Middle East

US drivers may have to wait until 2027 for gasoline prices to fall below 79 cents per litre, according to Patrick De Haan, Head of Petroleum Analysis at GasBuddy. He says global oil inventories could take more than a year to recover from disruptions linked to the war on Iran.

The Manchester City striker scored his first goals at a major international tournament as Norway powered past Iraq.

Erling Haaland scored twice in his World Cup debut as Norway powered past Iraq to win 4-1 in their Group I opener in Boston.

The Manchester City striker scored his first goals at a major international tournament on Tuesday as Norway returned to the World Cup for the first time in 28 years.

Haaland turned in from close range to give Norway the lead on 29 minutes, but Aymen Hussein’s header brought Iraq level.

Haaland then pounced on an error at the back to put Norway ahead again before half-time and take his goal tally at international level to 57 in just 51 matches.

Leo Ostigard headed in a third for Norway moments after coming off the bench to effectively wrap up the victory. Norway then got a fourth deep into stoppage time through a Hussein own goal.

The win left Norway on top of Group I on goal difference, level with France on three points after Les Bleus overcame Senegal 3-1 earlier in the day. The Norwegians face the African powerhouses in their next game in New Jersey on June 22 .

No team has endured a longer or more perilous road to the World Cup than Iraq, who secured their place as the 48th and final qualifiers in March after a 21-match campaign that stretched across 867 days.

Hussein, the scorer of the decisive goal in the play-off win over Bolivia, was held and questioned for hours by US immigration officials after arriving with the squad ahead of Iraq’s first World Cup since 1986.

Norway’s impressive return

Norway last played at the tournament in 1998, when coach Stale Solbakken was a member of the squad that famously beat Brazil in the group stage before exiting in the last 16. He also featured at Euro 2000.

After breezing impressively through qualifying, twice thrashing Italy, they are hoping a golden generation of players – led by Haaland and Arsenal midfielder Martin Odegaard – can break new ground in North America.

Solbakken predicted that Haaland would make a “very big impact” at his first major finals, and the Manchester City star was quick to deliver on that promise.

Antonio Nusa’s trickery was a problem for Iraq, and his incisive pass released the overlapping David Moller Wolfe clear before Haaland stretched to steer in the low cross from the left.

Iraq, who lost all of their group games in their only previous appearance, did not let that get to them as they equalised 10 minutes later.

Amir Alammari found space just inside the area and clipped in a cross, with Hussein rising brilliantly to power a header past Orjan Nyland.

But Iraq only had themselves to blame as they gift-wrapped Haaland’s second of the contest.

Goalkeeper Jalal Hassan was slow to react to a softly hit back pass, his attempted clearance smacking off Haaland’s shin and ricocheting into the net.

Iraq again responded well with Ibrahim Bayesh denied by a desperation block, Ali Alhamadi dribbling an effort wide, and centre-back Akam Hashim lashing a spectacular volley just over the bar.

Ostigard nodded in Odegaard’s corner on 76 minutes to seal the points for Norway, before Haaland was thwarted by Hassan when another loose pass sent him clean through and seeking his hat-trick.

Haaland, nonetheless, had a hand in Norway’s late fourth, his looping header back across goal deflecting off Hussein before trickling over the line.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich says Israel has transferred authority over Hebron to the army. It includes control of the key holy site, Cave of the Patriarchs. Al Jazeera’s Nour Odeh explains.

Mehdi Torabi issued a new visa after previous one expired when team returned to Mexico following the New Zealand game.

United States officials have confirmed that Iran’s team will have to leave the country within hours of the full-time whistle at their World Cup group games in Los Angeles and Seattle.

The response from the World Cup 2026 cohost nation came on Tuesday following criticism of its handling of the Iranian team’s visa and stay in the US after their first game.

“We were clear this was the process,” Andrew Giuliani, the executive director of the White House FIFA Task Force, told The Associated Press news agency.

Team Melli drew with New Zealand in a politically charged Group G game in Los Angeles on Monday following months of uncertainty over the team’s participation in the World Cup amid the US-Israel war on Iran.

The Iranian delegation left the US hours after the match ended at about 8pm local time (03:00 GMT) and returned to their base camp in Mexico, prompting criticism of the US handling of their visas as the team did not get a day to recover at their hotel.

Iran coach Amir Ghalenoei said after the match that his team had been ordered to leave the US and return to Mexico only a few hours later. Ghalenoei said the team had expected to spend the night in California to maximise the normal recovery process after their opening game.

The US faced further pushback as Iran winger Mehdi Torabi’s entry visa expired after the first game. Team officials confirmed Tuesday afternoon that they had secured him a new, multiple-entry visa allowing him to travel into the US for future matches.

“This issue has been resolved,” the US Department of State said.

“As soon as we became aware of the issue, we worked to ensure that the player can participate in every game.”

Giuliani said during an interview broadcast Monday night on CBS News that some of the Iranian team’s support staff and team officials were denied entry into the US, but all the players and coaches had received visas.

He also outlined the conditions by which the Iranian team would be able to come into the US for their games.

“The team will be allowed to come in, match day minus one, so the day before the match. They’ll be asked to leave the day that the match wraps up, so the evening of the match. And they’ll be able to do that again in Los Angeles. They’ll be able to do it again in Seattle,” Giuliani said.

When asked about why some support staff and team officials had been denied entry, Giuliani wouldn’t go into details but referred to previous comments made by Secretary of State Marco Rubio about denying entry to people with direct ties to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

“Secretary Rubio said very clearly: Anybody with direct ties to the IRGC is not coming into the United States of America, and they’re not going to let the World Cup be the reason why they can come in,” Giuliani said. “So I think it’s very clear why.”

Iran captain Mehdi Taremi said the team endured five hours of travel and security checks during what’s normally a very short trip from Tijuana to the Los Angeles area on Sunday.

“I think FIFA have to help us more than this,” Taremi said.

Somaliland’s President Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi is on a ‘historic’ tour of Israel, where he’s opened an embassy and visited the Knesset. The landmark trip comes months after Israel became the first country to recognise Somaliland as an independent nation.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino praised Iran’s players during a World Cup dressing room visit after the team’s 2-2 draw with New Zealand on Monday.

Drone attacks target vehicles in Nabatieh amid fragile ceasefire negotiations between Iran and the US.

Multiple Israeli strikes have killed at least four people in southern Lebanon’s Nabatieh governorate, according to Lebanon’s National News Agency (NNA), despite a ceasefire and a recent understanding between the United States and Iran to end the war on all fronts.

Tuesday’s killing took place as separate drone attacks targeted two vehicles in Mayfadoun. A third vehicle was also targeted in the village of Shoukin, the agency said.

Throughout the often fragile negotiations between Iran and the US, Iranian officials repeatedly said that any ceasefire arrangement would need to include an end to Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

While the final text of the memorandum of understanding has not yet been made public, the prime minister of Pakistan, which is acting as one of the mediators in the conflict, said on Monday that the agreement envisaged an immediate halt to military operations “on all fronts, including Lebanon”.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that Israel’s continued occupation of southern Lebanon would violate the deal, adding that “without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories they occupied during this war, the war has not fully come to an end”.

In a phone conversation with Lebanon’s Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, called for the US to compel Israel to end its war on Lebanon, stop home demolitions, and withdraw from occupied Lebanese territory.

Soon after the announcement of the deal between the US and Iran, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel will continue to occupy southern Lebanon.

Meanwhile, Lebanese group Hezbollah says it has received ⁠assurances ⁠from Iran that Tehran will demand ⁠a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon ⁠in its next phase of talks with the US, the Reuters news agency reported.

Since the resumption in fighting on March 2, at least 3,826 people have been killed by Israeli attacks in Lebanon and 11,851 wounded, according to the country’s health ministry.

Gaza’s football fans once watched the World Cup from the comfort of their homes. Now, displaced in schools and tents, they face power cuts, sparse internet access and the threat of Israeli attacks.

US President Donald Trump says Iran has agreed to not acquire nuclear weapons and will ‘suffer unbelievable consequences’ if they do. His remarks came during a meeting with Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim at the G7 summit in France.

The US-Iran memorandum of understanding expected to be formally signed in Switzerland on Friday could allow for the establishment of a $300bn investment fund for Iran, as part of a broader settlement to end the war that triggered a global energy crisis and upended markets worldwide.

US Vice President JD Vance told CBS News on Monday that the incentives would be connected to Iran’s “performance” in adhering to the deal, which was digitally signed by both sides on Sunday.

The scale of the financial incentives grabbed the headlines due to US President Donald Trump’s longstanding criticism of a 2015 nuclear accord that he claimed delivered economic benefits to Tehran.

In a bid to manage perceptions around this politically sensitive issue, Trump took to his Truth Social platform to claim that “the story that the US is paying Iran 300 million Dollars is Fake News,” while Vance told CBS News that the money would not be a US payout in exchange for Iran’s enriched uranium.

“When people say that billions of dollars of assets will be released, that’s not true,” the vice president told the CBS Morning programme. “What is true is that Iran will have a much better and much more prosperous future if they meet the obligations they make in this agreement.”

What do we know about the $300bn investment fund?

Vance said the deal “fundamentally extends a hand to Iran and says, ‘Look, if you guys are willing to honour your obligations, if you’re willing to allow real inspections of your nuclear programme, then we will welcome you back into the world economy.’

“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf Coast coalition, so long as they honour their end of the obligation,” Vance told CBS. He also claimed that while US money would not be injected, economic opportunities could arise once Iran repositions itself in the global economy.

The New York Times quoted sources saying the fund would not come from governments but be created for companies eager to invest in Iran.

Muhanad Seloom, a non-resident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the setup was a no-lose solution for Washington. “If Iran reforms, the administration owns the peace; if it doesn’t, the US loses nothing and the Gulf carries the risk,” he told Al Jazeera.

What about the Iranian frozen assets?

Seloom said the idea of an investment fund was built precisely to escape the optics of releasing Iran’s frozen funds. While the exact amount of Iran’s frozen assets is unclear, official Iranian reports and experts have set the total amount at more than $100bn.

Iran’s economy has been crippled due to years of sanctions imposed on the country by the United States and other nations following the Islamic revolution in 1979, and then amplified over Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missiles programmes. These measures have restricted Tehran’s ability to access its own assets, such as revenues from oil sales, which have been frozen in foreign banks.

Tehran was granted sanctions relief in the wake of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal signed under President Barack Obama, but Trump tore it up in 2018 during his first term. The 2015 deal had put limits on Iran’s nuclear enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief.

Iran’s state-affiliated Mehr News agency reported on Sunday that the 14-point draft memorandum of understanding provided for the release of $24bn in frozen Iranian assets.

Pressed by CBS News on the possibility of releasing frozen funds, Vance said the $24bn figure “just doesn’t appear anywhere in any of the texts that we’ve talked about with the Iranians”.

“What we have said is that we’re willing to talk about unfreezing assets, but a much, much bigger deal is unsanctioning their economy – so long as they make the long-term commitments on the nuclear programme,” the vice president added.

For Iran, where the war inflicted an estimated $29bn damage and the population is struggling with the highest inflation rate since 1942, the investment fund may constitute a much-needed lifeline.

But the optics will not be as favourable, raising a “dignity problem”, Seloom said. “Tehran reads this as supervised, conditional money rather than sovereign relief,” the analyst told Al Jazeera.

Which other contentious issues will be discussed after signing the deal on Friday?

One of the US’s main declared objectives has been to assuage concerns surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme, including a stockpile of more than 440kg (970lbs) of enriched uranium.

The memorandum extends an existing ceasefire arrangement for another 60 days, during which the two sides are expected to hold further negotiations on issues including the disposal of the enriched uranium.

Vance said Tehran had agreed to surrender its stockpile, undergo regular inspections and refrain from producing or buying nuclear weapons, but the full text of the memorandum of understanding has yet to be disclosed.

The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has been subject to competing blockades by the US and Iran, has also been a point of contention. Trump suggested an agreement to reopen the waterway had been reached when he announced a deal on Sunday with the words: “Let the oil flow!”

Speaking to CNBC, however, Vance acknowledged that not all sticking points surrounding the passageway had been resolved. “Well, our expectation is that the strait is gonna be opened in a toll-free way for the long term, and that’s the sort of thing that we’re gonna figure out in these technical negotiations,” he said.

Israel’s ongoing aggression on Lebanon is also expected to create friction, as Iran has insisted any ceasefire deal must include the allied nation. Israel has so far rejected any arrangement that would limit its ability to strike what it says are Hezbollah targets. Defence Minister Israel Katz on Friday said the military would continue operating in Lebanon regardless of any agreement with Tehran.

Mixed reactions to the agreement

Iranian ⁠⁠Foreign ⁠⁠Minister Abbas Araghchi said the memorandum of understanding would reap economic benefits for Iran but stressed that Tehran would not rely on those benefits for all of its needs.

“We have a history of broken promises, non-compliance, and the tearing up of agreements,” Araghchi said on Monday, according to Press TV. He said discussions about the lifting of US sanctions and Iran’s nuclear programme would be held during a 60-day period of negotiations following the official signature on Friday.

Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has yet to comment. Some Iranian observers objected to the timing of the announcement, which coincided with Trump’s birthday. Referring to the assassination of former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at the beginning of the US-Iran war, conservative journalist Parisa Nasr wrote on X: “Was giving a birthday gift to the killer of the martyred Leader also one of the unwritten conditions of the deal?”

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Iran’s Supreme National Security Council had approved the deal so that “America’s genuine commitment to respecting the rights of the Iranian nation could be tested in practice.”

Speaking at the G7 summit in France on Tuesday, Trump described the deal with Iran as “fair”, “good”, and under which Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon” or “they get blown up.”

Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, who is also attending the summit, said the Iran-US agreement will result in positive outcomes for the region.

“This is a very important deal, there’s still a lot of work to be done, but with this momentum – if we continue like that, Mr President – I think we can achieve and do great things in the region,” Sheikh Tamim said.

US Democratic lawmakers welcomed a deal to halt the war with Iran but stressed that its terms must be made public. Senator Gregory Meeks said “any final agreement must be durable, enforceable, transparent” and more than “vague announcements or political spin”.

US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on Sunday said he was “pleased” about the deal but also “somewhat concerned that Iran’s view of the agreement seems different than what the American negotiating team is claiming”.

Seloom, at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the different narratives underlined that the two sides were “not really talking to each other”. “They’re talking past each other, to domestic audiences,” he said. “Each side has to sell this as a victory it cannot sell honestly.”

Los Angeles – “I’m sure when we score a goal today, everyone will be cheering.”

That was the prediction of Iranian fan Parsa Tafreshi, who had travelled from New York to Los Angeles to see Iran take on New Zealand on Monday.

His words would prove largely true.

The game ended in a thrilling 2-2 draw, and each time Iran – known as Team Melli – scored, the stadium erupted in deafening celebrations.

There were two opposing sets of Iranian flags in Los Angeles, home to a large Iranian American community that is largely staunchly opposed to the governing system in Tehran.

Some fans waved the Islamic Republic flag, adorned with the name of God. Others opted for the pre-1979-revolution flag featuring the lion and sun, used by the Iranian opposition.

But when Team Melli were building up an attack, their supporters sang in unison.

Chants of “Iran, Iran” rang throughout the stadium, and the fans held their breath collectively each time Iran’s attackers came near New Zealand’s goal.

Concerns of unrest around the game did not materialise. Iranian fans vastly outnumbered their New Zealand counterparts at the stadium, and the game ended without any major incident.

Anti-team protest

A small group of demonstrators had gathered outside the venue, waving Israeli flags and chanting in support of opposition figure Reza Pahlavi.

They also called on United States President Donald Trump to resume the war with Iran, although Washington and Tehran have already reached a ceasefire deal.

“President Trump, finish the job,” they chanted on a loud megaphone.

Protesters also shouted slogans against the Palestinian group Hamas and Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

One of the demonstrators held a banner featuring the faces of Team Melli players with red crosses on them.

“IRGC Team,” it said, referring to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, with red ink meant to resemble blood dripping from the letters.

Protester Kourosh Kiumarsi told Al Jazeera that the Iranian squad is the “regime team”.

Asked about the Israeli flags at the demonstration, he said: “Israel and the USA attacked the regime and helped the people of Iran. They are not at war with Iran. They are at war with the Islamic Republic regime.”

Despite the intensity of the slogans at the protest, it was small and contained.

“I love that all the hype was just outside of the stadium,” said Sudi Farokhnia, who wore a green, white and red wig and a shirt featuring the lion and sun flag.

“Once you walked into the stadium, all you could hear was Iran, Iran, Iran. The energy was amazing. The people were amazing,” she told Al Jazeera after the match.

But that does not mean the entire affair was apolitical.

It would be difficult to argue that the pre-revolution flag is not a political statement.

FIFA bans political symbols at international matches, but thousands of Iranian fans on Monday were able to come in with lion-and-sun flags, shirts and hats.

Many also wore political slogans like “Make Iran Great Again” and “free Iran”.

FIFA did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment on the issue.

Minab message

There were also other political expressions at the match.

Arash, an Iranian fan who asked to be identified by his first name only, wore a shirt that said “Mibab 168” on the back.

The US-Israel war on Iran killed hundreds of civilians, including 168 children at a girl’s school in the southern city of Minab, during the first day of the conflict.

“This is not a political shirt. This is not just to send a political message,” Arash told Al Jazeera.

“It’s a simple, simple statement: Schools are sanctuaries, whether it’s school shootings, bombings. School is a place of virtue. It’s a place of learning. It’s a place that – no matter who you are, what you believe in, what country – school should be off limits.”

Inside the stadium, a group of Iranian fans also revealed a “MINAB 168” message during the game.

There were also Palestinian and Israeli flags visible in the stands.

The match kicked off with a political message: Many fans jeered the Iranian national anthem, which opposition activists see as representative of the government.

Iran’s participation in the tournament was in peril earlier this year because of the war. Team Melli were forced to stay in Mexico as their base camp, while all their group-stage matches were in the US, because the Trump administration refused to host them.

Once the ball was kicked, however, that all faded into the background.

It was 11 versus 11. And the football delivered excitement, joy and disappointment.

Iran dropped two valuable points against a lower-ranked team, but came twice from behind and hit the woodwork once.

And each of the two times the net bulged, the goals brought happiness to a nation with two flags at home and abroad that has gone through war and immense hardship.

There was a number of protesters outside.

But when Iran scored, almost all Iranians cheered.

A journalist for Press TV has been hit by shrapnel while filming a report on Israeli attacks in southern Lebanon. Hadi Hoteit said he was targeted despite wearing a ‘Press’ vest, and is in hospital receiving treatment.

The preliminary memorandum represents the first formal framework outlining how Washington and Tehran intend to move from military confrontation toward diplomacy.

While many details remain unpublished, statements from U.S., Iranian and Pakistani officials provide a broad outline of the deal’s structure.

Rather than resolving every dispute immediately, the agreement establishes a phased process aimed at reducing tensions first and addressing more difficult issues later.

The approach reflects the reality that both sides were able to reach consensus on ending hostilities more easily than on the underlying disputes that fueled the conflict.

Phase One: Ending the Fighting

The first stage focuses on immediate de-escalation.

According to mediator Pakistan, both sides have agreed to permanently halt military operations across all fronts.

The formal memorandum is expected to be signed in Switzerland, after which implementation would begin.

The objective of this phase is straightforward: stop active hostilities, reduce the risk of escalation, and create space for broader negotiations.

This represents the most immediate achievement of the agreement and is likely the reason markets reacted positively.

Reopening the Strait of Hormuz

The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz is arguably the agreement’s most significant economic provision.

The waterway serves as one of the world’s most important energy transit routes and has been at the center of global concerns throughout the conflict.

Both sides indicate that commercial shipping will resume following the signing of the memorandum.

The restoration of maritime traffic could:

• Increase global oil supply.
• Reduce shipping disruptions.
• Ease pressure on energy prices.
• Lower inflation risks for major economies.

However, questions remain over how the route will be governed.

Iran has suggested it will coordinate management of traffic with Oman, potentially giving Tehran a more formal role in overseeing one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.

That issue could become a future source of diplomatic friction.

The Nuclear Issue Has Been Deferred

The most controversial subject in the negotiations remains unresolved.

Rather than settling the nuclear dispute immediately, both sides appear to have agreed to address it during a 60-day negotiation period.

According to Iranian officials, Tehran would freeze nuclear activities during that time by halting additional enrichment and refraining from expanding facilities.

The long-term future of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure remains unclear.

Washington continues to emphasize inspections and preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Tehran continues to insist that its nuclear program is peaceful and seeks recognition of its right to maintain civilian nuclear activities.

These competing positions are likely to dominate the next phase of talks.

Sanctions Relief Could Shape the Success of the Deal

Economic issues may ultimately prove as difficult as nuclear negotiations.

Iran expects meaningful sanctions relief as part of any final settlement.

Iranian officials have spoken about:

• Temporary waivers on oil sanctions.
• The release of frozen assets.
• Financial support mechanisms.
• A pathway toward lifting U.S. and international sanctions.

The Trump administration has signaled a more cautious approach.

Washington has indicated that sanctions relief will depend on Iranian compliance and future negotiations rather than automatic implementation.

This difference highlights one of the central tensions in the agreement: each side expects benefits on different timelines.

Lebanon Remains a Flashpoint

The agreement’s treatment of Lebanon illustrates how regional conflicts have become intertwined.

Iran views a ceasefire in Lebanon as a critical component of the broader settlement.

Lebanese political leaders have welcomed the inclusion of Lebanon in the framework.

Israel, however, has made clear that it does not consider itself bound by all aspects of the agreement and intends to maintain military positions in areas it views as strategically important.

This creates uncertainty about whether the Lebanon component can be implemented as envisioned.

The issue could quickly become one of the first tests of the agreement’s durability.

Why This Matters

The memorandum matters because it shifts the conflict from the battlefield to the negotiating table.

The agreement addresses several immediate concerns:

• Rising energy prices.
• Shipping disruptions.
• Escalating regional instability.
• Growing economic uncertainty.

At the same time, it leaves the most difficult questions unresolved.

This means the framework should be viewed as the beginning of a diplomatic process rather than its conclusion.

Its success will depend on whether negotiators can transform temporary understandings into binding commitments.

Key Stakeholders

• United States
• Iran
• Pakistan (mediator)
• Israel
• Lebanon
• Oman
• European powers
• Gulf Arab states
• International energy markets
• Global shipping industry
• International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and nuclear inspectors

What to Watch Next

• Formal signing of the memorandum in Switzerland.
• Reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
• Progress during the 60-day negotiation period.
• Discussions on Iran’s nuclear program.
• Decisions regarding sanctions relief.
• Reactions from Congress and international partners.
• Israeli actions in Lebanon and other contested areas.

The memorandum creates a framework for de-escalation, but its long-term success remains uncertain.

If implemented effectively, the agreement could stabilize energy markets, reduce regional tensions, and create momentum for broader diplomatic engagement.

However, many of the issues that triggered the conflict remain unresolved.

Nuclear enrichment, sanctions, regional security arrangements, and competing strategic interests are all likely to generate difficult negotiations.

The coming 60 days will therefore be more important than the announcement itself.

They will determine whether the framework becomes a durable peace process or merely a temporary pause in a conflict whose underlying disputes remain intact.

Analysis

The structure of the agreement reveals a pragmatic calculation by both Washington and Tehran.

Rather than attempting to solve every dispute at once, negotiators prioritized issues where agreement was achievable: ending active hostilities, reopening shipping routes, and creating a mechanism for future talks.

This approach reflects the political realities facing both governments.

For President Trump, reducing energy prices and ending a costly conflict addresses growing domestic pressure. For Iran, halting military operations while preserving room to negotiate on sanctions and nuclear issues offers a path to economic relief without immediate capitulation.

Yet the framework’s greatest strength may also be its greatest weakness.

By postponing the hardest questions, the agreement creates momentum for diplomacy but also leaves significant room for disagreement later. Nuclear enrichment, sanctions relief, and regional security arrangements are not peripheral issues—they are the core disputes that drove the conflict.

As a result, the memorandum should be viewed less as a peace treaty and more as a diplomatic bridge. It lowers immediate risks and creates opportunities for negotiation, but it does not yet resolve the strategic rivalry between the United States and Iran.

Whether this becomes a historic breakthrough or a temporary truce will depend on what happens after the signatures are placed on the document. The real negotiations are only beginning.

With information from Reuters.

Governments across the world have welcomed the tentative deal between the US and Iran to end the war, calling it a major diplomatic breakthrough. But Israeli politicians have been quick to criticise it, claiming it would undermine Israel’s security.

The United Kingdom’s Court of Appeal has ruled that the British government was right to proscribe the Palestine Action activist group as a “terrorist” organisation last year.

Palestine Action is a British protest group which was founded six years ago and describes itself as a movement “committed to ending global participation in Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime”.

On Monday, police made more arrests of protesters demonstrating in support of Palestine Action outside the Court of Appeal in London.

Since the group’s proscription, which also bans support for proscribed groups, about 3,000 people have been arrested.

The Metropolitan Police welcomed the ruling and said it would continue to arrest those who protest in support of the group.

Here is what we know about the ruling:

What has the Court of Appeal ruled?

The judgement released on Monday states: “The proscription of an organisation like Palestine Action is highly controversial. But it is a fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism”.

The ruling was made by a five-strong panel, including the two most senior judges in England and Wales.

Palestine Action, which was formally proscribed by the UK last July, is a British protest group founded six years ago. It says it uses “disruptive tactics” to target “corporate enablers” and companies involved in the manufacture of weapons for Israel, such as Israeli group Elbit Systems, Italian aerospace company Leonardo, French multinational Thales and Teledyne from the United States. The group has targeted British facilities linked to those companies.

In all, British police say action by the group has resulted in millions of pounds of criminal damage.

A court in London ruled on June 12 that four Palestine Action members convicted of criminal damage at a British facility owned by Israeli weapons group Elbit Systems near Bristol, west England, would be sentenced on the basis that their actions had a “terrorist connection”.

Why was this case brought?

Following the proscription of Palestine Action last year, the group’s co-founder, Huda Ammori, challenged the decision in the High Court. In February, the High Court ruled that the government’s “terror group” ban was unlawful and disproportionate.

The government immediately said it would appeal. “I am disappointed by ⁠the court’s decision ⁠and disagree with the notion that banning ⁠this terrorist organisation ⁠is disproportionate,” ⁠Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood ⁠said.

The judgement on Monday agreed with her. Its ruling states: “The Home Secretary had the institutional competence and the democratic accountability to make the decision. The Proscription Decision was consistent with the Home Secretary’s Proscription Policy and was proportionate. It was not unlawful.”

Why did the UK proscribe Palestine Action?

On June 20, 2025, Palestine Action activists broke into the Royal Air Force base at Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and sprayed two military aircraft with red paint.

Days after the Brize Norton attack, members of parliament voted in favour of proscribing the group. That classified Palestine Action as a “terrorist” organisation, bringing it into the same category as armed groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIL (ISIS).

Critics decried the vote, arguing that while members of the group have caused damage to property, they have not committed violent acts that amount to terrorism. More than 130 high-profile public figures have spoken out against the proscription.

Other previous actions the group has taken include:

• In 2021, members protested for six days on the roof of Elbit Systems’ subsidiary, UAV Tactical Systems in Leicester, until some were arrested by police.
• In 2022, the group broke into a Thales equipment factory in Glasgow, causing damage to weapons worth more than a million pounds ($1.3m).
• In 2024, 10 months into Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Palestine Action activists broke into an Elbit Systems UK facility near Bristol in southwest England, causing another million pounds of damage.

How has Palestine Action responded to the ruling?

In a statement read by a representative following the ruling, Palestine Action’s Ammori said the group will challenge the judgement in the UK’s Supreme Court.

“We will fight this all the way. We will seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and, if need be, take this to the European Court of Human Rights,” Ammori said.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), established by the Council of Europe, allows individuals to hold member states accountable for rights violations through a dedicated court. When the ECHR finds a violation, its judgements are legally binding on the state concerned under the European Convention on Human Rights.

“We will not stop fighting to overturn one of the most extreme attacks on free speech and the right to protest in modern British history,” Ammori added.

“This unprecedented abuse of power has devastated the lives of thousands of people while silencing dissent over Israel’s slaughter of the Palestinian people during the genocide, when that dissent could not be more urgent.”

How have others reacted to the ruling?

Anas Mustapha, Head of Public Advocacy at CAGE International, said: “This ruling tells us exactly what these powers are for. They are not safeguards against violence, they are authoritarian tools for crushing dissent.”

Mustapha added: “No ruling from any court is going to convince people that their conscience is wrong, and no amount of legislation will make support for Palestine disappear. The only sustainable outcome is the abolition of these laws in their entirety.”

Thomas Bell, acting UK Director of Human Rights Watch, said: “This disastrous decision further cements the UK’s place among countries that are backsliding on human rights by classifying acts of protest as terrorism.”

“When Palestine Action members have committed criminal damage, that should be dealt with under normal criminal laws, not by misusing overbroad and poorly defined terrorism powers. Defining a protest group as terrorists has created an absurd situation where thousands of people peacefully holding up signs have been arrested,” Bell added.

Israeli journalist Gideon Levy says the US-Iran announcement represents a personal defeat for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ambitions against Iran and Lebanon. His relationship with US President Donald Trump could also be at risk if Israel jeopardises the deal.

The personal finance guru said whatever happens ‘don’t wait till you get to your destination’

Personal finance expert Martin Lewis has issued a warning to anyone using an airport this summer. People going on holiday have been told they will be making a big mistake if they make a key decision when they are ‘captive custom’.

People travelling this year are already concerned about potential cost rises and delays caused by the situation in the Middle East. Mr Lewis, appearing on ITV’s This Morning, explained that making any effort to get cash while at the airport is a mistake.

He told hosts Ben Shephard and Cat Deeley that people like to take cash for things like tips – and also some prefer to use it to budget more effectively. He said: “The worst place to get your cash is at the airport or at the ferry port or anywhere like that because they have your captive custom and the rates are horrendous.

“The best thing to do is to use a couple of travel exchange comparison sites online. Now, the thing is, you have to be careful. It’s a combination of the exchange rate and the fee. So what exchange rate are they giving you? What fee are they giving you? You want that all combined. And that’s what the comparison sites will do.

“You’ll just say, ‘I want £600 worth of dollars. Who’s going to give me the most dollars for my £600?’ And that’s the way that they will work. So, that’s by far the simplest way to do it. Just get yourself on a comparison. But don’t wait till you get to your destination.”

He said that comparison sites will look at perhaps 50 or 60 outlets, whereas if you go abroad before looking it’s unlikely those available will be able to compete. He said “If you go regularly to the same price abroad and you know there’s a little fella and you know and he gives you great rates and they’re much better than the ones at home then it’s fine.

“But if you don’t have that specialist knowledge, do the comparison, take the cash before you go. I mean also if you really do want cash, if you got a specialist overseas card, you know you got a Chase card or something just put it in the cash machine abroad. There’s no fees and you get the near-perfect exchange rate. So that’s another way to get cash.”

Mr Lewis also explained that anyone spending money in European destinations such as Spain, Greece or France should always make one decision when it comes to paying or getting money out. He explained that if people have gone to the trouble of lining up a card to work overseas, then they’re actually adding lots of money onto their bills by making the wrong choice when asked if it’s euros or pounds.

He said: “If you spend, if you go to a machine abroad or you go to an ATM and you’re in Europe, let’s say, or if it says, do you want euros or pounds? What it’s actually saying is if it’s euros, do you want your card to do the conversion? Your card company. If it’s pounds, we will do the conversion. for you and then charge your card. So, that’s the decision. Now, we’ve just talked about getting a specialist overseas card that gives you a near-perfect rate.

“Well, you want them to do the conversion. That’s why you got the specialist overseas card. And actually, even if you haven’t got a specialist card, even the bog standard pretty pants cards here tend to be better than the shop abroad doing it where they put a massive we can be six or 7% on the exchange rate.

“The same with overseas cash machines, which can also add a fee on top, but what happens is basically you put, let’s say, you’re in a cash machine abroad and it’s saying pounds or euros, and you say, as I will absolutely do. I go, I want euros, please, and it says are you sure you’re sure we won’t do the conversion are you actually? Yes, I want euros. Are you sure? What are you doing?

“They are desperate to persuade you to let them do the conversion because they make a lot of money from it it’s the opposite of what they’re trying to push you to do is what you want to do so very simply if you’re in Europe and you paying on a card, paying euros if you’re in America, pay in dollars if you’re in Vietnam.”

EXPLAINER

US President Donald Trump and Iranian leaders say a deal has been agreed to end more than 100 days of war that killed thousands.

United States President Donald Trump and Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said on Sunday that they had reached an initial deal to end the war and to resume traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump said the deal allows for toll-free shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, which has been largely closed since the US and Israel launched an assault on Iran on February 28.

“The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday.

The US and Iran will sign a memorandum of understanding in Switzerland on Friday, said the prime minister of Pakistan, whose country has served as a mediator.

Monday marks 108 days since the war began, with the US and Israel’s attacks on Iran. Here is what’s happening:

What we know about the deal

• The content of the agreement, which follows weeks of fraught negotiations and periodic threats from Trump of new hostilities unless Iran reaches a deal, remained unclear.
• Strait of Hormuz to reopen: Iran’s semi-official Mehr news agency said the draft deal called for reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days under Iranian arrangements. Trump, who turned 80 on Sunday, said the deal allows for toll-free shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, which has been largely closed since the US and Israel launched an assault on Iran on December 28.
• Frozen assets to be released: Iran’s Mehr news agency reported that the US would release $12bn in frozen assets to Iran before the start of negotiations.
• Iran’s enriched uranium: In an interview with The New York Times on Sunday, Trump said Washington was still negotiating whether Iran would suspend its enrichment for 20 years. Trump hinted that he might settle for a 15-year suspension, but said he did not want to negotiate via the press.
• Israel has not commented: There has been no official comment from Israel about the peace agreement.

In Iran

• The secretariat of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said on Monday that the deal with the US includes the immediate suspension of hostilities on all fronts. “Based on the agreements reached, the war and military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, will end immediately and permanently as of tonight, and in addition, the naval blockade against Iran will end immediately and completely,” it said in a statement.

In the US

• Democrats slam Trump over war: While Democratic lawmakers welcomed the deal, they criticised the Trump administration’s decisions pertaining to the war. Senator Chris Coons of Delaware said that while the deal moves the situation in the “right direction”, several questions remain. He warned that competing interpretations of what was agreed upon could pose risks. Senator Chris Murphy, who serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the deal is a “surrender to Iran” but that the US should be “glad about it because every day this insane, illegal war continues, we get weaker”.

In Lebanon

• Trump rebukes Israeli attack on Beirut: On Sunday, shortly before the deal was announced by Trump, Israel launched an air attack on Beirut. Trump angrily blamed Israel for delaying the deal’s signing after launching this attack. In an expletive-laden phone interview with US news outlet Axios, Trump fumed about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying: “I was so pissed off. I let him know.”

Global response

• Western leaders praise deal: UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he was ready to aid the further technical talks between the US and Iran, adding that he hopes the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz will stabilise energy markets.
• French President Emmanuel Macron also praised the deal and said Paris would support the Lebanese government.
• European Union chief Antonio Costa welcomed a deal between the US and Iran to end the Middle East war, adding that the bloc was ready to contribute to a strategy for “lasting peace”.
• UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said it was a “critical step” towards resolving the war in the Middle East.

Global economy

• Oil prices drop: Oil prices slipped to their lowest since March on Monday, with global benchmark Brent crude futures falling $4.08, or 4.7 percent, to $83.25 a barrel by 04:15 GMT. US West Texas Intermediate was at $80.53, down $4.35, or 5.1 percent. Both contracts fell to their lowest levels since March 10 on Monday after tumbling more than 3 percent on Friday.
• Asian markets soar: Markets in Japan soared, more than 5 percent up; in South Korea, they were up 5.3 percent; in Taiwan, they were up 2.4 percent. In Shanghai, they were up 1.3 percent; and in Hong Kong, they were up half a percent; while in Indonesia, they were up 2.07 percent; and in the Philippines, they were up 5.2 percent.

The US and Iran say they have reached a deal to end fighting on all fronts and open the Strait of Hormuz. Al Jazeera’s Osama Bin Javaid explains how both sides are claiming victory, even as tough negotiations over the details still lie ahead.

The 22-year-old scored two goals against Tunisia but had muted celebrations against the country of his father’s birth.

For a 22-year-old making his World Cup debut for Sweden, Yasin Ayari could only have dreamed of a better start to his introduction to the biggest showcase of football.

With a full-throttled volley into the top corner of Tunisia’s net just seven minutes into the first half of their Group H match in Monterrey, Ayari had opened the scoring for the Scandinavian side against their North African opponents.

The fresh-faced midfielder, though, did not revel in the moment as a young World Cup debutant might and instead chose to hold both his hands up before falling onto the ground in sujoud (Muslim act of prostration).

The reason? The deep Tunisian connection that runs in his blood, and one that could have seen him play for the opposition as late as four years ago.

Ayari is of North African heritage, with a Tunisian father and a Moroccan mother, but was born in Sweden. At 18 years of age, the promising footballer decided to represent the country of his own birth, rather than his parents’, and his father backed the decision.

“I wanted him to play for Sweden,” Azzouz Ayari told Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet, adding: “He should feel like he is giving back to the country that took care of him.”

Azzouz, who migrated to the Scandinavian country, revealed that his son was offered a place on the Tunisian side, but neither father nor son considered it an option.

Ayari began playing football at age seven on the youth side of his hometown club Rasunda, in Solna, before moving to Scandinavian football giants AIK, where he made his senior team debut in 2020.

The attacking midfielder was signed by English Premier League club Brighton & Hove Albion in 2023, making his Sweden national team debut in the same year.

Explaining his decision to wear the yellow and blue of Sweden instead of the red and white of Tunisia, Ayari said it was “only natural” to continue representing the country he had played for as a child.

When the World Cup 2026 draws were announced in December, the irony of playing against the country of his father’s heritage was not lost on Ayari.

“It was crazy that we ended up with them in our group,” he said.

The young talent was the standout player in Sweden’s thumping win over Tunisia, and he bookended their dominant performance with another scorching individual goal in the 95th minute.

Ayari found the ball at the edge of the Tunisian goal and sent it flying into the far corner to bag his second World Cup goal in his debut game.

This time, though, he did celebrate and soak in the applause of the jubilant Swedish crowd.

Two goals from Ayari and one each from Isak, Gyokeres and Svanberg take Sweden to the top of Group F in Monterrey.

Sweden crushed Tunisia 5-1 to leave the North African nation’s defensive reputation in tatters and seize control of World Cup Group F as the Mexican city of Guadalupe hosted its first fixture of the tournament.

Graham Potter’s men took the lead in the seventh minute of the game on Sunday, courtesy of midfielder Yasin Ayari’s thunderbolt from outside the box, following a mix-up at the back.

The celebrations of Ayari, who is of Moroccan and Tunisian descent, were muted, despite his fine finish.

Sweden doubled their lead on half an hour after a rapid break freed Alexander Isak on the left.

The Liverpool forward raced ahead and cut inside before unleashing a shot, which goalkeeper Mouhib Chamakh failed to keep out, even though he got a hand to the ball.

Tunisia did not concede a single goal in qualifying, becoming the first side to achieve the feat, subsequently matched by Ivory Coast and England.

Sweden threatened to overwhelm their opponents, but the match changed complexion minutes before half-time, when Omar Rekik headed home Hannibal Mejbri’s teasing cross.

However, the Scandinavian nation restored their two-goal cushion in the 59th minute after another defensive calamity for Tunisia.

Midfielder Ellyes Skhiri was caught in possession on the edge of the box by Isak, who fed Viktor Gyokeres, and the Arsenal man fired home.

Substitute Mattias Svanberg made it 4-1 late on after VAR ruled he was onside.

And there was still time for another stunning goal from Ayari from outside the penalty box.

Sweden reached the quarterfinals of the 2018 World Cup in Russia, but did not qualify for the tournament in Qatar four years later.

Tunisia were the first African team to win a World Cup match when they beat Mexico in 1978, but they have never progressed beyond the group stages.