Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back, seen here in a plenary session at the National Assembly, said Thursday that his ministry plans to reduce the number of troops deployed to border units “gradually” by 2040. Photo by Yonhap
Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back said Thursday that his ministry plans to reduce the number of troops deployed to border units “gradually” by 2040, dismissing concerns about a sharp cut in such personnel in a short period of time.
Earlier this week, Ahn told reporters that the defense ministry plans to cut the number of troops deployed at general posts near the inter-Korean border to some 6,000 from the current 22,000 by replacing them with surveillance systems equipped with artificial intelligence technology.
His remarks spawned concerns that the number of troops at border units could be sharply reduced in a short period of time, causing a possible vacuum in the military’s surveillance capabilities.
“(The planned reduction in troops) was a goal to be executed by the year 2040 after phased review,” Ahn wrote in a Facebook post.
“(The plan) should not be translated with the same alarm that suggests (our) troops are shrinking tomorrow,” he said.
The defense chief also said the efficient and scientific management of surveillance operations in border units is a “mandate, not a choice” in a time of sweeping demographic changes. South Korea braces for a drastic population decline, which signals a fall in military manpower resources, in a country where all able-bodied men are mandated to serve at least 18 months.
Ahn earlier stressed the need to revamp the structure of the armed forces, such as introducing a selective conscription system, as part of efforts to tackle the country’s demographic challenges.
Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.
WASHINGTON — President Trump is threatening to deploy ground troops to seize critical oil infrastructure on Iran’s Kharg Island, a military gambit that experts say would risk American lives and could still fail to end the war.
If Trump wants to hobble Iran’s oil industry for leverage in negotiations, a better option might be setting up a blockade at sea against ships that have filled up at Kharg Island’s oil terminals, the experts said.
The island — located on the other side of the Persian Gulf from U.S. bases in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia — is the beating heart of Iran’s oil industry, through which 90% of its exports pass. It is important because Iran’s coastline is mostly too shallow for tanker ships to dock.
“Putting people on the ground might be the most psychologically compelling way of striking a blow at Iran,” said Michael Eisenstadt, a former U.S. military analyst who now directs the Military and Security Studies Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
“On the other hand, you’re putting your own troops at jeopardy,” said Eisenstadt, a retired Army reserve officer who served in Iraq. “It’s not far from the mainland. So they can potentially rain a lot of destruction on the island, if they’re willing to inflict damage on their own infrastructure.”
Seizing Kharg Island could escalate the conflict, said Danny Citrinowicz, an Iran expert at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies.
He said Iran and its proxies — including Yemen’s Houthi rebels — could intensify their retaliation, including by laying mines in the Strait of Hormuz or striking targets with drones across the Arabian Peninsula, from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea.
Commodities researchers and investment banks warn major retaliation could have lasting implications for energy prices and the global economy.
“It will be hard to take. It will be hard to hold,” Citrinowicz said of Kharg Island. “And it might damage the economy, but not in a way that will force the Iranians to capitulate.”
Trump says ‘maybe we take Kharg Island’
Trump is under growing pressure to end the monthlong conflict with Iran, which has attacked U.S. bases and allies in the region.
Iran also has largely closed the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow chokepoint through which 20% of the world’s oil normally flows, causing fuel prices to soar and other economic tumult.
Trump said in a social media post Monday that “great progress is being made” in talks with Iran to end military operations. But he said that if a deal is not reached “shortly” and the strait is not immediately reopened, the U.S. would obliterate power plants, oil wells, Kharg Island and possibly even desalination plants.
Trump has raised the idea of American forces seizing Kharg Island.
“Maybe we take Kharg Island, maybe we don’t. We have a lot of options,” Trump told the Financial Times. “It would also mean we had to be there (on Kharg Island) for a while.”
Asked about Iranian defenses there, he said: “I don’t think they have any defense. We could take it very easily.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Friday that ground troops would not be needed to achieve the Trump administration’s goals. He did not repeat that assertion Monday after being asked about plans for U.S. ground troops, saying “the president has several options at his disposal” but diplomacy is Trump’s preference.
“Now, they are making threats about controlling the Hormuz Strait in perpetuity, creating a tolling system and the like,” Rubio told ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “That’s not going to be allowed to happen. And the president has a number of options available to him, if he so chooses, to prevent that from happening.”
U.S. has hit targets on the island crucial to Iran
The U.S. has already struck various targets on the island, including air defenses, a radar site, the airport and a hovercraft base, according to satellite analysis by the Institute for the Study of War and American Enterprise Institute’s Critical Threats Project.
Petras Katinas, an energy researcher at the Royal United Services Institute, said disrupting Kharg Island would not completely halt oil exports as Iran has other small ports. But it would reduce the oil revenue flowing to Iran’s government, “forcing flows through a much smaller, costlier and less efficient export system,” he said.
However, Tehran has too much at stake to surrender over a single asset, no matter how economically significant, said Citrinowicz, the Iran expert at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies.
While occupying Kharg might offer Washington some leverage in any negotiations, he said the notion that control of the island could be traded for Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was far-fetched.
“It’s in no way a decisive blow,” Citrinowicz said.
U.S. troops face risk from Iran’s mainland if they tried to seize Kharg Island
A U.S. Navy ship carrying about 2,500 Marines recently arrived in the Middle East, while at least 1,000 troops from the 82nd Airborne Division are expected soon. Another 2,500 Marines are being deployed from California. The Trump administration has not said what all those troops will be doing, but the 82nd Airborne is trained to parachute into hostile or contested territory to secure key territory and airfields.
One of the reasons American troops would be vulnerable on Kharg Island is its close proximity — about 33 kilometers (21 miles) — to the Iranian mainland, from which missiles, drones and artillery could be fired. Despite continued U.S. and Israeli strikes, the Islamic Republic is still attacking targets across the region, including a Saudi air base hundreds of miles away where more than two dozen American troops were injured last week.
Even with American ships and planes providing support, there would still be a relatively short window of time to shoot down every drone or missile launched from the mainland at the island, Eisenstadt said.
“The coast tends to be mountainous, so the drones can come in through mountain passes where it’s hard for our radar to pick up,” he said. “And we don’t have the warning time.”
Eisenstadt says a sea blockade against ships carrying Iranian oil would be a safer strategy and achieve the same goal of controlling most of Iran’s oil industry.
“Throw up a quarantine that seeks to seize Iranian oil shipments that are exiting the Gulf,” agreed Clayton Seigle, an energy security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. It could be done at a distance “outside the range of the lion’s share of Iran’s weapon systems.”
Seigle argued against destroying Kharg Island’s oil infrastructure, which Trump also suggested.
“We were supposed to be coming to the rescue of the people that had been rising up and protesting for a better future,” Seigle said. “So to cripple Iran’s revenue-generating potential for many years to come would definitely not work in that direction.”
Finley and Metz write for the Associated Press. Metz reported from Ramallah, West Bank.
Speaker of the Parliament of Iran Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf speaks during a news conference in Beirut, Lebanon, on October 12, 2024. File Photo by Wael Hamzeh/EPA
March 29 (UPI) — Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, issued a warning Saturday against a possible ground troop invasion as the U.S. military sends more troops to the region.
Ghalibaf made the comments in a message marking 30 days since the start of the war. The United States and Israel began strikes on Iran on Feb. 28 in their efforts to diminish the country’s nuclear weapons program.
Ghalibaf accused the United States of secretly planning a ground invasion of Iran. On Saturday, two U.S. ships arrived in the region carrying 3,500 U.S. service members as well as fighter jets, transport aircraft, amphibious assault vessels and other tactical assets. More troops were expected, U.S. Central Command said.
“The enemy publicly sends messages of negotiation while secretly planning a ground invasion — unaware that our men are waiting for American troops to enter on the ground, ready to unleash devastation upon them and punish their regional allies,” Ghalibaf said, as reported by CNN.
Last week, the Trump administration proposed a 15-point peace plan with Iran. President Donald Trump also ordered a 10-day halt on strikes against Iranian energy sites, though Israel carried out its own attacks on energy sites Friday.
Secretary of State Marco Rubiosaid Friday that Iran had not responded to the peace proposal.
“The United States speaks of its aspirations, presenting what it failed to achieve in war as a 15-point list to pursue through diplomacy,” Ghalibaf said.
“As long as the Americans seek Iran’s surrender, the answer of your sons remains clear: ‘Far be it from us to accept humiliation.'”
Ghalibaf’s message came in the wake of a Saturday report by The Washington Post that the Defense Department has drawn up plans for a weeks-long ground operation in Iran. Officials told The Post the plan isn’t considered a full-scale ground invasion, but would involve Special Operations forces and infantry troops.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a statement in response to the possibility of ground troops in Iran.
“It’s the job of the Pentagon to make preparations in order to give the commander in chief maximum optionality,” she said. “It does not mean the president has made a decision.”
Iran has launched attacks on Israeli and other U.S. allies in the Persian Gulf region, including one Sunday on a military camp in Kuwait, which killed 10 Kuwaiti service members. The army said it detected 14 ballistic missiles and 12 hostile drones in Kuwaiti airspace over the previous 24 hours. Since the start of the war, it has monitored more than 300 ballistic missiles, 2 cruise missiles and more than 600 hostile drones.
Meanwhile, Israeli officials said emergency officials were working on a large fire that broke out at a hazardous materials factory at the Neot Hovav industrial complex, The Guardian reported. The Israeli military blamed “a weapon fragment or interceptor fragment” for the damage and fire.
WASHINGTON — When President Trump ordered immigration raids in Los Angeles last June, only a handful of those arrested were violent criminals. The sweeps split families, cost businesses millions of dollars and drove many undocumented residents into hiding.
Activists protested the Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions, prompting the president to deploy thousands of federal troops in what he called a security operation. A federal judge called it unlawful and said the deployment caused “greater harm” to the city.
Now, Trump wants a redo.
At a Cabinet meeting Thursday, he called on the mayors and governors of several blue cities and states to allow troops to “come in and stop the crime,” pointing to purported successes in Washington, Memphis and New Orleans.
“Crime is down 75% in a short period of time,” Trump told his top advisors. “We could do that for L.A. and we could do that for, frankly, San Francisco.”
The president framed the deployments as both a crime-fighting and immigration enforcement tool, saying that federal authorities can remove people from cities in ways local officials cannot.
“We can do it much more effectively, because [local leaders] can’t do what we do,” Trump said. “All the time, people come up to me … and they say ‘thank you so much.’ I know immediately what they’re talking about. They’re able to walk to work.”
Trump also said this week that he would consider deploying the National Guard at airports to assist with mounting security delays amid a 40-day partial government shutdown.
The renewed call comes after a series of controversial federal interventions in cities across the country. In Washington, Trump has repeatedly touted a visible security presence near federal buildings, crediting it with improving public safety, though local officials and analysts have debated how much of any decline in crime can be attributed to his order.
U.S. Marines stationed outside the federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles in June.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
In January, Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to deploy troops to Minneapolis during the civil unrest that followed the fatal shooting of Renee Good by a federal immigration agent. The Pentagon prepared active-duty troops for a possible deployment, but they were ordered to stand down following the shooting of a second Minneapolis civilian, Alex Pretti, the same month.
Immigration sweeps in Los Angeles targeted workplaces, neighborhoods and churches, stirring widespread panic and forcing many undocumented residents — including those with long-term residency and native-born children — into hiding. As a result, businesses reported sharp declines in revenue and customer traffic. A county analysis found that 82% of surveyed businesses experienced negative impacts, with some losing more than half their income amid workforce shortages and traffic reductions.
During the fallout, Mayor Karen Bass condemned Trump’s deployment of some 4,000 California National Guardsmen and 700 U.S. Marines.
“Deploying federalized troops on the heels of these raids is a chaotic escalation,” she said. “The fear people are feeling in our city right now is very real — it’s felt in our communities and within our families, and it puts our neighborhoods at risk. This is the last thing that our city needs.”
The president called the occupation off after U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled that control of the California National Guard should be returned to the governor, rejecting the federal government’s authority to maintain control indefinitely. A similar Supreme Court ruling effectively ended federalized deployments throughout the country.
“The judges are really hurting this country,” Trump said Thursday. “Frankly, the justices — the Supreme Court — has really hurt our country, too.”
At the meeting, Trump also narrowed his comments on San Francisco and its mayor, Daniel Lurie.
“San Francisco was a great city, could quickly become a great city again,” Trump said. “But we can do it much more effectively.”
Last year, Trump considered carrying out similar federal law enforcement operations in the city. He backed off after a somewhat conciliatory phone call with Lurie, in which Trump said the mayor asked him “very nicely” to call off the deployment. Afterward, he agreed to give the newly elected mayor “a chance” to address crime in the city.
“In San Francisco, crime is down 30%, encampments are at record lows, and our city is on the rise,” Lurie said in a statement Thursday. “Public safety is my number one priority, and we are going to stay laser focused on keeping our streets safe and clean.”
A spokesperson for Lurie’s office said the two have not spoken since that October conversation, indicating Trump’s latest remarks do not reflect any new request or ongoing negotiations. Even so, the president struck a measured tone toward the San Francisco mayor on Thursday. He said Lurie is “trying very hard” but insisted federal intervention would get the job done faster.
Whether any Democrat-led city will take Trump up on that offer remains to be seen. City leaders have previously resisted federal deployments, arguing they undermine local control and risk inflaming already tense situations.
The White House did not respond to questions about whether any current plans exist to redeploy federalized troops to California cities.
Times staff writer Melissa Gomez in Los Angeles contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has offered Iran a 15-point ceasefire plan aimed at temporarily halting the war in the Middle East, as the Pentagon simultaneously orders thousands of Marines, paratroopers and a warship to the region.
The plan presented to Iranian leadership Tuesday broadly included a 30-day ceasefire and sanctions relief for Iran in exchange for a laundry list of U.S. demands, according to the Associated Press and other outlets.
But Iran dismissed the proposal Wednesday, criticizing the White House’s terms as “excessive” and out of step with reality, according to Iranian state-run media.
Those terms included limitations on Tehran’s missile stockpiles, and the permanent end to its nuclear program, its support for regional militias including Hezbollah, and of its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, various outlets reported, citing Pakistani officials mediating the negotiations.
Several of those provisions have long been considered nonstarters for Iran, which sees its missile stockade and regional alliances as central to national security.
Iranian officials responded with defiance and skepticism.
“Iran will end the war when it decides to do so and when its own conditions are met,” an Iranian official told state media. “Not when Trump envisions its conclusion.”
The official outlined the Islamic Republic’s terms for ending the conflict, which included a halt to “aggression and assassinations,” an end to fighting on all fronts, enforceable guarantees that hostilities will not resume, compensation for war damages and a formal recognition of Iran’s sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has stated that Iran is not interested in a ceasefire but rather a comprehensive “end of war” on all fronts, including the lifting of sanctions and guarantees to allow Iran to pursue peaceful nuclear enrichment for energy and medical applications.
Iranian officials told state media that they believed the Trump administration’s diplomatic efforts were deceptive.
“You have reached a stage where you are negotiating with yourselves,” Iranian military spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaqari said in a televised address Wednesday. “Do not call your defeat an agreement.
Since the start of the conflict, Iranian leaders have voiced suspicion of any diplomatic talks with the Trump administration, pointing to prewar diplomatic efforts as evidence they were “tricked.” The Islamic Republic says it made clear in those talks that it had no interest in developing nuclear weapons, but Trump launched his military campaign nonetheless.
There have been conflicting media reports over Tehran’s exact position. Statements from Iranian officials and state-linked outlets have left open the possibility that elements of the proposal are still under review, while some reports frame the response as an outright refusal.
The Iranian response also conflicts with President Trump’s insistence that negotiations were progressing.
“We have had very, very strong talks,” he said Sunday in Florida. “We have points, major points of agreement. I would say almost all points of agreement will at some point very, very soon meet.”
Compounding the issue, Israel — which continues to carry out routine bombing campaigns over Iran — has stayed out of the talks.
Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke about the peace deal in a phone call Tuesday. In a televised address, Netanyahu said that Trump “believes there is an opportunity” to realize U.S.-Israeli war objectives in an agreement “that will safeguard our vital interests.”
“At the same time, we continue to strike both in Iran and in Lebanon,” Netanyahu said. “We will safeguard our vital interests in any scenario.”
The negotiations are being facilitated by Pakistan, with support from Egypt and Turkey — countries that have pushed to contain a conflict that has killed more than 2,400 people, further destabilized the embattled region and disrupted global oil markets.
As Washington pursued a diplomatic end to the conflict, the Pentagon deployed an additional 2,000 troops from the 82nd Airborne Division to the Mideast. An additional 5,000 Marines and thousands of sailors are already en route to the region, where 50,000 more Marines are currently stationed.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters on Wednesday that the deployment “sends a signal to Iran that they need to get their act together,” but denied any coming escalations by the American side. Johnson instead said that he believes “Operation Epic Fury is almost done.”
Now in its fourth week, the operation began with a series of intensive airstrikes that killed Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, and dozens of other high-ranking officials. Since then, the U.S. and Israel have carried out over 9,000 strikes targeting Iranian military infrastructure and nuclear program.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters in the Oval Office Tuesday that while the president’s diplomatic envoys seek a peace deal, his department of war will continue to “negotiate with bombs.”
“The president has made it clear that you will not have a nuclear weapon. The War Department agrees,” Hegseth told reporters Tuesday in the Oval Office. “Our job is to ensure that, and so we’re keeping our hand on that throttle.”
Iranian retaliatory strikes have hit Gulf infrastructure and halted energy production and shipping in the region, spurring global fears of an enduring supply crunch. Meanwhile, Israel has expanded operations in Iran and sought to expand its borders into Lebanon.
Oil prices, which had surged above $120 per barrel earlier in the conflict, fell sharply this week on hopes that a ceasefire could ease supply woes.
In a statement Wednesday, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres demanded an end to the fighting, which he said “has broken past limits even leaders thought imaginable.”
He specifically called on the U.S. and Israel to end the war, as “human suffering deepens, civilian casualties mount, and the global economic impact is increasingly devastating.”
Times staff writers Ana Ceballos, in Washington, D.C., and Nabih Bulos, in Beirut, contributed to this report.
This is the April 21, 2021, edition of the Essential Politics newsletter. Like what you’re reading? Sign up to get it in your inbox three times a week.
Outgoing presidents often leave decisions for their successors to take on.
Over the last two decades, and four presidents, how to end America’s longest war — in Afghanistan — has been among the largest open questions. President Biden inherited it from President Trump, who inherited it from President Obama, who took it from President George W. Bush. Unpopular, seemingly unending and unwinnable, the war is a case study in how the choices of one administration echo into the next.
Last week, Biden formally announced a deadline of Sept. 11 — the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks that provoked the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan — to end military involvement in the country.
“War in Afghanistan was never meant to be a multigenerational undertaking,” he said.
The prospective exit also has been years in the works. Obama promised to scale back U.S. involvement, but first he sent a surge of troops. Trump vowed several times to withdraw all troops, making chaotic progress that stopped short of a full exit. Biden is now the third president to make a similar commitment.
Whether he will follow through remains to be seen. My colleagues David S. Cloud and Tracy Wilkinson have extensively covered the American involvement in Afghanistan, from Trump’s growing tensions with the Pentagon over withdrawal to the lives of Afghanistan’s youngest generation, which was born into U.S. occupation.
Taken together, their work over the last few years reveals the deep roots of Biden’s promise, and the complicated history that will color his path forward.
Get our L.A. Times Politics newsletter
The latest news, analysis and insights from our politics team.
By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service, which include arbitration and a class action waiver. You agree that we and our third-party vendors may collect and use your information, including through cookies, pixels and similar technologies, for the purposes set forth in our Privacy Policy such as personalizing your experience and ads.
The long path to leaving
January 2017: A president who promised peace leaves office after eight years of war
During his first presidential campaign, Obama pledged to end the war in Afghanistan, as well as in Iraq. He ended his presidency as the first two-term president to see U.S. forces at war for all eight years.
Experts saw his legacy as mixed. He did reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan, cutting their ranks to 8,400, and his administration reduced American deaths — if not Afghanis’ — by relying on diplomacy and on drones to launch airstrikes. Yet intelligence officials said the U.S. faced more threats in more places than the country had seen since the Cold War. “We’re now wrapped up in all these different conflicts, at a low level and with no end in sight,” one expert told The Times.
August 2017:Trump presides over a stalemate and negotiated settlement
Trump the candidate ran as a tough-on-the-Taliban leader, promising a hard-fought and fast victory to end U.S. engagement. But Trump the president softened when it came time to reveal formal plans, Cloud and Wilkinson wrote with former Times reporter W.J. Hennigan. Fighting continued — to show U.S. forces could not be pushed out — while Trump promised that the 16-year war might end “some day” in a negotiated settlement. It was an acknowledgment that victory would elude a president who loved to win and refused to concede defeat.
“This entire effort is intended to put pressure on the Taliban, to have the Taliban understand you will not win a battlefield victory,” then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said. “We may not win one, but neither will you. So at some point, we have to come to the negotiating table and find a way to bring this to an end.”
By February 2018, the Trump administration proposed a defense budget that increased spending in Afghanistan by almost $2 billion, for a total of $48.9 billion in the next fiscal year.
December 2018:Trump presses for peace talks and announces a withdrawal of half of troops
That month, a series of announcements signaled Trump’s growing dissatisfaction with involvement in Afghanistan. Increased Taliban attacks had caused hundreds of Afghan civilian and military casualties a month, prompting Trump administration officials to press for a cease-fire agreement, but with dim prospects, Cloud wrote.
Less than two weeks later, administration officials announced a drastic plan: withdraw up to half of the 14,000 American troops serving in Afghanistan, potentially by summer. The backlash was swift from U.S. lawmakers, allies and even the Pentagon. Defense Secretary James N. Mattis was so furious that Trump would abandon allies in Syria and Afghanistan that he resigned in protest, as Cloud reported.
February-May 2020: A truce and a landmark agreement to withdraw
With 12,000 troops still in Afghanistan, the Trump administration brokered a temporary deal with the Taliban to reduce violence for a week in February, Wilkinson reported. The test was a success, and on Feb. 29, U.S. and Taliban officials signed an accord to end the war. The Taliban would prevent Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups from using Afghan territory to threaten the U.S., without renouncing its terrorist ties. In return, the U.S. would withdraw its troops within 14 months, setting a deadline of May 1, 2021.
The plan again drew backlash, from former Trump and Obama administration officials, who warned a complete withdrawal could backfire, Cloud, Wilkinson and Stefanie Glinksi reported. Even as conflict continued between the Taliban and the Afghan government into May, the Trump administration remained committed to removing troops.
November 2020: Hopes of exiting before the election dashed
Trump, hoping that a full exit in 2020 would boost his reelection prospects, made clear to advisors that he cared little about conditions in Afghanistan, Cloud and Wilkinson reported. He wanted out, period. By July, the number of troops on the ground had shrunk to 8,600.
But as the peace talks the U.S. hoped to broker struggled to get off the ground, administration officials said about 4,000 troops would have to remain into November. The Pentagon said too rapid a withdrawal would doom the talks, invite violence and cause American forces to have to abandon valuable equipment. Trump said he wanted a withdrawal by the end of his term in January, and in November — as he refused to concede his loss to Biden — he ordered troop levels reduced in Iraq and Afghanistan, to 2,500 in each country.
Trump’s relationship with Congress further deteriorated in December, in part over the bipartisan pushback to his withdrawal plans. It was among the reasons he cited in vetoing the annual National Defense Authorization Act, Cloud and Jennifer Haberkorn wrote.
April 2021: Biden says it’s “time to end the forever war.”
When Biden took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2,500 troops remained in Afghanistan. But the new president faced the decision of whether to honor Trump’s May 1 deadline for withdrawing them — the final exit from the war, Cloud wrote. Once again, Defense Department officials pressured the president to delay a full withdrawal as the deadline the Trump administration negotiated with the Taliban approached.
On April 14, Biden made his decision public: The drawdown would proceed, but not so quickly. The U.S. would fully exit by Sept. 11, Cloud and David Lauter wrote.
“I am now the fourth United States president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan. Two Republicans. Two Democrats,” Biden said. “I will not pass this responsibility onto a fifth.”
The top half of the front page of the Los Angeles Times on Oct. 9, 2001.
(Los Angeles Times)
Enjoying this newsletter? Consider subscribing to the Los Angeles Times
— The conviction of former Police Officer Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd reenergized a push for sweeping criminal justice reform by President Biden and leading Democrats, who said Tuesday’s verdict was just the first step on the path to national healing, report Evan Halper, Eli Stokols and Sarah D. Wire.
— Anticipating an uproar, Facebook said it would crack down on violent content, hate speech and harassment ahead of the Chauvin verdict. But as Brian Contreras reports, critics are wondering why the platform doesn’t take those precautions all the time.
The latest on the environment
— China, Japan and South Korea are the world’s biggest funders of coal-fired power plants around the globe — and the Biden administration is looking to win their agreement to deep cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions by the end of the decade, write Anna M. Phillips and Wilkinson.
— Biden will convene leaders from around the world on Thursday and Friday as he marks the United States’ return to the global fight against climate change, Chris Megerian writes. Three people with knowledge of the White House plans say Biden will pledge to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions at least in half by 2030.
— Solar panels, wind turbines and electric cars will go far in helping California and the Biden administration meet their aggressive climate goals — but not far enough. As time runs short, scientists and government officials say the moment to break out the giant vacuums has arrived, Halper writes.
More from Washington
— Vice President Kamala Harris traveled to North Carolina on Monday to talk about economic opportunities and electric school buses as part of the Biden administration’s efforts to promote its roughly $2-trillion infrastructure, clean energy and jobs plan, Noah Bierman writes.
— The Supreme Court is weighing whether immigrants granted temporary protected status can get green cards — and if the Biden administration will make that decision, David G. Savage reports.
— The Justice Department has brought charges against hundreds of people who stormed the Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot, but one of its most pivotal potential cases involves a man who never set foot inside the building, writes Del Quentin Wilber.
— After Jan. 6, many of the nation’s largest corporations pledged that they would suspend donations to elected officials who opposed the certification of Joe Biden’s victory, hindered the peaceful transfer of power or incited violence. The vast majority kept their word, report Seema Mehta, Maloy Moore and Matt Stiles.
— What is there left to say about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi? Plenty, it turns out. In a new biography, Pelosi dishes on chiding Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and using the nickname “Moscow Mitch,” writes Wire.
President Trump frequently contradicts himself, sometimes in the same speech, social media post or even sentence. On Friday, he sent a torrent of mixed signals about the Iran war that raise more questions about the direction of the conflict and his administration’s strategy.
Within a few hours, Trump said he was considering winding down the war, his administration confirmed it was sending more troops to the Middle East and, in an effort to lessen the economic influence on global energy markets, the United States lifted sanctions on some Iranian oil for the first time in decades — relieving some of the pressure that Washington traditionally has used as leverage.
The confusing combination of actions deepens a sense among Trump’s critics that there is no clear, long-term strategy for the war the U.S. and Israel launched against Iran. Now in its fourth week, the war remains on an unpredictable path and a credible endgame is unclear as the global economy is being roiled.
‘Winding down’ the war
After another rough day in the financial markets, Trump said Friday afternoon on his social media network: “We are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East.”
Trump contended that the U.S. has adequately degraded Iranian naval, missile and industrial capacity and prevented Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The president then suggested the U.S. could pull out of the conflict without stabilizing the Strait of Hormuz, the channel through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil supply travels. The strait has been ravaged by Iranian missile, drone and mine attacks during the war.
“The Hormuz Strait will have to be guarded and policed, as necessary, by other Nations who use it — The United States does not!” Trump wrote. But, in another contradiction, he said the U.S. would help if asked, “but it shouldn’t be necessary once Iran’s threat is eradicated.”
While oil that traverses the strait is usually bound for Asia and other places rather than North America, the chaos still affects the United States. Oil is bought and sold globally, so a shortage in oil for Asian countries leads to bidding up prices on oil sold to companies in America too.
That fact, coupled with an Israeli strike on Iran’s gas fields and an Iranian retaliation that crippled a major terminal to ship liquefied natural gas from Qatar, helped tank U.S. equity markets Friday, with the S&P dropping 1.5%. There also was a sharp increase in U.S. fuel prices.
More troops to the war zone
Even as Trump said the U.S. was close to winding down the war, his administration announced it was sending three more warships to the Middle East with about 2,500 additional Marines. It was the second time in a week that the administration said it was deploying more forces to the war zone. The military says some 50,000 are supporting the war effort.
Trump has often said he has ruled out sending in ground troops, but not always, and his administration has hinted at a possible deployment of special forces or similar units.
The Marines being sent to the region are an expeditionary unit designed for quick amphibious landings, but their deployment does not mean a ground invasion is certain. Analysts have suggested the presence of U.S. forces on the ground may be needed to ultimately secure the strait.
The surge in troops came just a day after news emerged that the Pentagon was seeking an additional $200 billion from Congress to fund the war. That extraordinarily high figure does not suggest that the war was winding down.
Lifting some sanctions on Iran
The administration said it would lift sanctions on the sale of Iranian oil, provided it was already at sea as of Friday. The move was an attempt to help lower skyrocketing energy prices by allowing freer sale of oil that Iran has let pass through the strait. It also extends a financial lifeline to the Iranian government that Trump is targeting.
His administration has tried other methods to lower oil prices. It has tapped the U.S. strategic petroleum reserve and lifted sanctions on some Russian oil. Yet Brent crude remained at $112 per barrel Friday, and analysts say oil prices are likely to remain high for months regardless of the next steps in the war.
The Iranian oil eventually would have reached another country, but now the United States and its allies can bid on it as well, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wrote on X.
“At present, sanctioned Iranian oil is being hoarded by China on the cheap,” Bessent wrote. “By temporarily unlocking this existing supply for the world, the United States will quickly bring approximately 140 million barrels of oil to global markets, expanding the amount of worldwide energy and helping to relieve the temporary pressures on supply caused by Iran.”
While 140 million barrels may seem like a lot, that is only a couple of days’ worth of oil on the global market.
Patrick De Haan, the head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, a U.S. fuel-tracking service, said he does not expect the temporary suspension to have a major influence on gas prices. The de facto closure of the strait has a much greater effect, he said. “Prices will likely still continue to rise so long as the Strait remains silent,” De Haan said.
And the contradictions in the position were obvious in Bessent’s post announcing the move, which labeled Iran “the head of the snake for global terrorism.” He said the administration would take steps to prevent Tehran from cashing in on the sales, but it was unclear how that would be done.
Even among some Republicans, the contradictions triggered rare public skepticism.
“Bombing Iran with one hand and buying Iran oil with the other,” South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace posted on X on Saturday.
Riccardi writes for the Associated Press. AP business writer Dee-Ann Durbin in Ann Arbor, Mich., contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is reportedly sending three California-based warships and roughly 2,500 Marines to the Middle East, the second significant deployment in a week.
The three warships are part of the San Diego-based USS Boxer amphibious ready group. The Marines are from the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, based at Camp Pendleton. The deployments were reported Friday by the Associated Press, citing Pentagon sources.
A 2,500-strong Marine unit accompanied by the USS Tripoli warship launched from Japan on Saturday.
The major reinforcement comes as the war’s economic shock waves are felt throughout the globe, as Washington seeks to secure vital shipping lanes and deter further attacks on energy infrastructure around the Persian Gulf.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, front, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine arrive for a news conference at the Pentagon in Washington on Thursday.
(Mandel Ngan / AFP via Getty Images)
President Trump has continued pressing allies to join his proposed coalition to patrol the Iranian-controlled Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping lane through which about 20% of the world’s oil supply passes. So far, Europe, Japan, China and Australia have refused to heed the call.
Trump on Thursday said Iran “is close to demolished,” but that securing the Strait of Hormuz remained a struggle. He suggested the U.S. was working to secure the strait not for its own oil needs, but “just to be nice” to other countries that rely on oil from the region to a much larger degree than the U.S.
Marines perform a demonstration with helicopters and the amphibious assault ship USS Boxer Oct. 18, 2025, on Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton.
(Gregory Bull / Associated Press)
“They complain about the high oil prices they are forced to pay, but don’t want to help open the Strait of Hormuz, a simple military maneuver that is the single reason for the high oil prices. So easy for them to do, with so little risk. COWARDS, and we will REMEMBER!” Trump wrote Friday on Truth Social.
Iran continued sweeping attacks on Mideast energy facilities, a retaliation to Israeli strikes on its Iran’s South Pars field, the world’s largest natural gas field Wednesday. The fallout has dragged the gulf states into the war amid the largest energy supply disruption in history.
Iranian Shahed drones hammered Kuwait’s largest oil refinery Friday. Similar attacks triggered fires at Ras Laffan Industrial City in Qatar, bringing energy product screaming to a halt at the largest natural gas hub in the globe. Repairs are expected to take years.
Meanwhile, United Arab Emirates’ air defense systems were countering Iranian missiles overnight, and Saudi Arabia said it might respond with force if Iran continues to attack facilities in the kingdom.
An Israeli self-propelled howitzer artillery gun fires rounds toward southern Lebanon from a position in the upper Galilee in northern Israel near the border on Friday.
(Jalaa Marey / AFP via Getty Images)
Israel said Friday it had killed Esmail Ahmadi, a senior intelligence official in Iran’s Basij and deputy to its commander, in an airstrike. Officials described Ahmadi as “one of the most important pillars” of the Basij volunteer paramilitary force.
Even as Israel carries out daily decapitation airstrikes in Tehran and the U.S. deploys renewed forces to its front door, the Islamic Republic has not faltered.
Abolfazl Shekarchi, a senior spokesperson for Iran’s armed forces, said American and Israeli officials could be targeted worldwide.
“From now on, based on the information we have, even recreational and tourist locations around the world will not be safe for you,” Shekarchi said.
Oil prices have surged past $100 a barrel and found a volatile new floor amid the chaos.
Financial markets have reacted with sustained losses. Wall Street has now posted its fourth consecutive week of declines, with investors increasingly pricing in the risk that higher energy costs could slow economic growth while reigniting inflation. Analysts warn that persistently elevated crude prices are likely to squeeze corporate margins and weigh on consumer spending in the United States and beyond.
The International Monetary Fund has cautioned that the conflict could push inflation higher, too. The Federal Reserve is now facing renewed uncertainty as they weigh whether to hold interest rates higher for longer in response to rising energy costs.
At a White House event on Friday, Trump maintained that the United States’ military operation is “going extremely well in Iran.”
“The difference between them and us is they had a navy two weeks ago and they have no navy anymore. It’s all at the bottom of the sea,” Trump said. “Fifty-eight ships were knocked down in two days and we have the greatest navy in the world. It is not even close.”
The president did not take questions from reporters in the room. But in unprompted remarks, he said the United States and Iran are not engaging in talks because their leaders “are all gone,” adding to the uncertainty about the war’s exit strategy.
“We are having a hard time, we want to talk to them and there is nobody to talk to,” he said. “We have nobody to talk to and you know what? We like it that way.”
Two Palestinian brothers are the only survivors after Israeli troops killed their parents and two siblings in Tammun in the occupied West Bank, according to Palestinian health authorities. The boys say soldiers opened fire on their family car and beat them after the shooting.