Iraq

The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has begun the first steps towards disarmament, closing a chapter on a four-decade armed campaign against the Turkish state in a conflict that has killed more than 40,000 people.

A small ceremony was being held on Friday in Iraq’s northern Kurdish region, where 20 to 30 PKK fighters were destroying their weapons rather than surrendering them to any government or authority. The symbolic process is being conducted under tight security and is expected to unfold throughout the summer.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has welcomed the development, declaring it as “totally ripping off and throwing away the bloody shackles that were put on our country’s legs”. Erdogan also said the move would benefit the entire region.

The move follows an announcement in May by the PKK that it would abandon its armed struggle.

For most of its history, the PKK has been labelled a “terrorist” group by Turkiye, the European Union and the United States.

More than 40,000 people were killed between 1984 and 2024, with thousands of Kurds fleeing the violence in southeastern Turkiye into cities further north.

In a video aired earlier this week but recorded in June by the PKK-linked Firat News Agency, the group’s imprisoned leader Abdullah Ocalan described the moment as “a voluntary transition from the phase of armed conflict to the phase of democratic politics and law”, calling it a “historic gain”.

Ocalan has been held in solitary confinement on Imrali Island in Turkiye since his capture in 1999. Despite his imprisonment, he remains a symbolic figure for the group and broader PKK offshoots across the region.

The disarmament is being closely monitored by members of Turkiye’s Kurdish DEM party, as well as Turkish media. Further phases will take place at designated locations involving coordination between Turkiye, Iraq and the Kurdish regional government in northern Iraq.

The effect of the conflict has been deeply felt not only in Turkiye but across neighbouring countries, particularly Iraq, Syria and Iran, where the PKK and its affiliates have maintained a presence.

‘There’s a long way to go’

Reporting from Sulaimaniyah, Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed described the event as “highly symbolic”, with senior figures from both the federal Iraqi government and the semi-autonomous Kurdish regional government in attendance.

Abdelwahed noted that while this marks a significant moment, the road ahead remains uncertain. “This is just the beginning and it seems there’s a long way to go,” he explained. “The PKK also have demands, including the release of their leader Abdullah Ocalan. They want him to come here to northern Iraq and lead, as they say, the democratic process.”

Abdelwahed added that the development signals a major shift for Iraq, where the PKK was officially designated a banned organisation in April last year, following a high-level security meeting between Iraqi and Turkish officials.

Speaking from Istanbul, Al Jazeera’s Sinem Koseoglu said Ankara views developments in Sulaimaniyah as a major step forward in ending the conflict that has dragged on for decades. “What is happening in Sulaimaniyah is being seen by Ankara as a critical breakthrough in the decade-long conflict that cost tens of thousands of lives, both from the Turkish side and the Kurdish side,” she said.

The move follows months of direct talks between Turkish officials and Ocalan.

Koseoglu highlighted the political significance of this moment within Turkiye. “This is an important step that Turkish President Erdogan approved this process,” she said, noting that even traditionally hardline groups have shifted position.

“The Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which once denounced peace efforts as ‘treason’, now supports the process.”

The pro-Kurdish DEM Party is playing a key facilitation role, and the main opposition CHP – once highly critical of earlier peace attempts – now says it supports efforts to achieve peace, noted Koseoglu.

‘If the PKK leaves, there won’t be any shelling’

In northern Iraq, where the fighting has often spilled over, civilians are cautiously hopeful.

Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed visited communities in the mountainous district of Amedi, near the Turkish border, where villages have been caught in the crossfire.

“Here in northern Iraq, the PKK controls hundreds of villages spread across the semi-autonomous Kurdish region,” said Abdelwahed. “Some have been turned into battlefields, severely limiting access to farmland and making life even more difficult for displaced families who are desperate to return home.”

Shirwan Sirkli, a local farmer, told Al Jazeera that the conflict destroyed his family’s livelihood. “My farm was burned down by shelling as Turkish forces and the PKK brought their conflict to our lands. My brother also lost his $300,000 worth of sheep ranches. Many of our neighbours have left the village – only 35 out of about 100 families remain.”

Turkish military operations in the area have intensified in recent years, with Ankara establishing outposts across the border and frequently attacking PKK positions.

“The presence of PKK fighters in the area has only brought disaster to us,” said Ahmad Saadullah, a local community leader, speaking to Al Jazeera. “If they leave, there won’t be any shelling. We would like to see the peace deal implemented on the ground so we can reclaim our land and live in peace.”

The White House has sent letters to 20 different countries this week announcing new tariffs.

US President Donald Trump has issued a new round of tariff letters to six countries, including Algeria, Brunei, Iraq, Libya, Moldova and the Philippines.

The letters, which were sent on Wednesday, call for tariffs of 30 percent on Algeria and Iraq; 25 percent on Brunei, Libya and Moldova; 20 percent on the Philippines – the largest of the trading partners announced on Wednesday. The tariffs are expected to start on August 1.

Trump posted the letters on Truth Social after the expiration of a 90-day negotiating period that began with a baseline levy of 10 percent. Trump is giving countries more time to negotiate before his August 1 deadline, but he has insisted there will be no extensions for the countries that receive letters.

The Census Bureau reported that last year, the US ran a trade imbalance on goods of $1.4bn with Algeria, $5.9bn with Iraq, $900m  with Libya, $4.9bn with the Philippines, $111m with Brunei and $85m with Moldova.

The imbalance represents the difference between what the US exported to those countries and what it imported. None of the countries listed are major industrial rivals to the United States.

Taken together, the trade imbalances with those six countries are essentially a rounding error in a US economy with a gross domestic product (GDP) of $30 trillion.

Wednesday’s letters are the latest in a slate the Trump Administration sent to nations around the globe. On Monday, he threatened Japan and South Korea with 25 percent tariffs, stepping up pressure on the two historical US allies and a dozen other economies to reach trade deals with Washington.

Over the weekend, the Trump administration began sending letters to countries informing them that the US would begin to reimpose the tariffs it postponed in April. Trump’s erratic approach to tariffs is triggering widespread economic effects on the US and countries around the world.

In the US, the most recent jobs report showed little to no growth in sectors including trade and construction, industries largely impacted by tariffs. The US GDP contracted 0.5 percent in the first quarter of the year, according to data released by the US Department of Commerce’s report last month.

This comes amid a handful of looming trade negotiations across the globe that will impact the US economy and many of its key trade partners.

The Trump administration has only put forth two trade agreements thus far, which are with the United Kingdom and Vietnam.

US markets have stayed stable despite the new tariffs. As of 12:30pm Eastern Time (16:30 GMT), the Nasdaq is up 0.5 percent. The S&P 500 is about even with the market open, only up about 0.2 percent, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up by 0.1 percent.

Soldiers died from gas exposure during a mission to recover a Turkish soldier missing in the cave since 2022.

Twelve Turkish soldiers have died after inhaling methane gas during a mission in northern Iraq, the Turkish Ministry of National Defence says.

“Four other of our heroic comrades in arms, affected by methane gas, have died … bringing the total number of victims to 12,” the ministry said in a post on X on Monday.

According to it, the incident took place on Sunday as troops searched for the remains of a soldier killed by fighters belonging to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in 2022.

PKK has been labelled a terrorist group by Turkiye, the European Union and the United States. It fought for Kurdish autonomy for years, a fight that has been declared over now.

Nineteen soldiers were exposed to the gas inside a site once used by armed fighters as a hospital.

The condition of the remaining seven soldiers was not clear immediately. “I wish a speedy recovery for our heroes affected by methane
gas,” Turkish Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya wrote on X.

The soldiers were conducting a sweep operation inside a cave at an altitude of 852 metres (2,795 feet) in the Metina region, part of Turkiye’s ongoing Operation Claw-Lock targeting the PKK positions in northern Iraq.

Though the gas is not considered toxic, methane can become deadly in confined spaces due to suffocation risks. The ministry has not clarified how the gas accumulated inside the cave.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan expressed his “great sorrow” over the incident and extended condolences to the families of the fallen.

Defence Minister Yasar Guler travelled to the area to oversee inspections and attend ceremonies for the deceased.

News of the deaths emerged as a delegation from the pro-Kurdish DEM party was visiting jailed PKK founder Abdullah Ocalan as part of the ongoing negotiations with the Turkish government.

The decades-long conflict between Ankara and the PKK has killed more than 40,000 people since 1984.

From hiding in Auschwitz to vlogging in war zones, some Gen Z travellers are going to extreme lengths to secure content for social media as part of a growing dark tourism trend

Dark tourism is one of the most popular niches for young travellers. As stories emerge of tourists eating sandwiches on Holocaust tours and fraternising with global terror organisations, it provokes the question: is it ethical?

Defined by darktourism.com as tourism that involves travelling to sites that include death and disaster, it’s been widely expanded to include locations linked with unscrupulous figures and unpleasant events like incarceration. According to a 2022 Travel News survey found, a staggering 91% of Gen Z (13-28 year olds) have engaged in the activity in some form.

And if we’re talking about popular dark tourist sites, few places get darker than Auschwitz. It’s the most impelling legacy of the Holocaust, the twentieth century’s most obliterating tragedy. In the five years that it was active over 1.1 million people lost their lives, of which one million were Jewish. It’s also become an increasingly popular tourist destination.

Over 1.8 million people visited the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum in 2024, a 10 per cent rise compared to 2023. And while these numbers are lower than the pre-Pandemic high of 2 million, the museum puts this down to the current conflicts in Russia-Ukraine and the Middle East.

READ MORE: What’s the worst thing you’ve ever done on holiday? Once I broke into someone else’s home

Beverley Boden is a PhD researcher in the field of dark tourism and associate dean at Teesside University International Business School, who happens to spend a lot of her time at Auschwitz. Part of what fascinates her is what motivates people to visit these destinations, as well as the toll it takes on the tour guides.

Recently she’s also noticed a definite increase in interest in dark tourism from a crowd with two specific characteristics. Firstly, they tend to be predominantly young: 16 – 24. Secondly, there’s a lot of people who haven’t fully done their research.

Beverley explains: “When you’re at a place like Auschwitz, you see how disrespectful some tourists can be. They take calls when the guides ask them not to, eat food when the guides ask them not to. They take inappropriate pictures. They go into places that they shouldn’t.”

In one instance she recalls observing two young tourists hide behind the camp’s ovens, in gas chamber number one, and a tour guide had to plead with them to stop.

For more stories like this visit The Gulp or subscribe to our weekly newsletter for a curated roundup of top stories, interviews, and lifestyle picks from The Mirror’s Audience U35 team delivered straight to your inbox.

Another time, a man pulled out a sandwich and began eating it outside of block number 10, while the guide recounted the intentional genital mutilation of women to end the Jewish race.

It’s not just Auschwitz either. Beverley says she’s also noticed an interest in Chernobyl, another quintessential dark tourist destination. While the Russia-Ukraine war has made visitor numbers hard to discern, the location of one of the world’s most terrifying nuclear tragedies has long drawn a mass appeal.

As for why she believes that these destinations have taken off with a wider audience, including those who haven’t done as much research, Beverley points to several theories. One is the wild popularity of recent shows, like Netflix’s Dark Tourist, which aired in 2018 and which sees the host travel to a plethora of unlikely destinations, from haunted forests to Jeffrey Dahmer’s hometown.

From her own experience, she admits there is also a level of “morbid curiosity” in seeing places associated with destruction and death. For the upcoming generation, too, who haven’t known a world without Internet, there is a desire to “push the boundaries”.

However, another, potentially more worrying facet of dark tourism, Beverley explains, includes visiting active or recent conflict zones.

Pursuit of the perfect selfie

Travel vloggers like Miles Routledge, Mike Okay and @josievlogsthings have gone viral – and caused controversy – over recent years for their visits to locations like Mauritania, Iraq and Afghanistan. These countries all have UK FCDO travel advisories and some are currently caught in active wars or are being run by governments with questionable human rights records.

Whether borne out of a genuine interest, or something ulterior, the audience’s intrigue is undeniable: many of these videos gain millions of views. After all, is your travel content really that engaging if you haven’t taken a selfie with the Taliban? As travel YouTuber Miles Routledge claimed to have done, after being held in custody by the Taliban in 2023.

While there’s no explicit link, the rise of these social media vlogs has correlated with an increase in real-world visitor stats. In 2023, over 5,200 tourists visited Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the Iraqi government documented a record 500-plus US and European tourists visiting the country in 2024.

One such visitor was Xiaochen Su, a Chinese-American digital nomad currently based in Malta. He was backpacking through the Middle East when he spotted a connecting flight to Baghdad and thought, “why not one more country?” When he landed he didn’t know what to expect.

“I heard about Baghdad so much on the news back when the war was still happening. I just wanted to see what the current situation was like,” he says.

Iraq is on the FCDO Do Not Travel list, which advises against all travel to many parts of the country due to a high threat of terrorism. It has suffered through decades of conflict that has resulted in over 200,000 casualties between 2003-2022, according to the online database Iraq Body Count. Xiaochen remembers being taken aback by the dilapidated buildings, including main shopping streets left shuttered and in ruins.

But what also struck him was how warmly he was treated. “People would come up to me and say ‘hey’. We had difficulty communicating, but people were nice,” he says. Ultimately, cities like Baghdad, stages for recent and devastating wars, are places where hundreds of thousands of people still live and work.

This is true for many of these dark tourist adventures. Often these places that hold salacious intrigue for dark tourists are homes, memorials, or even ancestral graves for others. Visiting such locations can be educational, if done respectfully.

“A lot of people think that even traveling as a dark tourist is unethical,” Beverley says. “But I think one of the great things about dark tourism is that it does shine a light on historical events. It can educate the younger generation because lessons can be learned.”

Help us improve our content by completing the survey below. We’d love to hear from you!

After a short and successful war with Iraq, President George H.W. Bush claimed in 1991 that “the ghosts of Vietnam have been laid to rest beneath the sands of the Arabian desert.” Bush was referring to what was commonly called the “Vietnam syndrome.” The idea was that the Vietnam War had so scarred the American psyche that we forever lost confidence in American power.

The elder President Bush was partially right. The first Iraq war was certainly popular. And his successor, President Clinton, used American power — in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere — with the general approval of the media and the public.

But when the younger Bush, Clinton’s successor, launched wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Vietnam syndrome came back with a vengeance. Barely three weeks after the U.S. attacked Afghanistan on Oct. 7, 2002, famed New York Times correspondent R.W. Apple penned a piece headlined “A Military Quagmire Remembered: Afghanistan as Vietnam.”

“Like an unwelcome specter from an unhappy past,” Apple wrote, “the ominous word ‘quagmire’ has begun to haunt conversations among government officials and students of foreign policy, both here and abroad.”

“Could Afghanistan become another Vietnam?” he rhetorically asked. “Echoes of Vietnam are unavoidable,” he asserted.

Over the next 12 months, the newspaper ran nearly 300 articles with the words “Vietnam” and “Afghanistan” in them. The New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times ran articles mentioning Iraq and Vietnam at an average rate of more than twice a day (I looked it up 20 years ago).

The tragic irony is that President George W. Bush did what his father couldn’t: He exorcised the specter of “another Vietnam” — but he also replaced it with the specter of “another Iraq.”

That’s what’s echoing in the reaction to President Trump’s decision to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. We’re all familiar with cliches about generals fighting the last war, but journalists and politicians have the same habit of cramming the square peg of current events into the round hole of previous conflicts.

Trump’s decision to bomb Iran — which I broadly support, with caveats — is fair game for criticism and concern. But the Iraq syndrome cosplay misleads more than instructs. For starters, no one is proposing “boots on the ground,” never mind “occupation” or “nation-building.”

The debate over whether George W. Bush lied us into war over the issue of weapons of mass destruction is more tendentious than the conventional wisdom on the left and right would have you believe. But it’s also irrelevant. No serious observer disputes that Iran has been pursuing a nuclear weapon for decades. The only live question is, or was: How close is Iran to having one?

Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, told Congress in March — preposterously in my opinion — that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.” On Sunday, “Meet the Press” host Kristen Welker asked Vice President JD Vance, “So, why launch this strike now? Has the intelligence changed, Mr. Vice President?”

It’s a good question. But it’s not a sound basis for insinuating that another Republican president is again using faulty intelligence to get us into a war — just like Iraq.

The squabbling over whether this was a “preemptive” rather than “preventative” attack misses the point. America would be justified in attacking Iran even if Gabbard was right. Why? Because Iran has been committing acts of war against America, and Israel, for decades, mostly through terrorist proxies it created, trained, funded and directed for that purpose. In 1983, Hezbollah militants blew up the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon, killing 63. Later that year, it blew up the U.S. Marine barracks, also in Beirut, killing 241 Americans. In the decades since, Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies have orchestrated or attempted the murder of Americans repeatedly, including during the Iraq war. It even authorized the assassination of President Trump, according to Joe Biden’s Justice Department.

These are acts of war that would justify a response even if Iran had no interest in a nuclear weapon. But the fanatical regime — whose supporters routinely chant “Death to America!” — is pursuing a nuclear weapon.

For years, the argument for not taking out that program has rested largely on the fact that it would be too difficult. The facilities are too hardened, Iran’s proxies are too powerful.

That is the intelligence that has changed. Israel crushed Hezbollah and Hamas militants and eliminated much of Iran’s air defense system. What once seemed like a daunting assault on a Death Star turned into a layup by comparison.

None of this means that things cannot get worse or that Trump’s decision won’t end up being regrettable. But whatever that scenario looks like, it won’t look much like what happened in Iraq, except for those unwilling to see it any other way.

@JonahDispatch

WASHINGTON — Fallout from President Trump’s historic gamble to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities reverberated across the Middle East Sunday, as Washington braced for an unpredictable response from a cornered but determined Islamic Republic.

While the Iranian government downplayed the impact of the U.S. attack, noting the depths of its nuclear know-how built over decades of study, U.S. military officials said its precision strikes against Iran’s three main nuclear facilities caused “extremely severe damage and destruction.”

A senior Israeli official told The Times that Jerusalem was so satisfied with the operation that it was prepared to suspend hostilities if Iran ends its missile salvos against Israeli territory.

“We are ready to be done,” the Israeli official said, granted anonymity to speak candidly.

As the dust settled, the sun rose and satellite imagery emerged of the wreckage, the main question among Trump administration officials became how Tehran would respond — both militarily, against U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf and around the world, as well as with the remnants of its nuclear program, with so much of it destroyed.

Tehran’s nuclear-armed allies, in Russia and North Korea, have been critical of the military campaign, with former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev raising the prospect of Moscow giving Iran a nuclear warhead in response to the attacks.

The Israeli official dismissed that idea, alluding to direct talks with Moscow over the Iranian program. “We are not concerned,” the official said.

President Trump addresses the nation Saturday night about the U.S. military strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites. He is accomapnied by Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

(Carlos Barria / Pool via Associated Press)

Trump’s military action, dubbed “Operation Midnight Hammer,” was a contingency years in the making, prepared and much feared by Trump’s predecessors over two decades as a desperate last resort to a nuclear Iran.

Ever since Tehran resumed its fissile enrichment program in 2005, Republican and Democratic presidents alike have warned that the Islamic Republic could never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. But a constellation of diplomatic talks and complex agreements have failed to dissuade Tehran from a fundamental principle of a “right to enrich” uranium — near to weapons grade — on its own soil.

Despite the dramatic nature of the U.S. air raid, few in Washington expressed an appetite for a prolonged U.S. war with Iran and echoed Israel’s interest in a truce after assessing its initial operations a success. Vice President JD Vance denied that the United States was “at war” with Iran on Sunday, telling CBS that the nation is, instead, “at war with Iran’s nuclear program.”

But the prospect of another full-scale U.S. war in the Middle East, made palpable by the weekend strikes, shook Capitol Hill on Sunday, compelling Democrats who have long advocated a tough approach to Iran to push for a vote to restrict Trump under the War Powers Act.

More than 60 members of Congress, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, both of New York, called on the Trump administration to seek congressional authorization for any further action. At least one Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, joined in the call.

The Pentagon said that seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers deployed a total of 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrators — 30,000-pound bombs known as “bunker busters,” for their ability to destroy facilities buried deep underground — against Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.

The U.S. operation followed an Israeli campaign that began last week with strikes against Iranian air defenses and nuclear facilities, scientists and research facilities, as well as against military generals, ballistic missile launch pads and storage depots.

While the United States and Israel believe that Saturday’s strikes were a strategic victory, some concern remains that Iran may have removed critical equipment and materiel from its site in Fordow — an enrichment facility that had been burrowed into the side of a mountain — to an undisclosed location before the U.S. operation began, the Israeli official said.

“That remains a question mark,” the official added, while expressing confidence that Israeli intelligence would be aware of any other significant nuclear facilities.

Addressing the nation on the attacks on Saturday night, Trump warned Iran that U.S. attacks could continue if it refuses to give up on its nuclear program.

“There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days,” Trump said, flanked by his vice president, national security advisor and secretary of defense. “Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight’s was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes.”

Satellite image shows the Natanz enrichment facility in Iran after U.S. strikes.

(Maxar Technologies via Associated Press)

Across the region Sunday, the question paramount on observers’ minds was what shape Iran’s response would take.

Iranian officials downplayed the strikes’ impact, acknowledging damage to nuclear facilities but that the know-how remained intact.

“They [the United States and Israel] should know this industry has roots in our country, and the roots of this national industry cannot be destroyed,” said Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, according to a Sunday interview with the semi-official Tasnim News Agency.

“Of course, we have suffered some losses, but this is not the first time that the industry has suffered damage. … Naturally, this industry must continue and its growth will not stop.”

Hassan Abedini, the deputy political director of Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB, said the three targeted nuclear sites had already been emptied some time before the attacks and that they “didn’t suffer a major blow because the materials had already been taken out.”

Other officials, including leaders in the targeted areas in Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow, reassured residents there was no nuclear contamination as a result of the strikes and that they could “go on with their lives,” according to a statement Sunday from government spokesperson Fatemah Mohajerani.

The U.S. attacks drew swift pleas for restraint from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, both of which issued statements calling on all parties to de-escalate. Iraq, meanwhile, said the U.S. escalation “constitutes a grave threat to peace and security in the Middle East,” according to an interview with its government spokesman on Qatari broadcaster Al-Jazeera.

Oman, a key mediator in the negotiations between Tehran and Washington, was more scathing, expressing what it said was its “denunciation and condemnation” of the U.S.’s attacks.

In Europe, as well, governments urged caution and affirmed support for Israel.

“We have consistently been clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon and can no longer pose a threat to regional security,” France, Germany, and Italy, known as the E3, said in a statement. “Our aim continues to be to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.”

The last significant face-off between Iran and the United States happened during Trump’s first term, when he ordered the assassination of top Iranian commander Gen. Qassem Suleimani in 2020.

Satellite image shows a close view of the Isfahan nuclear technology facility in Iran after U.S. strikes.

(Maxar Technologies via Associated Press)

That attack spurred predictions of a furious retaliation, with fears of Tehran deploying its missile arsenal or activating its network of regional militias to attack U.S. forces and interests across Washington’s footprint in the region. Instead, Tehran reacted with little more than an openly telegraphed ballistic missile barrage on a U.S. base in Iraq.

Iran’s options are even more limited this time. Much of that network — known as the “Axis of Resistance” and which included militias and pro-Tehran governments in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Gaza, Afghanistan and Yemen — lies incapacitated after more than 20 months of Israeli attacks.

Allies such as Russia and China, though issuing condemnations of the U.S. attack, appear to have little appetite for involvement beyond statements and offers of mediation. And how much remains of Tehran’s missile capacity is unclear, with the Israeli official estimating roughly 1,000 ballistic missiles – half of their capacity before the most recent conflict started – remaining available to them.

Nevertheless, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned that the United States should expect “regrettable responses.”

“Instead of learning from repeated failures, Washington effectively placed itself on the front lines of aggression by directly attacking peaceful installations,” said a statement from the Guard Corps on Sunday. It hinted that its targets would include U.S. military presence in the region.

“The number, dispersion, and size of U.S. military bases in the region are not a strength, but have doubled their vulnerability,” the statement said.

The United States has more than 40,000 stationed in the region, according to Pentagon figures, and has bases in at least 10 countries in the region, not to mention a significant presence at sea.

Yet experts say the likeliest scenario would involve disruptions to shipping lanes, with Iran leveraging its control of the Strait of Hormuz, an oil transit chokepoint handling a fifth of the world’s energy flows, that is 30 miles wide at its narrowest point; or calling on Yemen’s Houthis to intensify their harassment campaign of merchant vessels on the Red Sea.

It a situation in which Iran has experience: During its conflict with Iraq in the eighties, Tehran engaged in the the so-called “Tanker War,” attacked hundreds of Iraqi ships near Hormuz and entering into direct confrontations with the U.S. Navy.

Shippers are already girding themselves for disruptions. But Danish shipping giant Maersk said it was continuing to use the Strait of Hormuz for the time being.

“We will continuously monitor the security risk to our specific vessels in the region and are ready to take operational actions as needed,” Maersk said in a statement.

Wilner reported from Washington, Bulos from Beirut.

Tel Aviv’s decision to launch a new war against Iran on June 13 is a disaster in the making. No one will benefit, including the Israeli government, and many will suffer. The exchange of fire has already resulted in at least 80 people killed in Iran and 10 in Israel.

It is tragically clear that the lessons of past failed military adventurism in the region have been entirely ignored.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has branded the war as “pre-emptive”, aimed at preventing Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapon. In doing so, he has repeated the strategic blunder of the last two politicians to launch an alleged “pre-emptive” attack in the region, US President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

As Israeli jets and missiles streaked across the Middle East’s skies and carried out their deadly strikes against Iranian military sites and military leaders, they immediately made the world a far more dangerous place. Just like the US-British invasion of Iraq, this unprovoked attack is set to bring more instability to an already volatile region.

Netanyahu claimed that the attacks were meant to devastate Iran’s nuclear capabilities. So far, the Israeli army has hit three nuclear facilities, Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow, causing various levels of damage. However, it is unlikely that these strikes will actually put a stop to the Iranian nuclear programme, and the Israeli prime minister knows it.

The Iranian authorities have intentionally built the Natanz site deep underground so that it is impervious to all but the strongest bunker-busting bombs. Tel Aviv lacks the capability to permanently destroy it because it does not have the Massive Ordnance Penetrator or the Massive Ordnance Air Blast bombs that are produced by the United States.

Washington has long refused to provide these, even under the administration of US President Donald Trump, which has coddled Israeli officials and sought to shield them from sanctions over their war crimes in the Gaza Strip. Trump’s team has recently indicated again that it would not supply these arms to Tel Aviv.

From US official reactions after the attack, it is not entirely clear to what extent Washington was informed. The US State Department initially distanced the US from the initial attacks, labelling them a “unilateral” Israeli operation. Shortly after, Trump claimed that he was fully informed.

The extent of US involvement – and approval – for the attack remains a major question, but it immediately ended any hopes that its intense diplomacy with Tehran over its nuclear programme in recent weeks would result in a new deal, which is a short-term win for Netanyahu.

But further action against Iran appears dependent on bringing the US into the conflict. That is a huge gamble for Tel Aviv given the number of critics of US interventionism among the top ranks of Trump’s advisers. The US president himself has attempted to make reversing US interventionism a key part of his legacy.

Israel’s actions are already harming Trump’s other interests by pushing global oil prices up and complicating his relations with the Gulf states that have much to lose if the conflict disrupts shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

If Israel looks like it is winning, Trump will undoubtedly claim it as his own victory. But if Netanyahu’s strategy increasingly depends on trying to drag Washington into another Middle Eastern war, he may well lash out against him.

As things stand now, unless Israel decides to breach international norms and use a nuclear weapon, making any further strategic achievements in Iran would indeed depend on the US.

Netanyahu’s second declared goal – overthrowing the Iranian regime – also seems out of reach.

A number of senior military commanders have been killed in targeted attacks, while Tel Aviv has openly called on the Iranian people to rise up against their government. But Israel’s unilateral aggression is likely to bring far more anger towards Tel Aviv among Iranians than it will against their own government, regardless of how undemocratic it may be.

In fact, Iranian regime assertions that a nuclear bomb is a needed deterrent against Israeli aggression now will appear more logical to those who doubted it domestically. And in other regional countries where Tehran’s interests had been retreating, Netanyahu’s actions risk breathing new life into these alliances.

But even if Israel succeeds in destabilising Tehran, it will not bring about regional peace. This is the lesson that should have been learned from the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. The collapse of the Iraqi state in the aftermath led to a major rise in extremism and ultimately to the establishment of ISIL (ISIS) that terrorised so much of the region in the 2010s.

Israel has no chance of instituting a smooth transfer of power to a more pliant regime in Tehran. Occupying Iran to try to do so is out of the question given that the two countries do not share a border. US support for such an effort is also hard to imagine under the Trump administration because doing so would be sure to increase the risk of attacks against the US.

In other words, Netanyahu’s attacks may bring short-term tactical gains for Israel in delaying Iran’s nuclear ambitions and thwarting talks with the US, but they promise a long-term strategic disaster.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Israel pounds Iran – and Iran strikes back, hitting Tel Aviv.

Since Israel’s war on Gaza began in October 2023, Israel has damaged Iran, not just at home, but also outside its territory – by striking its allies.

Hezbollah‘s leader Hassan Nasrallah was assassinated in Beirut, the Houthis in Yemen have taken hits, as well as militias in Iraq.

Israel struck Iranian interests in Syria and Tehran’s ally, former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, was deposed.

Hamas’ leadership has also been decimated, including in assassinations carried out in Tehran.

So is Iran now fighting from a weakened position?

Presenter: Cyril Vanier

Guests:

Ronnie Chatah, Political commentator, writer and host of The Beirut Banyan podcast.

Setareh Sadeqi – Professor at the University of Tehran’s Faculty of World Studies.

David DesRoches, Professor of National Defense University and former Pentagon director of Arabian Peninsula Affairs.

The Assyrians, an indigenous people with over 6,775 years of history and one of the world’s earliest Christian communities, are vanishing from their ancestral homeland. Not in theory. Not in the distant future. Today. Right now as you’re reading this. Assyria is already colonized, fragmented across Iraq, Syria, southeast Turkey, and northwest Iran—their indigenous homeland. And today, the final threads of Assyrian presence in these lands are being pulled apart through calculated policies of exclusion, erasure, and domination.

You’ve never heard of us, but you’ve heard of us. We’re the Iraqi Christians, the Syrian Christians, the Chaldeans, the Syriacs, and the Arameans. We are called everything but our name—Assyrian. A tactic of the dhimmi system, reinforced by the very basic human need to separate ourselves from a group targeted for genocide in order to survive. A Roman methodology of divide and conquer. Even our history is neglected, rewritten, and stolen. And this erasure is echoed by international actors who speak of us.

But our erasure isn’t just on paper. Across Iraq and Syria, Assyrians are being erased through systemic and systematic disenfranchisement, cultural destruction, forced displacement, and demographic engineering. The communities that survived genocide, invasions, and centuries of religious persecution now face a coordinated effort to extinguish their presence altogether. ISIS destroyed countless Assyrian artifacts, but the destruction did not end with them. Our heritage sites continue to be vandalized and destroyed, even used for military exercises by the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG).

In Iraq, Assyrians are treated as foreigners. Political power is monopolized by Kurdish parties in the north and Iranian-backed militias in the center, both of whom install proxies in parliamentary seats legally reserved for Assyrians. Elections are manipulated, and authentic Assyrian voices are suffocated, replaced by those loyal to external agendas.

Before 2003, there were over 1.5 million Assyrians in Iraq. Today, fewer than 300,000 remain. In KRG-controlled areas, losses have exceeded those under ISIS. That is not simply just a statistic; it is a verdict.

Two weeks before ISIS began its invasion of Iraq, the KRG disarmed Assyrian and Yazidi communities, despite being fully aware of the impending threat. The Peshmerga promised protection, only to abandon us without firing a single bullet in our defense from seven posts—the Nineveh Plains, Nineveh Dam, Makhmur, Zumar, Daqooq, Sinjar, and the left side of the Tigris in Mosul. When ISIS stormed through our towns, the Kurdish forces left entire communities to be slaughtered. Long before the Iraqi Army even fled, the Peshmerga had vanished. The Peshmerga, or “those who face death,” only returned once Western forces intervened to confront ISIS, attempting to appear involved and take credit for resistance they never provided. 

Our lands are stolen in broad daylight. Over 94 documented cases of land confiscation remain unresolved despite court rulings favoring Assyrians. Even when judgments are issued, Kurdish authorities do not enforce them. In some cases, false land deeds are fabricated to justify these seizures.

Assyrians who try to defend their lands are beaten, jailed, and paraded on state television, forced to publicly thank the very authorities who arrested them. These spectacles are not reconciliation. They are propaganda staged to legitimize injustice. Land grabs are not rogue incidents; they are part of a system built to erase Assyrian existence. Even the Erbil Airport and the United Nations compound stand on land that was seized from Assyrians without consent or restitution.

In 2023, the KRG officially registered Hawpa, a Kurdish neo-Nazi group whose charter explicitly calls for the extermination of Assyrians. With well over 1,000 members, and potentially more operating in secret, and meetings held with high-level Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) officials, including the Governor of Erbil, Hawpa is not a fringe movement. It is institutionally sanctioned and emboldened.

Education is used as a tool of indoctrination. Assyrian schools are forced to use curricula that glorify Kurdish nationalism and whitewash the histories of mass murderers like Simko Shikak, who orchestrated the 1918 assassination of our patriarch Mar Shimun XIX Benyamin, and Bedr Khan Beg, who brutally massacred thousands of Assyrians. Students are forced to revere those who butchered their ancestors in order to pass.

Despite repeated public claims of religious freedom, religious violations are rampant. In Sulaymaniyah, Christian-owned alcohol shops are bulldozed and replaced with mosques. The KRI now has nearly 6,000 mosques, mostly built after 1992. At the same time, the KRG constructs ornate churches to gain Western favor, using them as facades of religious freedom and tolerance, while the actual Assyrian congregation faces pressure, restrictions, and forced displacement. 

Beyond this, the treatment of Assyrians reveals a brutal reality. Prostitution is aggressively pushed into Ankawa, an Assyrian neighborhood, against our will and in violation of our Christian faith and values. The KDP encourages this, then uses it to frame Christians as morally corrupt, despite the fact that we have never had authority to prevent it.

I was sexually harassed on my multiple trips to Iraq simply for being a woman. One afternoon in Ankawa, a man in a black SUV followed me through the streets with him and his three passengers yelling at me in Kurdish, making obscene sounds and gestures. In the Erbil Citadel, men use crowds to grope Assyrian women. These violations are not isolated incidents. They reflect an environment fostered by those in power, where crimes against indigenous Assyrians are committed with impunity, and where women endure an even greater degree of danger and violation.

The system in power does not protect women. It exploits and erases us. But the assault on Assyrian women extends beyond harassment and prostitution. It is encoded into law.

One of the most devastating effects of this system of erasure is codified in Iraq’s Islamization of Minors law that extends into the KRI and automatically registers children born to a single Muslim parent as Muslim, even in cases of rape and even if the other parent is Christian. During ISIS’s occupation, countless Assyrian girls, some as young as 12, were abducted, raped, and forcibly impregnated by ISIS fighters. These pregnancies were the direct result of sexual violence on sex-trafficked minors. The resulting children are then registered as Muslim solely based on the father’s religion. In the case of ISIS crimes, this means the legal system gives greater weight to the claimed identity of a terrorist rapist than to the survivor of their violence.

This strips agency from survivors and embeds the trauma into the legal system. This law establishes a dangerous precedent that legitimizes the use of rape as a tool of demographic warfare, where sexual violence not only causes lifelong psychological and physical harm but also results in the forced erasure of the Assyrian identity and the severing of ancestral lines. It is a legal continuation of genocide, rewarding rapists with demographic control and denying survivors the right to raise their children in their faith, community, and identity.

This is the type of violence carried out by a regime that parades itself as progressive by appointing females in leadership roles to impress the West while quietly perpetuating a culture that abuses and erases indigenous women. These systems do not protect us; they exploit and erase us.

One of the most telling incidents of unmasked hatred occurred during Akitu, Kha B’Nissan, the Assyrian New Year. This year, a Kurdish man purportedly affiliated with ISIS attacked Assyrians with an axe during the New Year parade while screaming ISIS slogans. An investigation was promised, a scripted apology video from the perpetrator was released, and nothing came of it, except a statement referring to us as “Kurdistanis,” a term that doesn’t define us. It was buried beneath state media broadcasts and a government-orchestrated prayer breakfast to gain Western support for their campaign for statehood.

The Erbil prayer breakfast was a public relations performance. Inside, Western delegates mingled with Kurdish officials and tokenized Christian figures, while outside, Assyrians are suffocated by checkpoints, land seizure, and the flourishing of extremist ideologies.

Too many international actors fund and praise the regimes responsible for Assyrian displacement. They downplay schoolbook glorifications of murderers. They ignore axe attacks. They remain silent as Assyrian lands are illegally seized, yet publicly embrace the very actors engineering our disappearance, praising them as champions of democracy and guardians of Christianity.

In Syria, the Assyrian crisis is even more frightening. We are caught between an extremist Islamist group and the Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES). Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) leader Ahmed al-Sharaa has a long and bloody history in extremist militancy and terror networks, including involvement in the killing of Americans. Meanwhile, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) commander Mazloum Abdi of the Kurdish-led AANES is a former senior member of the U.S.-designated terrorist group PKK, known for recruiting and abducting children into terrorism. Under AANES control, Assyrian schools have been shut down for refusing to adopt a Kurdish nationalist curriculum. When church-run schools resisted, directors were beaten, and journalists detained.

In Beth Zalin (Qamishli), once majority-Assyrian, we are now a minority. With ISIS, the pattern here has been tragically similar to that of Iraq. As the Khabour River swelled and ISIS approached northeastern Syria, Kurdish forces retreated instead of defending them. While Assyrian towns braced for slaughter, Kurdish fighters were busy seizing properties in Qamishli. Multiple members of my family were told directly by high-ranking Kurdish officials that they “will not sacrifice themselves fighting for filthy Christians.” These betrayals were not isolated acts. They were decisions made in the service of ethnic nationalism, not solidarity, pluralism, or shared resistance to extremism.

Over 1,400 homes in the Khabour region remain illegally occupied by AANES-aligned actors. Churches have been militarized with the SDF building trenches over our churches and cemeteries, provoking relentless retaliation from brutal Turkish attacks. 

We do not want war where we worship. We do not want our churches to be turned into battlefields to manufacture the illusion that one regime protects us while another regime attacks us, so our suffering can be manipulated to gain Western support at the expense of our existence. We saw the devastating effects of this with the Mar Sawa Church in Tal Tawil, Khabour, in 2022.

Leaders like David Jendo were kidnapped and assassinated by YPG militants. Others, like Elias Nasser, survived assassination attempts and were violently attacked for speaking out.

Yet, the AANES claims to represent and protect Christians. But genuine Assyrian voices are strangled. Our political parties are delegitimized. International engagement is blocked, and when it does occur, it is centered on figures like al-Sharaa rather than confronting the lived realities Assyrians face under both regimes.

When ISIS came, many Kurdish neighbors joined them. A family member of mine was beaten and sold eight times by different Kurdish ISIS factions. Out of fear, we are often unable to even name our abusers, many of whom now live freely beside us without consequence. The fear of retaliation keeps us silent, while justice remains completely absent. Disturbingly, Associated Press video footage released in 2024 shows the Kurdish-led administration even releasing captured ISIS fighters. Many were freed after their families signed a paper claiming they were reformed. There is no process, no proof, no rehabilitation—just a signature trying to erase atrocity.

Kurdish officials, backed by powerful international backers like America and Israel, are lobbying for a fully recognized “Kurdistan.” A name that quite literally means “land of the Kurds.” Not land at all. Not the land of the indigenous Assyrians. Perhaps these backers are unaware of the realities on the ground, but our situation is growing increasingly dire. The facts are available if one is willing to look beyond the curated narratives and sit with genuine Assyrian leaders. If this is how we are treated now, what happens when that regime becomes a state with no international accountability?

Assyrians are not dying out; we are being pushed out from our homelands. Our children are oppressed. Our leaders are assassinated or suffer sudden and unexplained medical issues that lead to their untimely deaths, raising serious concerns in a system where perpetrators control the means of documentation and medical care. 

Genocide is not just mass killings. It is the destruction of language, the legitimizing of neo-Nazi groups and other extremist ideologies, the erasure of heritage, forced displacement, systemic assimilation, psychological terror, coerced identity erasure, denial of political representation, restriction of religious practice, medical neglect, and the silencing of advocacy. It includes the rape, sexual violence, and trafficking of our young women and girls and the forced Islamization of the children born from that violence. It is preventing the return of displaced people, stripping a population of economic opportunity, flooding their communities with drugs and prostitution to destroy social fabric, manipulating ethnic data on college applications, and enacting policies that deprive them of education free from historical revisionism. Every one of these tools is being weaponized against Assyrians today.

Those who speak out are at risk. Advocates and organizations are harassed, surveilled, and threatened. We are falsely labeled “anti-Kurd” for defending our rights. But we do not hate Kurds. We want to live in peace with our neighbors. Kurds also suffer under this regime, as KRG authorities have repeatedly infringed on the rights to free expression and press freedom through harassment, violent attacks, and arbitrary arrests of journalists.

We want peace and coexistence, but we cannot survive under a system built to erase us. When Assyrians show evidence of violence, we are harassed by Kurdish nationalist accounts, some of which are followed by well-known religious freedom advocates. Interestingly enough, these same advocates block us for speaking the truth.

The world is watching the dismantling of one of earth’s oldest civilizations. A nation that gave the world writing, law, and cities is being written out of its own story.

The Kurdish nationalist project, backed by powerful global actors, is not a project of inclusion; it’s a machine of conquest at all costs. Despite what it claims, it does not tolerate plurality. It was never meant to include us. It has erased us from policy, from education, from security, and from governance. We are the indigenous people of these lands, yet we are erased from the structures that claim authority over them. A state built on our bones cannot coexist with us still breathing.

If the world fails to support a free Assyria through the implementation of Article 125 for a Nineveh Governorate and support self-administration in Hasakeh, Syria, it will mark the final chapter of our existence in our ancestral homeland. Our extinction will not be by natural decline, but by coordinated neglect and the silence of humanity.

Amplify genuine Assyrian voices and support Assyrian organizations. Donate to the Assyrian Aid Society (Iraq) and Ashour Foundation for Relief and Development (Syria).

The United States is preparing a partial evacuation of its embassy in Iraq and has authorised “the voluntary departure” of dependants of US personnel from locations across the Middle East, including Bahrain, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, as regional security concerns rise.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement on Wednesday that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had authorised the departure of military dependants in the region and that CENTCOM was “monitoring the developing tension”.

Orders for all nonessential personnel to depart the US Embassy in Baghdad – which was already on limited staffing – was based on a commitment “to keeping Americans safe, both at home and abroad”, the Department of State said.

Speaking on Wednesday evening, US President Donald Trump said the order to move staff out had been given because the region “could be a dangerous place”.

“We’ll see what happens. We’ve given notice to move out, and we’ll see what happens,” Trump said.

Trump then added in reference to Iran: “They can’t have a nuclear weapon, very simple. We’re not going to allow that.”

Uncertainty has been growing in recent days as talks between the US and Iran over its nuclear programme appear to have hit an impasse.

US news broadcaster CBS reported late on Wednesday that US officials have been informed that Israel is “fully ready” to launch an attack on Iran and that Washington “anticipates” that Tehran could retaliate by targeting “certain American sites in neighbouring Iraq”.

Al Jazeera’s Alan Fisher, reporting from Washington, DC, said there have been clear signs in recent days of high-level discussions between senior military officials and the Trump administration amid concern around the ongoing talks with Iran over its nuclear programme.

“Donald Trump has in the last couple of days … expressed his concern that a deal might not be able to be done,” Fisher said.

“Therefore, we are seeing, effectively, the partial evacuation of the embassy in Baghdad with non-military personnel and non-essential staff being moved out. And the voluntary evacuation of other embassies in the region,” he said.

“They’ve done this sort of thing before,” Fisher said, noting the Baghdad embassy was partially evacuated previously over “concerns that the embassy could become a target for Iranian-aligned militias in Iraq”.

“Clearly, there is some concern that the discussions with the Iranians aren’t going well. Or, it could be that this is all designed to put pressure on Iranians. Because, you will remember, that Donald Trump said that if they couldn’t get some sort of deal, then … there could be some sort of military action against the Iranians.”

As reports of US embassy staff and dependants departing the Middle East region emerged, Iran’s mission to the United Nations posted on social media that “Iran is not seeking a nuclear weapon, and US militarism only fuels instability”.

“Threats of ‘overwhelming force’ won’t change the facts,” the Iranian mission said.

“Diplomacy – not militarism – is the only path forward,” it added.

Threats of “overwhelming force” won’t change facts:
Iran is not seeking a nuclear weapon, and U.S. militarism only fuels instability.

CENTCOM’s legacy of fueling regional instability, through arming aggressors and enabling Israeli crimes, strips it of any credibility to speak on…

— I.R.IRAN Mission to UN, NY (@Iran_UN) June 11, 2025

Separately, Iranian Defence Minister General Aziz Nasirzadeh told reporters earlier that he hoped talks with the US would be successful, though Tehran stood ready to respond to any aggression.

“If conflict is imposed on us, the opponent’s casualties will certainly be more than ours, and in that case, America must leave the region, because all its bases are within our reach,” he said.

“We have access to them, and we will target all of them in the host countries without hesitation.”

The next round of talks – the sixth – between the US and Iran on limits to Tehran’s nuclear programme in exchange for lifting sanctions on the country have been tentatively scheduled for this weekend in Oman, according to reports, and Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, is still scheduled to attend.

Iraqi authorities have opened an investigation into a mass die-off of fish in the country’s central and southern marshlands, the latest in a series of such incidents in recent years.

One possible cause for the devastation is a shortage of oxygen, triggered by low water flow, increased evaporation and rising temperatures driven by climate change, according to officials and environmental activists. Another is the use of chemicals by fishermen.

“We have received several citizens’ complaints,” said Jamal Abd Zeid, chief environmental officer for the Najaf governorate, which stretches from central to southern Iraq, adding that a technical inspection team had been set up.

He explained that the team would look into water shortages, electrical fishing, and the use by fishermen of “poisons”.

For at least five years, Iraq has endured successive droughts linked to climate change. Authorities further attribute the severe decline in river flow to the construction of dams by neighbouring Iran and Turkiye.

The destruction of Iraq’s natural environment adds another layer of suffering to a country that has already faced decades of war and political oppression.

“We need lab tests to determine the exact cause” of the fish die-off, said environmental activist Jassim al-Assadi, who suggested that agricultural pesticides could also be responsible.

Investigations into similar incidents have shown that the use of poison in fishing can lead to mass deaths.

“It is dangerous for public health, as well as for the food chain,” al-Assadi said. “Using poison today, then again in a month or two … It’s going to accumulate.”

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Dick Cheney on Monday fired Air Force Chief of Staff Michael J. Dugan, saying that the four-star general displayed “poor judgment at a very sensitive time” by revealing possible targets of air strikes in Iraq in the event of war.

President Bush and Gen. Colin L. Powell, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, concurred in the dismissal, which came in a 10-minute meeting with Dugan in Cheney’s Pentagon office early Monday.

Dugan was fired for comments published in The Times and Washington Post on Sunday, in which he said that–if war comes–the U.S. military intends to conduct a massive air campaign against Iraq, specifically targeting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, his family and his palace guard.

“Given the extreme delicacy and sensitivity of the current situation, it’s incumbent upon senior officials to be discreet and tactful in their public statements, and I found those qualities lacking” in Dugan’s remarks, Cheney said in a news conference Monday.

The defense secretary said Dugan’s comments put at risk the lives of the more than 150,000 U.S. troops in the region and jeopardized the five-week-old Persian Gulf operation by revealing classified details of U.S. war planning.

Cheney said he will nominate Gen. Merrill A. McPeak, currently commander of Pacific Air Forces, to be the next chief of staff.

As for Dugan, who had been in the post only since July, Cheney said: “He will be retired.”

The only other member of the Joint Chiefs to have been fired was Adm. Louis E. Denfeld, sacked in October, 1949, by President Harry S. Truman. Denfeld, ironically, had irritated the President and his fellow chiefs for raising questions about the value of air power in modern warfare.

Cheney cited a number of critical sins that Dugan committed in the interviews with three journalists conducted over several hours aboard his aircraft on a trip to Saudi Arabia last week.

“We never talk about future operations, such as the selection of specific targets for potential air strikes. We never talk about the targeting of specific individuals who are officials of other governments. Taking such action might be a violation of the standing presidential executive order” banning assassinations, Cheney said.

He also chastised Dugan for underestimating Iraqi military capabilities, for revealing classified information about the size and disposition of U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia and for demeaning the role of the other U.S. military services by citing air power as the “only option” available for defeating the 1-million-member Iraqi army.

Cheney also was disturbed with Dugan for “treating (U.S.) casualties cavalierly,” an aide said. He apparently was referring to a comment from a senior Dugan aide on the trip who called the expected loss of American lives in such a military operation a “manageable risk.”

Powell reportedly was furious when he saw the Post story on Sunday morning and called Cheney at home at 7 a.m. to point it out. Cheney then sought The Times’ version to see if Dugan’s remarks were accurately reported. The two articles were similar, and the quotations in common were exactly the same. Cheney was “very upset,” but did not make up his mind to fire Dugan until Sunday night, a knowledgeable defense official said.

An aide to Cheney said the defense secretary believes Dugan’s comments “showed egregious judgment” and could not be tolerated. “He became the self-appointed spokesman for (Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, who is directing the U.S. operation in Saudi Arabia) and the chiefs. He revealed classified information. He talked about operational plans that are fundamentally not his choice. He raised sensitive matters of diplomacy relating to other nations. He set a poor standard of military leadership, that a military commander would not take seriously the people we’re up against,” this official said.

“Based on all these things, the secretary just lost confidence in him,” the aide said.

Powell contacted Dugan in Florida and asked if he had been accurately quoted. Dugan assured him that he had been. Powell told him to report to Cheney’s office at 8 a.m. Monday but did not tell the Air Force chief that the decision had been made to dismiss him.

Dugan did not know when he entered Cheney’s Pentagon office that he was about to be fired, an Air Force official said.

In his news conference, Cheney did not dispute the truth of any of Dugan’s assertions, which included a statement that the Joint Chiefs have concluded that the United States would never have sufficient ground forces in Saudi Arabia to drive Iraqi troops out of Kuwait and would therefore be dependent on air power to sway any potential battle.

Dugan also revealed for the first time that the United States has deployed 420 combat aircraft to the Arabian Peninsula–nearly as much striking power as the fleet dedicated to defending Europe against the Soviet Union. Previous estimates of air power in the Persian Gulf region were about half that.

The Air Force chief also disclosed for the first time that the United States had recently purchased advanced Israeli cruise missiles and deployed them aboard B-52 bombers stationed within striking distance of Baghdad. In addition, he said that the Pentagon has consulted with Israeli intelligence agencies to determine the best targets in Iraq.

The most troubling matter, senior Pentagon officials said, was Dugan’s discussion of the possible targeting of Hussein, his family, his inner circle and even his mistress. Cheney suggested that such action “might” violate Executive Order 12333, issued in December, 1981, which specifically prohibits assassinations.

“I think it’s inappropriate . . . for U.S. officials to talk about targeting specific foreign individuals,” Cheney said in the news conference. “I think it is potentially a violation of the standing presidential Executive Order.”

However, the ban on assassinations was modified last year to allow for the killing of senior enemy military commanders as part of a “decapitation” strategy. Hussein is commander in chief of Iraqi military forces–as Bush is commander of all U.S. forces–and thus would be a legal target for military action, Pentagon officials said Monday.

But it clearly would violate U.S. law and policy to target Hussein’s wife, his children or his girlfriend, officials noted.

Cheney, pressed on a variety of Dugan’s assertions, said he could not confirm or deny them without violating the security considerations for which he dismissed Dugan.

The defense secretary also noted that Dugan is “not even in the chain of command,” which runs from Bush to Cheney to Powell to Schwarzkopf, commander of the U.S. Central Command, which covers the Middle East.

Under the current military structure, the members of the Joint Chiefs are advisers to the chairman and provide forces, equipment and support to theater commanders, known inside the Pentagon as the “war-fighting CINCs” or regional commanders in chief.

Cheney praised Dugan’s record of 32 years of Air Force service and said that he regretted firing him. “But under the circumstances, I felt it was necessary,” the secretary said. Dugan’s comments, Cheney noted, “did not in my mind reveal an adequate understanding of the situation and what is expected of him as chief of staff of the Air Force and as a member of the Joint Chiefs.”

The abrupt dismissal undoubtedly will reverberate throughout the Pentagon and the entire U.S. military, which has not enjoyed good relations with the press for two generations.

“You won’t be talking to any generals any time soon,” one senior Army officer told a reporter Monday.

Cheney denied that he was sending a message to military officers to avoid reporters. But he said that he expected his subordinates “to exercise discretion in what they say. . . . That sort of wide-ranging speculation about those matters that were discussed in the interviews that were granted by the general is what I felt was inappropriate.”

Air Force Secretary Donald B. Rice, who had recommended Dugan for the job and who concurred in Cheney’s decision to relieve him, said in a prepared statement: “I regret the circumstances that made it necessary for Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney to take this action. Gen. Dugan is a superb officer. His leadership and innovation will be missed by every man and woman in the Air Force.”

Dugan, 53, jumped over a number of senior Air Force officers when he was chosen for the chief of staff job earlier this year. He is a fighter and attack plane pilot with more than 4,500 flying hours and 300 combat missions in Vietnam.

A graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., Dugan rose rapidly through the Air Force, serving chiefly in fighter squadron commands. His last post before becoming chief of staff in July was as commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe.

His last Washington assignment was in 1988 and early 1989, when he served as deputy Air Force chief of staff for plans and operations.

Among his decorations are the Distinguished Service Medal, Silver Star, Legion of Merit with two oak leaf clusters, Purple Heart, Distinguished Flying Cross, Air Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm.

Dugan has six children, three of them Air Force officers. When the articles appeared Sunday, he was in Florida attending a ceremony for his son Michael’s graduation from F-16 pilot training school.

Sen. John S. McCain (R-Ariz.), a former Navy bomber pilot who was shot down and taken prisoner in Vietnam, said the American system of civilian control of the military dictated Cheney’s firing of Dugan. “I think that clearly Cheney has the authority, and indeed the responsibility, to discipline anyone who violated policy,” he said.

McCain said he was especially troubled by Dugan’s comment that in any bombing campaign “the cutting edge would be in downtown Baghdad. This wouldn’t be a Vietnam-style operation, nibbling around the edges. . . . The way to hurt you is at home, not out in the woods somewhere.”

McCain said he did not think the American public would accept that tactic, even if it were justifiable on purely military grounds.

“His comments are at best not cognizant of the sensitivity of those remarks and the reaction that would be fueled by them,” McCain said. “It’s too bad, because I’m sure the guy was highly qualified for the job. But it comes down to the fact that the civilian leaders have a right to choose whom they want.”

Sens. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) and John W. Warner (R-Va.), chairman and ranking minority member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a joint statement that they believe Dugan’s firing to be justified.

“The recent public statements attributed to Gen. Dugan were inappropriate,” they said.

THOSE WHO WENT TOO FAR The following is a list of some U.S. military leaders who have been cashiered or disciplined for their comments. GEN. MICHAEL J. DUGAN, Air Force chief of staff

Fired on Sept. 17, 1990

By: Defense Secretary Dick Cheney

For: Publicly discussing possible targets of U.S. air strikes in Iraq if President Bush ordered use of military force against Saddam Hussein.

MAJ. GEN. JOHN K. SINGLAUB, U.S. chief of staff in South Korea

Fired May 21, 1977

By: President Jimmy Carter

For: Publicly opposing Carter’s plan to withdraw U.S. ground forces from Korea. He contended that the move would lead to war.

GEN. DOUGLAS MacARTHUR, Commander, U.S. , U.N. forces in Korean War

Fired on April 11, 1951

By: President Harry S. Truman

For: Making public his disagreement with Truman over methods to win the war, including his desire to bomb supply centers in Manchuria.

ADM. LOUIS E. DENFELD, Chief of naval operations

Fired in October, 1949

By: President Harry S. Truman

For: Speaking out on Capitol Hill against Navy budget cuts and questioning the value of air power.

GEN. WINFIELD SCOTT, General in chief, U.S. Army

Suspended for a year in 1810

By: Court-martial

For: Calling his superior officer, Gen. James Wilkinson, as great a traitor as Aaron Burr.

(Southland Edition) THOSE WHO WENT TOO FAR . . . OR NOT FAR ENOUGH

The following is a list of some U.S. military leaders who have been cashiered or disciplined for their actions or comments. ADM. HUSBAND E. KIMMEL Commander in chief, Pacific Fleet

Retired in 1942 after being accused of dereliction of duty

By: Naval board of inquiry

For: Poor state of readiness of naval forces; poor response to Japan attack on Pearl Harbor.

GEN. JOSEPH HOOKER Commander, Union Army

Relieved of command in April, 1863

By: President Abraham Lincoln

For: Indecisiveness at the battle of Chancellorsville which allowed Confederates to mount surprise attack.

GEN. AMBROSE E. BURNSIDE Commander, Army of the Potomac

Relieved of command in December, 1862.

By: President Lincoln

For: Ordering his forces on Dec. 13, 1862, to make suicidal assault on entrenched

Confederate positions in Fredericksburg, Va., and sustaining 12,600 casualties.

GEN. GEORGE B. McCLELLAN Commander, Union Army

Fired on Nov. 7, 1862

By: President Lincoln

For: Procrastination and failure to capitalize on military opportunities, including allowing Confederates to hold the line at the Battle of Antietam on Sept. 17.

BRIG. GEN. JOHN POPE Union Army

Fired on Sept. 5, 1862

By: President Abraham Lincoln

For: Leading Union forces to defeat at the Second Bull Run battle in August.

DUGAN WAS WARNED: Cheney aides told the general to steer clear of the press. A10

WHITE HOUSE CONCERN: Officials are said to feel the military was too candid. A12

Forensic experts in Iraq meticulously work to identify the remains from mass graves, uncovering the fates of thousands who disappeared during decades of conflict. With rare access to excavation sites, the unfolding story reveals the tireless efforts of DNA specialists and the emotional journeys of families seeking closure.

As bones and belongings resurface, survivors confront the harrowing legacy of the Saddam Hussein era, sectarian violence, and ISIL (ISIS) atrocities. The painstaking process of identification not only brings solace to grieving families but also fuels the broader fight for justice and accountability in a country still grappling with its traumatic past.

If the Dead Come Home is a documentary film by Aaron Weintraub.

Arab leaders have urged the international community to fund their plan to rebuild the Gaza Strip after United States President Donald Trump reiterated a proposal to take over the Palestinian territory.

An Arab League summit held on Saturday in Baghdad said in its final statement that it urged “countries and international and regional financial institutions to provide prompt financial support” to back its Gaza reconstruction plan.

“This genocide [in Gaza] has reached a level of ugliness unparalleled in all conflicts in history,” Iraq’s Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani said in his opening speech at the 34th Arab Summit, which was dominated by Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

He said Iraq backed the creation of an “Arab fund to support reconstruction efforts”, adding that Iraq will contribute $20m towards the fund and another $20m for Lebanon, which has also been in conflict with Israel.

The Iraqi prime minister said Baghdad rejects “the forced displacement of Palestinians”, calling for an end to “the massacres in Gaza, the attacks on the West Bank and the occupied territories”.

“We have called, and continue to call, for serious and responsible Arab action to save Gaza and reactivate the UNRWA,” he said, referring to the UN body for Palestinian aid.

Saturday’s talks in the Iraqi capital came only a day after Trump completed his Middle East tour, triggering hopes of a ceasefire and the renewal of aid delivery to Gaza.

‘Carnage unfolding in Gaza’

United Nations chief Antonio Guterres and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez – who have sharply criticised Israel’s genocide in Gaza – were guests at the summit.

“We need a permanent ceasefire now, the unconditional release of the hostages now, and the free flow of humanitarian aid ending the blockade now,” Guterres said.

Spain’s Sanchez said the humanitarian crisis in Gaza must end “immediately and without delay”.

“Palestine and Spain are working on a new draft to be presented to the United Nations, where we are demanding Israel to end the unjust humanitarian siege laid to Gaza and to allow for the unconditional delivery of relief aid into Gaza”, he said.

He also said there must be “more pressure on Israel to end the carnage unfolding in Gaza by all the conceivable means, namely the tools available under the international law.”

“And here, I would like to announce that Spain will present a proposal to the General Assembly for the International Criminal Court to examine Israel’s compliance with the delivery of relief aid into Gaza,” the Spanish prime minister added.

In March, Israel ended a ceasefire reached with Hamas in January, renewing deadly attacks across Gaza and forcing a blockade of food and other essential items. In recent days, Israel has intensified its offensive, as tens of thousands of Palestinians are forced to starve.

At a preparatory meeting of the Arab League summit, Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein said they will try to endorse decisions that were made at their meeting in Cairo in March to support Gaza’s reconstruction as an alternative to Trump’s widely condemned proposal to take over the enclave.

During his visit to Qatar, Trump on Thursday reiterated that he wanted the US to “take” Gaza and turn it into a “freedom zone”. Earlier this year, he caused an uproar by declaring that the US would turn Gaza into a “Riviera of the Middle East”, prompting Arab leaders to come up with a plan to rebuild the territory, at a summit in Cairo.

The Arab plan for Gaza proposes rebuilding the Palestinian enclave without displacing its 2.4 million residents.

Besides Gaza, Arab officials also discussed Syria, which only six months ago entered a new chapter in its history after the fall of longtime ruler Bashar al-Assad.

Earlier this week, Trump in Riyadh met Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa, whose group spearheaded the offensive that toppled al-Assad last December. Prior to their meeting, he also announced that US sanctions on Syria will be lifted in a huge boost to the government in Damascus.

Al-Sharaa, who was imprisoned for years in Iraq on charges of belonging to al-Qaeda following the 2003 US-led invasion, however, missed Baghdad’s summit after several powerful Iraqi politicians voiced opposition to his visit. The Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani represented Damascus instead.

Saturday’s summit also came amid Iran’s ongoing nuclear talks with the US. Trump has pursued diplomacy with Iran as he seeks to stave off a threatened military strike by Israel on Iran, a desire shared by many of the region’s leaders.

On Thursday, Trump said a deal was “getting close”, but by Friday, he was warning that “something bad is going to happen” if the Iranians do not move fast.

Iraq has only recently regained a semblance of normalcy after decades of devastating conflict and turmoil, and its leaders view the summit as an opportunity to project an image of stability.

Reporting from Baghdad, Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed said the summit was “very crucial” for Iraq.

“This is the first time the summit has been held in Iraq since 2012 and Iraq takes it as a credit to regain its rule as a player to bridge the gap between member states of the Arab League,” he said.

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates — President Trump said Thursday that the United States and Iran have “sort of” agreed to terms on a nuclear deal, offering a measure of confidence that an accord is coming into sharper focus.

Trump, in an exchange with reporters at a business roundtable in Doha, Qatar, described talks between American envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi as “very serious negotiations” for long-term peace and said they were continuing to progress.

Still, throughout his four-day visit to the Gulf this week, the president has underscored that military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities remains a possibility if the talks derail.

“Iran has sort of agreed to the terms: They’re not going to make, I call it, in a friendly way, nuclear dust,” Trump said at the business event. “We’re not going to be making any nuclear dust in Iran.”

Without offering detail, he signaled growing alignment with the terms that he has been seeking.

A top political, military and nuclear advisor to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told NBC News on Wednesday that Tehran stands ready to get rid of its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium that can be weaponized, agree to enrich uranium only to the lower levels needed for civilian use and allow international inspectors to supervise the process.

Ali Shamkhani added that in return, Iran wants an immediate lifting of all economic sanctions.

On Thursday, hours after Trump said the two sides were getting closer to a deal, Araghchi said Tehran’s ability to enrich uranium remained a core right of the Iranian people and a red line in nuclear talks.

“We have said repeatedly that defending Iran’s nuclear rights — including enrichment — is a fundamental principle,” the official said. “This is not something we concede, either in public discourse or in negotiations. It is a right that belongs to the Iranian people, and no one can take it away.”

Trump said his demands have been straightforward.

“They can’t have a nuclear weapon. That’s the only thing. It’s very simple,” Trump said. “It’s not like I have to give you 30 pages worth of details. It is only one sentence. They can’t have a nuclear weapon.”

But Trump on Wednesday suggested he was looking for Tehran to make other concessions as part of a potential agreement.

Iran “must stop sponsoring terror, halt its bloody proxy wars and permanently and verifiably cease pursuit of nuclear weapons,” Trump said in remarks at a meeting in Saudi Arabia, the first stop on the Mideast trip.

Before moving on to the United Arab Emirates from Qatar on Thursday, Trump stopped at a U.S. military installation at the center of American involvement in the Middle East and spoke to U.S. troops. The Republican president has used his visit to Gulf states to reject the “interventionalism” of America’s past in the region.

Al-Udeid Air Base was a major staging ground during the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The base houses some 8,000 U.S. troops, down from about 10,000 at the height of those wars.

Trump told the troops that his “priority is to end conflicts, not start them.”

“But I will never hesitate to wield American power if it’s necessary to defend the United States of America or our partners,” he said.

Trump has held up Gulf nations such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar as models for economic development in a region plagued by conflict. He urged Qatari officials to use their influence to entice Iran to come to terms with his administration on a nuclear deal.

Trump later flew to Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates for the final leg of his trip. He visited the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque, the country’s largest mosque. The United Arab Emirates’ founder, Sheikh Zayed, is buried in the mosque’s main courtyard.

Trump took his shoes off, which is customary, as he stepped into the house of worship and spent time marveling at the architecture.

“It’s beautiful,” Trump said.

He later attended a state visit hosted by United Arab Emirates President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan at the Qasr Al Watan presidential palace. Trump and his delegation were greeted by children wearing traditional robes and waving small U.S. and United Arab Emirates flags, and they were guided through a space exhibit inside the palace.

Al Nahyan also presented Trump with the Order of Zayed, the United Arab Emirates’ highest civil decoration and credited Trump with building the two nations’ economic partnership to new heights.

“This partnership has taken a significant leap forward since you assumed office,” he told Trump.

As he made his way to Abu Dhabi on Thursday, Trump reminded reporters about President Biden’s 2022 fist bump with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a moment roundly criticized by human rights activists already upset by the Democrat’s decision to hold the meeting. Trump noted in contrast that while in Saudi Arabia and Qatar this week, he had shaken many hands.

“They were starving for love because our country didn’t give them love,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. “They gave him a fist bump. Remember the fist bump in Saudi Arabia? He travels all the way to Saudi Arabia … and he gives him a fist bump. That’s not what they want. They don’t want a fist bump. They want to shake his hand.”

Miller and Madhani write for the Associated Press. Madhani reported from Dubai. AP writers Amir Vahdat in Tehran and Gabe Levin in Dubai contributed to this report.