Middle East

Froun, Lebanon – Hasan Saeid Ramadan, 56, was at home in this southern Lebanese municipality when he heard the explosions.

“It shook the ground like an earthquake, and the mountain collapsed,” he said, pointing at the nearby Qantara mountains.

Israeli forces are present just south of Froun and occupy large areas of southern Lebanon, where they conduct operations, including regular detonations, that they say target the Lebanese group Hezbollah.

The ones conducted by Israel along the Qantara mountain range this week led to a visible collapse in at least two places in the mountains. Locals and officials in villages along the edge of Israeli-controlled Lebanese territory, such as Froun, Ghandouriyeh, Bourj Qalaway and Qalaway, told Al Jazeera that the sounds of war – warplanes, drones but, most of all, Israeli demolitions – are constant and often keep them up at night.

While Ramadan was speaking, an explosion echoed in the distance – another apparent Israeli detonation of a home. “Day and night,” he said. “We even see them.”

He added: “It’s become routine.”

Pilot zones

In March, Israel invaded Lebanon for the second time in less than two years. The first invasion in October 2024 was followed by a near-full Israeli withdrawal with soldiers remaining in five locations in southern Lebanon. After the second invasion, however, Israeli officials have said their troops will stay on in southern Lebanon despite promises from United States officials that the Israelis do not have territorial ambitions in Lebanon.

While US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire in April, Israel’s military has continued to attack what it says are Hezbollah targets and infrastructure around southern Lebanon.

Meanwhile, the Lebanese state has been locked in US-brokered direct discussions with Israel despite objections from Hezbollah and its allies, who favour indirect discussions with the Israelis to try to end the war and the Israeli presence in southern Lebanon.

Israel and Lebanon agreed a “framework agreement” in June, which launched a “pilot zone” plan. The pilot zones are to act as a test area for the Lebanese army to disarm Hezbollah and for the Israelis to withdraw. The first pilot zones were the villages of Froun, Srifa and Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh. But locals disputed the inclusion of Froun and Srifa, saying they were never occupied by Israel in the first place.

“[The Israelis] didn’t take a single step here,” Ramadan said.

For its part, Israel is also reportedly critical of the pilot zone scheme, and analysts doubt their willingness to allow it to progress.

“The pilot zones can only really work if you have goodwill of various parties,” Nicholas Blanford, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and author of a book on Hezbollah, told Al Jazeera. “The trouble is the Israelis have said they are not going to stage any more withdrawals, so it brings the process to a halt.”

And regardless of the efforts from the Lebanese state and the Lebanese army, both Hezbollah and Israel have played a role in undermining the process.

“Hezbollah opposes the scheme outright and argues that Lebanon should rely on Iran to pressure the US into demanding an Israeli withdrawal,” David Wood, the International Crisis Group’s senior analyst for Lebanon, told Al Jazeera. “Israel has paid lip service to the pilot zones scheme but has recently expanded – rather than reduced – its occupation of Lebanese territory.”

Demolitions and destruction

In the villages near the areas Israel controls, many of the homes and local infrastructure lie destroyed. Piles of concrete rubble and dust line many of the roads to the villages. Explosions were heard throughout the day on Thursday, and locals said they are often worse at night and disrupt their sleep.

During the harshest days of the war, these villages were ghost towns. Residents fled north to Sidon or Beirut, where they stayed with family, in displacement centres, or slept rough on the streets, locals said.

Residents began to return to these villages after the announcement of the framework agreement. But what they returned to was not what they had left behind.

Mohammad Ali Nader, the head of the municipality of Ghandouriyeh, said his area was mostly agricultural and farmers grew olives, wheat, chickpeas, corn and tobacco, among many other crops. But now, the area lies overwhelmingly in ruins. Most residents don’t have access to water or electricity.

The clanking sound of cranes and other construction equipment moving rubble or smashing concrete echoed out into the rolling hills behind Nader. He stood on the ruins of a home that had been destroyed by two Israeli rockets.

“Much like all the other houses that were destroyed, this house is no longer habitable,” he said, saying it had once boasted two storeys and a large garden. He added that the electric and water infrastructure in the area was also mostly destroyed. “We used to grow carob here, but where is there carob now?” he asked rhetorically. “Not a carob is left nor olives, tobacco or wheat.”

Nasser Mokdad, an official in the municipality of Froun, said the area was currently not receiving state-provided electricity but added that the Lebanese government was working on returning services, setting September 15 as a target date.

No water, no electricity, no return

Residents in the affected villages said the current period reminds them of the days of the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon from 1982 to 2000. Hasan Bazzi, the head of the municipality of Froun, said the only difference is that during the previous occupation, southerners remained in their Israeli-occupied villages.

This time around, the Israeli demolitions are ensuring that those whose homes are in Israeli-occupied areas will have difficulty returning, even if the troops eventually withdraw.

When the war restarted this year, Ramadan fled his home of 30 years and took refuge in an area near Tyre, a coastal city in southern Lebanon, and then moved farther north to Sidon, about an hour south of Beirut.

When he returned after the truce in the area, his house had been badly damaged. Still, it fared better than the neighbouring houses, which he said belonged to his cousins. He’s now sleeping in his garage with his wife. Their house, like the surrounding area, has no access to water or electricity.

He said the heat at night bothers him and he’s developed a bad heat rash. During the day, he slowly works on fixing the shrapnel-pocketed walls of his home.

Dripping with sweat under the midday sun, he smiled. “My conscience is at ease because I’m by my home,” he said.

Critics argue that the administration’s arcade games prioritise entertainment over pressing issues like rising costs and foreign conflicts.

The White House’s unveiling of five arcade-style games on its website, each believed to be promoting a different policy of United States President Donald Trump’s agenda, has ignited backlash, with critics accusing the administration of prioritising entertainment over addressing rising living costs and the ongoing war on Iran.

Announced on Thursday, the games include “Build the Wall” where players run to capture little green figures before they reach a border wall; “Rio Run”, a Snake-style game in which players gather border crossers along a fence; “Supply Line”, in which players reject food items that fail to meet “Make America Healthy Again” standards; “Flappy Bill,” a Flappy Bird-style game in which a bald eagle carries legislation over the National Mall; and “Trump Savings Tycoon”, in which players catch flying cash and gold bars to “fill your kids’ Trump Accounts,” in reference to the administration’s child savings programme.

“Heating oil is near an all-time high but hey you can play Border Czar Tom Homan in a video game,” Senator Matt Lesser wrote on X.

Rights groups have also criticised the administration for the gaming website.

“Makes me sick. They’ve been playing games with people’s lives for years, now they’ve made a video game of what they’re doing,” Amerika Garcia Grewal, co-director of the Frontera Federation in Eagle Pass, Texas, told AFP news agency.

The game designers “have lost touch with what it means to be human and care for others”.

Adriana Jasso, programme coordinator for AMIGOS San Diego Community, who works at the border, said the arcade-style games showed a fundamental “lack of seriousness” from the administration.

“The cruelty, the extremity of the administration … is no longer surprising,” she said.

In recent months, Trump has faced mounting criticism over the economic toll of the war on Iran and his broader domestic agenda.

The conflict has kept the Strait of Hormuz closed for nearly six months, disrupting global supplies of oil and natural gas and fertiliser, and pushing US inflation above the Federal Reserve’s 2-percent target, according to reporting by Texas Public Radio.

Trump has also faced criticism over tariff policies that the Supreme Court partly struck down earlier this year, along with cuts to food assistance programmes and the expiration of Affordable Care Act tax credits, all of which economists say have compounded the squeeze on household budgets.

The White House, meanwhile, appeared unfazed, posting “CAN’T STOP WINNING” on X alongside a link to the games.

Gaza City, Gaza Strip – In the stifling heat of Gaza City, Dr Rizq Sufyan Abo Halima sits in a small tent pitched in an alleyway, waiting for his next patient.

The tent was a last resort for the doctor, given that the high demand and low supply of properties in the Gaza Strip as a result of Israel’s genocidal war have made finding an affordable surgery impossible.

“The stifling rise in temperatures was my first challenge,” he told Al Jazeera. “I had to adjust the corners of the tent and lift it at the ends to allow air to pass through.”

His old clinic, Smile One, in Sheikh Zayed City in northern Gaza, was bombed during the early days of the war in 2023.

The 31-year-old built a new clinic in May last year, next to where his current tent is pitched, in Gaza City’s al-Nasr neighbourhood. But three months later, it too was destroyed when Israeli forces assaulted the area, just weeks before the ceasefire last October.

He is now forced to conduct operations and other emergency dental procedures in the tent close to the ruins of his former surgery. When the electricity supply stops, which is frequent, there is little he can do but sit in his tent and wait for the power to come back on.

Finding another office would be the obvious solution, but residential and commercial units are hard to find in Gaza and those few that remain are unaffordable.

More than four in five buildings in Gaza City and northern Gaza have been completely destroyed or severely damaged in Israel’s war, according to the United Nations Satellite Centre (UNOSAT).

Fewer than one in five buildings in Gaza can still be used and Israel’s ban on building materials has made repairs impossible. That has created a skewed supply situation, which has made prices of office spaces or homes unaffordable.

“Before the war, I used to rent an entire apartment for my clinic for 500 shekels ($166) a month, but today I cannot afford the prices of remaining apartments at all,” he said. Now, the cost is closer to $1,000.

Heat is better than high costs

Using a tent is the cheapest alternative Dr Abo Halima could find, and he does not want to pass on what he calls the excessive price of building rent to his customers, who are already suffering immense personal and financial hardships.

“If I had rented an apartment for my clinic instead of a tent, the cost of one filling to teeth would have doubled for the patient,” Dr Abo Halima said.

“I am here, enduring the harsh summer heat, so that I can protect people from the high prices that I will inevitably have to charge if I rent an apartment, in addition to the fact that I have no other options at all.”

Dr Abo Halima treats his instruments with care. He sterilises them regularly to protect them from dust and germs and hires a security guard. After all, the thin canvas walls offer little protection from thieves.

Despite his best efforts, the collapsed, resource-starved economy in Gaza means that dental care is a luxury for many patients.

One of them, 25-year-old Yousef Abo Halima, sums up the situation in a few simple words: “I can handle the harsh heat inside the tent, but I certainly cannot afford the high costs of fillings at clinics that operate inside apartments”.

Difficult choices

After Heba Rihan, 23, graduated from Al-Aqsa University with a major in general nursing, she struggled to find work in her field.

So she made an arduous daily journey from the south of the Gaza Strip to the west on foot, looking for work. She eventually found Dr Abo Halima’s clinic in May and began working there.

Now, one of the most regular parts of her job is explaining to patients that the high cost of treatment is due to the scarcity of materials and other issues related to the war and Israel’s siege on Gaza.

“One day [a patient] came in deep pain… When he asked how much the filling cost and was told it was 350 shekels ($116), he didn’t have the money. He asked directly about the tooth extraction, which is only 50 shekels ($17),” she said.

“He decided to extract his original tooth because he could not bear the pain or the cost. That was the most painful moment I’ve ever had here.”

The United States and Iran continue to make competing claims about who has greater control of the critical Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf.

Washington claims the strait is open and that dozens of ships, carrying millions of barrels of oil, are passing through each day. US President Donald Trump claimed last month that the US was in “total control” of the waterway, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas is shipped during peacetime, but which has been closed since the US-Israel war on Iran began six months ago.

Iran, however, says the strait remains under its control and is closed except to pre-approved vessels using its designated channels. It has warned that other ships attempting to transit risk being targeted.

So what is really going on in the strait – and what explains the divergent accounts?

What are the latest US claims about the Strait of Hormuz?

The US says shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has significantly increased in recent weeks.

Two US officials told CNN that 40 commercial ships carrying some 18 million barrels of oil passed through the strait under US military escort on Tuesday, in what would be a new wartime record.

Trump gave a similar figure on Monday, saying the US Navy was helping some 30 ships pass through Hormuz every night. He later said the waterway was “under USA control”.

In terms of oil, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that “at least 10 million barrels” were getting through the strait each day, with between 15 million and 17 million on Tuesday.

The assessment comes after US CENTCOM commander Brad Cooper claimed last week that the US military had cleared Hormuz’s transit lanes of sea mines.

Before the war began, an average of around 100 ships and 20 million barrels of oil are estimated to have passed through the waterway each day.

According to figures from PortWatch, this has fallen to an overall average of seven vessels since March.

What does Iran claim about the strait?

Iran has acknowledged that some vessels are getting through the strait, but insists it remains in control of the waterway.

Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf on Tuesday said “the enemy managed to get some ships” through Hormuz, but stressed that Iranian forces remain “in complete control of the strait and will not allow it to be opened”.

Ghalibaf accused the US of giving ships “false guarantees” about their ability to cross a southern route in Hormuz, warning that ships that try to do so would be targeted.

The following day, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed two oil tankers had hit mines and were disabled while trying to cross an “illegal route” in the strait. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, claimed an Iranian attack hit a Saudi oil tanker, killing two Filipino sailors.

What does shipping data show?

The latest ship-tracking data paints a different picture than the US claims, with far fewer vessels recorded as transiting the strait.

According to marine analytics firm Kpler, just six vessels crossed the strait on Wednesday, 11 on Tuesday and five on Monday. It put the 10-day average at 13 vessels per day.

Other ship-trafficking services show a similar pattern. Maritime data firm Lloyd’s List Intelligence recorded an average of around 12 transits per day from August 26 to September 1, though the latest data may be incomplete “due to a lag in identifying dark transits”, said the firm’s maritime intelligence and research director, Bridget Diakun. This means that some ships are switching off their tracking beacons.

From August 17-23, Lloyd’s List Intelligence recorded “about 14 non-Iranian-linked ships each day”, Diakun told Al Jazeera.

All these figures are far lower than the US claim that 40 ships transited the strait on Tuesday.

The Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC), which monitors threats to shipping in the region, said in a September 1 advisory that commercial traffic through Hormuz was “far below baseline”, despite a “modest uptick from recent lows”.

The advisory put the risk level for Hormuz at “severe”, citing a “continued risk of drifting or uncharted mines”, despite US claims to have cleared the strait of mines.

What explains the discrepancy?

Diakun told Al Jazeera that it is difficult to explain the gap between US-claimed transit figures and those recorded by ship trackers without insight into how the US tallies its own figures.

She said it’s possible the US includes smaller or non-cargo-carrying ships in its total, unlike Lloyd’s, which only counts “cargo-carrying vessels over 10,000 dwt [deadweight tonnage]”.

Eirik Hooper, a senior associate covering the ports and terminals sector for maritime research consultancy Drewry, also pointed to possible differences in how the US counts vessel transits.

“A US operational count plausibly includes everything that moved under or near naval protection: naval auxiliaries, offshore support and tugs, coastal and small craft [and] dhows,” said Hooper, noting that ship-tracking firm Kpler filters out such vessels “on size or cargo grounds”.

Hooper also said the US has access to “satellite, airborne and other sensor coverage plus its own convoy manifests”, which enables it to see vessels not immediately picked up by the normal automatic identification system (AIS) tracking system.

“By late August, the majority of Hormuz crossings were classified ‘dark’ or unknown by route, and AIS data counts often need to be revised to include vessels that switch off their transponders, with confirmed movements backdated,” said Hooper.

More generally, both the US and Iran have an incentive to play up their influence in the strait, the status of which has become a major sticking point in their six-month conflict.

Former US Ambassador Henry Ensher recently told Al Jazeera that he believes the latest cycle of US-Iran confrontation was likely triggered by CENTCOM’s claims to have de-mined that strait, and said “both sides would be well served to stop talking quite so much”.

The global energy order is changing.

US President Donald Trump celebrated on Truth Social what he called the “biggest oil deal in history” – a 100-year concession on 17 oil fields in Venezuela that would secure 65 billion barrels of oil.

Around the same time, QatarEnergy informed Edison, one of its biggest European customers, that force majeure on its liquefied natural gas (LNG) deliveries would continue until early November. Five more cargoes were cancelled, taking the total to 29, or about 3.8 billion cubic metres of gas.

The contract has run since 2009 and normally covers roughly a tenth of Italy’s annual consumption. Edison has kept supplying its customers by finding replacement cargoes elsewhere, including in the US.

For decades, the bargain between Washington and the Gulf was clear. The US protected the region and kept its sea lanes open; Gulf producers supplied the energy on which the global economy depended and settled their sales in dollars to benefit the US economy.

That bargain has been turned on its head. America no longer simply protects Gulf energy. It competes with it, and increasingly profits when the Gulf cannot deliver due to insecurity.

Six months of war have reportedly impacted Qatar’s LNG exports significantly. Other Gulf countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have seen a substantial drop in oil exports as well. Meanwhile, US oil and gas have moved into the space left behind, with US energy giants raking in record-high profits.

It is important here to distinguish between the US as a government and the dense network of private interests that operates around it. Washington wants strategic leverage over Iran and continued influence over the Gulf states. Energy companies want access to reserves, favourable regulation, profitable prices and new customers. Trump brings the two together under the banner of energy dominance. State power opens the door; private capital walks through it.

Israel adds another layer. Chevron operates its two main offshore gas fields, owning almost 40 percent of the Leviathan gasfield and 25 percent of the Tamar gasfield. Leviathan is expanding after a $35bn agreement was signed last year to increase exports to Egypt.

Israel is therefore not an independent energy rival to the US in the way Qatar is. Its growing role as an Eastern Mediterranean gas hub is tied to a US operator and fits comfortably within a US-backed regional system linking Israel, Egypt and Jordan.

Chevron is the thread running through much of this story. It has major interests in US production, controls Israel’s most important gas assets and is positioned to expand in Venezuela. This does not mean Chevron determines foreign policy. It does show how easily the exercise of American power can translate into commercial opportunity for American companies.

Israel is also determined not to let the confrontation with Iran end on terms it considers not to be in its interest. The US-Iran memorandum of understanding signed in June fell well short of Israeli war aims. Israel said it was not bound by all its provisions, insisted on freedom of action in Lebanon and briefly resumed attacks while the US was trying to sustain negotiations.

For Israel, ceasefires have tended to be pauses, not settlements: opportunities to regroup while preserving the option of striking again. The reasons are chiefly strategic. Israel wants to prevent Iran from rebuilding its nuclear, missile and regional capabilities, while Israeli leaders fear accepting a deal and looking weak ahead of elections.

The consequences of Israel pushing for continuous conflict align with US energy interests. Continued pressure on Iran keeps the Strait of Hormuz insecure, Gulf exports vulnerable and risk premiums for energy transport high. Israel and US energy companies do not need to be following a common plan for their interests to reinforce one another.

Price is where the argument becomes clearest. Trump talks constantly about cheap oil, but US producers cannot prosper if it becomes too cheap. A Dallas Federal Reserve survey found that US companies needed an average price of about $43 a barrel to operate existing wells and $66 to drill new ones profitably. The two main Permian basins sit at roughly $61 to $62.

Trump therefore needs a narrow band: oil cheap enough to contain inflation, but expensive enough to keep shale, fracking and export investment alive. Gulf insecurity helps maintain it. The disruption need not be catastrophic. It only has to keep prices at a point where the next American well makes economic sense.

This may help explain the attraction of a no-war, no-peace outcome. A full regional war could close Hormuz, send prices soaring and threaten Chevron’s Israeli operations. A durable settlement would remove the risk premium, restore confidence in Gulf supply and limit Israel’s freedom of action.

Managed insecurity sits conveniently between the two: enough restraint to protect US-linked production, but not enough diplomacy to make Gulf energy entirely dependable again.

Israel keeps Iran under pressure. Washington retains leverage over its allies. US producers gain customers and commercially supportive prices. The danger lies in the convergence: Several powerful actors now have something to gain from preventing the crisis from reaching a final resolution.

The Gulf still holds vast reserves and enjoys production costs US companies cannot match. But reserves alone no longer decide market power. Reliability does. Only an estimated 3.5 to 5.5 million barrels a day can bypass Hormuz through Saudi and Emirati pipelines. The rest remains exposed to a single point of failure, despite decades of arms purchases, foreign bases and security guarantees.

The greatest threat to the Gulf’s energy future is not depletion. It is that customers learn to live without it. Every delayed tanker strengthens the case for an Atlantic alternative. Every Qatari cargo replaced by US LNG creates a relationship that may endure long after the war.

US power once rested partly on protecting the flow of Gulf energy. It now rests increasingly on replacing it.

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

United States President Donald Trump has threatened more attacks on Iran, warning that Washington could hit Iran “anytime we want”, as the death toll from the latest US strikes climbed to 18, with at least 108 others wounded.

Trump’s threat on Wednesday came after the US and Iran exchanged their biggest barrage since July. The US military struck cities and areas along Iran’s southern coast, near the blockaded Strait of Hormuz, including a wedding party in the city of Kuhestak.

Iran retaliated with attacks on US bases across the Middle East, including Bahrain, Iraq and Jordan.

Speaking to reporters at the White House, Trump said, “We hit them very hard last night” and that the strikes “took out all of the new equipment that they tried to build along the Strait of Hormuz”.

“It was a very heavy attack last night. And we’re prepared to do another one. And anytime we want,” he said.

Iranian officials said at least 18 people were killed in the US strikes.

The victims included two children, according to Mohammad-Reza Zafarghandi, Iran’s health minister. One of them was a four-year-old who was killed in the strike on the wedding party in Kuhestak in Sirik county.

At least four people were killed in that strike.

Esmaeil Baghaei, the spokesman for Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, described the Kuhestak attack as a “war crime” and hit back at US claims that it does not target civilians.

“The reality is so horrifying that even American propaganda has never dared make the claim [the US military] is making today. Sirik is not a story. The civilians are real. The victims are real”, Baghaei wrote on X.

Iranian media said the funeral for the four Kuhestak victims will be held on Thursday.

‘Uncomfortable strategic position’

The six-month war has led to a spike in oil prices, roiled the global economy and posed increasing political problems for Trump’s Republican Party ahead of November midterm elections in the US.

Only 31 percent of Americans approve of the war, while some 63 percent disapprove, according to a poll by the Reuters news agency and the Ipsos polling firm in August. Voters are particularly unhappy about high gas prices. Since the fighting resumed this weekend, the price of Brent crude oil, the international standard, has climbed to about $95, up more than 30 percent from the start of the war.

Trump’s approval rating has also fallen from 40 percent to 33 percent since the conflict began, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling.

On Wednesday, Trump said he did not think the renewed military campaign ⁠would last long. He also reiterated his position that the upcoming elections were not a factor in his Iran strategy.

“Number one, I’m not running. My party is running, and I’m going to help my party,” he told reporters in the Oval Office. “But I think my party respects the fact that we’re not allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

Iran has denied seeking a nuclear weapon.

Tariq Khan, a retired Pakistani lieutenant-general and former commander of the Pakistan Army’s Frontier Corps, said the US “now finds itself in an increasingly uncomfortable strategic position in the Iran war”.

“The US has not succeeded in restoring the maritime environment that existed before the war, and is now expending military resources to deal with a problem the war itself helped create,” he told Al Jazeera, referring to Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

The strait was a free-flowing international waterway carrying roughly one-fifth of the world’s traded oil before the war. Tehran shut the waterway in response to the US and Israeli strikes on February 18 that began the war. Despite repeated US claims that the strait remains open, only a handful of vessels now pass through each day, and Iran continues to target ships attempting the crossing.

On Wednesday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said two oil tankers had struck mines and were disabled while attempting an unauthorised transit. Separately, Saudi shipping firm Bahri reported that two Filipino sailors were killed in an attack on their vessel earlier in the week.

Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), which Tehran set up to police the Strait of Hormuz, added 11 more ships to its blacklist for alleged “noncompliance” this week, on top of the 45 blacklisted last week. The PGSA said the vessels will face fines, seizures or confiscation unless they submit required documentation to Iran before attempting to cross the strait.

Strait of Hormuz

At the same time, the US has intensified an economic isolation campaign against Iran, threatening to slap countries that ‌trade with Tehran with massive sanctions, while also maintaining its own blockade in the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump on Wednesday continued to insist that Washington was in control of the strait, saying US forces were helping bring “lots of boats out every day with millions of barrels of oil”.

“We are, for the most part, doing it without trouble. Every once in a while they shoot a drone, and we knock it down. We have control, very strong control,” he said.

On Tuesday, he had claimed the US Navy was helping escort some 30 ships out of the strait every day. Before the war, some 130 ships transited the waterway daily.

Khan, the former Pakistani general, said Iran understands it cannot defeat the US conventionally and is seeking to make the war costly for Trump.

“If Trump escalates, Iran can portray America as being drawn deeper into another Middle Eastern war; if he restrains himself, Tehran can claim that American military superiority cannot compel Iran to surrender,” he said.

“Iran does not need a battlefield victory; it needs to remain standing, keep the economic disruption alive, and make the war politically costly for the US. Tehran has to make American victory increasingly unaffordable – militarily, economically and electorally.”

Spain faces unrest as residents protest, while migrants and asylum seekers search for shelter and resources in Ceuta.

Thousands of protesters have rallied across Spain against the ongoing migrant crisis in Ceuta, a small Spanish territory on the African coast.

Roughly 50,000 people gathered in Madrid alone on Wednesday. In Ceuta itself, residents draped Spanish and city flags over their shoulders.

“Expel the invaders” and “Ceuta is not for sale, Ceuta must be defended” were among the crowd’s chants.

The protests fell on Ceuta Day, a local holiday that marks the Portuguese takeover of the North African city in the 15th century.

They also come a little more than a month after more than 70,000 migrants and asylum seekers crossed en masse from Morocco into Ceuta on July 30 and 31. The deadly surge killed at least 80 people.

While many of the arrivals have returned to Africa, some remain. Estimates vary as to how many. The Spanish government places the figure at about 5,000 people, including 1,200 minors, but local statistics have a higher count.

Among those who remain stranded in the Spanish territory is Otman Ianaya, 40. He swam to Ceuta with his wife and two young daughters, searching for better prospects.

“There is no work in Morocco,” he told the news agency AFP. “I want to build a future in my life.”

Some migrants and asylum seekers sleep on Ceuta’s beaches. The Spanish government has worked to expand emergency housing and increase funds to social services, but critics have blasted the effort as inadequate to answer the needs of so many people.

The strain has sparked isolated instances of violence, including fights, the stoning of a military patrol and reports of sexual assault.

Residents in Ceuta have also clashed with police and burned items belonging to migrants and asylum seekers, in protest of the influx of people.

“The situation has been chaotic, so much so that you can’t go out onto the street,” said Gema Guillen, a protester.

The July incident has also underscored political schisms.

Ceuta’s regional leader, Juan Jesus Vivas, represents Spain’s conservative Popular Party and has called the crisis a “violation of Spain’s territorial integrity”.

Meanwhile, Spain’s territorial policy minister, Angel Victor Torres, has accused the conservative and far-right opposition of exploiting the crisis “to attack the government of Spain” instead of helping the city.

Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has blamed the surge on a misread court ruling and online disinformation that he said encouraged people to cross the border.

He also said negative coverage of the crisis has since been amplified by Russian and Israeli-linked accounts, though he did not offer proof, instead citing findings from Spain’s intelligence community.

Madrid has pledged 309 million euros ($357m) in aid for Ceuta.

Amid the standoff, while some migrants are looking for economic opportunities, others are seeking asylum to escape alleged persecution back home.

“They are people in a vulnerable situation; we need to have a little bit of empathy,” said Halima Ahmed of Luna Blanca, a nongovernmental organisation that distributes food and aid to migrants and asylum seekers.

“People are tired, people are fed up… but that does not justify any type of violence,” she added.

On Monday, Greece and Israel signed a $3.5bn defence deal to build an integrated, multilayered defence network to protect Greek territory dubbed the Achilles Shield. The package brings together the David’s Sling and Spyder interceptors, the Barak air and missile defence system and multimission radars, alongside a separate deal adding Drone Dome systems to protect strategic sites from UAVs.

It is the largest defence deal ever concluded between the two countries. It is also one of the most significant export agreements in Israel’s recent history.

What makes the agreement particularly striking is that it comes as Israel’s global standing is at one of its lowest points in decades. And Greece is no outlier, given that 65 percent of its citizens now view Israel unfavourably. Why, then, has Athens now chosen to openly deepen its ties with Israel in the most politically sensitive of areas: defence and military technology?

Firstly, the shadow of Israel’s conflict with Iran looms large. In early March, an Iranian drone struck Cyprus, Greece’s neighbour and close partner. This likely reinforced anxieties that were already visible in 2024. After Israel, with the help of the United States, downed approximately 300 Iranian drones and missiles, Greek Defence Minister Nikos Dendias called on Athens to develop its own antidrone “dome”.

The deal is therefore partly the product of pragmatic necessity as countries scramble for military solutions to growing drone threats. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, for example, are acquiring antidrone technology from Ukraine, another country able to market its products as battle-tested.

Despite its political disadvantage, Israel has a practical head start, given that it has long practised “arms diplomacy”, using its defence industry as a springboard to cultivate deeper bilateral ties with prospective buyers.

The second factor driving the Achilles Shield deal is another longstanding tenet of Israeli grand strategy: the “periphery doctrine”. This advocates that Israel develop ties with non-Arab states and peoples on the periphery of the Levant to counter the hostility between Israel and its immediate neighbours. It is a recognition that shared threats can produce strategic partnerships. And in the case of Israel and Greece, that shared threat is Turkiye.

The irony is that Turkiye – as a non-Arab state and the gateway between the Middle East and Europe – was Israel’s close partner in the early days of the periphery doctrine. In 1949, Turkiye was the first Muslim country to recognise Israel. In subsequent years, Ankara and Tel Aviv developed robust but clandestine security ties.

This worked as Israel intended in that it opened the door to increasingly public and broader bilateral relations, which continued even after the Islamist-oriented AK Party, or Justice and Development Party, came to power in Turkiye in 2002.

But both sides fell out in late 2008 after Israel launched an offensive on the Gaza Strip. Subsequent divergences over Israeli policies towards the occupied Palestinian territory have gradually unravelled their deep ties.

Bilateral trade has collapsed since Ankara imposed an embargo on Israel in 2024. There are no longer direct flights between the two countries. In June, US President Donald Trump claimed that US pressure stopped Turkiye from joining the war on Iran, on Tehran’s side. This may sound far-fetched, yet it illustrates how Israel and Turkiye not only disagree on many geopolitical issues, but increasingly see each other as rivals and even threats.

What is remarkable is how quickly Greece has filled the void. In previous years, Tel Aviv’s partnership with Ankara precluded closer ties with Athens. But no more: in late 2025, Israel, Cyprus and Greece signed a “Joint Action Plan” that mandates enhanced military cooperation.

Energy has reinforced this strategic convergence. The discovery of substantial gas reserves in the eastern Mediterranean encouraged Israel, Greece and Cyprus to cooperate on pipelines and maritime security.

And, as was the case with Turkiye, more extensive bilateral ties followed security cooperation: some 744,000 Israelis visited Greece in 2025, compared with the peak of 558,000 Israeli tourists who travelled to Turkiye in 2008.

The increasing regional division into competing blocs has also driven the burgeoning Israel-Greece relationship. In February, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu floated a “hexagon alliance” of Israel, Greece, Cyprus, India and unnamed Arab and African countries.

Six months later, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement. This alliance broadly overlaps with what commentators earlier labelled the “Islamic coalition”.

This is an evolving dynamic and inter-bloc collaboration is as common as intra-bloc divergences. But it demonstrates that the crisis of confidence in the US as a security guarantor extends beyond the Gulf states and predates the recent war on Iran. It also portends headaches for Washington’s policymakers, given that these increasingly competing states are all US allies.

The Achilles Shield deal is therefore the new manifestation of an old Israeli strategy that has been accelerated by the US-Israel war on Iran. Public scepticism may complicate Greece-Israel relations, but Israeli-Turkish ties deepened for decades despite similarly unfavourable public attitudes.

In short, in the eastern Mediterranean and elsewhere, growing popular outrage at Israel’s policies will continue to coexist uneasily with deepening security cooperation at an elite level. The irony is that the same conflicts that have damaged Israel’s international standing have also increased the value of its military experience and defence technology.

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

Israeli forces have fired tear gas into a mosque in the occupied West Bank, leaving worshippers inside struggling to breathe, hours after settlers tried to set fire to a second mosque in the territory.

The Palestinian Ministry of Religious Affairs condemned the continued pogroms on Tuesday, calling them a flagrant violation of the sanctity of places of worship.

Footage, verified by Al Jazeera, showed worshippers at the mosque in Madama, near Nablus, coughing in the aftermath of the tear gas attack.

One elderly man was seen bent over as another tried to help him.

The ministry said Israeli forces “fired tear gas canisters” into the mosque as people gathered for their evening prayers. The attack “resulted in several elderly worshippers suffering from suffocation and caused widespread disruption to the congregation”, it added.

The attack in Madama came hours after Israeli settlers tried to set fire to another mosque in the nearby town of Bazariya.

Photos and videos from Nur al-Din Zanki Mosque showed blackened burn marks around a window of a room and Hebrew phrases sprayed on the exterior walls.

Majed Nasr, who lives near the mosque, said the attack took place early on Tuesday morning. “There was a small explosion that caused a fire inside the mosque building,” he told the AFP news agency. “We managed to contain the blaze before things could get worse and reach the main upper part of the building.”

The Religious Affairs Ministry condemned the “criminal attack” and said some 13 mosques have been “violated” by the Israeli military or settlers since the start of 2026.

Local sources told the Anadolu agency that the racist slogans sprayed at the site included threats against Palestinians and a message to the United States ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, saying: “Huckabee, greetings from the terrorists.”

Last month, Huckabee had described Israeli settlers attacking Palestinians in the town of Qusra and other areas of the occupied West Bank as “terrorists”.

The office of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued a statement following the Madama attack, warning of “the dangers of the continued and escalating religious war” waged by Israeli forces and settlers against religious sites in the occupied West Bank, including the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem.

The “systematic attacks … crossed all red lines and risked triggering a religious conflict with serious consequences for the region and the world”, it said.

Settlers also burned vehicles in the town of Beta, south of Nablus, and set fire to a Palestinian vehicle in Nahalin, west of Bethlehem, on Tuesday, according to media reports and footage posted online.

The attacks come amid a sharp increase in pogroms by Israeli forces and settlers across the occupied West Bank.

The United Nations said in August that at least 76 Palestinians have been killed in the territory this year and that some 3,800 people have been displaced by settler violence, as well as demolitions and evictions.

It also said settler violence had reached “unprecedented levels,” with more than 1,430 attacks resulting in casualties or property damage documented this year.

Elsewhere in the occupied West Bank, Israeli forces arrested at least 14 Palestinians, including five in Rummanah, one at the Anab checkpoint, one in Tammun, three in Hebron, two in Bethlehem and two in Nablus.

Israeli forces also uprooted olive trees near Jenin, demolished greenhouses and issued a demolition notice for a home in the town of Idhna.

Hubert Bartkowiak, from Gniezno in Poland, was told he had to pay £8,640 for three rooms for three nights at the Luxor View Hotel in Egypt, or his reservation would be cancelled

Holidaymakers are being told to pay 12 times more for hotel rooms after booking – or face a cancelled reservation. Forward-thinking Hubert Bartkowiak had been looking forward to a trip to Luxor, Egypt, with friends.

The Pole had booked three rooms for four people at the Luxor View Hotel over a year before the holiday, through Booking.com, forking out $1,040 (£768) for three nights, working out at £64 per person, per night. Hubert, from Gniezno, was shocked to receive a message from the hotel demanding 12 times as much, otherwise the booking would be cancelled.

“Please note that prices have increased; for your booking during this period, the room will be $1,300 (£960) a night,” the message read. With each of the three rooms costing £960 a night, he faced a bill of £8,640. When he refused to pay, the hotel worker implied the reservation would be cancelled and the hotel closed “for renovations” if Hubert turned up.

Do you have a travel story to share? Email webtravel@reachplc.com

“The hotel will be closed for renovations. You’re free to leave. You won’t have any rooms,” a message seen by the Mirror reads. After The Mirror contacted Booking.com on Hubert’s behalf, the hotel decided to honour his booking at the original rate.

However, there are many more people heading to Spain, Tunisia, Egypt and other countries in the path of next August’s eclipse who have already had their bookings cancelled as prices spike. “Raising prices I can understand as demand is high, but changing the price after making a reservation or cancelling it for a better offer is simply unfair,” Hubert said.

Another spurned holidaymaker is Kara Wiley. She booked a hotel in Luxor, paying $681 (£504) for three nights, only to receive a message from the owner demanding $3,900 (£2,886). “This is not affordable for me, and my flights are already booked,” she wrote in a post on a Facebook group.

Facebook groups and Reddit threads are full of such horror stories, with many eclipse hunters now worried that they’ll arrive ahead of the August 2 to discover they’ve nowhere to stay.

Such a scenario befell David Tunnicliffe, who booked a villa in Escalona del Prado, Spain, two years before the eclipse this August. “It was just cancelled by the host one day before we were due to arrive for a week. Sucks to be me, I guess!” David said. David was blanked by the accommodation provider, and his emails bounced. Luckily, David managed to book back-up accommodation at the last minute. It cost twice as much, but the booking platform he used agreed to pay the extra expense.

On Monday, August 2 next year, the moon will block the sun starting in the Atlantic Ocean, crossing southern Spain and North Africa, and moving through the Middle East and the Horn of Africa before ending in the Indian Ocean. The event has been dubbed “the eclipse of the century” due to the length of totality. Total darkness will descend for 6 minutes and 23 seconds in some areas, including Luxor. That is roughly three times the duration of this year’s eclipse.

Following the eclipse this August and the buzz that’s generated, accommodation prices for next year have rocketed. In El Palmar, a villa for six people located around 600 metres from the beach will cost €33,129 (£28,379) for one night. Split between the six potential guests, that would be around €5,522 (£4,730) per person.

According to Citizens Advice, customers should check the terms and conditions for the holiday or booking they’ve made to see if they allow the company to increase the price. Look for something like ‘price variation’ – this means the price can change. They can’t increase it if the terms and conditions don’t allow it. Even if the terms and conditions allow price increases, the company can only increase the price because of:

• fuel price rises which mean transport costs have gone up
• changes to taxes or fees by third parties – like tourist taxes
• exchange rates which affect the price of the holiday

The company has to let you know in writing about their plans to increase the price. They also have to give you a reasonable time to tell them if you accept it or want to cancel. If they’re offering another package instead, they must tell you how much it costs.

The company must tell you about the price rise at least 20 days before the package starts and explain why they put the price up. You have the right to cancel the holiday without paying a fee if the increase is more than 8% – you’ll get back any money you’ve already paid.

Search and rescue operations under way as authorities lose contact with 10 crew members after a vessel collision near Istanbul.

Turkiye’s coastguard has launched a search and rescue operation after two Turkish-flagged commercial vessels collided off Istanbul and contact was lost with one vessel and its crew of 10.

The collision took place at 3am (00:00 GMT) in the Marmara Sea a little more than 20 miles (32 kilometres) south of Silivri, a suburb of Turkey’s largest city, the Istanbul governor’s office said in a statement on Wednesday.

Contact was lost with the crew of the Tugberk Imamoglu, flagged to Turkey, after the collision with the Turkish-flagged Alsu, which appeared undamaged, the governor’s office said.

“Numerous naval units from the coast guard’s Marmara and Bosphorus Command and a coast guard helicopter were dispatched to the scene,” the office said.

Last week, Israel attacked Syrian territory yet again. Israeli forces shelled a hilltop near Beit Jinn in the western Damascus countryside, while soldiers raided a village in Quneitra province.

The attacks came just days after Israeli fighter jets struck the Abu al-Duhur military base in northern Syria, inflicting significant damage. Israel said the strike was intended to prevent a possible Turkish military deployment there, although both Damascus and Ankara disputed these claims. The Israeli attacks have persisted despite Syrian efforts to de-escalate through diplomacy, and criticism from Washington of the Abu al-Duhur strike.

While avoiding confrontation, the government of Ahmed al-Sharaa continues to insist that Israel withdraw from Syrian territory it has occupied and that Damascus must remain free to rebuild its armed forces and cooperate with the partners of its choosing.

All this reveals more than Syria’s military weakness. It suggests that the new Syrian leadership believes sovereignty can be recovered by rebuilding state capacity first. This strategy, however, carries potential risks: Israel may continue to encroach on Syrian sovereignty while taking advantage of Syrian restraint; and the Syrian government may eventually begin to lose the trust of Syrians and the wider Arab public, among whom Israel is overwhelmingly viewed as a threat.

Syria’s weakness is real. In late 2024, after the army of former President Bashar al-Assad collapsed, Israel struck strategic military assets across the country. The new government then had to begin assembling a national security architecture from dysfunctional institutions and a patchwork of armed groups.

For now, a Syrian military response capable of altering Israel’s behaviour is difficult to imagine.

Instead, al-Sharaa has placed economic recovery and international legitimacy at the top of his priorities. His government has focused on rebuilding state institutions, restructuring the security sector, restoring energy supplies, improving foreign relations and reconnecting Syria to the international economy. But rebuilding Syria is an enormous challenge.

The World Bank estimates that reconstructing Syria’s damaged physical assets will cost about $216bn. A state facing needs on that scale cannot restore its authority through military institutions alone. It needs revenue, electricity, functioning administration, banking access, investment and external relationships.

Al-Sharaa has achieved significant progress on the international front. Washington dismantled the broad Syria sanctions programme in 2025, while the European Union lifted its economic sanctions, although targeted and security-related measures remain. On August 24, Washington also removed Syria from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, eliminating another key obstacle to financial normalisation and investment.

For Damascus, these steps expand the resources with which the state can govern; they are not simply an economic dividend of avoiding war.

This also makes the dispute with Israel more consequential. Syria’s reconstruction strategy now depends heavily on precisely the international access that years of isolation denied it. A major military escalation with Israel could undermine investor confidence, complicate Syria’s reintegration into international banking and weaken the diplomatic support on which its recovery depends.

It could also expose Damascus to renewed political pressure by Washington and the EU, even if this does not automatically translate into the reimposition of broad sanctions.

The dilemma is therefore becoming sharper: Restraint helps Damascus preserve the international environment it needs to rebuild the state, but it also gives Israel room to constrain the very military and strategic capacity Syria is trying to reconstruct.

Israel has security concerns about the new Syrian government, whose leadership emerged from an armed Islamist movement, and it is increasingly alarmed by Turkiye’s military relationship with Damascus. But Israeli demands have extended well beyond preventing hostile forces from approaching its border.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for the demilitarisation of Syria’s Quneitra, Deraa and Suwayda provinces. His government has also opposed the deployment of forces belonging to Syria’s new army south of Damascus and has sought to restrict the scope of Damascus’s military cooperation with Turkiye.

Israel clearly wants to limit the rebuilding of Syria’s military capacity. It sees such interference through the prism of preventive security. Damascus sees the same issue through the prism of sovereignty: A state that cannot decide where its army deploys or with whom it trains has not fully recovered strategic autonomy.

This is one of the central risks of al-Sharaa’s strategy. Syria is avoiding an unwinnable confrontation partly to rebuild the capacities of state power, while those same capacities are increasingly becoming objects of Israeli pressure.

There are limits to what restraint can achieve. Syria has the backing of other Arab states, while the United States and EU have supported the reconstruction of a functioning Syrian state as part of their approach to regional stability. Damascus has also repeatedly expressed interest in reaching a security agreement with Israel.

And yet, none of this has stopped Israeli military action.

The other risk concerns Syrian public opinion. Appearing indefinitely unable to respond to Israeli attacks could eventually damage al-Sharaa’s public standing and the legitimacy of his government.

A large survey by the Arab Center Washington DC conducted in 2025 found that 74 percent of Syrians opposed recognising Israel, 70 percent rejected an agreement that did not include the return of the Golan Heights, and 88 percent believed Israel threatened Syria’s security and stability. At the same time, 61 percent said the current government’s foreign policy reflected the views of the Syrian people.

The findings are important precisely because they complicate the picture. The survey predates the latest confrontations and does not tell us whether Syrians favour military retaliation. It establishes political red lines, not a public demand for war.

Wider Arab polling points in the same direction. Across the countries surveyed in the 2025 Arab Opinion Index, opposition to recognising Israel remained overwhelming.

That said, Syria under the al-Assads also generally avoided confrontation with Israel while retaining a reputation for belonging to the regional “resistance” camp. The old model combined avoidance of direct war with alliances and armed networks that gave Damascus regional leverage.

Al-Sharaa’s government appears to be making a different bet, focusing on consolidated institutions, economic recovery, international access and a rebuilt national military.

This does not replace territorial sovereignty. It is an attempt to rebuild the means of exercising it.

The bet will become harder to defend, both at home and abroad, if restored state capacity does not eventually give Syria greater control over its territory, its security choices and its foreign relations.

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

UN watchdog says Syria ‘failed to report nuclear material, facilities and activities’ under Bashar al-Assad’s rule.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog has confirmed that Syria tried to construct a nuclear reactor in the eastern province of Deir Az Zor under ousted former President Bashar al-Assad.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in a confidential report seen by news agencies on Tuesday, said it visited several sites in Syria in August and carried out verification work.

Based on observations at the Deir Az Zor site, the agency said it confirms “that the cooling infrastructure which has now been uncovered is consistent with that of a nuclear reactor”. The agency said it would continue to monitor the activities at the site “as the excavation work progresses”.

Syria was believed to have operated an extensive undeclared nuclear programme under al-Assad that included a nuclear reactor built by North Korea in Deir Az Zor.

The site only became public knowledge after Israel launched air strikes in 2007 that destroyed the facility. Syria later levelled the site and never responded fully to the IAEA’s questions about it.

Israel is believed to have its own undeclared atomic weapons programme that makes it the only country in the Middle East with nuclear bombs. Israel neither confirms nor denies having atomic weapons.

Following al-Assad’s removal in early December 2024, the new government agreed to give IAEA inspectors access to suspected former nuclear sites.

The agency took samples at the site in 2024 and reported last year that they contained uranium particles.

In its Tuesday report, the IAEA said it was also able to “establish that the former Syrian authorities had failed to report nuclear material, facilities and activities”.

Besides the nuclear reactor under construction at Deir Az Zor, the IAEA listed a fuel fabrication plant, where the nuclear fuel for the reactor was manufactured, and a location where the nuclear fuel, as well as uranium scrap and waste, were stored.

During the visit to Syria, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi and a team of senior inspectors also visited a previously undeclared site.

The new Syrian administration notified the agency of the site’s existence in a July 17 letter and invited the IAEA “to cooperate with the Syrian authorities in the inspection and verification of the site and of any nuclear material to be potentially found”.

The IAEA said in its report that this new site contained “natural uranium metal in the form of fuel rods with cladding”.

The agency verified the material and confirmed “the presence of around 73 tonnes of natural uranium metal”. The agency reported that “all of this nuclear material is currently subject to Agency containment and surveillance measures”.

The new Syrian authorities have also expressed an interest in developing a civilian nuclear energy programme and said any nuclear material found in the country would remain in Syria’s custody under international safeguards.

US says its forces ‘successfully’ completed a wave of strikes against Iranian targets, accusing the IRGC of attempted attacks on shipping and US service members.

The IAEA said lack of information and access to facilities to verify Iran’s nuclear material is a proliferation concern.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has called for “utmost urgency” to address the lack of access to Iran’s nuclear sites.

In a quarterly report seen by news agencies on Tuesday, the United Nations nuclear watchdog labelled its “lack of information about this nuclear material and access to facilities to verify it is a matter of proliferation concern”.

The US has claimed preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon – an ambition that Tehran continues to deny – as the motivation for the war that it launched in March. However, Tehran has been successful in shifting the focus of the hostilities to control of the strategic Strait of Hormuz waterway.

In particular, the IAEA report raised concerns over the lack of access to the Isfahan plant, which was targeted several times by the US and Israel over the past year or so.

In the report, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi expressed his “conviction that the long-standing problems and recurrent crises surrounding these issues must be resolved through a long-lasting, verifiable diplomatic agreement”.

However, Iran has said that access to the sites that have been struck by military action must be arranged via special arrangement.

The head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Mohammad Eslami, said on August 26 that the IAEA “cannot seek to inspect these centres until it develops specific criteria and protocols for inspecting sites targeted by military attacks”.

Tehran suspended cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog following US and Israeli attacks on Iran in June 2025 that included strikes on nuclear sites before saying in September 2025 it would allow the UN agency’s inspectors to return.

However, access to the nuclear sites that have been bombed has not yet been granted. Despite US President Donald Trump having claimed last year that the US had destroyed the facilities and crippled Tehran’s nuclear programme, Iran’s stores of enriched uranium remain unaccounted for.

Tehran has repeatedly denied any military ambition linked to its nuclear programme, insisting on its right to the technology for civilian purposes.

However, the IAEA, whose latest report will be discussed at its board of governors meeting from September 21-25, has reported in the past that the level of Iran’s enrichment of its uranium reserves is well above that needed for civilian purposes, although neither is it at the level of weapons grade.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

US says it is attacking IRGC targets following ‘attempted attacks’ on ships in Strait of Hormuz.

The United States military says it is conducting new strikes against Iran as fighting renews between the two countries.

The Middle East-based Central Command (CENTCOM) of the US military said on Tuesday that it was hitting Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) targets.

“The strikes follow recent attempted attacks by the IRGC against commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and against American service members deployed to the region,” CENTCOM said.

Iran has previously responded to similar US attacks, so the strikes risk sparking a new cycle of fighting.

Iranian semiofficial news agency Tasnim reported explosions in the south of the country, including in Konarak, Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island.

Tuesday’s strikes follow an exchange of attacks on Sunday when the US military struck Larak Island in southern Iran and Tehran retaliated with missile launches against a base housing American troops in Jordan.

The fighting on Sunday saw the first attacks by both countries since July. The administration of US President Donald Trump had said that it was shifting its strategy from military strikes to intense economic pressure on Iran.

The US has imposed a naval siege on Iranian ports while threatening Tehran’s trade partners with secondary sanctions.

But Iran continues to assert its control over Hormuz – a major artery for the global energy trade. However, in recent weeks, Trump and his aides have said that the US is managing to get millions of barrels of oil through the strait daily despite the Iranian blockade.

Still, attacks on ships around the strait have been reported almost daily.

On Monday, the UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said an oil tanker was hit by three “unknown projectiles” while transiting through Hormuz.

More to come…