pushed

A YOUNG woman was pushed to the ground and “sexually assaulted” while walking down a road as a man, 27, has been arrested.

Detectives have arrested a man following the incident that took place in the early hours of Sunday morning in Liverpool.

A woman in her 20s reported that a man on a bike had been following her while she was walking down Crosby Road South at around 5.45am.

The suspect then proceeded to cover her mouth with his hand and push her to the floor.

After the victim desperately screamed for help, the man fled the scene.

Merseyside Police have arrested a 27-year-old man from Litherland on suspicion of sexual assault.

He currently remains in custody for questioning. 

Detective Chief Inspector Nick Suffield said that the incident is deeply concerning and left the victim “extremely shaken.”

In a statement he said: “This is a deeply concerning incident and our investigation continues.

“The victim was understandably left extremely shaken and we will support her through this process.

“A man has been arrested, but I would still urge anyone who lives in the area to check your own, CCTV, dashcam and any doorbell devices should there be anything which helps this work.

“Any information could be vital, so let us make the assessment.”

Extensive witness and CCTV enquiries are continuing.

Anyone with information on the incident should contact the Merseyside Police social media desk @MerPolCC on X and Facebook quoting reference 25000780190

STRICTLY alum Gemma Atkinson has just shared an update about when she will tie the knot with her fiancé, Gorka Marquez.

The pair met on Strictly Come Dancing back in 2017.

5

5

5

But funnily enough Gemma, 40, and Gorka, 35, weren’t actually coupled up during their time on the show.

Their relationship blossomed off-screen, with the duo beginning to officially date in 2018.

They got engaged three years later and now share a son and a daughter – Mia, five, and son Thiago, two.

After years of being engaged, Gemma has revealed why the couple have been waiting so long to walk down the aisle – and why they plan to wait even longer.

In an interview Gemma said: “We’ve toyed about doing it in Spain so his [Gorka’s] family can come.

“We’ve even thought about doing it in a registry office or a hotel in Manchester, just the two of us, and then have a big party after.”

But what the lovebirds have settled on couldn’t be sweeter or more thoughtful.

“I think now we want to wait until Thiago is a bit older, so maybe next year or the year after, as he’s only two.

“If he’s a bit older, he could be involved in it, which would be really nice.”

Back in 2022 Gemma announced that herself and Gorka had to postpone their previously-planned wedding.

The cancellation came about due to incredibly busy schedules on both ends, with Gorka busy as a professional dancer and Gemma as a radio host.

The pair were also wishing to prioritise trying for another baby instead of splashing out on a lavish event.

The wedding update comes only months after Gemma and Gorka found out that their reality TV show Gemma and Gorka: Life Behind The Lens had not been renewed for a third season on Apple TV.

It was devastating news for the couple, as the show had performed really well.

5

5

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has installed a right-wing researcher who pushed false claims about the 2020 election to a position in charge of election oversight.

As of Tuesday, a leadership chart for the Department of Homeland Security shows Pennsylvania activist Heather Honey serving as the deputy assistant secretary for election integrity in the Office of Strategy, Policy and Plans.

Honey’s appointment was first reported by the investigative news outlet Democracy Docket on Monday.

Her position has raised eyebrows among critics of the Trump administration due to her involvement in several efforts that resulted in misleading research about the 2020 presidential race.

Trump has pushed the false claim that his loss in the 2020 election was the result of massive fraud, and he has consistently refused to admit defeat.

Since returning to the White House for a second term in January, he has placed loyalists in positions of power, raising fears about the independence of certain offices.

He has also used his false claims of fraudulent elections to place pressure on the country’s electoral system, which is administered largely by state and local officials.

Critics have warned that overtly partisan appointments to posts overseeing elections could diminish confidence in the voting process.

“What I’m concerned about is that it seems like DHS [Department of Homeland Security] is being poised to use the vast power and megaphone of the federal government to spread disinformation rather than combat it,” David Becker, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research, told The Associated Press news agency.

“It’s going to really harm DHS’s credibility overall.”

Who is Heather Honey?

Honey’s appointment in particular has prompted election experts and local officials to speak out, given her prominent role in spreading misinformation about the 2020 election.

For instance, Adrian Fontes, Arizona’s secretary of state and a Democrat, told the news outlet ProPublica in a statement that Honey has a “well-documented history of spreading election lies”.

Honey leads a consulting firm called Haystack Investigations, which was involved in election “audits”, which experts consider flawed, as well as another organisation called Verity Votes, which also purports to conduct election research.

Trump and his supporters have drawn on some of her firms’ conclusions in their efforts to undermine the 2020 election results.

In the key swing state of Pennsylvania, for instance, Honey’s group misrepresented incomplete voter data to falsely allege that the state had more votes than voters in 2020.

Two years later, in 2022, Verity Vote claimed that Pennsylvania sent mail-in ballots to voters who failed to provide appropriate identification.

State officials, however, accused Verity Vote of misrepresenting the “not verified” designation in its voting system.

In public statements, the Pennsylvania Department of State explained that it uses the “not verified” tag to signal to local officials that a voter’s identification needs to be verified. The designation is a “security feature” for voter applications, it said – not an indication that voters could submit ballots without proper ID.

Trump narrowly lost Pennsylvania in the 2020 election, with Democrat Joe Biden edging him out by less than 1 percent.

In Arizona, another critical battleground swing state that Trump lost in 2020, Honey participated in a partisan audit of election results in Maricopa County, a populous area containing the city of Phoenix.

Despite searching for fraud for nearly six months, the audit turned up no evidence that the outcome in Biden’s favour was erroneous. Still, experts say that audit was filled with errors and biased methodology.

In the years since, former Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, a Republican, told The Associated Press that he had received dozens of public records requests related to elections from Honey.

Richer served in the role from 2021 to 2025, and said that such requests occupied “scores of hours of staff time”.

He told The Associated Press he was surprised to hear Honey was in a position of such “authority and responsibility” and said that she was “not a serious auditor”.

Honey is not the first Trump official to face public scrutiny for her role in his administration. Other appointees, like Emil Bove, have faced intense public questions about whether they would prioritise their loyalty to Trump over their commitment to government ethics.

Since his victory in the 2024 election, Trump has also opened investigations into critics and officials who probed his false claims about the 2020 election.

He has said he will do away with things like mail-in ballots and voting machines, demands shared by others who push anti-election conspiracies on the US right.

INDEPENDENT travel agency, InteleTravel, is answering questions about their business practices after The Sun’s investigation shined a light on the true cost of joining their organisation to sell travel.

With glamorous celebrities like Strictly’s Vicky Pattison and TOWIE’s Jess Wright promoting the scheme on their huge social platforms, it was revealed they could be earning over £200,000 as fans sign up to the scheme.

5

5

However, our report showed that almost 90 per cent of people don’t make a single penny working as an Independent Travel Agent (ITA) – with many ending up out of pocket.

Those selling travel through the Vicky’s Vacay team will almost certainly have signed up with recruitment firm, PlaNet Marketing, who are a separate company to InteleTravel.

Even though they are different companies, The Sun could find no way of joining InteleTravel without signing up to PlaNet Marketing and paying an initial fee of £140 and then £30 per month thereafter.

Industry experts TTG, have reported that since The Sun called for clarity on how many Brits are affected negatively by joining the scheme, InteleTravel is now reviewing its partnership with the US-headquartered company that recruits agents on its behalf.

In our report, we looked at how likely it is for everyday women and fans of these glamourous celebrities to earn money selling holidays to their friends and family for a small commission.

Social media messaging flaunting a jet-set lifestyle and ability to ‘be your own boss’ is rife on platforms like Instagram.

And it’s not just the celebrities who are at it.

Many ITAs who say they make ‘big money’ from selling travel are, in fact, doing so with an elaborate recreruitment downline.

This means anyone they sign up to their ‘team’ must pay them a commission, as well as the commission to InteleTravel – an ABTA-approved travel agency – on anything they go on to sell.

InteleTravel came under criticism as recruiters for the network, appear to approach people, most-often women and mums, on social media.

Subtle messaging, which some women who spoke to The Sun allege they are trained for, is used to lure new agents in by telling them a glamorous lifestyle can be achieved while on their family holiday.

It’s heavily implied that a huge salary can be achieved while being a full-time mum or working in another job.

A recruiter told our reporter that she earned £27,000 alongside her full time job in a different sector.

Tricia Handley-Hughes, InteleTravel’s UK and Ireland managing director, insisted the agency’s partnership with PlanNet Marketing had “not run its course” but added: “discussions need to take place”.

5

5

Senior industry agents also reacted to the story, calling it “deeply concerning”.

In a article published by trade publication, Travel Weekly, they raised concerns about InteleTravel’s recruitment methods and about the impact of the story on the professional reputation of other agents in the sector.

Advantage Travel Partnership chief executive Julia Lo Bue-Said said: “It’s important to remember the vast majority of travel agents across the UK are highly professional and trustworthy”.

“Being a travel agent is not a hobby. It should never be treated as a casual side hustle to make some extra money”.

While marketing consultant Steve Dunne, chief executive of Digital Drums, said such stories “could push back the reputation of the travel agents a generation”.

A number of InteleTravel agents have reacted to our report in defence of InteleTravel.

They were keen to tell their followers that agents can ‘just sell holidays’ and do not have to sign up to be part of the business responsible for the recruitment of other agents.

James Pirie-Warsop said: “I’ve been with Intele for about two or three years and I’m glad I did [join them]. Yes, there’s a multi-level marketing side, but you don’t have to do it”.

Whilst no-one is forced to recruit a ‘dream team of travel agents’ like Vicky and Jess, official data from the Direct Selling Association reveals that 63 per cent of agents in the sector do go on to build a ‘team’.

InteleTravel’s own figures may differ from the UK wide average, but when asked directlt by The Sun, they declined to comment on the amount their agents earn.

Read our full InteleTravel report here.

Have you been approached to join InteleTravel or asked if you’d like to make money selling travel with a team of like-minded agents? Get in touch with us at

5

SEOUL — Since beginning his second term earlier this year, President Trump has spoken optimistically about restarting denuclearization talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, whom he met for a series of historic summits in 2018 and 2019 that ended without a deal.

“I have a great relationship with Kim Jong Un, and we’ll see what happens, but certainly he’s a nuclear power,” he told reporters at an Oval Office meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in March.

Earlier this month, Trump attempted to send a letter to Kim via North Korean diplomats in New York, only to be rebuffed, according to Seoul-based NK News. And now, following the U.S. military’s strike on three nuclear facilities in Iran on Sunday, the chances of Pyongyang returning to the bargaining table have become even slimmer.

For North Korea, which has conducted six nuclear tests over the years in the face of severe economic sanctions and international reprobation — and consequently has a far more advanced nuclear program than Iran — many analysts say the lesson from Sunday is clear: A working nuclear deterrent is the only guarantor of security.

“More than anything, the North Korean regime is probably thinking that they did well to dig in their heels to keep developing their nuclear program,” said Kim Dong-yup, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul.

A TV screen at the Seoul Railway Station shows the launch of a North Korean intercontinental ballistic missile on Oct. 31.

(Lee Jin-man / Associated Press)

“I think this strike means the end of any sort of denuclearization talks or diplomatic solutions that the U.S. had in mind in the past,” he said. “I don’t think it’s simply a matter of worsened circumstances; I think the possibility has now gone close to zero.”

On Monday, North Korea’s foreign ministry condemned the U.S. strike on Iran as a violation of international law as well as “the territorial integrity and security interests of a sovereign state,” according to North Korean state media.

“The present situation of the Middle East, which is shaking the very basis of international peace and security, is the inevitable product of Israel’s reckless bravado as it advances its unilateral interests through ceaseless war moves and territorial expansion, and that of the Western-style free order which has so far tolerated and encouraged Israeli acts,” an unnamed ministry spokesperson said.

Trump has threatened to attack North Korea before.

Early in Trump’s first term, when Pyongyang successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile that could reach the U.S. West Coast., administration officials reportedly considered launching a “bloody nose” strike — an attack on a nuclear site or military facility that is small enough to prevent escalation into full-blown war but severe enough to make a point.

“Military solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely,” Trump wrote on social media in August 2017.

While it is still uncertain how much damage U.S. stealth bombers inflicted on Iran’s nuclear sites at Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo — and whether they have kneecapped Iran’s nuclear program, as U.S. officials have claimed — experts say the feasibility of a similar attack against North Korea is much smaller.

“North Korea has been plowing through with their nuclear program for some time, so their security posture around their nuclear facilities is far more sophisticated than Iran,” Kim Dong-yup said. “Their facilities are extremely dispersed and well-disguised, which means it’s difficult to cripple their nuclear program, even if you were to successfully destroy the one or two sites that are known.”

Kim Dong-yup believes that North Korea’s enrichment facilities are much deeper than Iran’s and potentially beyond the range of the “bunker buster” bombs — officially known as the GBU-57 A/B — used Sunday. And unlike Iran, North Korea is believed to already have 40 to 50 nuclear warheads, making large-scale retaliation a very real possibility.

A preemptive strike against North Korea would also do irreparable damage to the U.S.-South Korea alliance and would likely also invite responses from China and, more significantly, Russia.

A mutual defense treaty signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un last June states that the two countries “shall immediately provide military and other assistance” to the other if it “falls into a state of war due to armed invasion from an individual or multiple states.”

Yet talk of such an attack in Trump’s first term was soon replaced by what he has described as a friendship with Kim Jong Un, built over the 2018-19 summits, the first ever such meetings by a sitting U.S. president. Though the talks fell apart over disagreements on what measures North Korea would take toward disarmament and Trump’s reluctance to offer sanctions relief, the summits ended on a surprisingly hopeful note, with the two leaders walking away as pen pals.

An undated photo provided on Sept. 13 by the North Korean government shows its leader, Kim Jong Un, center, visiting what the country says is a facility for nuclear materials in an undisclosed location in North Korea.

(Associated Press)

In recent months, administration officials have said that the president’s goal remains the same: completely denuclearizing North Korea.

But the attack on Iran has made those old sticking points — such as the U.S. negotiating team’s demand that North Korea submit a full list of its nuclear sites — even more onerous, said Lee Byong-chul, a nonproliferation expert who has served under two South Korean administrations.

“Kim Jong Un will only give up his nuclear weapons when, as the English expression goes, hell freezes over,” Lee said. “And that alone shuts the door on any possible deal.”

Still, Lee believes that North Korea may be willing to come back to the negotiating table for a freeze — though not a rollback — of its nuclear program.

“But from Trump’s perspective, that’s a retreat from the terms he presented at the [2019] Hanoi summit,” he said. “He would look like a fool to come back to sign a reduced deal.”

While some, like Kim Dong-yup, the professor, argue that North Korea has already proven itself capable of withstanding economic sanctions and will not overextend itself to have them removed, others point out that this is still the United States’ primary source of leverage — and that if Trump wants a deal, he will need to put it on the table.

“Real sanctions relief is still valuable,” Stephen Costello, a non-resident fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a Washington-based think tank.

While he agrees that immediate denuclearization may be unrealistic, Costello has argued that even halting production of new fissile material, nuclear weapons and long-range missiles are “well worth ending nonmilitary sanctions,” such as those on energy imports or the export of textiles and seafood.

“Regardless of U.S. actions in the Middle East, the North Koreans would likely gauge any U.S. interest by how serious they are about early, immediate sanctions relief,” he said.

The attack on Iran will have other ramifications beyond Trump’s dealmaking with Kim Jong Un.

Military cooperation between North Korea and Iran, dating back to the 1980s and including arms transfers from North Korea to Iran, will likely accelerate.

Lee, the nonproliferation expert, said that the attack on Iran, which was the first real-world use of the United States’ bunker-buster bombs, may have been a boon to North Korea.

“It’s going to be a tremendous lesson for them,” he said. “Depending on what the total damage sustained is, North Korea will undoubtedly use that information to better conceal their own nuclear facilities.”

WASHINGTON — The go-broke dates for Medicare and Social Security trust funds have moved up as rising health care costs and new legislation affecting Social Security benefits have contributed to earlier projected depletion dates, according to an annual report released Wednesday.

The go-broke date — or the date at which the programs will no longer have enough funds to pay full benefits — was pushed up to 2033 for Medicare’s hospital insurance trust fund, according to the new report from the programs’ trustees. Last year’s report put the go-broke date at 2036.

Meanwhile, Social Security’s trust funds — which cover old age and disability recipients — will be unable to pay full benefits beginning in 2034, instead of last year’s estimate of 2035. After that point, Social Security would only be able to pay 81% of benefits.

The trustees say the latest findings show the urgency of needed changes to the programs, which have faced dire financial projections for decades. But making changes to the programs has long been politically unpopular, and lawmakers have repeatedly kicked Social Security and Medicare’s troubling math to the next generation.

President Trump and other Republicans have vowed not to make any cuts to Medicare or Social Security, even as they seek to shrink the federal government’s expenditures.

Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank Bisignano, sworn into his role in May, said in a statement that “the financial status of the trust funds remains a top priority for the Trump Administration.”

“Current-law projections indicate that Medicare still faces a substantial financial shortfall that needs to be addressed with further legislation. Such legislation should be enacted sooner rather than later to minimize the impact on beneficiaries, providers, and taxpayers,” the trustees state in the report.

The trustees are made up of six people — the Treasury Secretary serves as managing trustee, alongside the secretaries of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the commissioner of Social Security. Two other presidentially-appointed and Senate-confirmed trustees serve as public representatives, however those roles have been vacant since July 2015.

About 68 million people are enrolled in Medicare, the federal government’s health insurance that covers those 65 and older, as well as people with severe disabilities or illnesses.

Wednesday’s report shows a worsening situation for the Medicare hospital insurance trust fund compared to last year. But the forecasted go-broke date of 2033 is still later than the dates of 2031, 2028 and 2026 predicted just a few years ago.

Once the fund’s reserves become depleted, Medicare would be able to cover only 89% of costs for patients’ hospital visits, hospice care and nursing home stays or home health care that follow hospital visits.

The report said expenses last year for Medicare’s hospital insurance trust fund came in higher than expected.

Income exceeded expenditures by nearly $29 billion last year for the hospital insurance trust fund, the report stated. Trustees expect that surplus to continue through 2027. Deficits then will follow until the fund becomes depleted in 2033.

The report states that the Social Security Social Security Fairness Act, enacted in January, which repealed the Windfall Elimination and Government Pension Offset provisions of the Social Security Act and increased Social Security benefit levels for some workers, had an impact on the depletion date of SSA’s trust funds.

Romina Boccia, a director of Budget and Entitlement Policy at the libertarian CATO Institute called the repeal of the provisions “a political giveaway masquerading as reform. Instead of tackling Social Security’s structural imbalances, Congress chose to increase benefits for a vocal minority—accelerating trust fund insolvency.”

“It’s a clear sign that populist pressure now outweighs fiscal responsibility and economic sanity on both sides of the aisle,” She said.

Pair that with a Republican reconciliation bill that increases tax giveaways while refusing to rein in even the most dubious Medicaid expansions, and the message is unmistakable: Washington is still in giveaway mode.

AARP CEO Myechia Minter-Jordan said “Congress must act to protect and strengthen the Social Security that Americans have earned and paid into throughout their working lives.” “More than 69 million Americans rely on Social Security today and as America’s population ages, the stability of this vital program only becomes more important.”

Social Security benefits were last reformed roughly 40 years ago, when the federal government raised the eligibility age for the program from 65 to 67. The eligibility age has never changed for Medicare, with people eligible for the medical coverage when they turn 65.

Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, an advocacy group for the popular public benefit program said in a statement that “there are two options for action: Bringing more money into Social Security, or reducing benefits. Any politician who doesn’t support increasing Social Security’s revenue is, by default, supporting benefit cuts.”

Congressional Budget Office reporting has stated that the biggest drivers of debt rising in relation to GDP are increasing interest costs and spending for Medicare and Social Security. An aging population drives those numbers.

Several legislative proposals have been put forward to address Social Security’s impending insolvency.

Hussein writes for the Associated Press. AP reporters Amanda Seitz and Tom Murphy in Indianapolis contributed to this report.

Indiana Fever star Caitlin Clark got hit in the eye and knocked to the ground, while also doing some shoving of her own, during a testy and physical game against the Connecticut Sun on Monday night in Indianapolis.

The Fever emerged with an 88-71 win after a game that featured a pair of skirmishes, including a fight in the final minute that led to three ejections.

Speaking to reporters after the game, Indiana coach Stephanie White blamed “bad officiating,” which she said is a league-wide issue.

“This is what happens,” White said. “You’ve got competitive women who are the best in the world at what they do, right? And when you allow them to play physical and you allow these things to happen, they’re going to compete. And they’re going to have their teammates’ backs. It’s exactly what you expect out of fierce competition.

“So I started talking to the officials in the first quarter. And we knew this was going to happen. You could tell it was gonna happen. So they’ve got to get control of it. They’ve got to be better.”

Things appeared to be chippy between Clark and Connecticut’s Jacy Sheldon throughout the game, with ESPN cameras showing Clark giving Sheldon a bit of a shove as the two were exchanging words during the second quarter.

Then, during a play midway through the third quarter, Clark got poked in the eye by Sheldon and responded by giving the Sun star another shove. Connecticut’s Tina Charles stepped in and wagged her finger toward Clark, then the Sun’s Marina Mabrey pushed Clark to the ground.

Sheldon was called for a flagrant 1 foul, while Clark, Mabrey and Tina Charles each received a technical foul. When Clark was asked about the technical foul during the postgame news conference, White jumped in and said she’d handle questions about the officiating.

Clark and Charles each led their teams with 20 points apiece.

Later, with less than a minute left in the game and the Fever up by 17, Sheldon made a steal and was taken down hard by Indiana’s Sophie Cunningham. A scuffle ensued, with Cunningham, Sheldon and Connecticut’s Lindsay Allen eventually being ejected.

After the game, Sun coach Rachid Meziane said Cunningham’s foul on Sheldon was “disrespectful.”

“When you are winning a game by 17 points, and you doing this … for me, [it’s] a stupid foul,” Meziane said.

Asked about the same play, White said, “It was a flagrant foul.” When pressed on whether Cunningham might have made the move in defense of Clark or the team, White simply repeated, “It was a flagrant foul.”

With the win, the Fever earned a spot in the Commissioner’s Cup championship game against the Minnesota Lynx on July 1.

Sir Keir Starmer has hit back at potential rebels in the Labour Party over his plans to cut the benefits bill, insisting “we have got to get the reforms through.”

MPs will vote in the coming weeks on a package of measures aiming to cut the benefits bill by £5bn by 2030.

The Welfare Reform Bill will include proposals to make it harder for disabled people with less severe conditions to claim Personal Independence Payment, or PIP, in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Speaking to reporters, the prime minister said: “We have got to get the reforms through, and I have been clear about that from start to finish.

“The system is not working. It’s not working for those that need support, it’s not working for taxpayers.

“Everybody agrees it needs reform, we have got to reform it and that is what we intend to do.”

Last week, ministers sought to reassure nervy Labour MPs by introducing a transition period for those whose benefits are being withdrawn.

Dozens of Labour MPs have expressed concerns about the plans to cut Pip payments and the sickness-related element of Universal Credit.

Many have said they are prepared to vote against the primary legislation the government needs to pass to make the changes to welfare payments.

The welfare package as a whole could push an extra 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, into relative poverty, according to the government’s impact assessment.

Asked if there could be further concessions, Sir Keir said he was determined to press ahead with the changes:

“The principles remain the same, those who can work should work.

“Those who need support in to work should have that support in to work which I don’t think they are getting at the moment.

“Those who are never going to be able to work should be properly supported and protected. And that includes not being reassessed and reassessed.

“So they are the principles, we need to do reform and we will be getting on with that reform when the Bill comes.”

Historians may well mark June 13, 2025, as the day the world crossed a line it may not easily step back from. In a move that shocked the international community and sent global markets reeling, Israel launched a wide-scale military operation against Iran in the early hours of the morning, striking targets across at least 12 provinces, including the capital, Tehran, and the northwestern hub of Tabriz. Among the targets were suspected nuclear facilities, air defence systems, and the homes and offices of senior military personnel. Iranian state media confirmed the deaths of several top commanders in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The Israeli government officially confirmed responsibility for the attacks, naming the campaign Operation Raising Lion. Iranian officials described it as the most direct act of war in the countries’ decades-long shadow conflict.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears to be pursuing two objectives. First, Israeli officials fear that Iran is nearing the technical capability to build a nuclear weapon – something Netanyahu has repeatedly promised to prevent, by force if necessary. Second, Israel hopes a dramatic escalation will pressure Tehran into accepting a new nuclear agreement more favourable to United States and Israeli interests, including the removal of its enriched uranium stockpiles. Just as Netanyahu has failed to destroy Hamas through military force, both goals may ultimately serve only to perpetuate a broader regional war.

While the prospect of all-out war between Iran and Israel has long loomed, Friday’s events feel dangerously different. The scale, audacity and implications of the attack – and the near-certain Iranian response – raise the spectre of a regional conflict spilling far beyond its traditional bounds.

Since the 2011 Arab Spring, a Saudi-Iranian cold war has played out across the region as each country has sought to expand its influence. That rivalry was paused through Chinese mediation in March 2023. But since October 2023, a war of attrition between Israel and Iran has unfolded through both conventional and asymmetrical means – a conflict that now threatens to define the trajectory of the Middle East for years to come.

Whether this confrontation escalates further now hinges largely on one man: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. If Iran’s supreme leader comes to view the survival of the Islamic Republic as fundamentally threatened, Tehran’s response could expand far beyond Israeli territory.

In recent months, Israeli leaders had issued repeated warnings that a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities was imminent. Intelligence assessments in Tel Aviv claimed Iran was only weeks away from acquiring the necessary components to build a nuclear weapon. Although this claim was disputed by other members of the international community, it nonetheless shaped Israel’s decision to act militarily.

At the same time, indirect negotiations between Iran and the US had been under way, focused on limiting Iran’s uranium enrichment and reducing tensions through a revised nuclear agreement. US President Donald Trump publicly supported these diplomatic efforts, describing them as preferable to what he called a potentially bloody war. However, the talks faltered when Iran refused to halt enrichment on its own soil.

The US administration, while officially opposing military escalation, reportedly gave tacit approval for a limited Israeli strike. Washington is said to have believed that such a strike could shift the balance in negotiations and send a message that Iran was not negotiating from a position of strength – similar to how Trump has framed Ukraine’s position in relation to Russia. Although US officials maintain they had advance knowledge of the attacks but did not participate operationally, both the aircraft and the bunker-busting bombs used were supplied by the US, the latter during Trump’s first term.

Initial reports from Iranian sources confirm that the strikes inflicted significant damage on centrifuge halls and enrichment pipelines at its Natanz facility. However, Iranian officials insist the nuclear programme remains intact. Iran’s nuclear infrastructure includes multiple deeply buried sites – some more than 500 metres (550 yards) underground and spread across distances exceeding 1,000km (620 miles). As a result, the total destruction of the programme by air strikes alone in this initial phase appears unlikely.

Iranian officials have long warned that any direct military aggression on their territory by Israel would cross a red line, and they have promised severe retaliation. Now, with blood spilled on its soil and key targets destroyed, Khamenei faces enormous internal and external pressure to respond. The elimination of multiple high-ranking military officials in a single night has further intensified the demand for a multifaceted response.

Iran’s reply so far has taken the form of another wave of drone attacks, similar to those launched in April and October – most of which were intercepted by Israeli and Jordanian defences.

If Iran does not engage with the US at the upcoming talks in Oman on Sunday regarding a possible nuclear deal, the failure of diplomacy could mark the start of a sustained campaign. The Iranian government has stated that it does not view the Israeli operation as an isolated incident, but rather as the beginning of a longer conflict. Referring to it as a “war of attrition” – a term also used to describe Iran’s drawn-out war with Iraq in the 1980s – officials have indicated the confrontation is likely to unfold over weeks or even months.

While retaliatory missile and drone strikes on Israeli targets are likely to continue, many now anticipate that Iran could also target US military bases in the Gulf, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and even Jordan. Such an escalation would likely draw US forces directly into the conflict, implicate critical regional infrastructure and disrupt global oil supplies, particularly through the Strait of Hormuz. That, in turn, could trigger a steep rise in energy prices and send global markets spiralling – dragging in the interests of nearly every major power.

Even if an immediate, proportionate military response proves difficult, Iran is expected to act across several domains, including cyberattacks, proxy warfare and political manoeuvring. Among the political options reportedly under consideration is a full withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Iran has long used the NPT framework to assert that its nuclear programme is peaceful. Exiting the treaty would signal a significant policy shift. Additionally, there is growing speculation within Iran’s political circles that the religious decree issued by Khamenei banning the development and use of nuclear weapons may be reconsidered. If that prohibition is lifted, Iran could pursue a nuclear deterrent openly for the first time.

Whether Israel’s strikes succeeded in delaying Iran’s nuclear ambitions – or instead provoked Tehran to accelerate them – remains uncertain. What is clear is that the confrontation has entered a new phase. Should Iran exit the NPT and begin advancing its nuclear programme without the constraints of international agreements, some may argue that Israel’s campaign – intended to stop a bomb – may instead end up accelerating its creation.

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