stance

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed legislation to require proposed data centers to provide estimates of their water usage last year, saying he was “reluctant to impose rigid reporting requirements” without understanding the impact on businesses and consumers.

Opposition to the mammoth tech hubs and their massive thirst of water, power and land has only escalated throughout the state and nation ever since. In just a matter of months, Newsom again could find himself in the political crosshairs.

Several bills to regulate the facilities and increase public transparency on their impacts are progressing in the California Legislature, which could create a conundrum for a governor who has long aligned with the tech industry but also paints himself as an environmental and social justice advocate.

“I think the governor is in a fragile position,” said Megan Mullin, a public policy professor at UCLA. “Tech has been a long backer of his, but at the same time there is this growing national outcry against data centers.”

Data centers have existed for decades but are rapidly expanding due to the worldwide boom in artificial intelligence. The newer centers built to power AI are far larger than their original counterparts and require immense amounts of water and energy.

The facilities also contribute to fossil fuel emissions, with Cornell University researchers estimating last year that AI growth could add 24 to 44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere annually by 2030. Fossil fuel emissions are drivers of climate change and linked to a range of health conditions, including asthma, various cancers and birth defects.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced last week that the Trump administration will not set national environmental requirements or recommendations for the data center industry, leaving it to state lawmakers to determine best policies.

Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego, said the nation will likely look to the Golden State for guidance.

“California’s laws will create a national model,” he said. “We’re the home of Silicon Valley and we’re just a massive state — the way we regulate data centers will set the tone.”

The political landscape around data centers has since changed since Newsom’s veto in October, said Dan Schnur, a political science professor who teaches at UC Berkeley and USC.

“No one should assume he will automatically act in the same way,” Schnur said. “Newsom is an incredibly savvy politician so he is clearly aware that voters are a lot more upset or concerned about data centers than they were a year ago.”

A Gallup poll released last month found 7 out of 10 Americans oppose data centers being built in their area.

The facilities can create thousands of jobs for construction workers and generate significant revenue for local governments due to sales and property taxes. The artificial intelligence they power is also — at least temporarily — boosting the stock market, leading to more tax dollars for California.

But residents who live near hyperscale centers have expressed outrage over a range of issues, including health impacts, spiking utility bills, constant noise, dropping water pressure and concerns about potentially losing their land through eminent domain. Meanwhile, community meetings about data centers are growing contentious, with police arresting a farmer in Oklahoma, three women in Wisconsin and a man in California.

Earlier this month, residents of Monterey Park voted overwhelmingly to ban data centers, making the San Gabriel Valley city the first in the nation to do so by public vote.

“Six months ago, politicians of both parties were falling all over each other to bring data centers into their states,” Schnur said. “Now that the public backlash has erupted, they are working just as hard to distance themselves from these projects.”

With Newsom eyeing a presidential bid in 2028, he might be reluctant to brand himself as a defender of an increasingly unpopular industry.

But Schnur said the governor likely also has concerns about angering one of his biggest backers.

“The tech community is a critical part of Newsom’s donor base, so he has to keep fundraising in mind when he makes these decisions,” Schnur said.

A spokesperson for the governor’s office declined to comment on data centers or pending legislation.

Newsom, during an interview at a Center for American Progress conference in May, said the concern that data centers may drive up electricity costs for Californians is a “legit issue,” but not the main one.

“The tech genie is not going to go back in the bottle,” Newsom said. “Just saying that you should not or cannot build a data center is not going to slow this technology down. What can be, will be. Nature of technology. And so we just have to steer it and not make the mistakes we made with social media.”

Among the measures in the Legislature are two bills from Sen. Steve Padilla (D-San Diego). SB 886 would create a corporate tariff to cover the cost of data center-related grid upgrades. SB 887 would ban data centers from receiving ministerial exemptions from the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA.

Neither bill picked up support from Republicans, but both cleared the Senate and were recently referred to the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee.

Padilla represents Imperial County, a farming community near the border of Mexico where plans for a 950,000–square–foot data center face fierce opposition from residents. The county exempted the proposal from CEQA, which requires projects to undergo an extensive state environmental review before breaking ground.

The city of Imperial sued the county earlier this year, arguing the project should not have received an exemption. The San Diego Chapter of the Sierra Club joined the lawsuit last month. The county board of supervisors last week approved a 45-day moratorium on all new data centers to allow the county to evaluate proposed data center development.

Two other data center-related bills recently passed the Assembly, each picking up support from a few Republicans. They now await action from the Senate.

AB 2619 from Assemblymember Diane Papan (D-San Mateo) would require data center owners to provide an estimate under penalty of perjury about expected water usage and sources before applying for a business license. AB 1577 from Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda) would require data center owners to submit monthly information to a state commission about water and fuel consumption.

Ben Green, an assistant public policy professor at the University of Michigan who is researching how data centers impact communities, said reporting requirements are a “bare minimum” type of regulation, making it especially noteworthy that Newsom vetoed a similar measure last year.

For comparison, several states are weighing more restrictive bills — New York recently sent legislation to the governor’s desk that would enact a one-year moratorium.

“It seems that there was a ton of lobbying pressure that he was getting,” Green said. “The tech industry doesn’t want to have any restrictions.”

Green said data centers could be a hot topic in upcoming elections, as Americans on both sides of the aisle are expressing valid concerns.

“There’s not an easy fix for getting the public on board with data centers because their critiques are grounded in reality,” he said. “This is not just some sort of reactionary NIMBY-ism or pearl clutching.”

Beijing warmly welcomes the peace agreement and memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran, considering it an important step toward de-escalating regional tensions. China supports the diplomatic path to resolving the crisis, based on a clear strategy aimed at protecting its economic and strategic interests. Beijing emphasizes that a permanent ceasefire, the protection of national sovereignty, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and ensuring the safety of international navigation are top priorities. China contributed behind the scenes to shaping the negotiating framework and influencing Tehran to accept the agreement with the United States in order to safeguard its vital interests in the continued flow of Iranian oil. Accordingly, China officially welcomed the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran, affirming that the agreement represents a crucial step toward de-escalating regional tensions. The Chinese diplomatic welcome focused on the key provisions of the agreement, as stated by the spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry. These provisions guarantee a comprehensive ceasefire, freedom of navigation, energy security, an end to the naval blockade, and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to global trade and energy supplies. China considers this essential for its energy and economic security. This agreement, along with the nuclear framework and negotiations, marks the conclusion of the first phase, followed by a 30-60 day negotiation period to discuss the Iranian nuclear program (uranium enrichment and the lifting of sanctions). This Chinese announcement came in support of international mediation efforts ahead of the official signing ceremony in Geneva.

The most prominent points welcomed by China in the US-Iranian agreement, according to announcements and follow-up by Chinese diplomatic channels and as included in the key provisions of the memorandum of understanding, were a cessation of military operations; an immediate and permanent ceasefire on all fronts, including the Lebanese front; freedom of navigation through a commitment to end the naval blockade and open the Strait of Hormuz to global trade and energy supplies; and the nuclear framework, with the conclusion of a phase one agreement stipulating that negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program (uranium enrichment and sanctions relief) would take place within a specified timeframe of 30 to 60 days following the signing.

China has played a pivotal, often unacknowledged, role as a diplomatic bridge between Tehran and Washington to protect its strategic and economic interests in the Middle East. The dimensions of China’s behind-the-scenes role include ensuring the flow of energy. Beijing seeks to maintain stability in the Gulf region to guarantee the uninterrupted supply of Iranian oil and to protect its interests and investments in the Belt and Road Initiative. Iran represents a crucial geographical and strategic hub in China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative. To this end, Beijing has sought to leverage its strong economic ties and strategic partnership with Tehran to persuade it to make flexible concessions during critical times, while offering support to avoid military escalation. Beijing fears that the collapse of diplomatic channels could lead to a regional war that would jeopardize its extensive investments in the region.

On the other hand, Beijing seeks to counterbalance American influence. China prefers a negotiated framework between Tehran and Washington that limits American unilateral hegemony and positions itself as a responsible international player capable of peacemaking. China’s vision for diplomatic balancing between Washington and Tehran is shaped by several key strategic axes, most importantly (establishing the principle of a political settlement). Here, Beijing consistently emphasizes that dialogue is the only solution to the Iranian crisis, rejecting military escalation that harms the security of navigation and global trade. This is coupled with regional and international networking, where China supports parallel diplomatic efforts, such as Pakistani mediation. Beijing maintains continuous communication with the parties to the crisis to ensure the opening of indirect negotiation channels that prevent a full-scale confrontation and safeguard vital interests. China has maintained the flow of Iranian oil while simultaneously strengthening its extensive economic partnerships with the Gulf states, granting it unique diplomatic weight and influence that Western powers lack. Despite this notable progress, Beijing faces ongoing challenges due to US containment policies. China rejects Washington’s classification of its major technology companies as military entities and threatens retaliatory measures, making Beijing’s attempts to create a strategic balance with the United States an extremely delicate and sensitive process.

Based on the preceding understanding and analysis, we can see how successful Beijing has been in transforming escalating tensions in the Middle East into strategic gains. China has played an active mediating role by supporting diplomatic talks and the memorandum of understanding for peace between Washington and Tehran, thus positioning itself as a responsible international power seeking to establish stability and move away from unilateral hegemony.

German Trade Minister Katherina Reiche is travelling to China from Tuesday to Friday as Berlin’s trade deficit with Beijing continues to deepen.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The trip comes two days after several of the EU’s largest economies – France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, as well as Lithuania – issued a non-paper urging the EU to crack down on Chinese overcapacity and unfair trade practices.

Berlin, however, did not endorse their call.

Germany remains the main chokepoint in the EU’s strategy towards China. While Euronews previously reported that the publication late last year of Germany’s trade deficit with Beijing marked a turning point for the EU executive, which is trying to sharpen its trade defence tools, Germany continues to favour cooperation with the Chinese.

In March, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called for a trade agreement with Beijing. Brussels pushed back against the idea.

“There are a number of concerns and real challenges that the European Union has consistently expressed to China that we need to see them meaningfully address before we can even talk about any future agreements or anything like that,” the Commission’s deputy chief spokesperson, Olof Gill, said at the time.

Even with a record €87 billion trade deficit with China, Berlin hopes Beijing will keep its market open to German industry, despite the obstacles faced by EU businesses in China and the Asian giant’s strategy of reducing its dependence on foreign products.

Access to China’s market

The main objective of Reiche’s visit this week is to discuss potential economic cooperation. According to the German government, the strategy is to explore future opportunities for collaboration while maintaining dialogue with the Chinese leadership.

Despite a steadily growing trade deficit, China remained Germany’s most important trading partner in 2025. According to the Federal Statistical Office, bilateral trade volume reached €250 billion. Around 5,200 German companies operate in China, making the country one of the most important foreign markets for Germany’s automotive, mechanical engineering and electrical industries.

During the trip, Reiche is expected to hold political talks, attend a business forum and visit local companies. She will be accompanied by a business delegation representing around 40 companies. Discussions are also set to focus on the development of energy technologies.

“We hope the visit will help to transfer the insights gained on the ground into the political discussion in Berlin and to further develop bilateral exchange,” said Oliver Oehms, Executive Director of the German Chamber of Commerce in China.

In a survey published in May by the chamber, 51% of German companies operating in China supported policies favouring partnerships with Chinese companies, while 42% backed the “strategic” use of knowledge gained through such partnerships.

But these sectors are also increasingly under pressure, as Chinese competitors benefit from extensive state subsidies.

According to a report published in May by the EU think tank Centre for European Reform, the growing concentration of global car, machinery and chemicals production in China could weaken innovation in traditional manufacturing hubs and increase Beijing’s leverage over Berlin through the threat of supply disruptions, similar to its blockade of rare earth exports in 2025.

The report added that demand generated by Germany’s fiscal stimulus after easing its debt brake could end up boosting Chinese imports rather than supporting Berlin’s domestic industry.

German exports to China fell by 9.7% year-on-year, while imports of Chinese goods such as electronics, electric vehicles and components rose significantly by 8.8%.

“China has already eaten much of German industry’s lunch and is preparing to start on dinner,” the report said.

Barnes & Noble was turning a page on the chain’s history of declining sales, but recent comments have stirred bad blood for the bookseller.

James Daunt, the chief executive credited with breathing new life into the retailer, is clarifying the store’s stance on stocking its shelves with AI-written books.

The controversy stems from Daunt’s Monday appearance on “Today” with Jenna Bush Hager. In a viral clip from the interview, Daunt said, “I have actually no problem selling any book, as long as it doesn’t masquerade or pretend to be something that it isn’t. So, as long as an AI-written book says it’s an AI-written book, then we will stock them.”

By Wednesday, thousands of calls to boycott the bookseller had flooded social media.

Kathlin Finn, a writer and former employee of the chain, posted on social media, writing, “Hey Barnes & Not Noble, I worked for you and have supported you, but your latest AI decision is extremely disappointing. I will not be shopping or promoting B&N unless you change your AI policy.”

Author Cristin Bishara wrote, “As an author this [is] the most depressing news. I’ve been saying for a long time that this was coming. People told me I was overreacting. And I had a feeling it would start with a cute round table at the front of a B&N.”

Another social media user added, “The Barnes & Noble CEO saying they’ll stock AI generated books as long as they’re labeled and aren’t ‘ripping off somebody else’ is wild considering all generative AI is ripping off someone else.”

Daunt told The Times that the wave of backlash is based on misinterpretations of what he said, and that only a “highly edited version” of what the bookseller “actually said” had been aired.

In an emailed statement, he said the bookseller does not sell AI books, “as far as we are aware.” Barnes & Noble “demand[s] that publishers label any books that are AI generated,” and the chain takes “active measures to exclude all AI generated books.”

Daunt further stated that Barnes & Noble “will sell AI generated books if there is clear demand” and not “ban reputable books published by reputable publishers, even if AI generated, should these be published, labeled and there be clear evidence of customer demand.”

He also said that the retailer thinks it’s “very unlikely” that there will be customer demand for AI-generated books or that reputable publishers will publish them.

“The argument is nuanced, and perhaps over nuanced, but there are important principles that have to be balanced and I believe we do so as sensibly and thoughtfully as is possible,” he said. “Book banning is a clear and present danger, so we are very careful with demands to ban any books” while also remaining vigilant “not to sell AI generated books that masquerade to be by real authors.”

Last year, Daunt spoke with BBC on the issue of AI in publishing and bookselling and said that there’s a huge proliferation of AI-generated content, and “most of it is not books that we should be selling.” He told the broadcaster that, as a bookseller, the company sells what publishers publish and that he’d be surprised by efforts to put forth an “AI-generated piece of nonsense” but that, ultimately, the decision on reading material would lie with the reader.

“We don’t dictate, and we don’t dictate around politics or any other particular issues around books,” he said. “We leave it up to the reader to decide.”

In June 2025, more than 70 authors issued a call to action to big-five publishers Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, Simon & Schuster, Hachette Book Group, and Macmillan, asking the companies to pledge that they will never release books that were created by machines. Authors Lauren Groff, R.F. Kuang, Emma Straub and Emily Henry were among the petitioners.

“At its simplest level, our job as artists is to respond to the human experience. But the art we make is a commodity, and our world wants things quickly, cheaply, and on demand,” the letter read.

“We are rushing toward a future where our novels, our biographies, our poems and our memoirs — our records of the human experience — are ‘written’ by artificial intelligence models that, by definition, cannot know what it is to be human. To bleed, or starve, or love. …

“Every time a prompt is entered into AI, the language that bot uses to respond was created in part through the synthesis of art that we, the undersigned, have spent our careers crafting. Taken without our consent, without payment, without even the courtesy of acknowledgment.”

In March, Hachette pulled “Shy Girl” from publication after widespread allegations that the horror novel appeared to be AI-generated and was swiftly scrubbed from Amazon and the Hachette website. The book’s author, Mia Ballard, denied that she had relied on AI to pen the book but said an acquaintance she had hired to edit the novel used AI.

“Hachette remains committed to protecting original creative expression and storytelling,” a Hachette spokeswoman said, per the New York Times.

Boston World Cup host committee says fans will be allowed to tailgate for all seven matches at the Gillette Stadium.

In a reversal of an earlier decision, FIFA will allow tailgating at World Cup games at Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Massachusetts, the Boston World Cup host committee announced.

The committee said on Monday that the shift conforms with local policies that allow tailgating “like any other event hosted at the stadium as there are no venue restrictions or local public safety restrictions in place that would prohibit it”.

FIFA originally stated that tailgating would ⁠⁠not be allowed at any of the 104 matches, of which the United States is hosting 78, causing an uproar among football fans in the country.

The US is cohosting the 2026 tournament with Canada and Mexico from June 11 to July 19.

The Gillette Stadium – rebranded as the Boston Stadium during the World Cup to comply with FIFA’s policy prohibiting corporate-sponsored names for tournament venues – will host five group-stage matches, one round-of-32 match and a quarterfinal match at the home of the National Football League’s (NFL) New England Patriots.

Patriots games, New England Revolution ‌‌games and concerts allow tailgating at the stadium.

Space will be severely reduced from what is normally available. There are about 20,000 parking spots available for Patriots games, but only about 5,000 will be available for public use during the World Cup.

The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority has set train prices at $80 for a round trip from Boston to Foxborough for tournament games, four times what it charges for NFL and MLS games. There is also an express bus option that will depart from various Boston-area locations, which will cost $95 for a round trip.

New York City announced on Monday that a fan fest for each of the city’s five boroughs will be ‌‌held in conjunction with World Cup matches at the MetLife Stadium – to be known as New York New Jersey Stadium – in East Rutherford, New Jersey.

What is tailgating in the US?

In the context of US sports, tailgating is a pre-game social event that sees fans of a team park their cars outside the stadium hosting the game. The supporters then gather around these parked cars to socialise by drinking, eating, and often cooking on site while they soak in the match-day atmosphere despite not being inside the venue.

It can often begin several hours before the start of the action inside the stadium. The culture is most common during NFL matches and is especially popular among fans of US football.

Which other US stadiums are hosting the World Cup?

The USA will open their World Cup campaign against Paraguay on June 12 at the SoFi Stadium, to be renamed the Los Angeles Stadium, in Inglewood, California.

The MetLife Stadium will host the final on July 19.

The other World Cup stadiums in the US are:

• Philadelphia (Lincoln Financial Field)
• Dallas (AT&T Stadium)
• Seattle (Lumen Field)
• Kansas City (Arrowhead Stadium)
• Miami (Hard Rock Stadium)
• Atlanta (Mercedes-Benz Stadium)
• Houston (NRG Stadium)
• San Francisco Bay Area (Levi’s Stadium)

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s authorities and state media project that they are less interested than before the war in negotiations with the United States if they go beyond their accepted terms, as mediated talks failed to materialise in Pakistan.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met senior Pakistani officials in Islamabad on Saturday and left for Oman, to be later bound for Russia. The top diplomat, who was not joined by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf like in a previous round of negotiations earlier this month, said he was “yet to see if the US is truly serious about diplomacy”.

Envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner had been expected in Pakistan after the White House said Iran asked for a second round of direct negotiations, but US President Donald Trump cancelled the trip and said, “we have all the cards, they have none” while reiterating his claim about “infighting and confusion” among Iran’s leadership.

“If they want to talk, all they have to do is call!!!” Trump wrote in an online post, continuing to put the onus on Iran’s leadership.

Amid a state-imposed near-total internet shutdown in Iran, nearing two months, officials and the supporters of the Islamic Republic emphasise that they are united in opposing any concessions to Trump.

The US president said earlier this week he was in “no rush” to reach an agreement with Iranian leadership, whom he claimed, without evidence, were “fighting like cats and dogs” among themselves.

Since Trump highlighted the perceived fractures, military, security, judiciary and government authorities in Iran have been releasing synchronised messages with near-identical wording to proclaim absolute unity.

The messages, circulated through state media and even using similar graphics and fonts but with different colours, claim that everyone in the country is “revolutionary” and exercises “complete obedience” to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

The authorities also claim that more than 30 million people – a third of Iran’s total population – have registered in a state-run campaign to express readiness to “sacrifice” their lives if necessary, but they have not provided any documentation to prove this.

The Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Saturday afternoon that armed forces would retaliate against the US if it continues its “blockade, banditry and piracy” in Iran’s southern waters.

“We are prepared and determined to monitor the behaviour and movement of the enemies in the region and maintain management and control of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, and to inflict more severe damages on the American-Zionist enemies in case of another aggression,” read its statement.

The IRGC on Saturday took a state television presenter to broadcast near two vessels seized days earlier in the strait to report that Iran exercised “total control” over the waterway.

Iranian authorities continue to call on their supporters, including paramilitary forces, to take to the streets every night in order to maintain control.

In a rally in downtown Tehran on Friday night, Meysam Motiei, a prominent state-backed religious singer with links to the supreme leader’s office, told the crowds that anyone stuck in factional infighting during times of war “has not grown up yet”.

“If anyone from any group or faction, especially in the name of being a revolutionary, tries to disturb the unity of the people, they will get a slap in the face by the people,” he asserted.

But in ultraconservative Mashhad in northeast Iran, where a shrine considered holy for Shia Muslims is located along with powerful religious and economic foundations, some were still preaching aggressively against the possibility of former reformist and moderate leaders retaking power.

“They have instructed us to keep unity with incumbent officials, not these two people,” a speaker told a gathering crowd on Friday night in a clip shared by state-linked media, in reference to former President Hassan Rouhani and his foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif.

“We are not afraid of B-2s and B-52s; we are afraid of dishonourables who have no concern for the homeland. Wherever Trump makes a mess, Zarif comes and blabbers away,” he said, about the diplomat who led nuclear talks that led to a now-expired landmark accord with world powers in 2015.

Iran’s judiciary continues to execute dissidents, and on Saturday announced the hanging of Erfan Kiani, who was arrested during the nationwide protests in January when thousands were killed.

The judiciary described him as “Mossad’s hired knife-wielder” and said he was accused of destroying property, arson and more in downtown Tehran.

No nuclear talks?

Iranian state media reports indicate that the US naval blockade of Iran’s ports is undermining the ceasefire extended by Trump and allowing the more hardline voices in Tehran to come out on top.

The Tasnim and Fars news agencies, affiliated with the IRGC, argued against allowing any nuclear negotiations to take place with the US, even though Trump and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu started the war with the predominant goal of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran. Tehran has consistently stressed that its nuclear programme is peaceful, although some Iranian leaders have called for the development of a bomb.

“The negotiations with the US are strictly to end the war, and Iran does not consider the nuclear issue to be part of the talks,” Tasnim said, claiming that time was not on Washington’s side due to the tumult in global markets resulting from the war.

Khamenei has not directly commented on more negotiations, but Ali Khezrian, another representative of Tehran in the hardline-dominated parliament, told state media on Thursday that Khamenei was “opposed to any extension of negotiations” under threats from the US and Israel.

Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz earlier this week adopted Trump’s apocalyptic messaging, and said armed forces are awaiting a greenlight from the US to “return Iran to the age of darkness and stone by blowing up central energy and electricity facilities and crushing national economic infrastructure”.

There are currently three US aircraft carriers and their supporting vessels in the Middle East region, according to the US military, which marks the first time this has happened since the buildup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

But Mahmoud Nabavian, a senior black-turban cleric and hardline member of parliament who was a part of the large Iranian delegation in the first round of talks, said it was a “strategic mistake” to even include the nuclear issue.

He told state media that this allowed the US to raise demands like a 20-year suspension of enrichment, and shipping Iran’s buried high-enriched uranium abroad.

“From now on, entering any negotiations with the US is pure damage and has no interest for the Iranian nation,” he said earlier this week, adding that oil sales were providing the government with a “full hand”.

Mohammad Saeedi, the Friday prayer imam of ultraconservative Qom, located south of Tehran, said in reference to the US that it would be “meaningless and unfair to sit down behind the negotiating table with a symbol of corruption”.

Civilian infrastructure in danger

The government of relatively moderate President Masoud Pezeshkian has signalled concern about the potential impacts of systematic targeting of more civilian infrastructure, especially power plants, in case the war continues.

“We have a simple request from the people: to reduce their consumption of power and energy. For now, we have no need for these dear people to sacrifice their lives, but we need to control consumption,” the president said on Saturday. “They have hit our infrastructure and blockaded us, so the people become dissatisfied.”

Mohammad Allahdad, the head of Tavanir, the government-owned mother company for development and operation of Iran’s power grid, told state television that it would pay a reward to citizens who would report any theft and illegal use of electricity.

First Vice President Mohammadreza Aref said, “We will build Iran back more glorious” through unity after previous infrastructure attacks that hit oil and gas facilities, steel producers, petrochemical firms, aluminium factories, energy facilities, as well as airports, naval ports, bridges and railway networks.

The government reopened Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Airport for limited foreign-bound flights on Saturday, including those taking people to the Hajj pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia, despite the potential of war resuming.