipping and resulting in a fresh surge in oil prices.”

US President Donald Trump claimed the IEA decision “will substantially reduce oil prices as we end this threat to America and the world.”

So far there has been no sign that ships can safely sail through the Strait of Hormuz, the now-blockaded channel along the Iranian coast that serves as a conduit for around a fifth of the world’s oil.

An Iranian military spokesperson said the Strait was “undoubtedly” under Iran’s control.

Iran’s sports minister said his nation will not participate in this summer’s World Cup following the attacks on the country by the U.S., one of the tournament’s hosts.

The U.S. bombing campaign against Iran, which began two weeks ago, has triggered a region-wide conflict and killed more than 1,300 Iranians including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country’s supreme leader, according to Iran’s U.N. ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani.

“Considering that this corrupt regime has assassinated our leader, under no circumstances can we participate in the World Cup,” sports minister Ahmad Donyamali said on state television Wednesday.

“Our players do not have security, and fundamentally the conditions for participation do not exist.”

Donyamali’s statement came just hours after FIFA president Gianni Infantino said he had received assurances from President Trump that Iran would be allowed to participate in the tournament, which will be played in the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

“President Trump reiterated that the Iranian team is, of course, welcome to compete in the tournament in the United States,” Infantino wrote in an Instagram post. “We need an event like the FIFA World Cup to bring people together now more than ever, and I sincerely thank the President of the United States for his support.”

Last year President Trump signed an executive order suspending visa issurance to nationals of 19 countries, including Iran, although the State Department can make exceptions for “participants in certain major sporting events” such as the World Cup.

Iran, which has played in the last three World Cups, earned its place in this summer’s tournament by dominating its group in the Asian confederation tournament. However it did not send a representation to a World Cup planning summit last week in Atlanta.

Iran was drawn into Group G for the World Cup and is scheduled to begin play June 15 against New Zealand at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood. Iran’s second group-stage game, against Belgium, is also scheduled for SoFi Stadium before the team finishes the first stage of the tournament against Egypt in Seattle.

According to The Athletic, no country has withdrawn from a World Cup after qualifying since the 1950 tournament in Brazil, when India, Scotland, France and Turkey pulled out, mostly over costs and logistical issues.

Donyamali did not say whether he has begun the formal process or withdrawing Iran from the World Cup but FIFA could be facing a time crunch if it had to replace Iran in the 48-team field. Article 6.7 of FIFA’s 2026 World Cup regulations states: ‘If any Participating Member Association withdraws and/or is excluded from the FIFA World Cup 26, FIFA shall decide on the matter at its sole discretion and take whatever action is deemed necessary. FIFA may decide to replace the Participating Member Association in question with another association.”

The most likely replacement scenario would have Iraq, the top non-qualifier from the Asian confederation, taking Iran’s place. Iraq is scheduled to play the winner of a Suriname-Bolivia playoff in Mexico later this month for a final World Cup berth but with airspace over the Middle East closed because of the war, the Iraqis are unsure how they will get to Mexico. Giving them Iran’s berth would solve that problem but it would create another; who would replace Iraq in the playoff against the Suriname-Bolivia winner? Based on the Asian qualifying tournament, the UAE would be the most likely candidate but it, too, would face travel concerns in getting to Mexico.

FIFA could leave those playoffs untouched and give Iran’s spot to Italy, which is ranked 13^th in the world but must win a four-team UEFA playoff later this month to qualify for the World Cup. Basically FIFA can do whatever it wants.

FIFA regulations say that any team that withdraws from the tournament “no later than 30 days before the first match” will be fined and could face other “disciplinary sanctions” including expulsion from subsequent FIFA competitions. This summer’s World Cup kicked off June 11 in Mexico City and Toronto. The U.S. opener is scheduled for June 12 in Inglewood.

Earlier this week six members of Iran’s delegation to the Women’s Asian Cup were granted humanitarian visas and allowed to remain in Australia rather than return to Iran where they feared persecution for not singing the national anthem during the tournament.