news

A group of Democrats in the United States Senate is demanding public hearings on the country’s war against Iran after receiving a series of classified briefings from officials in President Donald Trump’s administration.

Lawmakers say the White House has not clearly explained why the US entered the conflict, what its goals are, or how long it may last.

Republicans currently hold a narrow, 53-47 Senate majority, which gives them the power to control what legislation comes to the floor for debate.

Some Democrats have expressed frustration after the latest closed-door briefing. Trump has not ruled out sending US ground ⁠troops into Iran.

“I just came from a two-hour classified briefing on the war,” Senator Chris Murphy from the state of Connecticut said on Tuesday. “It confirmed to me that the strategy is totally incoherent.

“I think this is pretty simple: if the president did what the Constitution requires and came to Congress to seek authorisation for this war, he wouldn’t get it – because the American people would demand that their members of Congress vote no,” he added.

Here is what we know:

What has happened so far?

Since the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran on February 28, senior officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have held several closed-door meetings to brief Congress members on the military campaign and its progress.

Because the meetings are classified, lawmakers are restricted in what they can publicly disclose about the information they received.

What are Democrats saying?

Several Democratic senators have said they left the briefings frustrated, arguing that the administration had not provided clear answers about the war’s objectives, timeline or the long-term strategy guiding their approach to the conflict.

Earlier this week, six Democratic senators also called for an investigation into a strike on a girls’ school in Minab, in southern Iran. Reports indicate the attack, which investigators say involved US forces, killed at least 170 people, most of them children.

“There seems to be no endgame,” Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal said. “The president, almost in a single breath, says it’s almost done, and at the same time, it’s just begun. So this is kind of contradictory.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts raised concerns about the cost of war.

“The one part that seems clear is that while there is no money for 15 million Americans who lost their health care, there’s a billion dollars a day to spend on bombing Iran,” Warren said on Tuesday.

“The one thing Congress has the power to do is to stop actions like this through the power of the purse,” she added.

Others seem worried that a ground deployment could take place.

“We seem to be on a path toward deploying American troops on the ground in Iran to accomplish any of the potential objectives here,” Blumenthal, of Connecticut, told reporters after Tuesday’s classified briefing.

“The American people deserve to know much more than this administration has told them about the cost of the war, the danger to our sons and daughters in uniform and the potential for ⁠further escalation and widening of this war,” he added.

What are Republicans saying?

Republicans, who have slim majorities in both houses of Congress, have almost unanimously backed Trump’s campaign against Iran, with only a handful expressing doubt about the war.

Some Republican leaders say the strikes are necessary to curb Iran’s military capabilities, missile programme and regional influence.

They have also argued that the operation is limited in scope and designed to weaken Iran’s ability to threaten US forces and allies in the region.

Republican Representative Brian Mast of Florida, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, last week publicly thanked Trump for taking action against Iran, saying the president is using his constitutional authority to defend the US against the “imminent threat” posed by Tehran.

But some Republican members of Congress have voiced concerns.

Representative Nancy Mace from South Carolina said she did “not want to send South Carolina’s sons and daughters into war with Iran”, in a post on X.

Rand Paul, a Republican senator from Kentucky, accused the Trump administration of changing its narrative and rationale for the war on a daily basis.

“We keep hearing new reasons for war with Iran—none convincing,” he wrote on X. “‘Free the oppressed’ sounds noble, but where does it end? We’ve been told for decades Iran is weeks from a nuke. War should be a last resort, not our first move. A war of choice is not my choice.”

Why does the debate matter?

The dispute has revived a long-running debate in Washington, DC, about the limits of presidential war powers.

Under the US Constitution, Congress has the authority to declare war, but modern presidents have frequently launched military operations without formal congressional approval, often citing national security or emergency threats.

The law allows the president to deploy US forces for up to 60 days without congressional authorisation, followed by a 30-day withdrawal period if Congress does not approve the action.

Some lawmakers and legal experts say the war on Iran highlights the need for stronger congressional oversight of military action.

“In the 1970s, we adopted something called the War Powers Resolution that gives the president limited ability to do this,” said David Schultz, a professor in the political science and legal departments at Hamline University.

“And so, either you could argue that what the president is doing violates the Constitution by… not [being] a formally declared war; or b, it exceeds his authority, either as commander-in-chief or under the War Powers Act,” he added.

“And therefore, you could argue that domestically, his actions are illegal and unconstitutional,” Schutlz said.

The Trump administration has argued that the February 28 strikes were justified as a response to an “imminent threat”, a rationale often used by presidents to justify military action without prior congressional approval.

However, US intelligence agencies had themselves said before the start of the war that they had no evidence of an imminent Iranian threat to the US or its facilities across the Middle East.

The armed wing of Hamas, Al-Qassam Brigades, released a video message on Wednesday afternoon showing an Israeli captive currently held in Gaza, the Palestinian Information Centre has reported. The footage shows Omri Miran lighting a candle on what he described as his “second birthday” in captivity.

“This is my second birthday here. I can’t say I’m celebrating; it’s just another day in captivity,” said Miran. “I made this cake for the occasion, but there is no joy. It’s been a year and a half. I miss my daughters and my wife terribly.”

He addressed the Israeli public directly, including his family and friends. “Conditions here are extremely tough. Thank you to everyone demonstrating to bring us home safely.”

The captive also urged Israelis to stage a mass protest outside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s residence. “Bring my daughters so I can see them on TV. Do everything you can now to get us home. Netanyahu’s supporters don’t care about us, they’d rather see us dead.”

Screengrab from footage shows Israeli captive Omri Miran

He asked captives released in previous prisoner exchange deals to protest and speak to the media. “Let the people know how bad it is for us. We live in constant fear of bombings. A deal must be reached soon before we return home in coffins.

Miran urged demonstrators to appeal to US President Donald Trump to put pressure on Netanyahu: “Do not believe Netanyahu. Military pressure is only killing us. A deal — only a deal — will bring us home. Turn to Trump. He seems to be the only powerful person in the world who could push Netanyahu to agree to a deal.”

He also mentioned the worsening humanitarian situation: “The captors told me the crossings are closed; no food or supplies are coming in. As a result, we’re receiving even less food than before.”

In conclusion, the captive sent a pointed message to the Israeli leadership: “Netanyahu, Dermer, Smotrich, Ben Gvir — you are the reason for 7 October. Because of you, I am here. Because of you, we’re all here. You’re bringing the state to collapse.”

READ: US synagogues close their doors to Israel MK Ben-Gvir

Footage from the ground in Erbil, Iraq shows several drones over the city’s airspace and the wrecking of a drone falling through the sky onto the city.

A new report has expressed alarm at what it describes as backsliding press freedoms across the Americas, with the United States seeing the steepest decline.

The Inter American Press Association (IAPA) released its latest press freedom index on Tuesday, ranking last year as the lowest point for freedom of expression since the report began in 2020.

Researchers found that the Americas have experienced a “dramatic deterioration” in unrestricted speech, according to the report.

“This is one of the worst years for journalism in the region, marked by murders, arbitrary arrests, exile, and rampant impunity in countries such as Mexico, Honduras, Ecuador, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Colombia, Cuba, and Venezuela,” the report said.

It added that enhanced restrictions on free speech have occurred in countries of various ideological persuasions, whether right-wing or left-wing.

The US, however, was singled out as an area of “alarming decline”. In a ranking of 23 countries across the hemisphere, the US dropped from fourth place to 11th, indicating that journalists operate with increased restrictions.

Changes under President Donald Trump, who returned to office last year, were cited as a primary factor.

“Even though journalistic practice in the United States remains protected by the Constitution and laws, last year’s events saw the erosion of safeguards,” the report explained.

Trump, it said, had contributed to the “stigmatisation of critical journalism”. The report also pointed to developments like cuts to public media funding and the closure of Voice of America, a government-funded broadcaster, as detriments to the free press.

In total, the report tallied 170 attacks against journalists in the US last year, and it cited interactions with federal immigration agents as an area of concern.

The report also noted that Nicaragua and Venezuela continue to rank as “without freedom of expression”.

In Venezuela’s case, for instance, it cited the closure of more than 400 radio stations and the detention of 25 journalists in the wake of the controversial 2024 presidential election.

On a scale of 100, the report ranked press freedom in the country at 7.02. It remains in last place on the report’s list of 23 countries.

El Salvador also dropped in the index’s latest evaluation, now in 21st position on the press freedom list, just ahead of Nicaragua and Venezuela.

In an accompanying statement, Sergio Arauz, the president of the Association of Journalists of El Salvador (APES), denounced what he called the “escalating repression” under the government of President Nayib Bukele.

Arauz noted that 50 Salvadoran journalists had been pushed into exile in the last year amid a campaign of harassment by the government.

“There are no possibilities of practicing journalism fully without facing consequences when there is an Executive branch with virtually unlimited powers and no effective legal oversight,” said Arauz.

Since 2022, Bukele and his government have placed the country under a state of emergency that suspended key civil liberties and granted wide latitude to state security forces, in the name of addressing crime.

Tuesday’s report pointed to the state of emergency as a factor in undermining free speech, and also cited El Salvador’s new Foreign Agents Law, which gives the government the power to dissolve organisations that receive funding from abroad.

El Salvador is one of eight nations categorised in the index as “high restriction”, along with Ecuador, Bolivia, Honduras, Peru, Mexico, Haiti and Cuba.

The Dominican Republic, Chile, Canada and Brazil were ranked among the highest for protecting press freedoms.

In a surprising development, Serbia has emerged as an operator of the Chinese-made CM-400 air-launched supersonic standoff missile. The weapon has been integrated into Serbia’s Soviet-era MiG-29 Fulcrums, which have undergone various upgrades. As it stands, the Balkan state, which has had a turbulent recent history, likely fields a missile capability otherwise unmatched in Europe (outside of Russia, at least).

A photo recently emerged showing a Serbian Air Force and Air Defense MiG-29 carrying a pair of CM-400 missiles on its inboard underwing hardpoints.

There had also been previous clues that Serbia might be poised to introduce a powerful new weapon of some kind.

According to Belgrade-based defense journalist Petar Vojinović, the chief of the General Staff of the Serbian Armed Forces, Gen. Milan Mojsilović, stated last month that “in the air component, we have weapons of a similar maximum range and lethality [to the PULS rocket artillery system].”

Mojsilović was referencing the Israeli-made PULS (Precise and Universal Launching System) since this has been recently introduced by the Serbian Army. You can read more about this ground-launched artillery rocket here.

Furthermore, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić recently alluded to recently introduced military capabilities, stating: “…people couldn’t dream about everything we have, everything we are acquiring, they couldn’t dream.”

As for the CM-400, this weapon was developed and is manufactured by the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC), apparently primarily for export. So far, it is not known to be in Chinese military service.

Unveiled in 2012, the CM-400 has a length of around 17 feet, a diameter of 16 inches, and weighs roughly 2,000 pounds. This includes one of two types of warheads, either a high-explosive charge weighing 330 pounds or an armor-piercing warhead weighing 440 pounds.

The CM-400 is a supersonic weapon, and CASIC claims it can reach a speed of Mach 4.5 in the terminal phase of flight. It has often been described as a hypersonic missile, but this is likely not the case: Mach 5 is typically considered to be the boundary between high-supersonic and hypersonic speed.

Nevertheless, it is clearly a very fast missile.

The missile’s range remains unclear, with varying accounts of this aspect of its performance.

At the very least, it is reported to have a range of 155 miles, while some sources claim it can hit targets at a range of 186 miles or even 250 miles.

The CM-400 has also been described as a quasi-ballistic missile, though this is also probably not entirely accurate.

Generally speaking, a quasi-ballistic missile is capable of being used on a depressed trajectory. This makes the missile more capable of significant maneuvering in flight, presenting greater challenges even for opponents with more robust missile defense capabilities.

In the case of the CM-400, the missile reportedly flies on a relatively high ballistic trajectory, powered by its solid rocket motor. It then careens toward its target at a steep angle of descent. While it may also be able to maneuver dynamically during its terminal attack phase, to attack moving ships, it doesn’t fly on a depressed trajectory, as far as we know.

In terms of target sets, the missile has been widely described as an anti-ship missile, specifically even as a ‘carrier-killer’. In fact, the basic weapon can also be configured as an anti-radiation missile, and it is presumed to also have the capability to attack non-emitting ground targets.

Depending on the different targets, the CM-400 can have different seeker heads fitted. All of the versions have an inertial guidance system with Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) correction. For the terminal phase, it relies on an infrared/optoelectronic seeker for attacking naval targets, or a passive radar seeker to take out electromagnetic emitters. The circular error probable (CEP) for the anti-radiation version is claimed to be 16-33, reduced to 16 feet or less for the anti-ship version.

Previously, the only confirmed export operator of the CM-400 was Pakistan, which uses it on its JF-17 Thunder multirole fighters. Pakistani officials claimed that the missile saw successful combat use against Indian S-400 air defense systems during the conflict between the countries in May last year. However, this remains unconfirmed.

In Serbian service, the CM-400 is carried by the MiG-29 fighter. These aircraft were first acquired by the then Yugoslavia in the 1980s. Survivors of Operation Allied Force in 1999 were later supplemented by secondhand MiG-29s from Russian and Belarusian stocks. The aircraft have also been moderately upgraded and are now known as MiG-29SM+. Fourteen examples are currently in active Serbian service.

The long-term plan for the Serbian MiG-29s is somewhat unclear, since the country ordered 12 Dassault Rafale multirole fighters, in a deal that you can read more about here.

For the time being, however, in the CM-400, Serbia looks to have secured a capability that is very likely unique in the wider region.

With its combination of very high speed, long range, and ‘fire and forget’ guidance, the missile is ideal for deep standoff strikes. It is optimized for striking hardened strategic targets, day and night, and in all weather.

Thanks to CATIC’s Standalone Weapon Fire Control System (SWFCS), also designated as WZHK-1 by China, the CM-400 (and other Chinese missiles) areis designed to allow foreign models of aircraft to operate Chinese missiles and bombs.

Speaking to Janes during the exhibition, a CATIC official said that the system is designed to equip a range of Chinese air-launched weapons and can be installed on existing weapon hardpoints.

“The system gives air forces around the world the ability to easily integrate Chinese-made weapons with their aircraft without requiring them to make software or hardware changes to the host aircraft,” a CATIC official told Janes about the SWFCS back in 2024.

“The [SWFCS] uses a wireless data system that connects to a tablet in the cockpit that can be worn by the pilot. The tablet acts as a portable wireless controller that the pilot can use to launch the missiles,” the official added. Similar tablet-based soluiions have also been used by Ukraine to rapidly integrate Western weapons on Soviet-era jets, as you can read about here.

Ukrainian Air Force Su-27 Flanker Wild Weasel operations, seen here conducting multiple low level standoff strikes against Russian radars with US-supplied AGM-88 HARMs. pic.twitter.com/7CosjXFNkO

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) April 21, 2024

The same SWFCS interface is also being used to carry another Chinese air-to-ground weapon, the LS-6 precision-guided munition. This is a 1,100-pound-class weapon that combines a general-purpose bomb with a strap-on upgrade package to provide range extension and precision strike capabilities.

Meanwhile, weapons in the CM-400 class are a response to the growing threat posed by ground-based air defense systems, which are pushing combat aircraft ever further from the targets they are assigned to destroy.

With its very high maximum speed, the CM-400 is also well suited to attacking time-sensitive targets, which could also include mobile air defense systems or mobile ballistic missiles, provided their coordinates can be established in the required timeframe.

For Serbia, the new missile would appear to offer a relatively easy way to expand its air-launched, precision standoff strike capability. With a high degree of flexibility, fast reaction time, and the ability to penetrate most enemy air defenses, it is a notably hard-hitting weapon for what is otherwise a fairly modest air force.

It is also interesting that Serbia is looking to China to fulfil its missile needs, rather than Russia.

While Belgrade and Moscow have traditionally had good relations, acquiring Russian arms has become far harder since the West imposed sanctions in response to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Even before this, however, there were signs that Serbia was looking to move away from Russia as its main arms supplier. As such, it has increasingly moved into a more Western-oriented orbit, with acquisitions from Airbus, for example, but it is also buying weapons from China and Israel.

At the same time, the Serbian military is increasingly switching to more NATO-style doctrine, as well as equipment, including exercises alongside the U.S. Air Force, as you can read about here.

Bearing in mind the fact that it can be integrated on non-Chinese platforms, it will be interesting to see if other nations also adopt the CM-400.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com