Military

Israeli attacks killed at least 31 people in southern Lebanon on Friday, including a rescue worker, Lebanon’s official National News Agency said.

Warring sides accuse each other of violations as attacks continue across front lines.

Russia and Ukraine have accused each other of breaching a short ceasefire announced by Moscow to coincide with Victory Day commemorations marking the Soviet Union’s defeat of Nazi Germany.

The Kremlin said its forces downed 264 Ukrainian drones early on Friday, with officials in Moscow reporting attempted attacks on the capital and in the Perm region in the Ural Mountains.

The truce, declared from May 8 to May 10, was intended to cover annual celebrations that include a military parade in Moscow.

Russia had warned that any disruption would trigger a large-scale missile response against Kyiv, urging foreign diplomats to leave the Ukrainian capital before potential escalation.

In a separate announcement, the Russian transport ministry said on Friday that 13 airports in Russia’s south halted operations due to drone attacks.

“Operations at the regional centre in Rostov-on-Don, which manages air traffic in southern Russia, have been temporarily suspended after Ukrainian drone struck the administrative building of the ‘Southern Russia Air Navigation’ branch,” the ministry said.

There were no casualties, it added.

Victory Day commemorations mark the Soviet Union’s loss of 27 million people in World War II, as it drove Nazi forces back to Berlin, where Adolf Hitler died, and the Red Army’s Soviet Victory Banner was raised over the Reichstag in May 1945.

‘We will defend our people’s lives’

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russian forces continued to attack positions overnight, dismissing the ceasefire as ineffective.

He said Russia had carried out more than 140 attacks on front-line positions by early morning, alongside 10 assaults and more than 850 drone attacks.

“As we did over the past 24 hours, Ukraine will respond in kind today as well. We will defend our positions and people’s lives,” Zelenskyy said.

Ukraine also reported striking a Russian oil facility in Yaroslavl, deep inside Russian territory, in what Kyiv described as retaliation for attacks on its cities.

“Ukraine’s long-range sanctions continued in response to Russian strikes on our cities and villages,” Zelenskyy said.

Kyiv had proposed an open-ended ceasefire beginning on May 6, which it said Russia ignored. Moscow did not adopt that proposal, and neither side accepted the other’s terms.

In remarks before the truce, Zelenskyy criticised Russia’s approach to the commemorations, saying Moscow sought a pause “to hold their parade, to go out onto the square safely for an hour once a year, and then continue killing, killing our people and waging war”.

“The Russians are already talking about strikes after May 9. Strange and certainly inappropriate of the Russian leadership,” he added.

“Just as 81 years ago, so now America can help peace with a just and strong stance against the aggressor,” Zelenskyy said. “And it is important that the American people now view Russia precisely in this way – as an aggressor.”

May 7 (UPI) — U.S. Central Command said Thursday that American forces struck Iranian military sites responsible for “unprovoked” missile, drone and boat attacks on U.S. warships in the Strait of Hormuz.

“U.S. forces intercepted unprovoked Iranian attacks and responded with self-defense strikes as U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyers transited the Strait of Hormuz to the Gulf of Oman,” CENTCOM said in a statement.

CENTCOM said Iran had targeted the USS Truxtun, the USS Rafael Peralta and the USS Mason.

“No assets were struck,” it said.

The U.S. strikes targeted the Bandar Abbas and Qeshm ports near the strait, CBS News and CNN reported, each citing unnamed U.S. officials.

The attacked Iranian facilities included “missile and drone launch sites; command and control locations; and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance nodes,” according to CENTCOM.

After the U.S. vessels had transited the strait, President Donald Trump promptly took to social media to post a warning to Iran.

“Missiles were shot at our Destroyers, and were easily knocked down,” he wrote. “Likewise, drones came, and were incinerated while in the air. They dropped ever so beautifully down to the Ocean, very much like a butterfly dropping to its grave! A normal Country would have allowed these Destroyers to pass, but Iran is not a Normal country. They are led by LUNATICS.”

Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy said in a statement carried by Iranian state-owned outlet Press TV that it attacked the U.S. warships in response to an alleged U.S. cease-fire violation as well as a U.S. attack on an Iranian tanker near the Iranian city of Jask.

Iranian forces caused “significant damage” to the U.S. warships, it said.

A spokesperson for the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters also said the Iranian strikes were in response to the “aggressive, terrorist and outlaw” U.S. military, Press TV reported.

The attacks come after Trump earlier this week called off Project Freedom, a U.S. military operation to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz, as Washington and Tehran try to reach an agreement to end the war.

Despite the attacks, Trump told reporters that the fragile cease-fire that halted the war that began in late February was still intact.

“They trifled with us today. We blew them away,” Trump told reporters Thursday evening.

“If there’s no cease-fire, you’re not going to have to know. You’re just going to have to look at one big glow coming out of Iran.”

BEIRUT — A dozen U.S. Democratic Senators have called for the U.S. Central Command to answer questions about American coordination with Israel in declaring broad “ evacuation zones ” in Lebanon and Iran, alleging that the practice may violate international law.

The letter underlines how the Democratic Party — both its leaders and the base — has grown increasingly critical of Israel.

Since the beginning of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran and the latest Israel-Hezbollah war in Lebanon, the Israeli military has regularly issued maps covering large areas of territory along with warnings telling all residents of the zones to flee. Israel had previously used a similar approach in Gaza.

The senators said the sweeping warnings have “been used to permanently displace people and destroy homes and towns” and that some civilians who refused to leave their homes in the areas have been killed by subsequent strikes.

The 12 senators led by Vermont Sen. Peter Welch, in a letter dated May. 4 to CENTCOM chief Adm. Brad Cooper that was provided to The Associated Press, state that Israel’s practice of unilaterally declaring mass evacuation warnings in Lebanon and Iran “likely contravene international laws the United States has helped develop around humane warfare.”

The other signatories include senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

The letter asked the CENTCOM chief whether U.S. forces have coordinated military targets with Israeli forces during the recent war with Iran, whether they provided assistance or intelligence helping Israel’s military to impose the evacuation zones in Lebanon and Iran, and whether CENTCOM signed off on U.S. military support for the targeting of people or infrastructure in the evacuation zones. It also asked whether the U.S. military has reviewed the legality of the practice.

The Israeli military declined to comment when asked about the letter. CENTCOM did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In the past, Israel has said the evacuation maps aim to keep civilians out of harm’s way. It says Hezbollah has positioned fighters, tunnels and weapons in civilian areas across southern Lebanon, from which it has launched hundreds of drones and missiles — without warning — into northern Israel.

A shift in the party stance

Observers said the move is part of a larger shift in the stance of Democratic Party leaders on U.S. military assistance to Israel. Democrats have also been critical of the Trump administration’s entry into the war on Iran alongside Israel.

The letter came nearly three weeks after more than three dozen Democrats supported an effort by Sanders to block arms sales to Israel, signaling a growing discontent in the party with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the wars in Gaza and Iran.

The two resolutions to block U.S. sales of bulldozers and bombs to Israel were opposed by all Republicans and rejected 40-59 and 36-63.

Jon Finer, former deputy national security adviser under President Joe Biden, said the recent steps by Democratic senators reflect a “growing concern about Israeli conduct of various wars that cause civilian harm and U.S. complicity in that” across the spectrum within the Democratic Party.

Asked why the Democratic Party is taking these steps now and not at the time when the war in Gaza and the Israel-Hezbollah war broke out — when the Democratic Biden administration was in power — Finer said: “our operational integration with Israel appears to be growing, which is part of it, but the truth is the Democratic base has been moving in this direction for some time and Washington has been catching up.”

Andrew Miller, a former senior official on Israel and Palestinian Affairs at the State Department, said the letter “represents a shift among congressional Democrats moving from questions of the legality of Israeli military operations to concerns about the complicity of the U.S. military.”

“It demonstrates that Democrats are taking international law very seriously and that is a welcome development,” Miller said.

The evacuation zones

Israel has issued dozens of evacuation warnings in Lebanon since the latest Israel-Hezbollah war began on March 2. Over 1 million people in Lebanon have fled their homes during the war.

Israel has also issued similar warnings for Iranians, both during the 12-day Israel-Iran war last year and during the U.S.-Israeli war launched on Iran on Feb. 28. In one case last year they warned 300,000 people in Tehran, Iran’s capital, to evacuate.

On Wednesday, the Israel military’s Arabic-language spokesperson Avichay Adraee issued an evacuation warning to residents of 12 villages in southern Lebanon saying Hezbollah is using them to launch attacks. The warnings came despite a ceasefire that has been nominally in place since April 17, although Israel and Hezbollah have been carrying daily attacks since then.

The senators said the declaration of evacuation zones does not absolve Israeli and U.S. forces “from the absolute legal responsibility to determine that each individual person or civilian facility targeted by drones, jets, and gunfire is, in fact, a military target.” It said the use of the zones has been linked to “the deaths of thousands of civilians,” describing them as “kill zones.”

In response to questions by the AP last month, the Israeli military said it issues warnings by phone, text, radio broadcast, social media and leaflets dropped from the air, in accordance with the “principles of distinction, proportionality and feasible precautions” under international law.

Mroue writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Julia Frankel contributed to this report from Jerusalem.

Chinese military and intelligence analyses for 2025 and 2026 indicate that China views the expansion of the Egyptian Armed Forces in establishing numerous naval and air bases, such as the Bernice and Gargoub bases, with strategic interest. Beijing considers this trend, spearheaded by the Egyptian political leadership under President El-Sisi and the Egyptian Ministry of Defense, a vital component of a comprehensive strategic partnership between Egypt and China, aimed at securing shared interests in strategically vital regions. Chinese intelligence and military agencies view the Egyptian expansion in establishing military bases, such as the Mohamed Naguib base, the July 3 base, and bases east and west of the Suez Canal, as part of a comprehensive Chinese strategy to develop the Egyptian Armed Forces and enhance their deterrent capabilities against Beijing’s adversaries in the region. This perspective aligns with Beijing’s view of Egypt as a key strategic partner in Africa and the Middle East. The Chinese military establishment’s vision for this Egyptian military development of air and naval bases up to 2026 can be detailed, as follows: Supporting the Egyptian political leadership’s vision, from a Chinese perspective, of Egyptian military development under President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, is seen as a serious attempt to modernize the army and transform it into a smart deterrent force capable of protecting national security and the country’s economic interests. This aligns with China’s +1 strategy (localization), as China seeks to leverage the development of Egyptian bases to become centers for localizing Chinese military technology in Egypt, particularly in the areas of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), such as the Wing Loong and advanced air defense systems, such as the HQ-9B.

In this context, China views Egypt’s expansion in establishing military bases, such as the Mohamed Naguib Base, the July 3 Base, and the bases east and west of the Suez Canal, with strategic interest as a crucial element in strengthening the comprehensive strategic partnership between Cairo and Beijing. China considers these Egyptian military bases, especially those located on the Mediterranean Sea and near the Suez Canal. Bases like the July 3rd Air Base serve as vital support points for protecting China’s commercial interests and the routes of its Belt and Road Initiative, which passes through the Egyptian Suez Canal. Egypt represents a cornerstone in China’s 21st-century strategy. Therefore, China aims to bolster Egypt’s deterrent capabilities (a defense partnership). Chinese military officials believe that modernizing the Egyptian armed forces through these naval and air bases and localizing Chinese defense industries in Cairo, in accordance with President Sisi’s vision, enhances the independence of Egyptian military decision-making, paves the way for multipolarity, supports developing countries in the Global South, and contributes to regional stability. Relations between Egypt and China have moved beyond mere arms deals to the localization of Chinese technology within Egypt, enabling Egypt to confront regional challenges more effectively and creating a kind of regional balance of power. Here, Beijing, by supporting Egyptian military expansion through these bases, aims to create a strategic balance in the region amidst a growing Egyptian-Chinese rapprochement seen as an alternative to or complement to traditional partnerships with the West. This can be inferred from the military exercises. The air capabilities and joint military exercises between Egypt and China are reflected here. Joint air exercises, such as Eagles of Civilization 2025, and cooperation at Wadi Abu Rish Air Base are Egyptian-Chinese joint training exercises aimed at exchanging expertise in air combat and protecting maritime routes. This coincides with Egypt’s interest in military and arms deals with China, such as the J-10C. Other Egyptian military negotiations with China regarding the purchase of advanced submarines, known as the Yuan class, are also underway. This reduces Egypt’s military dependence on Washington and the West and strengthens the Chinese presence in the Egyptian military arsenal. This reflects a convergence of military visions between the two countries, with China supporting Egypt’s efforts to modernize its military infrastructure. The new bases are considered a cornerstone for securing shared interests in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea.

Beijing also aims to strengthen the comprehensive strategic partnership. Here, the Chinese vision extends beyond mere arms deals; it views this as a core partnership aimed at establishing a broad military alliance with Egypt to develop the Chinese military Silk Road. This includes joint operational planning and training exercises, as demonstrated in the Civilization Eagles 2025 maneuvers. China seeks to effect a comprehensive shift in the regional balance of power. Chinese intelligence believes that establishing bases and developing naval and air forces will grant Egypt strategic independence and reduce its dependence on the West. This, in turn, opens the door for China to enhance its influence in the region through defense cooperation, thereby securing shared Chinese and Egyptian military interests. Beijing considers securing Egyptian bases for maritime routes (the Suez Canal) and the Red Sea to be in line with Chinese economic and security interests within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative. In general, the Chinese military establishment views Cairo as working to build a strong regional pivot point, and Beijing sees this expansion as an opportunity to deepen defense and technological ties with Cairo, paving the way for the formal declaration of a Chinese-Egyptian military Silk Road partnership.

China views the new Egyptian military bases as a means of protecting its strategic interests within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative. These bases, particularly those located on the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, and the Suez Canal, occupy vital maritime chokepoints, and China considers them a guarantee for the security of its international trade routes. The relationship between Egypt and China has evolved from mere arms purchases to the localization of defense industries, such as the production of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and electronic warfare systems, increasing Egypt’s military reliance on Chinese technology. These Egyptian military bases, which enhance Egypt’s rapid deployment capabilities, align with China’s interests in establishing a multipolar regional order that reduces American influence in the Middle East. Chinese intelligence, military, defense, and security reports indicate a qualitative shift in Egyptian military doctrine. Chinese military institutions affiliated with the People’s Liberation Army analyze that Egyptian military bases, such as the July 3rd base, provide strategic depth and protection for economic assets (gas fields and the Dabaa nuclear power plant), thus contributing to the economic stability in which China participates. For this reason, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is seeking to train and qualify the Egyptian military elite through the Military Academy for Advanced Studies as an alternative to Western and American training.

The Chinese intelligence and military establishments view the Egyptian army’s expansionist vision in establishing naval and air bases within Egypt as part of the development strategy adopted by the Egyptian Armed Forces and the political leadership of President El-Sisi. This strategy aims to complete the modernization of the Egyptian Armed Forces and advance the Chinese military Silk Road with Egypt’s assistance. China supports the Egyptian Armed Forces’ efforts to modernize Egyptian military infrastructure, considering the new Egyptian military bases a cornerstone for securing China’s shared interests in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea. China views these new Egyptian military bases, particularly on the Red Sea, as essential for securing Chinese trade routes (the military/maritime Silk Road) and mitigating risks. In addition to the significant role Egypt plays for China as a regional power center and a key player in the balance of power, relevant military circles in Beijing analyze the modernization of the Egyptian army as a center of gravity for stability in the Middle East and Africa. A strong and stable army serves China’s interests in the Eastern Mediterranean. Therefore, China translates its vision into tangible support, including modernizing Egypt’s military infrastructure to align with the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative in its maritime, air, and naval components and equipping it with advanced weapons systems.

Based on the preceding understanding and analysis, we conclude that the new Egyptian military bases (naval and air) are considered, according to the Chinese military and strategic vision, strategic strengths. Their benefits extend beyond Egypt, securing China’s commercial and military interests in the Mediterranean and Red Seas. They also provide a Chinese technological alternative in a region previously dominated by Western and American platforms, paving the way for China’s gradual expansion of its military Silk Road initiative.

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Tuesday that Operation Epic Fury – the US-Israeli strikes on Iran which commenced on February 28 and prompted a regional conflict – had concluded as its objectives had been achieved. Washington now prefers “the path of peace”, Rubio said.

On the same day, US President Donald Trump announced that the US military operation to escort stranded ships out of the Strait of Hormuz – “Project Freedom”, which was launched the day before – had been paused.

So, does this mean the US-Israel war on Iran is over?

What did Rubio say about Operation Epic Fury?

In a media briefing at the White House on Tuesday, Rubio told reporters that Operation Epic Fury was over.

“The Operation Epic Fury is concluded. We achieved the objectives of that operation,” Rubio said.

“We’re not cheering for an additional situation to occur. We would prefer the path of peace. What the president would prefer is a deal,” he said, referring to Pakistan’s efforts to arrange direct talks between Iran and the US.

The first round of these, in Islamabad last month, ended without a resolution. Both sides have submitted new proposals since then.

“The on-again, off-again talks with Iran, alongside Trump’s abrupt about turn on ‘Operation Freedom’ to guide vessels out of the Strait of Hormuz has created unwelcome frenzy in the Gulf,” Burcu Ozcelik, a senior research fellow for Middle East security at UK-based think tank Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), told Al Jazeera.

“It also reflects the highly fraught and almost frantic diplomatic backchannelling aimed to extract deep concessions from Tehran on the nuclear issue that will lock in commitments that exceed previous conditions, and which will convince the US to lift the blockade on Iranian ports and unlock sanctions relief – thereby effectively ending the war.”

Ozcelik explained that Iran, on the other hand, wants guarantees that this will be the end of the war, rather than just a pause.

What did Trump say about Project Freedom?

The same day, Trump told reporters that Project Freedom had been paused “based on the request” of Pakistan and other countries, and the “fact that Great Progress has been made towards a Complete and Final Agreement” with representatives of Iran.

Project Freedom was the US forces’ operation to escort stranded ships through the Strait of Hormuz that Trump announced the day before. It had appeared to signal a direct challenge to Iran’s closure of the strategic waterway, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped in peacetime. Iran’s threats to attack ships in the strait have blockaded it since the US-Israel attacks on Iran began. Then, the US announcement of a naval blockade on Iranian ports added to the standoff around the strait.

After Trump announced Project Freedom, Iran said ships trying to use the strait without permission from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) would be fired on, igniting fears of a return to war. His announcement triggered a war of words between the US and Iran, with claims and counterclaims about strikes continuing throughout the day.

First, Iran’s Fars agency claimed it had hit a US warship with drones after it ignored orders to turn back from the Strait of Hormuz. US Central Command (CENTCOM) denied a US ship had been struck, however, and instead claimed to have sunk at least six IRGC vessels. Iran denied that. Tehran then published a new map extending its claimed area of control over the strait into UAE waters, raising fears of a new regional confrontation.

The UAE accused Iran of launching strikes on its Fujairah port, the site of an important oil pipeline, which sparked a fire in an oil refinery.

On Tuesday, the US operation had been stopped, according to Trump.

“We have mutually agreed that, while the [US] Blockade will remain in full force and effect, Project Freedom (The Movement of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz) will be paused for a short period of time to see whether or not the Agreement can be finalized and signed,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Iran has not immediately responded to this.

Shahram Akbarzadeh, a professor in Middle East and Central Asian politics at Australia’s Deakin University, told Al Jazeera that while it is difficult to determine exactly why Trump has paused Project Freedom, the pause comes against the backdrop of growing antiwar public opinion in the US.

“At the same time, Trump may be losing patience with the war; he says he has time to drag this out,” Akbarzadeh said.

“But in reality, Trump has a short attention span and needs to secure a win – soon. Pausing Project Freedom allows diplomacy to pick up pace, bringing US and Iran closer to a deal that Trump would label as a win.”

Is this the end of the war on Iran?

Not exactly. Akbarzadeh said pausing Project Freedom could serve as “the beginning of the end for the war”.

“We know that the Iranians are desperate for an end, so there is little chance of them resuming attacks on US Navy if Trump sends explicit signals that diplomacy has a green light,” he said.

However, he added, “The problem is that we have been here before. Earlier opportunities were squandered because Israel insisted that the US could get a better deal or because Trump misread the situation and expected the military option to grant him more concessions.”

What happens next?

It is difficult to predict this, but neither side appears to want a return to full-scale war, so both are likely to prioritise a diplomatic way out, Akbarzadeh said.

Still, “neither can afford to be seen as the loser,” he added. “They feel their public image needs to be preserved for their own respective domestic audience. This complicates negotiations and reaching a deal.”

Ozcelik said what happens next “will be determined by what the fractured leadership in Tehran commits to on the nuclear file.

“While it has rejected that talks involve curbs on Iran’s nuclear programme, this type of posturing has aimed to assuage domestic, hard-line and Iranian nationalists who are rattled by the US-Israel strikes and see nuclear issues from a nationalist, sovereign rights perspective.”

She predicted that the United Nations may soon issue a formal condemnation of Iran for unilaterally blockading the Strait of Hormuz.

“But the real pressure, mounting by the day, is the economic one – that shutting the strait is imposing punishing costs on Iran’s economic recovery prospects,” she said.

“Despite rhetoric on resilience and survival, the remaining Iranian leadership is undeniably concerned about the costs of the war. The possibility of renewed military strikes against Iranian critical infrastructure and the destabilising impacts these would inevitably have might be finally forcing Tehran’s hand,” Ozcelik concluded.

In an Al Jazeera exclusive interview, US Central Command spokesman Tim Hawkins says the main priorities in the Strait of Hormuz are securing safe routes for merchant vessels and blockading Iran.

The defense ministry said Tuesday it has dismissed three Army officers from military service and removed another from service over their involvement in former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s short-lived martial law declaration.

The decision came after the ministry convened a disciplinary committee meeting last month to review the cases of the four Army officers accused of involvement in the Dec. 3, 2024, martial law bid.

Brig. Gen. Kim Jeong-geun; Col. An Mu-seong, who had been awaiting promotion to brigadier general; and Col. Kim Se-un were dismissed from military service, the highest level of disciplinary punishment, according to sources. The punishment carries a 50 percent cut in military retirement benefits.

Brig. Gen. Kim and An are accused of deploying troops to the National Assembly on the night martial law was declared, while Col. Kim is accused of transporting the troops to the National Assembly building.

Col. Kim Sang-yong, former deputy chief of the Defense Ministry’s Criminal Investigation Command, was removed from military service, the second-highest level of disciplinary punishment, over his alleged role in helping form a team to arrest key politicians and other major figures. The punishment does not affect military retirement benefits.

The latest move came as the ministry has launched an internal probe into about 860 general-grade and field-grade officers and identified some 180 military personnel as having been involved in the martial law bid in late 2024.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

Iranian commander says US military attacked two passenger boats, not IRGC vessels, in the Strait of Hormuz on Monday.

Iran has accused the United States of killing five civilians in the Strait of Hormuz, saying its forces attacked passenger vessels in the waterway rather than boats belonging to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as claimed.

The claim on Tuesday contradicted a statement by US Admiral Brad Cooper, who said Central Command forces had sunk six IRGC vessels that had attempted to interfere with a US mission to escort stranded ships out of the Strait of Hormuz.

US President Donald Trump later put the number at seven boats.

The US operation, dubbed “Project Freedom”, has shaken a fragile ceasefire reached between Iran and the US on April 8 and renewed fears of a return to war.

Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB quoted an unnamed Iranian military commander as saying that Tehran launched an investigation following the US claim of attacks on IRGC vessels.

It said while none of the IRGC vessels was hit, the investigation found that US forces had “attacked two small boats carrying people on their way from Khasab on the coast of Oman to the coast of Iran on Monday”.

The attacks destroyed the boats and killed five civilian passengers, the commander said. The US “must be held accountable for their crime”, the commander added.

There was no immediate comment from the US military.

The violence comes as Trump seeks to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has effectively blockaded following the US and Israeli attacks on the country on February 28.

The closure of the vital maritime corridor – through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s energy supplies flow – has sent oil and fertiliser prices surging around the world and prompted fears of a global recession and food emergency.

Iran is now insisting on maintaining control over the Strait of Hormuz and collecting transit fees as reparations for the destruction caused by the US and Israel.

Attacks on UAE, ships in Hormuz

The Iranian military on Monday warned commercial vessels they would “jeopardise their safety” if they attempted to cross the waterway without permission. The military also warned US forces would face attacks if they approached or entered the chokepoint.

Amid the tensions, the United Arab Emirates said Iran launched a drone attack on one of its oil tankers that attempted to transit the strait and said Iranian forces launched 15 ballistic missiles and four drones at its territory.

UAE authorities said the attacks set off a large fire at a major oil refinery in the eastern emirate of Fujairah and wounded three Indian nationals.

A South Korean vessel in the Strait of Hormuz, the HMM Namu, also reported an attack, saying an explosion had caused a fire in its engine room.

Nonetheless, the US military said two US-flagged ships made it through the strait on Monday with the support of navy guided-missile destroyers.

The IRGC denied the claim as “baseless and completely false”, but the global shipping firm Maersk said the US-flagged Alliance Fairfax exited the Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz accompanied by the US military on Monday.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the events in Hormuz on Monday “make clear there’s no military solution to a political crisis”.

He said in a post on X that peace talks with the US were “making progress” with Pakistan’s mediation and that Washington “should be wary of being dragged back into quagmire by ill-wishers”.

“So should the UAE,” he added. “Project Freedom is Project Deadlock.”

Meanwhile, Trump has renewed his threats against Iran.

He told Fox News Iran would be “blown off the face of the Earth” if they attacked US vessels carrying out Project Freedom.

“We have more weapons and ammunition at a much higher grade than we had before,” he said.

“We have the best equipment. We have stuff all over the world. We have these bases worldwide. They’re all stocked up with equipment. We can use all of that stuff, and we will, if we need it.”

The United States has transferred 22 crew members from the Iranian container ship, the Touska, to Pakistan, in what Islamabad describes as a “confidence-building measure” during tension in the Strait of Hormuz.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesman, Captain Tim Hawkins, said the crew had been handed over for repatriation. Pakistan’s foreign ministry confirmed the transfer, saying the sailors would be returned to Iranian authorities.

The Touska was seized by US forces in the Gulf of Oman in the early hours of April 20, in what Tehran described as an act of “piracy”, after the US declared a naval blockade of Iranian ports. Iran had effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz following the start of the US-Israeli war on Iran.

On Monday, tensions continued to escalate in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

First, US President Donald Trump announced that US naval ships would help guide stranded vessels through the strait in an operation he dubbed “Project Freedom”.

Iran issued a new map of the strait with new boundaries further to the east, and warned shipping not to attempt to pass without coordinating with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Then, state media reported that two Iranian missiles struck a US naval vessel near Jask Island in the strait after ignoring warnings from the IRGC to turn back. Washington denied any attack.

Amid continued interceptions and seizures of vessels by both sides, questions remain over whether the two countries can de-escalate and reach a broader peace agreement. Pakistan has been central to these efforts, seeking to keep diplomatic channels open, but talks hosted in Islamabad last month ended without a breakthrough.

Iran’s foreign ministry says it is reviewing Washington’s response to its 14-point proposal aimed at ending the conflict sent via Pakistan on Friday. As Pakistan continues to mediate, Trump previously described Tehran’s offer as “unacceptable”.

What happened to the Touska?

The Iran-flagged Touska was seized by US forces in the Gulf of Oman, close to the Strait of Hormuz, on April 20 after Washington accused the crew of failing to comply with the US naval blockade on Iranian ports. Shortly after midnight local time in Iran, CENTCOM said the USS Spruance fired its 5-inch (127mm) deck gun at the vessel’s engine room, disabling it.

According to the US military, the ship was attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz en route to Iran’s main commercial port, Bandar Abbas.

The Touska, a small container ship operated by the sanctioned Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), was boarded near Iran’s Chabahar port. US Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit captured the vessel after what CENTCOM said were repeated warnings over six hours.

Video released by the US military showed Marines descending from helicopters launched from the USS Tripoli and securing the Tusk.

Iran condemned the capture as a violation of international law and an act of “piracy“, before demanding the immediate release of the vessel and its crew.

What does the release of the Touska’s crew mean, diplomatically?

Pakistan has positioned itself as a mediator between Washington and Tehran, and is now framing the transfer of the Touska crew as a step towards de-escalation of tensions. In a statement, the Pakistani foreign ministry said the move reflected a “confidence-building measure” and reaffirmed its commitment to facilitating dialogue.

US and Iranian delegations met in Islamabad last month for their first talks since 1979. Although negotiations ended without a deal, they marked a rare moment of direct engagement.

Pakistan has since coordinated with regional powers, including Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, Qatar and Egypt, while maintaining close communications with China, in an effort to build broader support for de-escalation.

In a call with Iran’s Foreign Minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, on Monday, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister, Ishaq Dar, reiterated that diplomacy remains the only viable path to stability. Tehran, in turn, acknowledged Islamabad’s mediation efforts.

Will this de-escalate tensions in the Strait of Hormuz?

There are not many signs that it will.

Indeed, tensions in the Strait of Hormuz have continued to increase despite the release of the crew members.

Most notably, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard published a new map on Monday outlining what it claims is an expanded zone of control in the waterway, stretching from Iranian and Omani territory to include the territorial waters of the United Arab Emirates as well.

Analysts say this new claim exceeds internationally recognised boundaries. The UAE has accused Iran of launching drones at an oil tanker linked to Abu Dhabi’s national energy company, while Washington has dismissed Iranian reports of an attack on a US warship as false.

Military analyst Alexandru Hudisteanu, a maritime security expert who served 13 years in the Romanian navy, told Al Jazeera on Monday that the conflicting claims reflect a broader test of resolve. “Any attempt to open the strait will likely be met with resistance from Iran,” he said, adding that Tehran views control of Hormuz as its primary leverage in negotiations.

Hudisteanu warned that the situation carries a high risk of miscalculation, with both sides continuing to operate in close proximity. For Iran, the Strait of Hormuz is the “only leverage” it has for peace negotiations, Hudisteanu said.

Iranian analyst Foad Izadi argued that the ceasefire effectively collapsed when the US imposed its blockade, which he described as “an act of war”. He added that the targeting and seizure of ships along the Strait of Hormuz further undermined any notion of a truce.

“Attacking an Iranian ship’s engine is an act of war as well,” he added, despite the release of the Touska’s crew signalling some short-term goodwill between the US and Iran.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s vow to shrink America’s military deployment in Germany has put a new spotlight on the U.S. role in Europe.

There are usually 80,000 to 100,000 troops on the continent, with more than 36,000 in Germany. The Pentagon announced Friday that it would remove 5,000 troops from Germany, and Trump said the next day that he would go “a lot further” than that.

The U.S. military presence is a legacy of World War II, when Americans helped stabilize and rebuild Europe, and the Cold War, when the troops served as a bulwark against Soviet expansion. More recently, the deployment has played a key role supporting operations in the Arctic, Africa and the Middle East including the current conflict with Iran.

But Trump has broken with years of bipartisan consensus, criticizing European allies in NATO and following through on threats to reduce the U.S. commitment to the continent’s security. The recent announcement comes after escalating tensions with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who last week said the U.S. was being “humiliated” by Iran and accused Washington of lacking a clear strategy.

Here’s a look at America’s current deployment in Europe and how it could change.

What to know about the U.S. defense posture in Europe

The U.S. European Command, created in 1947 and known as EUCOM, is one of 11 combat commands within the Defense Department, and covers some 50 countries and territories.

In addition to more than 36,000 troops in Germany, Italy hosts more than 12,000 and there’s another 10,000 in the United Kingdom, according to Pentagon numbers from December.

The Pentagon has offered few details about which troops or operations would be affected in the drawdown announced Friday.

The U.S. increased its European deployment after Russia launched its full-scale war on Ukraine four years ago. NATO allies like Germany have expected for over a year that these troops would be the first to leave.

European deployment has global role

Aside from its role as a deterrent to Russia, the U.S. military presence in Europe helps Washington project power across the globe.

U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, who is the commander in Europe of both U.S. and NATO forces, reinforced the benefits of a strong footprint on the continent to the Senate Armed Services Committee in March.

“It is having capabilities in Europe, munitions in Europe that allow us to help U.S. Africa Command to target terrorists in Africa, or to help U.S. Central Command as they execute Operation Epic Fury,” he told lawmakers, referring to the Iran war. “The distances are shorter, it’s less expensive and it’s much easier to project power.”

Germany hosts the headquarters of the U.S. European and Africa commands, Ramstein Air Base and a medical center in Landstuhl, where casualties from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were treated. U.S. nuclear weapons are also stationed in the country.

The U.S. has approximately 100 nuclear bombs deployed to bases in Europe that would be delivered by aircraft, according to a March estimate from the Federation of American Scientists. The group’s report said the bombs are at bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, while it’s possible they’re also at a base in the United Kingdom.

A call to move U.S. forces further east in Europe

Even before Trump’s comment Saturday to reporters, Republican leaders of both armed services committees in Congress expressed concern about the Pentagon plan, warning a premature drawdown in Europe would send “the wrong signal to Vladimir Putin” as the Russian president continues his war in Ukraine.

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi and Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama said troops should be shifted to bases in Eastern Europe rather than withdrawn.

The lawmakers also said allies have made “substantial investments to host U.S. troops.”

Wicker and Rogers said the Pentagon, following its announcement Friday, has also decided to cancel the planned deployment to Germany of one of the U.S. Army’s long-range fires battalions, which operate ground-launched missile systems.

Trump’s vision: DIY defense in Europe

As part of its National Defense Strategy announced in January — a sweeping document laying out a vision on everything from deterring China to defending against cyberattacks to disrupting Iran’s nuclear ambitions — the administration said Europe must do more for its own defense.

While “we are and will remain engaged in Europe, we must — and will — prioritize defending the U.S. Homeland and deterring China,” it said.

Among other things, the document noted that Europe’s economic power, while shrinking in relative terms globally, remains significant, and said that Germany’s economy alone “dwarfs that of Russia.”

“Fortunately, our NATO allies are substantially more powerful than Russia — it is not even close,” it said, noting a recent commitment among NATO allies to raise national defense spending to 5% of GDP in total, a push led by Trump.

What Germany has been doing to beef up its forces

Germany has moved to modernize its long-neglected military, or Bundeswehr, since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. That year, it set up a $117 billion special fund to boost Bundeswehr, much of which has been committed to procuring new equipment.

Late last year, Merz’s government announced plans to raise the number of military personnel to 260,000, up from about 180,000. In 2001, when Germany still had conscription, the headcount was 300,000 — more than a third of them conscripts.

Berlin says it will also need around 200,000 reservists, more than double the current figure.

Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, in comments to German news agency dpa after the Pentagon’s drawdown plan was announced Friday, acknowledged that Europe must take more responsibility for its own security — and said the Bundeswehr is growing, military equipment is being procured more quickly, and infrastructure is being developed.

Keaten and Finley write for the Associated Press. Keaten reported from Geneva.

“I have all the cards,” posted the White House on its X account on Sunday, alongside an image of President Donald Trump holding playing cards from the Uno game, in a message appearing to signal Washington’s confidence in its ongoing war on Iran.

Uno is a card game in which the winner is the first to get rid of all their cards.

The post came after Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that the US military would begin guiding ships stranded around the Strait of Hormuz by the war on Monday, in a sign that the conflict could further escalate, despite the near-month-long fragile ceasefire. Tehran has been effectively blocking nearly all shipping from the Gulf for more than two months, after the US and Israel attacked Iran two months ago, disrupting global energy supplies.

“We have told these countries that we will guide their ships safely out of these restricted waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business,” Trump said, dubbing the campaign “Project Freedom”. “They are merely neutral and innocent bystanders!”

The president added that US negotiators were engaged in “very positive discussions” with Tehran, which could lead to “something very positive” without further elaboration.

Iran, however, reacted by insisting that the security of the waterway was in the hands of its armed forces, and warned that “any safe passage and navigation in any situation” should be “carried out in coordination with the armed forces”.

On Monday, the Iranian Fars news agency reported that a US warship had been hit by two Iranian drones, the claim was denied by US Central Command.

So what leverage do the US and Iran hold over each other, and what happens next?

In response to Trump’s “I have all the cards” social media post, Iran’s Consulate General in Hyderabad, India, posted its own image on X.

“Yes, we have less cards,” Iran’s consulate in the Indian city of Hyderabad wrote on X, together with a photo of an Iranian military spokesperson holding four Uno cards compared to Trump’s five, pointing out that usually holding all the cards means you are losing, not winning, in the game of Uno.

In response to Trump’s “Project Freedom” declaration, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) warned that ships deemed to be in breach of its rules in the Strait of Hormuz “will be stopped by force”, while insisting there has been no change in how it manages traffic through the strategic waterway.

On Monday, it issued a new map of the Strait of Hormuz with boundaries extending further to the east than its previous one, and said any ship travelling between the two sides must coordinate with the IRGC first.

“There has been no change in the management process of the Strait of Hormuz,” spokesperson Sardar Mohebbi said, adding that vessels that comply with the “transit protocols issued by the IRGC Navy” will be “safe and secure”.

“Other maritime movements that are contrary to the declared principles of the IRGC Navy will face serious risks. Violating vessels will be stopped by force,” he said.

What leverage does the US have over Iran?

Sanctions

The United States’ most enduring source of leverage over Iran remains its sanctions regime, which was launched in 1979 when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini declared Iran an Islamic Republic.

Successive US administrations over the past 47 years have hit Tehran with a series of financial restrictions targeting Iran’s banking, oil exports and access to international markets – the US says the sanctions are a response to Iran’s nuclear programme.

Sanctions have significantly constrained Iran’s economy, limiting government revenue and contributing to inflation and currency depreciation. Measures enforced through the US Treasury also deter other countries and companies from engaging with Iran, further strangling its economy.

The economic pressure has been central to US strategy towards Iran, particularly during its attempts to force Tehran back to negotiations over its nuclear programme, under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Military power

Beyond economics, the US maintains overwhelming military superiority, especially air power. Aircraft carriers, long-range bombers and precision strike capabilities give Washington the ability to target Iranian infrastructure with relatively low risk to its own forces.

US bases across the Gulf, as well as military partnerships with regional allies – most notably Israel – reinforce this advantage.

American forces, together with the Israeli army, have killed more than 3,000 people, and struck thousands of sites across Iran in the current war, including Iran’s energy and nuclear sites.

Naval blockade

Since mid-April, the United States has enforced a widespread naval blockade of Iranian ports and ships. The operation began on April 13 after talks between Washington and Tehran collapsed, with US forces ordered to stop or divert vessels entering or leaving Iranian ports.

US forces have since intercepted or turned back dozens of ships, and seized a container ship, the Touska. On Monday, the US announced that its crew had been repatriated to Iran from Pakistan, where they were taken after their ship was captured in the Gulf of Oman last month.

According to Trump, the blockade is designed to choke Iran’s oil exports, its main revenue source.

US officials say the measures have severely disrupted Iran’s trade, which relies heavily on sea routes.

What leverage does Iran have?

Strait of Hormuz

The vital waterway is Iran’s most significant strategic asset, the narrow passage ships one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies in peacetime.

Tehran has effectively closed the strait since the war began on February 28, sending global oil and gas prices soaring and energy markets into turmoil. Iran has repeatedly demonstrated its ability to target shipping, seize vessels, or conduct military exercises, demonstrating its ability to close or restrict the strait.

The result is soaring energy prices globally, forcing many countries to implement severe austerity measures to soften the blow.

Last week in the US, the average price of a gallon (3.8 litres) of gasoline (petrol) rose to $4.30, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), up from less than $3 before the war.

Surging energy costs have driven up inflation and deepened economic uncertainty in the US, compounding Trump’s political troubles amid overwhelming disapproval for the war amongst Americans.

Even if the US does begin escorting ships through safely – the threat from mines or Iranian strikes may be enough to prevent tankers from attempting to sail, experts say. Insurance companies are also unlikely to underwrite voyages.

Regional allies

Iran’s network of allied groups across the Middle East is another asset that Tehran relies on heavily. These include armed groups in Iraq and Syria, as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen

Through these groups, Iran has exerted pressure indirectly, targeting US interests and allies without engaging in direct confrontation.

One critical threat Iran has previously made is for the Houthis to disrupt shipping in the Bab al-Mandeb, another vital maritime chokepoint linking the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.

The Houthis, an Iran-aligned group in Yemen, have previously targeted shipping in this area, most notably during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, further raising concerns about the security of global trade routes.

Roughly 4.2 billion barrels of crude oil and refined petroleum liquids flowed through the strait in 2014, accounting for about five percent of global supply.

Cheap drones and cluster bombs

While nowhere near the military capabilities of the US, Iran’s investment in missile and drone programmes has proven to be an effective means of deterrence. That is particularly through its ability to threaten regional US bases and impose significant costs on regional countries hosting American assets involved in military operations against Tehran.

While the US undoubtedly has a more sophisticated and powerful arsenal at its disposal, the interceptors it uses to combat Iranian drones cost around $4 million each, while Iran’s Shahed drones can be mass-produced at $20-50,000 each.

Furthermore, Iran’s ballistic missiles have proved capable of breaching Israel’s much-lauded “Iron Dome” defence system on several occasions. Iran has also dropped cluster bombs, which divide before they can be intercepted, making them much harder to stop.

So does the US really hold the most cards?

Michael Clarke, visiting professor at the Department of War Studies, King’s College London, said Trump’s overwhelming conventional military strength has failed to translate into strategic leverage on the ground.

“President Trump thinks he is a great poker player,” Clarke told Al Jazeera. “He thought America’s sheer destructive potential put all the ‘cards’ in his hand” when starting the war on Iran.

But Iranian forces have consistently disrupted US expectations through asymmetric tactics, he said.

“At every turn, the Iranians have come up with asymmetric tactics – vicious, reckless tactics – that have negated everything the Americans have tried to do,” Clarke noted, describing a pattern in which traditional US military superiority has been blunted by unconventional responses.

Despite significant American forces and assets in the region – including “no fewer than three US Carrier Strike Groups, two Marine Expeditionary Units, hundreds of combat aircraft and thousands of troops”, Clarke argued that Washington has struggled to find an effective use for its multi-billion-dollar resources at its disposal.

Moreover, he said, domestic pressure on Trump is growing. Trump “can’t find a way to use them [US forces] that will make any real difference to the current stalemate in the limited time he has before his own MAGA base concludes he has lost the game”.

Clarke also highlighted the willingness of Iran’s IRGC to escalate tensions. “Whatever this war might do to Iranian society, the IRGC is prepared to gamble with its own existence in the fight,” he added.

The US president has accused some NATO countries of not doing enough to support the US-Israel war on Iran.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte says European leaders have “gotten the message” after United States President Donald Trump announced plans to withdraw 5,000 soldiers from Germany.

Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with NATO allies, accusing them of not doing enough to support the US-Israel war on Iran. Speaking on Monday, Rutte acknowledged “disappointment from the US side”.

“European leaders have gotten the message. They heard the message loud and clear,” Rutte said before a European Political Community meeting in Armenia.

“Europeans are stepping up, a bigger role for Europe and a stronger NATO,” he added.

The Pentagon announced the troop withdrawal from Germany on Friday, days after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Iran was humiliating the US during the negotiations aimed at ending the war.

The European Union’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, called the announcement’s timing a “surprise”.

“I think it shows that we have to really strengthen the European pillar in NATO, and we have to really do more,” Kallas said while stressing that “American troops are not in Europe only for protecting European interests but also American interests.”

Over the weekend, NATO spokesperson Allison Hart said officials in the 32-nation military alliance “are working with the US to understand the details of their decision on force posture in Germany”.

‘Dangerous military intervention’

European criticism of the war on Iran has mounted in recent weeks as the conflict sends shockwaves through the global economy due to the continued disruption to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

Last week, Merz compared the war to previous military quagmires, such as the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

“It is, at the moment, a pretty tangled situation,” he said. “And it is costing us a great deal of money. This conflict, this war against Iran, has a direct impact on our economic output.”

Spain has refused to let the US launch attacks on Iran from its airspace or military bases. Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has condemned the war as “unjustified” and a “dangerous military intervention” outside the realm of international law.

In response, Trump called Spain “terrible” and threatened to end all trade ties.

Despite this, Rutte said “more and more” European nations were now pre-positioning assets such as minehunters and minesweepers close to the Gulf to be ready for the “next phase” in the war.

He provided no details, and European nations have previously insisted they would not help to police the Strait of Hormuz until the war is over.

Increased defence spending

Many European countries have committed to ramping up defence spending in the face of fears over Trump’s commitment to NATO and Russia’s assault on Ukraine – a push underscored by several leaders in the Armenian capital.

“Europeans are taking their destiny into their own hands, increasing their defence and security spending, and building their own common solutions,” French President Emmanuel Macron said.

“We have to step up our military capabilities to be able to defend and protect ourselves,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told reporters.

The latest escalation between Hezbollah and Israel began in early March following strikes linked to a wider regional conflict involving Iran and the United States. Hezbollah entered the conflict shortly after, positioning itself as part of a broader regional confrontation.

Since then, the group has faced significant battlefield losses, territorial setbacks in southern Lebanon, and growing domestic criticism. Israeli forces have established a buffer zone inside Lebanese territory, while large numbers of civilians have been displaced, particularly from Shiite communities that form Hezbollah’s core support base.

The conflict follows an earlier war that severely weakened Hezbollah, including the killing of its long time leader Hassan Nasrallah. Despite rearming and adapting its tactics, the group now faces mounting pressure on both military and political fronts.

Hezbollah’s Strategic Gamble
Hezbollah officials suggest the decision to re enter conflict was calculated. By aligning more closely with Tehran during a wider regional war, the group aims to ensure Lebanon becomes part of any future negotiations between Iran and the United States.

The expectation is that Iranian leverage could secure a stronger and more lasting ceasefire than previous agreements. However, this strategy carries high risks, especially as Washington has indicated that any deal with Iran may not include Lebanon.

Rising Human and Material Costs
The war has inflicted heavy casualties. Lebanese authorities report thousands killed since March, though the exact number of Hezbollah fighters remains disputed. Reports from within the group suggest losses could be substantial, with some fighters’ bodies still unrecovered in frontline towns.

Entire communities in southern Lebanon have been devastated, with villages destroyed and new graves appearing rapidly after ceasefire periods. Displacement has also intensified sectarian tensions, as affected populations seek refuge in other regions where resentment toward Hezbollah is growing.

Domestic Political Fallout
Inside Lebanon, opposition to Hezbollah’s armed status has hardened. Critics argue that its actions continue to expose the country to repeated wars. In a significant shift, the Lebanese government has engaged in direct talks with Israel, a move Hezbollah strongly opposes.

The government has also taken steps to limit Hezbollah’s military role, including banning its armed activities earlier this year. However, enforcing such measures remains difficult given the group’s entrenched influence and the risk of internal conflict.

Continuing Clashes Despite Ceasefire
Although a ceasefire announced in mid April reduced large scale fighting, hostilities have not fully stopped. Both sides continue to exchange strikes in southern Lebanon, and Hezbollah has dismissed the truce as ineffective due to ongoing Israeli attacks.

Israel maintains that its operations are necessary to eliminate threats to its northern regions and has indicated that dismantling Hezbollah’s military capacity will be central to any long term agreement.

Analysis
Hezbollah’s current position reflects a complex mix of resilience and vulnerability. While it has demonstrated the ability to regroup and continue fighting, this alone does not translate into strategic success. The group is increasingly constrained by battlefield losses, internal Lebanese opposition, and uncertainty over external support.

Its reliance on Iran introduces another layer of risk. If a broader agreement between Tehran and Washington excludes Lebanon, Hezbollah may find itself bearing the costs of a war without securing meaningful political gains.

At the same time, Israel appears determined to reshape the security landscape in southern Lebanon, potentially prolonging the conflict. Without a comprehensive regional settlement, the most likely outcome is a prolonged stalemate marked by intermittent violence and continued suffering on both sides.

With information from Reuters.

Tens of thousands of partygoers gathered for an illegal “free party” at a military firing range near Bourges, despite warnings about unexploded World War II ordnance. Authorities warned of serious risks, while organisers said the event was attended by 40,000 to protest against proposed laws targeting unregistered raves.

US president says he is considering the 14-point peace plan, but warns strikes could resume if Tehran ‘misbehaves’.

United States President Donald Trump has said he is reviewing Iran’s 14-point proposal to end his war on the country, while warning that Washington could restart air strikes if Tehran “misbehaves”.

Speaking to reporters in Florida before boarding Air Force One on Saturday, Trump confirmed that he had been briefed on the “concept of the deal”.

Despite the diplomatic opening, the US president struck a characteristically blunt tone regarding the possibility of renewed hostilities, which have been paused since the announcement of a ceasefire between the sides on April 7.

“If they do something bad, there is a possibility it could happen,” Trump said when asked if strikes would resume.

Trump added that the US was “doing very well” and claimed that Iran was desperate for a settlement because the country had been “decimated” by months of conflict and a naval blockade.

In a post on Truth Social later, Trump said it was difficult to imagine that the Iranian proposal would be acceptable as Tehran had “not yet paid a big enough price for what they have done to Humanity, and the World, over the last 47 years.”

Tehran’s 14-point plan reportedly calls for the lifting of the US naval blockade, war reparations, and the release of all frozen assets.

It also seeks a 30-day window to finalise the terms of their peace, a timeline at odds with Washington’s preference for a longer transition.

The diplomatic push comes amid a fragile three-week truce that has put a pause on the US-Israel war on Iran, which began in late February.

Despite the ceasefire, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Saturday that it remains on “full standby” for a return to hostilities, citing the US’s lack of commitment to previous treaties.

Tensions have been further stoked by Trump’s recent characterisation of the US naval blockade as a “very profitable business”.

Tehran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs seized on the remarks, labelling them a “damning admission of piracy”.

The impasse is further complicated by technical obstacles to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, including the presence of Iranian sea mines, and a growing rift with NATO allies following Trump’s decision to withdraw 5,000 US troops from Germany.

White House officially tells Congress that hostilities with Iran have ‘terminated’ despite continued presence of US troops in Middle East.

President Donald Trump has feuded with European allies over their reluctance to step up support for war on Iran.

The United States military has said that it will pull 5,000 troops out of Germany amid ongoing tensions with the key European ally concerning the US war against Iran, according to media reports.

Reuters reported that the Pentagon made the decision on Friday, several days after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that Iran was humiliating the US during negotiations over the end of the war.

“The president is rightly reacting to these counterproductive remarks,” the report cites an anonymous official as saying.

The news service reported that the withdrawal is expected to take place over the next six to 12 months. The decision was also reported by CBS News, citing senior defence officials.

President Donald Trump has lashed out at European allies for not doing more to assist the US-Israel war on Iran, and had stated on Wednesday that he was thinking of pulling troops out of European countries deemed insufficiently supportive.

The US outlet Politico reported earlier this week that Trump’s threats to pull troops out of European countries caught the military by surprise, citing several anonymous defence officials and a congressional aide.

Trump attacked his German counterpart in another social media post on Thursday, stating that Merz should spend more time trying to end the war between Russia and Ukraine and less time “interfering with those that are getting rid of the Iran Nuclear threat, thereby making the World, including Germany, a safer place”.

While European countries have been hesitant to commit their own forces to the US war on Iran, leaders such as Merz were initially hesitant to offer criticism of the US attacks, widely considered illegal under international law.

But criticism has mounted as the war sends shocks across the global economy due to serious disruptions to regional energy supply. Earlier this week, Merz compared the war to previous military quagmires such as the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

“It is, at the moment, a pretty tangled situation,” he said. “And it is costing us a great deal of money. This conflict, this war against Iran, has a direct impact on our economic output.”

Iran says it will respond with “long and painful strikes” on US positions across the Gulf region if Washington renews attacks, and has restated its claim to the Strait of Hormuz, complicating the plans of the United States for a coalition to reopen the waterway.

Two months into the US-Israel war on Iran, the strait remains closed, choking off 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas supplies. That has sent global energy prices surging and heightened concerns about the risks of an economic downturn.

Pakistan-led efforts to resolve the conflict have hit an impasse. Despite a ceasefire in place since April 8, Iran continues to block the strait in response to a US naval blockade of its ports, preventing oil exports – Tehran’s economic lifeline.

Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei defended the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. “This is because of the war and the defence of our right – that is, according to international law, it is legitimate, legal, and accepted,” he said on Thursday night, Iran’s official news agency IRNA reported.

He accused the US of “exploiting a waterway” of which Iran is the coastal state. “In such circumstances, you cannot allow this waterway to be misused,” he said.

Baghaei also justified attacks on US assets in Gulf countries.

“Unfortunately, the regional countries also truly acted unjustly; during the holy month of Ramadan, they cooperated with a foreign party in attacking an Islamic country, and this is something that will remain a permanent demand.”

On Thursday, the United Arab Emirates said it had banned its citizens from travelling to Iran, Lebanon and Iraq, and urged those currently in those countries to leave immediately and return home.

Then, on Friday, in response to Iran’s threat to hit targets in the Gulf, the adviser to the UAE’s president, Anwar Gargash, said: “No unilateral Iranian arrangements can be trusted or relied upon, following its treacherous aggression against all its neighbours.”

Bahraini King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa also condemned what he described as Iranian aggression against Manama and accused Tehran of threatening its security and stability and exposing internal collaborators.

In a statement, the king expressed anger at individuals and some legislators accused of siding with the attackers, warning that traitors could face imprisonment, loss of citizenship and expulsion. He stressed that loyalty to the nation is “paramount”, urging unity and accountability, and said parliament must be “cleansed” of those who support enemies.

New US strikes?

It is unclear whether the US is planning to renew its attacks on Iran.

Friday is the deadline for Congress to approve the war. Without that – or a 30-day extension, which the Trump administration must also justify by the day – the US will have to scale back its offensive significantly under the 1973 War Powers Resolution.

A senior administration official said late on Thursday that, for the resolution, hostilities had ceased with the start of the April ceasefire between Tehran and Washington, effectively resetting the clock.

President Donald Trump received a briefing from officials on Thursday on plans for a series of further military strikes to pressure Iran to negotiate an end to the conflict, US publication Axios reported, quoting sources.

US Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal told CNN on Thursday that he had the “impression from some of the briefings”, as well as from other sources, that “an imminent military strike is very much on the table”.

He added that this prospect was “deeply disturbing” because it could “well involve American sons and daughters in harm’s way” and lead to “potential massive casualties”.

Bracing for attack

Meanwhile, Iran has been bracing itself for likely attacks. Air defence activity was heard in some areas of the capital, Tehran, late on Thursday, Iran’s semi-official Mehr news agency reported, and the Tasnim news agency said air defences were engaging small drones and unmanned surveillance aerial vehicles.

A senior official of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said any new US attack on Iran, even if limited, would usher in “long and painful strikes” on its regional positions. Iranian media reports, quoting the aerospace force commander, Majid Mousavi, said: “We’ve seen what happened to your regional bases, we will see the same thing happen to your warships.”

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei said in a written message to Iranians that “the enemies’ abuses of the waterway” would be eliminated under the new management of the strait, indicating that Tehran intended to maintain its hold over it.

“Foreigners who come from thousands of kilometres away … have no place there except at the bottom of its waters,” he said.

Multiple scenarios

Reporting from the White House, in Washington, DC, Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna said: “There’s no doubt that there have been various scenarios laid out for him [Trump] by his military advisers and by his intelligence advisers as to what to do should the ceasefire no longer be extended.”

“Obviously, that would involve some form of armed action, some form of intensified economic action.”

“There’s absolutely no doubt that President Trump has all sorts of scenarios that have been laid out in front of him, but very clearly as well, it’s going to be him and him alone who will choose what to do next,” Hanna added.

Russia has continued heavy attacks on Ukraine for the past 24 hours, with several coming overnight on Thursday and in the early hours of Friday. At least one person has been killed and several have been injured.

A Russian drone attack overnight damaged port infrastructure in Ukraine’s southern Odesa region and wounded two people in the Black Sea port city of Odesa, regional Governor Oleh Kiper said on Friday morning.

Two high-rise residential buildings were damaged in the attack, which destroyed apartments and caused fires, Kiper wrote on the Telegram messaging app.

“This night, Russia again massively attacked the civilian infrastructure of the Odesa region: two people were injured,” he said.

Kiper noted that two multistorey residential buildings in Odesa were damaged by drone strikes. Apartments were destroyed and fires broke out at the sites of the hits, and all necessary assistance was being provided to the victims.

The Russian army also attacked the Black Sea shipbuilding town of Mykolaiv with drones, Mayor Oleksandr Sienkevych reported on Facebook.

“As a result of the impact, there is damage in the private sector, and a fire also broke out,” he wrote. He warned residents that the threat is ongoing and urged people to remain sheltered.

On Thursday night, Ukraine launched its fourth drone attack in the past week on Russia’s Black Sea port of Tuapse, as it continues to target Russian energy infrastructure in a bid to halt oil revenues.

“In Tuapse, as a result of a drone ⁠attack by the ⁠Kyiv regime, a fire broke out on the territory ⁠of the seaport ⁠terminal,” the General ⁠Headquarters in the Krasnodar Region reported on Telegram. It ‌added that emergency crews were working at ‌the ‌site.

Russia hits central Ukraine

The Russian army attacked three districts of the Dnipropetrovsk region in central Ukraine “almost 20 times” with drones and artillery, the head of the Regional Military Administration (OVA), Oleksandr Ganzha, wrote on Telegram.

Ganzha reported that infrastructure was damaged in Kryvyi Rih, where one person was injured.

Ukraine’s news outlet Interfax reported that there were strikes on the Synelnyky district, the Dubovykivska and Petropavlivska communities, where a garage and a car were burned, and residences were damaged.

In the Nikopol district, communities in Nikopol, Marhanetska and Chervonohryhorivska have been affected. A private house was occupied and infrastructure, a petrol station, an administrative building and buses were damaged, Interfax reported.

In Kherson, attacks by drones have continued for the past 24 hours in Kherson, Zymivnyk, Komyshany and Zelenivka.

The head of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry, Yaroslav Shanko, wrote on Telegram: “Over the past day, 4 settlements in the Kherson community have been subjected to enemy attacks. As a result of Russian attacks in the Kherson community, 1 person was killed and 8 were injured.”

Private houses and multistorey buildings, an administrative building, warehouses, buses and civilian cars have been damaged.

April 30 (UPI) — Israeli forces intercepted and boarded the Global Sumud Flotilla in international waters off Greece on Thursday, preventing it from delivering aid to Gaza and drawing international condemnation.

The Israeli military, using drones and armed personnel, blocked the fleet of ships in the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of the Greek island of Crete. Twenty-two of 58 vessels were seized, with passengers held at gunpoint.

“Our boats were approached by military speedboats, self-identified as ‘Israel’, pointing lasers and semi-automatic assault weapons, ordering participants to the front of the boats and to get on their hands and knees,” the Global Sumud Flotilla aid mission said in a statement.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry said in a social media statement on Thursday that it detained about 175 activists from the more than 20 boats of the flotilla.

“Well done to our Navy!” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement following the operation, stating he had directed the military to intercept the boats before they reached Gaza.

“No ship and no Hamas supporter reached our territory, and not even our territorial waters. They were turned back and will return to their countries of origin.”

The flotilla was sailing from Barcelona, Spain, to Gaza when its ships were intercepted. Crete is more than 700 miles from the Palestinian enclave.

The Global Sumud Flotilla social media page posted that Israeli forces smashed engines and destroyed navigation arrays on its ships before retreating.

“Intentionally leaving hundreds of civilians stranded on powerless, broken vessels directly in the path of a massive approaching storm,” the social media post reads. “Furthermore, communications with multiple vessels have been jammed, severing their ability to coordinate or signal for help.”

Israel has maintained a maritime blockade of Gaza since 2009. It has said the blockade is meant to block weapons smuggling to Gaza.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry called the aid flotilla a “PR stunt.”

“As international media have exposed, these are professional provocateurs on pleasure cruises, addicted to self-promotion,” the Israeli Foreign Ministry wrote on social media.

Numerous countries, politicians and human rights organizations voiced condemnation of the Israeli operation, with a dozen-country bloc, including Brazil, Pakistan, Spain, Malaysia and South Africa, describing the interception as an “Israeli assault” on a peaceful civilian humanitarian initiative.

“The Israeli attacks against the vessels and the unlawful detention of humanitarian activists in international waters constitute flagrant violations of international humanitarian law,” the bloc said in a statement.

Italian President Giorgia Meloni separately condemned the seizure, while Turkey’s Foreign Ministry called upon the international community “to adopt a unified stance against this unlawful act by Israel.”

The U.S. State Department, meanwhile, issued a statement condemning the flotilla.