news

Ayatollah Alireza Arafi, member of a constitutional watchdog, appointed to temporary council, along with Iranian president and chief justice.

Iran has announced the formation of a three-member transitional council to handle the state duties following the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Ayatollah Alireza Arafi, member of a powerful constitutional watchdog, was appointed on Sunday to the temporary council, whose other two members are President Masoud Pezeshkian and Supreme Court Chief Justice Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei.

The 67-year-old cleric, who is a member of the Guardian Council that must later choose a supreme leader, was confirmed to the council by the Expediency Council, a powerful arbitration body.

According to Article 111 of the Iranian Constitution, the transitional council will govern the country until an 88-member panel called the Assembly of Experts chooses a new supreme leader after almost 37 years of rule by Khamenei.

His killing on Saturday by the joint United States and Israeli forces has raised crucial questions about Iran’s future.

Although the leadership council will govern in the interim, the Assembly of Experts “must, as soon as possible,” pick a new supreme leader, according to the Iranian constitution.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Iran’s security chief Ali Larijani are also expected to play pivotal roles in the transitional council, but it remains to be seen where the balance of power lies.

The commander-in-chief of the IRGC was also killed in the US-Israeli attack on Saturday – the second such killing in less than a year – and the next leader of the elite military and economic force is yet to be announced.

IRGC-linked Telegram channels are citing deputy chief Ahmad Vahidi, who was appointed to the position by Khamenei two months ago, as a likely candidate.

Earlier on Sunday, Larijani accused the US and Israel of trying to plunder and break apart Iran and warned “secessionist groups” within Iran of a harsh response if they attempt action, state media said.

“The brave soldiers and the great nation of Iran will teach an unforgettable lesson to the international oppressors,” he said.

A former parliamentary speaker and senior policy adviser, Larijani was appointed to advise Khamenei on strategy in nuclear talks with US President Donald Trump’s administration.

The crossing with Egypt is considered vital for the delivery of humanitarian aid and the evacuation of critically ill patients.

Israel has closed Gaza’s Rafah border crossing with Egypt amid the joint Israeli-United States attacks on Iran.

“Several necessary security adjustments have been implemented, including the closure of the crossings into the Gaza Strip, among them the Rafah Crossing, until further notice,” Israel’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) said in a statement.

The Rafah crossing, located on Gaza’s southern border, had reopened only last month, allowing a limited number of Palestinians to leave for the first time in months, including patients in urgent need of medical care.

The crossing is considered vital for the delivery of humanitarian aid and the evacuation of critically ill patients.

Virtually all of Gaza’s population of more than two million people was displaced during Israel’s genocidal war on the territory, and the enclave remains heavily dependent on humanitarian assistance.

In mid-February, the United Nations said it continued to face impediments in delivering lifesaving aid to Gaza.

In a February report, Human Rights Watch said Israeli restrictions had contributed to shortages of medicines, reconstruction materials, food and water inside the Strip.

COGAT claimed that sufficient food had entered Gaza since the start of the ceasefire to meet four times the nutritional needs of the population. However, it did not provide any evidence to back its claim.

“The substantial quantities of food that have entered since the beginning of the ceasefire amount to four times the nutritional needs of the population,” the Israeli defence body said. “Therefore, the existing stock is expected to suffice for an extended period.”

It added that “the closure of the crossings will have no impact on the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip”, saying it would remain in contact with the international community and provide updates on any developments.

COGAT is the Israeli military body responsible for overseeing civil affairs in the occupied Palestinian territory. Critics say it functions as an instrument of surveillance and control, particularly in enforcing movement restrictions and closures.

The Palestinian prisoners in Israel’s Shatta Prison are medically neglected and enduring unprecedented maltreatment, the Palestinian Commission of Detainees’ and Ex-Detainees’ Affairs said on Thursday.

The Commission described the conditions of the Palestinian prisoners in Shatta as “horrifying,” reported the Palestinian Information Centre. “They are exposed constantly to brutal beatings and pepper spray attacks, and served raw and unsalted food.”

According to the Commission’s lawyer who visited the prisoners in Shatta recently, they are medically neglected and not provided with any treatment. The lawyer specifically mentioned Waleed Musallam, who suffers from severe psoriasis, and Fadi Raddad, who has been suffering from sharp pains in his back and right shoulder since Israeli jailers assaulted him.

The detainees appealed to rights groups to intervene with the Israel Prison Service to allow them to practice their religious rituals during the holy month of Ramadan without restrictions, to improve the quality of food, and to provide them with copies of the Holy Qur’an and clocks.

READ: Hundreds of Palestinians, including children and women, released from Israeli jails

Spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei says Iran’s attacks on US targets across the region are legitimate defensive actions.

Iran is entitled to defend itself from Israeli and US attacks, the spokesman for Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stressed.

“We have every right in accordance with international law, with the UN Charter, to defend ourselves with all might”, Esmaeil Baghaei said in an interview with Al Jazeera on Saturday.

The US and Israel launched a wave of attacks across multiple Iranian cities, including Tehran, on Saturday, in what US President Donald Trump described as “major combat operations”.

At least 201 people have been killed, according to Iranian media, citing the Red Crescent.

Iran responded by firing missiles towards Israel and US military targets in multiple countries, including Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

Baghaei said the country’s armed forces “are defending national sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Iran against these barbaric acts of aggression”.

The US-Israeli attacks came after a third round of indirect negotiations on Iran’s nuclear programme between the US and Iran ended on Friday.

“We were supposed to meet on Monday to talk about technical aspects of any possible deal on [the] nuclear issue,” Baghaei said. “And the Americans themselves acknowledged that these negotiations went quite well. The mediator, [the] foreign minister of Oman, qualified this round of negotiations as being of significant progress.”

It was the second time in less than a year that diplomacy had been scuttled by an attack on Iran, Baghaei noted. Iran and the US had engaged in several rounds of negotiations last year, when Israel launched a 12-day war on Iran in June, which the US briefly joined, despite Trump saying he was committed to a diplomatic resolution.

Baghaei said the US “launching an act of aggression against another member of the United Nations” also threatened the international body, as its main pillar, “the UN Charter, is the provision of the use of force.”

“So, I think what is at stake is not only the security and peace of the region and that of Iran, but also the whole fabric of international law. And the normative system that has been created by the United Nations Charter,” he added.

Friends in the region

Baghaei defended Iran’s retaliatory attacks in several countries across the region.

“Under international law, any place, any location, any logistical support that are given to the aggressor [is a] legitimate target for the victim state,” he said. “So, we are not attacking any country in the region. We are friendly with all countries of the region. What we are doing is just taking defensive actions.”

“We have proven that we trust our friends in the region,” Baghaei said. “That’s why we try to get together with the countries of the region in furtherance of this diplomatic process. The problem is that the United States is conducting this war of aggression at the cost of everyone, including the countries of the region.”

Iran has begun 40 days of mourning after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in ongoing attacks by the United States and Israel, according to Iranian state media.

Top security officials were also killed in Saturday’s strikes, along with Khamenei’s daughter, son-in-law and grandson. The killings mark one of the most significant blows to Iran’s leadership since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

President Masoud Pezeshkian condemned the killing as “a great crime”, according to a statement from his office. He also declared seven days of public holidays in addition to the 40-day mourning period.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi said people were pouring into the streets of the capital following the news of Khamenei’s killing.

“There will be expected ceremonies,” he said, noting they would likely take place amid continuing bombardment across the country.

Protests denouncing Khamenei’s killing were also reported elsewhere, including Shiraz, Yasuj and Lorestan.

“There will be expected ceremonies,” he said, noting they would likely take place amid continuing bombardment across the country.

Footage aired by Iranian state media showed supporters mourning at the shrine of Imam Reza in Mashhad, with several people seen crying and collapsing in grief.

The killing also led to protests in neighbouring Iraq, which declared three days of public mourning. In Baghdad, protesters confronted security forces in the heavily fortified Green Zone, which houses Iraqi government buildings and foreign embassies.

Videos verified by Al Jazeera showed demonstrators waving flags and shouting slogans, with witnesses saying some were attempting to mobilise towards the US Embassy. Footage also showed protesters blocking vehicles at a roundabout near one of the entrances to the area.

There was also a protest in the Pakistani city of Karachi, where footage, verified by Al Jazeera, showed people setting fire to and smashing the windows of the US consulate.

However, there have also been reports of celebrations in Iran, with the Reuters news agency quoting witnesses as saying some people had taken to the streets in Tehran, the nearby city of Karaj and the central city of Isfahan.

Meanwhile, the official IRNA news agency reported that a three-person council, consisting of the country’s president, the chief of the judiciary, and one of the jurists of the Guardian Council, will temporarily assume all leadership duties in the country. The body will temporarily oversee the country until a new supreme leader is elected.

Khamenei assumed leadership of Iran in 1989 following the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who had led the Islamic revolution a decade earlier.

While Khomeini was regarded as the ideological force behind the revolution that ended the Pahlavi monarchy, Khamenei went on to shape Iran’s military and paramilitary apparatus, strengthening both its domestic control and its regional influence.

Attacks across the region

Meanwhile, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) pledged revenge and said it had launched strikes on 27 bases hosting US troops in the region, as well as Israeli military facilities in Tel Aviv.

Explosions have continued to be reported in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, while security alerts are in place in several countries across the region.

US President Donald Trump, in a social media post on Sunday, warned Iran that it would be hit “with a force that has ⁠never been seen before” if it retaliated.

Iran’s retaliatory attacks since Saturday have targeted Israel and US assets across multiple Middle East countries, including Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

Harlan Ullman, chairman of the strategic advisory firm Killowen Group and an adviser to the Atlantic Council in Washington, DC, said the US may have made a “big mistake” by killing Khamenei.

“Decapitation only works when you get all the leaders, and I don’t think that we got all the leaders,” Ullman said, adding that the US should not expect Iran’s leadership to enter negotiations in the immediate aftermath.

Iranian state media reported on Saturday at least 201 people have been killed in the joint US-Israeli attacks across 24 provinces, citing the Red Crescent. In southern Iran, at least 148 people were killed and 95 wounded in a strike on an elementary girls’ school in Minab on Saturday, with the toll continuing to rise, according to state media.

The US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz says striking Iran was necessary to protect American allies, prevent proxy militias, and to ensure that Tehran can never “threaten the world with a nuclear weapon.”

EXPLAINER

The former defence minister and secretary of Iran’s Defence Council was involved in US-Iran nuclear negotiations.

Ali Shamkhani, the secretary of Iran’s Defence Council and close adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has reportedly been killed in Israeli and US strikes on Iran.

An Israeli military spokesperson said he was among several top Iranian officials killed on Saturday.

There was no immediate comment from Tehran on his fate.

The 70-year-old was overseeing the negotiations between the US and Iran over the Iranian nuclear programme, the latest round of which concluded on Friday.

“If the main issue of the negotiations is not making nuclear weapons by Iran, this is in compliance with a religious decree issued by Iran’s leader and the country’s defence doctrine, and an immediate agreement is within reach,” Shamkhani said on Thursday.

Shamkhani had also been targeted in an Israeli strike in June 2025, during the 12-day war between Iran and Israel. There were reports that he had been killed in the attack, but he was later confirmed to have survived. He was pulled from the rubble of his home, and had sustained severe injuries.

He was recently appointed the secretary of Iran’s Defence Council, which was created after the war and coordinates Iran’s defence and national security policies, while mobilising resources to address threats.

In January, he warned that Iran’s response to any US military action would be “immediate, all out, and unprecedented, targeting the heart of Tel Aviv and all those supporting the aggressor”.

He led the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) for a decade until 2023, making him the second-longest-serving security chief since 1979 after former President Hassan Rouhani, who was SNSC secretary for nearly 16 years.

Born in Ahvaz in Iran’s Khuzestan, Shamkhani and his family moved to Los Angeles in the United States when he finished school. He later returned to Iran, where he studied engineering.

During the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, Shamkhani was a commander in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and went on to be a commander of both of Iran’s navies, the IRGC Navy and the Iranian Navy.

He was the minister of defence between 1997 and 2005, and was the first Iranian defence official to visit Saudi Arabia since the revolution. He also came third in the 2001 presidential elections before returning to his role as defence minister.

Figures from across the United States political spectrum have reacted to President Donald Trump’s joint attack with Israel on Iran, with Republicans largely expressing support and Democrats failing to offer a robust and unified response.

The attacks have reportedly killed at least 201 people, including more than 80 in a school in southern Iran, many of them children.

Iran has launched retaliatory strikes on Israel as well as US bases across the region, located in countries such as Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Kuwait, prompting fears that the conflict could spiral out of control and plunge the region into violence.

An initial YouGov poll conducted on February 28, after the strikes, suggested that 33 percent of US adults approved of the US attacking Iran, while 45 percent disapproved. Among Democrats and Independents, approval was just 10 percent and 21 percent, respectively, while 68 percent of Republicans expressed support.

Here’s how some of the US’s most prominent elected representatives and political figures have reacted.

President Donald Trump: “A short time ago, the United States military started major combat operations in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime, a vicious group of very hard, terrible people. Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world.”

Republican House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson: “Today, Iran is facing the severe consequences of its evil actions. President Trump and the Administration have made every effort to pursue peaceful and diplomatic solutions in response to the Iranian regime’s sustained nuclear ambitions and development, terrorism, and the murder of Americans—and even their own people.”

Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune: “For years, Iran’s relentless nuclear ambitions, its expanded ballistic missile inventory, and its unwavering support for terror groups in the region have posed a clear and unacceptable threat to U.S. servicemembers, citizens in the region, and many of our allies. Despite the dogged efforts of the president and his administration, the Iranian regime has refused the diplomatic off-ramps that would peacefully resolve these national security concerns. I commend President Trump for taking action to thwart these threats.”

Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries: “Donald Trump failed to seek Congressional authorization prior to striking Iran. Instead, the president’s decision to abandon diplomacy and launch a massive military attack has left American troops vulnerable to Iran’s retaliatory actions. We pray for the safety of the men and women of the US military as they have been put into harm’s way in a dangerous theatre of war.”

Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer: “The administration has not provided Congress and the American people with critical details about the scope and immediacy of the threat. Confronting Iran’s malign regional activities, nuclear ambitions, and harsh oppression of the Iranian people demands American strength, resolve, regional coordination, and strategic clarity. Unfortunately, President Trump’s fitful cycles of lashing out and risking wider conflict are not a viable strategy.”

Democratic Representative Rashida Tlaib: “The American people do not want a war with Iran. Trump is acting on the violent fantasies of the American political elite and the Israeli apartheid government, ignoring the vast majority of Americans who say loud and clear: No More Wars.”

Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “The American people are once again dragged into a war they did not want by a president who does not care about the long-term consequences of his actions. This war is unlawful. It is unnecessary. And it will be catastrophic. Just this week, Iran and the United States were negotiating key measures that could have staved off war. The president walked away from these discussions and chose war instead.”

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani: “Today’s military strikes on Iran — carried out by the United States and Israel — mark a catastrophic escalation in an illegal war of aggression. Bombing cities. Killing civilians. Opening a new theatre of war.  Americans do not want this. They do not want another war in pursuit of regime change. They want relief from the affordability crisis. They want peace.”

Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders: “This Trump–Netanyahu war is unconstitutional and violates international law. It endangers the lives of U.S. troops and people across the region. We’ve lived through the lies of Vietnam and Iraq. No more endless wars. Congress must pass a War Powers Resolution immediately.”

Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen: “Trump is lying to the American people as he launches an illegal, regime-change war against Iran. This is endangering American lives and has already resulted in mass civilian casualties. This is not making us safer & only damages the US and our interests. The Senate must immediately vote on the War Powers Resolution to stop it.”

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham: “I fervently pray that the long-suffering people of Iran will have their oppression ended soon. I also fervently pray that we’re on the verge of a new dawn in the Middle East, with historic opportunity for lasting peace and prosperity. As to our allies in Israel, President Trump and all under his command, your bravery has set in motion the end of evil and darkness, and the beginning of the light. Well done.”

Democratic Representative Ro Khanna: “Trump has launched an illegal regime change war in Iran with American lives at risk. Congress must convene on Monday to vote on Representative Thomas Massie and my WPR [War Powers Resolution] to stop this. Every member of Congress should go on record this weekend on how they will vote.”

Republican Representative Thomas Massie: “I am opposed to this War. This is not “America First.” When Congress reconvenes, I will work with Representative Ro Khanna to force a Congressional vote on war with Iran. The Constitution requires a vote, and your Representative needs to be on record as opposing or supporting this war.”

Republican Senator Tom Cotton: “Iran’s missile program poses an imminent threat to the United States and our allies. I’m thankful President Trump is taking necessary action to protect our homeland.”

Democratic Senator Adam Schiff: “Trump is drawing our country into yet another foreign war that Americans don’t want and Congress has not authorised. The Iranian regime is a brutal and murderous dictatorship. But that does not give Trump the authority to unilaterally initiate a war of choice.”

Democratic Senator John Fetterman: “Operation Epic Fury. President Trump has been willing to do what’s right and necessary to produce real peace in the region. God bless the United States, our great military, and Israel.”

Former Democratic Presidential Nominee Kamala Harris: “Donald Trump is dragging the United States into a war the American people do not want. Let me be clear: I am opposed to a regime-change war in Iran, and our troops are being put in harm’s way for the sake of Trump’s war of choice.”

Former Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene: “We said “No More Foreign Wars, No More Regime Change!” We said it on rally stage after rally stage, speech after speech. Trump, Vance, basically the entire admin campaigned on it and promised to put America FIRST and Make America Great Again. My generation has been let down, abused, and used by our government our entire adult lives and our children’s generation is literally being abandoned.”

At an emergency UN Security Council meeting in New York on Saturday afternoon, US Ambassador Mike Waltz said the strikes were “directed toward specific and strategic objectives: to dismantle missile capabilities that threaten allies, to degrade naval assets used to destabilise international waters, and to disrupt the machinery that arms proxy militias and to ensure the Iranian regime, never ever can threaten the world with a nuclear weapon”.

President Donald Trump stood in front of regional leaders during a visit to the Middle East in May and declared a new era of US foreign policy in the region, one that is not guided by trying to reshape it or change its governing systems.

“In the end, the so-called nation-builders wrecked far more nations than they built, and the interventionists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand themselves,” the US president said in rebuke of his hawkish predecessors.

Less than a year later, Trump ordered an all-out assault on Iran with the stated goal of bringing “freedom” to the country, borrowing language from the playbook of interventionist neoconservatives, like former President George W Bush, whom he spent his political career criticising.

Analysts say the war with Iran does not fit with Trump’s stated political ideology, policy goals or campaign promises.

Instead, several Iran experts told Al Jazeera that Trump is waging a war, together with Israel, that only benefits Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

“This is, once again, a war of choice launched by the US with [a] push from Israel,” said Negar Mortazavi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy in Washington, DC.

“This is another Israeli war that the US is launching. Israel has pushed the US to attack Iran for two decades, and they finally got it.”

Mortazavi highlighted Trump’s criticism of his predecessors, who had waged regime-change wars in the region.

“It is ironic, because this is a president who called himself the ‘president of peace‘,” she told Al Jazeera.

History of warnings of the Iranian ‘threat’

Netanyahu, who promoted the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, has been warning for more than two decades that Iran is on the cusp of acquiring nuclear weapons.

Iran denies seeking a nuclear bomb, and even Trump administration officials have acknowledged that Washington has no evidence that Tehran is weaponising its uranium enrichment programme.

After the US bombed Iran’s main enrichment facilities in the 12-day war in June last year – an attack that Trump says “obliterated” the country’s nuclear programme – Netanyahu pivoted to a new supposed Iranian threat: Tehran’s ballistic missiles.

“Iran can blackmail any American city,” Netanyahu told pro-Israel podcaster Ben Shapiro in October.

“People don’t believe it. Iran is developing intercontinental missiles with a range of 8,000km [5,000 miles], add another 3,000 [1,800 miles], and they can get to the East Coast of the US.”

Trump repeated that claim, which Tehran has vehemently denied and has not been backed by any public evidence or testing, in his State of the Union address earlier this week.

“They’ve already developed missiles that can threaten Europe and our bases overseas, and they’re working to build missiles that will soon reach the United States of America,” he said of the Iranians.

Trump has been building the case for a wider war with Iran since the June conflict, repeatedly threatening to bomb the country again.

But the US president’s own National Security Strategy last year called for de-prioritising the Middle East in Washington’s foreign policy and focusing on the Western Hemisphere.

Meanwhile, the US public, wary of global conflict after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has also been largely opposed to new strikes against Iran, public opinion polls show.

Only 21 percent of respondents in a recent University of Maryland survey said they favoured a war with Iran.

The first day of the war saw Iran fire missiles against bases and cities that host US troops and assets across the Middle East in retaliation for the joint US-Israeli strikes, plunging the region into chaos.

Trump acknowledged that US troops may suffer casualties in the conflict. “That often happens in war,” he said on Saturday. “But we’re doing this not for now. We’re doing this for the future. And it is a noble mission.”

‘Ignoring the vast majority of Americans’

The Trump administration had appeared to step back from the brink of conflict earlier this month by engaging in diplomacy with Tehran.

US and Iranian negotiators held three rounds of talks over the past week, with Tehran stressing that it is willing to agree to rigorous inspections of its nuclear programme.

Omani mediators and Iranian officials had described the last round of negotiations, which took place on Thursday, as positive, saying that it yielded significant progress.

The June 2025 war, initiated by Israel without provocation, also came in the middle of US-Iran talks.

“Netanyahu’s agenda has always been to prevent a diplomatic solution, and he feared Trump was actually serious about getting a deal, so the start of this war in the middle of negotiations is a success for him, just like it was last June,” Jamal Abdi, the president of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), told Al Jazeera.

“Trump’s embrace of regime change rhetoric is a further victory for Netanyahu, and loss for the American people, as it suggests the US may be committed to a long and unpredictable military boondoggle.”

While announcing the strikes on Saturday, Trump said his aim is to prevent Iran from “threatening America and our core national security interests”.

But US critics, including some proponents of Trump’s “America first” movement, have argued that Iran – more than 10,000km (6,000 miles) away – does not pose a threat to the US.

Earlier this month, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee told conservative commentator Tucker Carlson that “if it were not for Iran, there wouldn’t be Hezbollah; we wouldn’t have the problem on the border with Lebanon”.

Carlson said, “What problem on the border with Lebanon? I’m an American. I’m not having any problems on the border with Lebanon right now. I live in Maine.”

On Saturday, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib stressed that the US public does not want war with Iran.

“Trump is acting on the violent fantasies of the American political elite and the Israeli apartheid government, ignoring the vast majority of Americans who say loud and clear: No More Wars,” Tlaib said in a statement.

Democratic lawmakers have largely condemned the strikes on Iran, emphasizing the lack of congressional approval.

Lawmakers from the Democratic Party have condemned the US attacks on Iran as a “dangerous” and “unnecessary” escalation, and called on the Senate to immediately vote on legislation that would block the president’s ability to take further military action without congressional approval.

Senator Tim Kaine, a member of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees and the primary author of the war powers resolution, called President Donald Trump’s order to attack Iran a “colossal mistake”.

“The Senate should immediately return to session and vote on my War Powers Resolution to block the use of US forces in hostilities against Iran,” Kaine said in a statement on Saturday. “Every single Senator needs to go on the record about this dangerous, unnecessary, and idiotic action.”

House of Representatives Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries echoed Kaine, saying that House Democrats are committed to forcing a floor vote on a measure to restrict Trump’s war powers regarding Iran.

“Donald Trump failed to seek Congressional authorisation prior to striking Iran. Instead, the President’s decision to abandon diplomacy and launch a massive military attack has left American troops vulnerable to Iran’s retaliatory actions,” he said in a statement. “The Trump administration must explain itself to the American people and Congress immediately.”

The push for a legislative check on Trump’s executive power has gained significant bipartisan momentum in the Senate, of which the Republican Party maintains a slim majority.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer demanded on Saturday that Congress be briefed immediately about the Iran attacks, including an all-senators classified session and public testimony, criticising the administration for not providing details on the threat’s scope and immediacy.

“The administration has not provided Congress and the American people with critical details about the scope and immediacy of the threat,” he said in a statement.

Senator Mark Warner, vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, described the strikes in a statement posted on X as “a deeply consequential decision that risks pulling the United States into another broad conflict in the Middle East”.

He questioned the urgency and intelligence behind the attack, warning of repeating “mistakes of the past”, like the Iraq war.

“The American people have seen this playbook before – claims of urgency, misrepresented intelligence, and military action that pulls the United States into regime change and prolonged, costly nation-building,” he said.

Not just Democrats

While the push to curb executive military authority is largely driven by the Democratic caucus, a growing contingent of Republican lawmakers has signalled a rare break from the White House to join the effort.

Republican representative Thomas Massie, one of the most outspoken critics, described the strikes as “acts of war unauthorised by Congress”.

“I am opposed to this War. This is not America First,” he wrote on X.

In the Senate, Republican Senator Rand Paul, who also co-sponsored the war powers resolution, said his opposition to the war is based on constitutional principles.

“My oath of office is to the Constitution, so with studied care, I must oppose another Presidential war,” he said on X.

The U.S. has used LUCAS kamikaze drones for the first time in combat, U.S. Central Command acknowledged on Saturday. The drones, based on the Iranian Shahed-136, were launched from the ground by Task Force Scorpion Strike (TFSS). The task force was set up in December “to flip the script on Iran,” a U.S. official told us at the time. The launch of LUCAS drones marks a rare instance when the U.S. adopted Iran’s drone playbook and used it against them.

Today’s strikes were part of Operation Epic Fury, an attack the U.S. launched along with Israel on targets across Iran. You can read more about that in our initial story here.

The War Zone has advocated for the procurement of this exact class of drone by the American military.

The LUCAS drones are designed to be a far less expensive strike weapon than missiles, which not only cost more, but are far more difficult and time-consuming to produce.

“Costing approximately $35,000 per platform, LUCAS is a low-cost, scalable system that provides cutting-edge capabilities at a fraction of the cost of traditional long-range U.S. systems that can deliver similar effects,” Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, a CENTCOM spokesperson, told TWZ back in December. “The drone system has an extensive range and the ability to operate beyond line of sight, providing significant capability across CENTCOM’s vast operating area.”

In addition, the LUCAS design includes features that allow for “autonomous coordination, making them suitable for swarm tactics and network-centric strikes,” a U.S. official told us. As we have explained in detail in the past, the swarming capabilities combined with some of the drones being equipped with Starlink terminals, means extremely advanced cooperative tactics and dynamic targeting are possible, all while keeping humans in the loop.

The LUCAS drones have “an extensive range and are designed to operate autonomously,” CENTCOM said in a press release announcing the creation of Task Force Scorpion Strike. “They can be launched with different mechanisms to include catapults, rocket-assisted takeoff, and mobile ground and vehicle systems.”

Though the LUCAS drones fired against Iran were ground-launched, U.S. Navy personnel in the Middle East test-fired one from the Independence class Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) USS Santa Barbara. This came two weeks after the U.S. military announced the formation of Task Force Scorpion Strike.

Overall, the LUCAS drone’s core design was based directly on the Shahed-136, a U.S. official told us.

“The U.S. military got hold of an Iranian Shahed,” according to the U.S. official in December. “We took a look and reverse-engineered it. We are working with a number of U.S. companies in the innovation space.”

“The LUCAS drone is the product of that [reverse-engineering] effort,” the official added. “It pretty much follows the Shahed design.”

As we have explained for years, the Shahed was based on an Israel concept, which also has roots in a German concept. So it is a complicated lineage for sure.

The LUCAS was designed by SpektreWorks. Its website provides basic specifications for a related target drone design called the FLM 136, which has a stated maximum range of 444 miles and can stay aloft for up to six hours. Its total payload capacity, not counting fuel, is 40 pounds, and it cruises at a speed of around 74 knots (with a dash speed of up to 105 knots). Whether these details reflect the capabilities of the operationalized LUCAS design is unclear.

In contrast, the baseline Shahed-136, which is powered by a small 50-horsepower internal combustion engine, has a top speed of around 100 knots (185 kilometers per hour) and a maximum range of approximately 1,242 miles (2,000 kilometers) while carrying an 88-pound (40-kilogram) warhead, according to the U.S. Army’s Operational Environment Data Integration Network (ODIN) training portal. It was designed to strike static targets based on targeting data programmed in before launch.

Iran has shown additional versions over the years. The Shahed-238 has new guidance systems, with radar and electro-optical/infrared guidance and jet power. Earlier Shahed versions primarily employed a combination of inertial and GPS navigation to hit fixed targets.

از موشک کروز ابرفراصوت فتاح2 و پهباد شاهد 147 با حضور رهبر انقلاب رونمایی شد

Russia also now produces a still-expanding array of variants and derivatives of this design, referred to locally as the Geran. Iran and Russia have both been notably working to integrate more dynamic targeting capabilities into their respective versions of the drone.

The use of the LUCAS comes as Iran has launched its Shahed-136 drones against targets across the Middle East and highlights the limitations of air defenses. Even IDF’s multi-tier integrated air defense system, the most advanced one on Earth, and U.S. ground- and sea-based air defense systems around the Middle East do not offer complete protection against these and other weapons.

Iran used Shahed-136s to successfully strike the headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet in Manama, Bahrain.

Final Oscar voting began yesterday. How many of the nominated movies have you seen? Are you doing your due diligence in all the categories before the March 15 ceremony or, given the summer weather outside your window, might the mountains be calling?

I’m Glenn Whipp, columnist for the Los Angeles Times and host of The Envelope newsletter. It’s never too early for flip-flops, is it?

Testing out a new mandate

To vote for the Oscars, you have to watch all the nominated movies.

This may seem obvious. But until this year, the motion picture academy operated entirely on the honor system, strongly encouraging members to see everything before voting.

Now voters have to show their work — up to a point.

This year, academy members are required to certify through the group’s screening room portal that they have viewed all nominated films in each category to be eligible to vote in that category. Since nominations were announced in January, the academy has been emailing voters with updates on their progress, indicating where they’re cleared to vote and where they still have work to do.

One wrinkle, and it’s not a small one: Members can simply check a box indicating that they’ve watched a movie outside the academy’s platform. Perhaps they saw it at a festival, on a streaming platform other than the portal or the place God intended films to be seen — a movie theater.

Whether they actually did watch the movies is left to the honesty of the voter. It’s still an honor system, and members do not need to show movie stubs, tickets or receipts.

Talking with academy members, there seems to be a little wiggle room when it comes to having a clear conscience.

Take the voter who loved Ethan Hawke‘s lead turn as legendary lyricist Lorenz Hart in “Blue Moon,” but hated “Marty Supreme,” turning it off 20 minutes after starting it. Since the academy’s screening room counts a movie as watched only if it’s viewed in its entirety, this voter told me they planned on restarting “Marty Supreme” one night and running it on mute so he could vote in the lead actor category.

“I’d seen enough,” he said. “Watching [Timothée] Chalamet play another pingpong tournament wouldn’t make me change my mind.”

Other academy members told me they were OK marking the “watched” box next to a movie they hadn’t seen, provided they had viewed four of the category’s other nominees. By and large though, they were the outliers. Most voters said they were happy to abstain from voting in a category in which they hadn’t watched all the nominated work. (As academy members may not publicly state voting decisions or preferences, voters spoke on the condition of anonymity.)

“I don’t need to see another ‘Avatar’ movie,” a producers branch member said. “So I’m fine not voting for visual effects or costume design this year. Life is short.”

“I like the idea that I can abstain from categories without any guilt,” an Oscar-nominated writer noted, adding that she thought the new system has been “helpful, reminding me to watch things.”

To that effect, academy members have been receiving a flurry of emails and texts that would give off Big Brother vibes if it didn’t simply boil down to an admonition to watch “Frankenstein” so they could vote in the nine categories where Guillermo del Toro’s monster movie is nominated.

It really isn’t that big an ask, as in recent years the Oscars have become increasingly dominated by a smaller number of movies vacuuming up a greater share of the nominations. This year, the five movies earning the most recognition — “Sinners,” “One Battle After Another,” “Marty Supreme,” “Frankenstein” and “Hamnet” — hauled in 56 nominations.

If an Oscar voter viewed the 10 best picture nominees, they’d be eligible to mark their ballots in best picture and eight other categories — supporting actor, adapted screenplay, casting, cinematography, film editing, production design and original score. Add Hawke’s “Blue Moon” and that opens up lead actor. Make it a double feature with “It Was Just an Accident” and original screenplay becomes available.

“You don’t really need to be much more than a casual moviegoer to knock out most of your ballot,” an actors branch member told me, “except for things like animation and documentaries and the shorts. I don’t know how many people watch all of those.”

Nobody does, save for the PricewaterhouseCoopers accountants counting the ballots. The question vexing both voters and the awards consultants paid to persuade them is how this new, formalized voting will affect the results. As Oscar winners are sometimes the movies that are the most-watched, might requiring voters to see all the nominated work boost less-publicized efforts?

“If ‘Sirât’ wins sound over ‘F1,’ then I think it’s a new ballgame,” one veteran campaigner said. “Right now, though, nobody knows.”

We will soon. In the meantime, with Oscar voting running through Thursday, some academy members tell me their weekend is booked.

“Three nights, three movies,” one voter said. “And then I’m watching ‘Bridgerton.’”

Interior Ministry official says 66 missiles were fired at Qatar, and there were 114 reports of falling shrapnel. 

Doha, Qatar – Eight people have been injured in Qatar after missile shrapnel landed in multiple locations across the country, authorities said, following a barrage of Iranian missiles that Qatar said were intercepted by its air defences.

Brigadier Abdullah Khalifa Al-Muftah, the head of public relations at Qatar’s Ministry of Interior, said in a televised address on Saturday that 66 missiles were fired at Qatar and that authorities received 114 reports of shrapnel falling nationwide. He said one of the injured people was in serious condition.

The Interior Ministry issued an emergency alert urging the public to stay away from military sites and remain indoors, warning people not to approach or handle any unidentified debris and to report any to authorities.

Qatar’s Ministry of Defence said it had “successfully intercepted” a second wave of attacks targeting several areas. It said all missiles were intercepted before reaching the country’s territory, and urged residents to remain calm and follow official instructions.

Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned what it said was the targeting of Qatari territory with Iranian ballistic missiles, calling it “reckless and irresponsible”, as well as a “flagrant violation” of sovereignty and an escalation threatening regional stability.

Ibrahim Sultan Al-Hashemi, the head of public relations at the Foreign Ministry, said the attack was inconsistent with the principles of “good neighbourliness”, and that Qatar reserved the right to respond “in accordance with international law”.

The ministry also called for an immediate halt to escalation and a return to negotiations.

The missile barrage came as Iran launched strikes across the Gulf after the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, an escalation that prompted air-defence interceptions over several countries. The news agency Reuters reported that Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain said they intercepted Iranian missiles, while Jordan also intercepted missiles.

This is not the first Iranian attack on Qatar. In June 2025, during the 12-day war between Iran and Israel, Iran launched missiles at the Al Udeid airbase, a key facility hosting US forces near Doha.

Saturday’s barrage came after the United States and Israel carried out strikes on Iran, raising fears of a wider conflict and increasing pressure on Gulf states that host US forces and critical energy infrastructure.

The developments heightened anxiety across the Gulf, where Ramadan routines were disrupted by air raid alerts, interceptions and warnings about unexploded fragments, as leaders urged restraint amid fears of a widening confrontation.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney arrives in Mumbai on his first official visit to India seeking to reset strained relations and advance an ambitious trade agenda designed to reduce Canada’s dependence on the United States.

The visit marks a significant recalibration in Ottawa’s foreign policy. After years of diplomatic friction under Justin Trudeau, Carney is positioning Canada as a pragmatic middle power, intent on diversifying alliances and building new trade corridors with fast-growing economies.

From Mumbai, Carney will travel to New Delhi for talks with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with negotiations expected to accelerate toward a comprehensive trade agreement that Canadian officials hope to conclude by November.

Repairing a Fractured Relationship

Canada–India relations deteriorated sharply after Trudeau publicly alleged that Indian agents were linked to the assassination of a Canadian citizen associated with Sikh separatism. New Delhi strongly denied the accusation, and diplomatic ties cooled considerably.

Carney’s itinerary reflects a deliberate attempt to lower political temperatures. Unlike previous Canadian leaders, he will not visit Punjab, a state central to India’s Sikh population and a major source of immigration to Canada. Sikh separatist activism has long been a sensitive issue in bilateral relations, and avoiding the region signals Ottawa’s intent to keep the focus on trade and investment rather than diaspora politics.

This shift has drawn criticism from some Sikh organizations in Canada, which argue that Ottawa risks sidelining concerns about foreign interference. However, Carney’s government insists domestic security remains non-negotiable while economic engagement proceeds.

Trade as Strategic Rebalancing

The India trip forms part of a broader diplomatic tour that includes Australia and Japan — countries Carney views as fellow “middle powers” capable of shaping a more diversified global trading system.

The strategy is driven by two pressures.

First, Canada’s economic dependence on the United States leaves it exposed to protectionist policies, including tariffs and threats to trade access. Second, global supply chains are being reshaped by geopolitical rivalry, creating opportunities for countries that can act as connectors rather than competitors.

India, now the world’s most populous nation and one of its fastest-growing major economies, represents both a vast consumer market and a strategic counterweight in global trade realignments.

Reports suggest negotiations may include a long-term uranium supply agreement worth billions of Canadian dollars, alongside cooperation in oil and gas, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, education and environmental technology. Such sectoral diversification would deepen economic interdependence beyond traditional commodities.

The momentum is reinforced by the European Union’s recent trade deal with India, which has raised expectations that New Delhi is increasingly open to structured economic partnerships with Western economies.

A Style Contrast With the Trudeau Era

Carney’s approach also signals stylistic change. Trudeau’s 2018 India visit drew criticism for perceived overemphasis on symbolic gestures and cultural theatrics, which some observers argued distracted from substantive negotiations.

Carney, a former central banker, projects a more restrained and technocratic image. Business leaders describe the trip as tightly focused on capital flows, market access and long-term economic sovereignty rather than domestic political optics.

This repositioning aligns with Carney’s broader message that Canada must adapt to what he calls a reordered global economy one less dominated by a single superpower and more defined by regional blocs and mid-sized powers coordinating strategically.

The “Middle Powers” Doctrine

Carney’s Davos speech earlier this year laid out the intellectual framework for this pivot: a coalition of middle powers pursuing “principled and pragmatic” cooperation to hedge against great-power volatility.

India fits squarely into that concept. It maintains strategic autonomy, balancing relations with the United States, Europe, Russia and the Global South. Canada hopes to mirror that flexibility while leveraging its strengths in energy, natural resources, finance and advanced technology.

After India, Carney’s stops in Australia and Japan underscore the Indo-Pacific tilt of Canada’s strategy. Together, these engagements suggest Ottawa is prioritizing economic resilience over ideological alignment.

Can Trade Override Political Tensions?

The key question is whether economic pragmatism can overcome lingering distrust.

India remains sensitive about Sikh separatist activism in Canada. Canadian authorities remain concerned about allegations of foreign interference. These issues are unlikely to disappear entirely.

However, both governments appear motivated by economic incentives. Canada seeks market diversification and foreign investment. India seeks reliable energy supplies, advanced technology partnerships and expanded global trade networks.

If negotiations proceed smoothly, Carney’s visit could mark a turning point not a full reconciliation, but a reset grounded in mutual economic interest rather than political grievance.

In an era of fragmented globalization, Ottawa is betting that strategic trade partnerships with rising powers like India can secure both growth and autonomy. Whether that bet pays off will depend on how effectively Canada balances principle with pragmatism in one of its most complex bilateral relationships.

With information from Reuters.

There is a school of thought among some fans that a good season is one where your team still has plenty to play for come April.

Liverpool will not be winning back-to-back Premier League titles, but they will head into March still in the FA Cup and the Champions League and now in a strong position to finish in the top five, which would effectively confirm Champions League football next season.

At the end of a week in which the club confirmed record revenues of over £700m for the last accounting year, with a profit after tax of £8m, the importance of that European spot cannot be underestimated.

Midfielder Alexis Mac Allister, who scored Liverpool’s third goal, told Match of the Day: “The last four or five months is when teams show what they can do.

“That’s what we want. We know how important it is to qualify for the Champions League for the club and us as a team. The goal is there and we are going to do everything to qualify and be closer to the teams on top.”

Team-mate Cody Gakpo took a similar view, telling Sky Sports: “It was a good afternoon. Step by step, we’re getting [to be] a better team.

“We had a difficult moment during the season, but hopefully these last few games are the start of something beautiful.”

With consecutive games against Wolves in the league and FA Cup next week, before a trip to Galatasaray in the Champions League, the next 10 days or so will go a long way to shaping how their season ultimately is remembered.

Get through that unscathed and, whisper it quietly, Liverpool fans may well start to genuinely believe that they can do something beautiful indeed.

Tehran, Iran – Iranians are being directly addressed by leaders inside and outside the country after the United States and Israel launched attacks across Iran, prompting Tehran to respond with a wave of ongoing missile and drone attacks across the region.

“In light of the continued joint operations by the US and the Zionist regime against Tehran and several other major cities, if possible while remaining calm, please travel to other centres and cities where it is feasible for you to do so,” read a text message sent to the 10 million residents of Tehran by the government on Saturday afternoon.

All outbound roads from the capital were heavily congested with traffic from the morning, shortly after the US and Israel began joint strikes that targeting more than 20 of Iran’s 32 provinces.

Inside Tehran, people also formed long queues in front of petrol stations, even as government authorities emphasised that they remain in control, saying that food and fuel supplies would not be a problem and that contingency plans were in motion.

Authorities also accommodated civilians trying to exit the city, including by setting up roadside refuelling stations. Many families were headed to three provinces to the north near the Caspian Sea, as they did during the 12-day war with Israel.

Last June, during the war, US President Donald Trump issued a direct warning telling all Tehran citizens to immediately evacuate.

But in a video message released shortly after the strikes began on Saturday, he urged the Iranian people to stay in their homes and wait for a suitable time to rise up and overthrow the theocratic establishment governing Iran since a 1979 Islamic revolution. He framed it as “probably your only chance for generations”.

Similar sentiments were echoed in separate video messages released by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the US-backed shah who was overthrown by clerics led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini during the revolution.

“Be vigilant and prepared so that at an appropriate time, which I will inform you precisely, you return to the streets for the final effort,” Pahlavi said.

This was in reference to nationwide protests that gripped Iran in January, during which thousands of civilians were killed, many on the nights of January 8 and 9.

Iranian authorities claim that civilians were killed by “terrorists” and “rioters” armed, funded and trained by the US and Israel. But the United Nations and international human rights organisations have blamed state forces for an unprecedented crackdown against peaceful protesters, and say tens of thousands have been incarcerated and some face execution.

Student protests also took place last week in Tehran and major cities, including the holy Shia city of Mashhad to the northeast and Shiraz to the south of Iran. A number of students were suspended, while others were arrested or summoned by intelligence authorities.

Universities and schools were declared closed after the strikes on Saturday until further notice, according to a directive by the Supreme National Security Council. Most had already been moved online until the end of the Iranian calendar year on March 20 in response to the unrest at other universities.

But dozens of people, many of them children, were killed after two schools were hit in southern Iran’s Minab and in Tehran.

State media showed paramilitary Basij members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) patrolling the streets of downtown Tehran on Saturday afternoon on motorcycles and vehicles and waving flags.

A similar gathering was recorded in Palestine Square, where pro-state groups shouted “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”.

Iranians forced into another internet blackout

The opening salvo in Tehran targeted the Pasteur neighbourhood in the downtown area, where government offices are located.

A satellite image and videos of the area showed that the compound housing the offices of the supreme leader was largely destroyed in the strikes. It was not immediately clear if Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was present at the time of the attack, but the foreign minister later told NBC News that Khamenei and President Masoud Pezeshkian were alive “as far as I know”.

Minutes after the start of the war, Iranian authorities began shutting down internet connections and mobile phone connections across multiple areas of Tehran. Some mobile connectivity was restored, but the internet shutdown was expanded across the country, with almost all traffic blocked and leaving only few proxy connections working to access the global internet.

The Islamic Republic had imposed an unprecedented 20-day total internet shutdown in January, and heavy state filtering was in place prior to the shutdown on Saturday.

Iranian authorities urged citizens on Saturday to only follow official state media, to report any suspicious activity, and to refrain from collaborating with “enemies” on pain of heavy punishment.

As daylight waned, Tehran’s streets emptied, but the sounds of explosions continued to ring loud.

Across advanced and emerging economies, central bankers are confronting an increasingly assertive political class. Populist leaders and fiscally strained governments are pressing for lower interest rates, easier financing and, in some cases, greater influence over monetary authorities themselves.

The response from central banks has been firm but not without risk. In defending their independence, they risk appearing political, blurring the very boundary they are trying to protect.

The U.S.: Digging In at the Federal Reserve

In the United States, the confrontation has been direct. Jerome Powell has faced repeated criticism from President Donald Trump over interest rates, with Trump arguing that tighter policy undermines economic growth.

Rather than soften its stance, the Federal Reserve has emphasized its legal independence and data-driven approach. Powell has repeatedly stressed that decisions will be based on inflation and employment data, not political preference.

The stakes are high. With U.S. federal debt at $36 trillion and large refinancing needs ahead, pressure to keep borrowing costs low is intensifying. Any perception that the Fed is yielding to political demands could unsettle bond markets and erode confidence in its anti-inflation mandate.

Europe: Pre-Emptive Exits and Institutional Defense

In Europe, resistance has taken a subtler form. François Villeroy de Galhau is stepping down from the Bank of France months before elections that polls suggest could benefit the far right. Though officially described as a personal decision, the move is widely seen as an attempt to preserve institutional continuity before a potential political shift.

Similarly, Christine Lagarde has not ruled out the possibility of leaving the European Central Bank before completing her term, even while stating her baseline intention is to stay.

Such pre-emptive departures highlight a paradox: central banks are trying to shield themselves from politicization, yet early resignations can themselves be interpreted as political maneuvers. Critics argue this risks undermining the perception of neutrality.

European institutions are legally insulated by treaties, but they are not immune to democratic pressures particularly as high debt levels in countries such as France and Italy fuel debates over whether central banks should help finance public spending.

Japan: Market Discipline as a Shield

At the Bank of Japan, the dynamic is slightly different. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi appointed dovish economists to the board, a move seen by some as an effort to temper rate hikes.

Yet the BOJ has maintained its commitment to policy normalization. In Japan’s case, currency markets have provided reinforcement. A weakening yen during earlier periods of ultra-loose policy heightened political sensitivity to inflation risks. Market volatility effectively strengthened the central bank’s hand, illustrating how investor reactions can discipline governments as well as monetary authorities.

Why Independence Matters

The battle is about more than institutional pride. Central bank independence emerged in the late 20th century as a response to the inflationary spirals of the 1970s. Countries that subordinated monetary policy to political cycles often experienced runaway prices and capital flight.

More recent examples underscore the danger. In countries such as Turkey and Argentina, political interference in rate-setting has coincided with surging inflation and currency instability.

For advanced economies now grappling with record sovereign debt and rising defense spending, the temptation to lean on central banks is clear. Lower rates ease fiscal pressure. But if investors believe policy is being distorted for political convenience, borrowing costs may ultimately rise rather than fall.

The Blurred Line Between Mandate and Mission Creep

The past decade has complicated the picture. Massive bond-buying programs during the global financial crisis and the pandemic pulled central banks deeper into fiscal territory. In Europe and Britain, limited climate-related initiatives sparked accusations of overreach.

Critics argue that such expansions of mandate have made central banks more politically visible and therefore more vulnerable.

This creates a delicate trade-off. Remaining silent in the face of political pressure may preserve appearances but risk policy distortion. Publicly resisting may safeguard inflation credibility but invite accusations of entering the political arena.

Markets as Final Arbiter

Ultimately, financial markets may determine how much room politicians have to maneuver. Governments can pressure central banks, but they cannot easily compel investors to finance deficits at artificially low rates.

If markets sense that independence is eroding, they may demand higher yields, weaken currencies or pull capital outcomes that raise inflation and undermine growth. In that sense, investor discipline can reinforce central bank autonomy more effectively than legal protections alone.

A Costly Defense

Central bankers today face a more hostile and fragmented political landscape than their predecessors. The old assumption that technocrats could quietly manage inflation while politicians handled everything else no longer holds.

By fighting back, they defend hard-won credibility. But in doing so, they risk appearing as participants in political struggles rather than neutral arbiters of economic stability.

The challenge is no longer simply setting interest rates. It is preserving trust in institutions designed to stand above politics at a time when politics increasingly refuses to stand aside.

With information from Reuters.

Amid the apparent movement of U.S. Air Force refueling aircraft from an airbase in Qatar, the United States has urged its citizens to leave Israel immediately as the threat of a strike on Iran looms ever larger. U.S. President Donald Trump has assembled two carrier strike groups in the region as part of a significant military build-up and has continued to express doubt that Iran is serious about ending its nuclear program.

You can get a good sense of the state of play and the possible questions surrounding possible military action in our previous story here.

Available satellite imagery from yesterday indicates that the aerial refueling aircraft formerly present at Al Udeid, the major U.S. Air Force hub in Qatar, have been moved. In previous days, imagery had revealed between seven and 15 KC-135 Stratotanker aircraft at the base. However, C-17A Globemaster III transports can still be seen at the base, which would be consistent with supplies flowing in ahead of a contingency. C-130 Hercules-series transports also seen on the tarmac are likely part of the special operations presence at the airbase. Moving assets out of Al Udeid, which would be among the highest-priority targets for Iran if hostilities break out, would be expected ahead of a major U.S. operation against Tehran, as was the case last year.