Uncertainty

Another Day Of Uncertainty In The Strait After U.S. Claims Strikes On Iranian Minelayers

The most recent flare-up of hostilities between the U.S. and Iran yet again highlights that while the future of Tehran’s nuclear ambitions remains at the heart of peace negotiations, the status of the Strait of Hormuz is the key flashpoint. On Tuesday, Tehran vowed retaliation a day after U.S. forces struck several targets in southern Iran on and near the Strait. Exacerbating the problems, another vessel was reportedly attacked near the mouth of the vital waterway on Tuesday.

These incidents are complicating work toward a peace deal amid an increasingly fragile ceasefire. After the start of the war on Feb. 28, the strategic chokepoint was closed to most traffic by Iran, which is now letting some vessels through under a new fee system that the U.S. vehemently rejects. The closure is having global economic impacts.

“Undoubtedly, the Islamic Republic of Iran will not leave any act of mischief unanswered and will not hesitate in defending the country’s integrity,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on X in which it labeled the U.S. strikes on Monday “a gross violation of the ceasefire enacted on April 8. 

The ministry offered no specifics about what actions it could take.

🔴 وزارت خارجه: نقض آتش‌بس توسط آمریکا بی‌پاسخ نمی‌ماند. pic.twitter.com/XBuQsw8jLa

— خبرگزاری فارس (@FarsNews_Agency) May 26, 2026

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei issued a threat against U.S. allies in the region. Countries like Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Oman and Iraq all house U.S. facilities, many of which have already come under attack during Epic Fury and even after the April 8 ceasefire.

“The hand of time does not turn back, and the nations and lands of the region will no longer serve as shields for American bases,” he stated on X. “America will no longer have a safe haven for mischief and the establishment of military bases in the region.”

عقربه‌ی زمان به عقب برنمی‌گردد و ملّت‌ها و سرزمین‌های منطقه، دیگر سپر پایگاه‌های امریکایی نخواهند بود. امریکا دیگر نقطه‌ی امنی برای شرارت و استقرار پایگاه نظامی در منطقه نخواهد داشت.

— رسانه رهبر انقلاب اسلامی (@Rahbarenghelab_) May 26, 2026

The statements were among many from Iran decrying the latest kinetic exchange with America. On Monday, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) told us it hit targets being used to endanger its personnel.

U.S. forces “conducted self-defense strikes in southern Iran… to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces,” Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, CENTCOM’s chief spokesman told TWZ Monday evening. “Targets included missile launch sites and Iranian boats attempting to emplace mines. U.S. Central Command continues to defend our forces while using restraint during the ongoing ceasefire.”

CENTCOM carried out the strikes after Iran deployed mine-laying boats in the Strait of Hormuz and flew attack drones near American ships, The New York Times reported on Tuesday.

The U.S. “observed Iranian forces taking several actions, including launching the drones and activity at missile launch sites,” the newspaper noted.

CENTCOM spox tells me U.S. forces conducted self-defense strikes in southern Iran today to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces. Targets included missile launch sites and Iranian boats attempting to emplace mines….

— Howard Altman (@haltman) May 25, 2026

CENTCOM’s statement followed reports of explosions in the key southern Iranian city of Bandar Abbas, the epicenter of Iranian naval operations around the Strait of Hormuz. It was attacked repeatedly during Operation Epic Fury and again earlier this month after the ceasefire was in place.

🔴 Several explosions were heard in Bandar Abbas, Iran’s main southern port city near the Strait of Hormuz, the state-linked Fars news agency reports

🔴 The origin of the explosions remains unclear, according to the agency

🔴 Similar sounds were also reported near the coastal… pic.twitter.com/qXMronEPrc

— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) May 25, 2026

Meanwhile, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) organization reported that the Olympic Life, a Marshal Islands-registered oil tanker, was attacked 60 nautical miles east of Muscat, Oman on Tuesday.

The maritime security firm Ambrey told us the ship was struck by an unknown projectile, which resulted in an explosion on the vessel’s port side along the waterline, creating a discharge of bunker fuel. There were no injuries reported and neither UKMTO nor Ambrey said who launched the projectile.

Amid these incidents, The Wall Street Journal, citing U.S. military officials, reported that the “U.S. Navy is quietly assisting vessel crossings through the Strait of Hormuz.”

The officials told the newspaper that a Greek supertanker laden with two million barrels of crude was guided by the U.S. Navy, as it crossed the waterway off the Omani coast. The ship was stuck in the Middle East Gulf since early March and is now heading to India to deliver its cargo.

However, CENTCOM denied the report, or that it was resuming Project Freedom, the short-lived effort to protect ships stuck in the Strait.

🚫CLAIM: Recent media reporting claims that the U.S. Navy has restarted escorting or assisting commercial vessels during transits through the Strait of Hormuz. FALSE.

✅TRUTH: Project Freedom has not resumed, and U.S. forces are not currently escorting commercial vessels through… pic.twitter.com/JD9cY5FUNN

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) May 26, 2026

Prior to yesterday’s actions by CENTCOM, both sides had indicated progress on a memorandum of understanding that could halt the war and restart shipping through the blockaded Strait of Hormuz, while giving negotiators 60 days to negotiate more complex issues. These include Iran’s nuclear program, its ballistic missile arsenal and support for proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and several groups in Iraq.

On Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he remains hopeful that ongoing peace talks won’t be derailed. However, he also said that the matter of Iran charging fees for ships transiting the Strait was unacceptable.

“There were some talks going on in Qatar today, so we’ll see if we can make progress on – I think it’s a lot of talking back and forth going on about specific language in the initial document,” Rubio told reporters on Tuesday. “So it’ll take a few days.”

Pressed on whether yesterday’s U.S. strikes will affect the peace talks, the secretary said the status of the Strait is non-negotiable.

“Well, the Straits have to be open,” he explained. “They’re going to be open one way or the other. So they need to be open. What’s happening there is unlawful; it’s illegal. It’s unsustainable for the world; it’s unacceptable. I don’t know of any country in the world that doesn’t – the Russians are not in favor of a tolling system; the Chinese are not in favor of a tolling system. I mean, there’s no country in the world that’s in favor of a tolling system except the regime in Iran. So that’s not acceptable; that cannot happen. The Straits need to be open, unimpeded, without tolls. And obviously that needs to happen immediately as soon as anything’s agreed to.”

SECRETARY RUBIO: The straits have to be open. What’s happening there is illegal. It’s unsustainable for the world and it’s unacceptable. pic.twitter.com/5lQHIxjnNK

— Department of State (@StateDept) May 26, 2026

As we previously reported, Iran claims it is not imposing a toll, but instead a fee for environmental and other services. 

“A tolling system that simply charges ships to pass through the waterway would be illegal under international law, but charging fees for actual services rendered to vessels, such as waste disposal at a port, is allowed under certain circumstances,” The New  York Times recently noted.

Regardless, Rubio’s comments about the pace of negotiations pours cold water on any hopes of a quick resolution to the crisis. The renewed hostilities do nothing to move the needle forward either.

UPDATES

Though Iran has made ending the Israel-Hezbollah fight part of its negotiation stance, Israel’s military said its ground forces are moving further into Lebanon.

“As per the directive of myself, the Defense Minister and the IDF Chief of Staff, we are deepening our operation in Lebanon,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced. “The IDF is operating with large forces on the ground and seizing dominant terrain. We are fortifying the security zone to protect the communities of the north. Concurrently, we are leading a massive national effort to advance creative and innovative solutions against explosive drones. We back and praise our heroic commanders and soldiers. They are deep in the field. We are counting on you!”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, today, at the start of the Security Cabinet meeting:
“As per the directive of myself, the Defense Minister and the IDF Chief of Staff, we are deepening our operation in Lebanon. The IDF is operating with large forces on the ground and seizing… pic.twitter.com/GBLuWgEbyl

— Prime Minister of Israel (@IsraeliPM) May 26, 2026

The Israeli Air Force on Tuesday released video it says shows attacks on Hezbollah infrastructure in Lebanon.

חיל-האוויר ממשיך לתקוף תשתיות של ארגון הטרור חיזבאללה בדרום לבנון: חוסלו מחבלים שקידמו מתווי טרור נגד כוחותינו והותקפו תשתיות מהן פעלו לשיגור רקטות pic.twitter.com/RhKLx3ojnC

— Israeli Air Force (@IAFsite) May 26, 2026

Netanyahu’s announcement about the increased push deeper into Lebanon comes a day after Trump demanded Arab nations seek peace with the Jewish state.

In a lengthy post on his social media platform on Monday, Trump demanded that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan join Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates as members of the Abraham Accords, the 2020 peace and economic trade treaty with Israel created by Trump in his first term.

The American leader also said that while negotiations with Iran are “proceeding nicely,” he will resume attacking should no deal be reached. 

“During my discussions on Saturday with President Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, of The United Arab Emirates, Emir Tamim bin Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, and Minister Ali al-Thawadi, of Qatar, Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir Ahmed Shah, of Pakistan, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, of Türkiye, President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, of Egypt, King Abdullah II, of Jordan, and King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, of Bahrain, I stated that, after all the work done by the United States to try and pull this very complex puzzle together, it should be mandatory that all of these Countries, at a minimum, simultaneously, sign onto the Abraham Accords,” Trump proclaimed on Truth Social. “Those Countries discussed are Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Emirates (already a Member!), Qatar, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain (already a Member!). It may be possible that one or two have a reason for not doing so, and that will be accepted, but most should be ready, willing, and able to make this Settlement with Iran a far more Historic Event than it would, otherwise, be. The Abraham Accords have proven to be, for the Countries involved (The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan, and Kazakhstan), a Financial, Economic, and Social BOOM, even during this time of Conflict and War, with the current Members never even suggesting leaving, or taking so much as even a pause.”

Trump also suggested Tehran would be invited to join if a U.S.-Iran peace deal is inked.

“… Iran signs its Agreement with me, as President of the United States of America, it would be an Honor to have them also be part of this unparalleled World Coalition,” Trump posited. “The Middle East would be United, Powerful, and Economically Strong, like perhaps no other area, anywhere in the World! By copy of this TRUTH, I am asking my Representatives to begin, and successfully complete, the process of signing these Countries into the already Historic Abraham Accords.”

U.S. President Donald J. Trump posted a lengthy statement on his Truth Social app earlier on the ongoing negotiations. This most recent statement was centered around President Trump’s proposition to Arab leaders on the Abraham Accords. Per the president’s statement, negotiations… pic.twitter.com/Cj4nKWv8vE

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 25, 2026

Trump’s Truth Social post follows a phone call he had on Saturday with these leaders announcing that peace talks with Iran had resumed.

“Trump told the leaders that after the war with Iran ends he expects all of them who are still not part of the Abraham Accords or don’t have peace agreements with Israel to join and normalize relations with the Jewish state,” Axios reported, citing two U.S. officials. “The leaders, especially those of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Pakistan who don’t have formal diplomatic relations with Israel, were surprised by Trump’s request.” 

“There was silence on the line, and Trump joked and asked if they are still there,” the outlet claimed one of the sources told it.

Given the long-standing enmity between Israel and countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan, the likelihood of them joining the Abraham Accords is questionable. Even though Egypt and Jordan have peace treaties with Israel, the chances either of them sign on are unlikely as well. A major sticking point for all these countries is the ongoing situation in Gaza and the overall unresolved Palestinian-Israeli relations.

The idea that Iran would join the Abraham Accords seems even more far-fetched for obvious reasons.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Howard is a Senior Staff Writer for The War Zone, and a former Senior Managing Editor for Military Times. Prior to this, he covered military affairs for the Tampa Bay Times as a Senior Writer. Howard’s work has appeared in various publications including Yahoo News, RealClearDefense, and Air Force Times.




Source link

Watch: Cuba’s blackouts leave high-rise residents with constant uncertainty

As Cuba heads into another month of blackouts due to the near-total fuel blockade imposed by the US, many say their lives now revolve around these power outages.

For Ana Rosa Romero, a 70-year-old widow living in a high-rise building, the constant power cuts have transformed her daily life.

BBC’s Will Grant spoke to her about the impact of the blackouts.

Video edited by Blanca Estrada

Source link

News Analysis: Uncertainty, frustration define messy midterm battles for mayor, governor and Congress

With little more than a week left until primary voters winnow the candidates for Los Angeles mayor, California governor and Congress, there remains a palpable sense of political uncertainty among the electorate — attributable to a lack of clear front-runners, redrawn political maps, messy party infighting and competing voter frustration with both President Trump and the state’s Democratic establishment.

In a state where Democrats hold a substantial advantage among registered voters and Trump lost in 2024 by more than 20 percentage points, MAGA-aligned Republicans are nonetheless competing on a message of ineptitude from longtime liberal leaders to address the state’s most intractable problems. Even some Democrats have railed against the status quo.

With Trump’s grip on the Republican base intact despite abysmal overall approval ratings, many Republican candidates have courted his approval — and been hammered for it by their Democratic opponents.

But those same Democrats have found it harder to explain why their own party should continue to lead the state despite allowing its affordability, housing and homelessness crises to take root and persist — taking little responsibility while swiping at each other for having failed to find solutions sooner.

All that party infighting — present before every primary, but at a fever pitch now — comes against a backdrop of broader voter unease about the war in Iran, volatile oil and gas prices, and the burgeoning threat of AI to the American workforce.

Republican voters are being warned of a blue wave in November giving Democrats control of Congress and grinding Trump’s agenda to a halt. Democratic voters are being warned of Trump administration efforts to undermine local and state elections, and of control of Congress unfairly slipping from reach thanks to further Republican redistricting following a U.S. Supreme Court decision undermining the Voting Rights Act and its protections for majority-Black districts across the South.

Many California voters — some already shaken or burned by former Rep. Eric Swalwell dropping from the gubernatorial race amid sexual assault and rape allegations last month — appear hesitant to cast ballots early, despite warnings that the Trump administration may try to discount those mailed at the last minute.

“Voters don’t want to make a mistake. They’re not absolutely certain,” said Rob Stutzman, a Republican consultant in California. “It’s just not real clear where to land.”

James Adams, a political science professor at UC Davis who studies elections and public opinion, said California Democrats this cycle “have a candidate problem and they have a message problem,” in that they are trying to convince voters to back them “not because they offer exciting ideas or inspiring leadership, but because their Republican opponents are even worse.”

And that message — offered as they gerrymander California in a race to the bottom with Republicans nationally — isn’t cutting it, Adams said.

“People are alienated from our current politics not because Americans are cynical, but because people recognize that they deserve better.”

Outsider shakes up L.A. mayor’s race

Amid entrenched homelessness, affordability concerns and lingering anger over the bungled response to last year’s wildfires, the L.A. mayor’s race was “supposed to be a referendum” on embattled Mayor Karen Bass, Stutzman said.

And yet, Bass remains in the lead, and many voters remain confused about which way to turn away from her — if at all.

Bass has won the endorsement of three council members who are members of the Democratic Socialists of America, despite City Councilmember Nithya Raman, an ally who’d previously endorsed Bass and is a member of the DSA herself, entering the race to her left.

Unable to consolidate support from the city’s progressive flank, Raman is now running neck and neck for a second-place finish and a chance to face Bass in the November runoff with former reality TV personality Spencer Pratt, who has remained in contention in ultra-liberal L.A. despite pushing a MAGA-aligned message to Bass’ right.

Pratt, who did not respond to a request for comment, lost his Pacific Palisades home in the fires and has won over many frustrated city residents with his anti-establishment message and cheeky AI videos — including one casting him as Batman, taking on a corrupt Democratic bourgeoisie.

Pratt, a registered Republican, has tried to dance around politics in the race, calling his campaign a “nonpartisan” one and comparing himself to President Obama politically. But he is backed by many Republicans, has echoed Trump’s rhetoric around restoring “common sense” and a “Golden Age” to L.A., and recently responded to Trump saying that he’d heard Pratt “is a big MAGA person” — and Raman posting the quote to X — with a meme of himself shrugging.

Fernando Guerra, founding director of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University, said he’s glad city voters have choices this race, because they clearly aren’t happy. He said Angelenos are less optimistic today than ever before and are deeply frustrated with “this same liberal Democratic regime from Bradley to Bass over 50 years” — a reference to former Mayor Tom Bradley, who first took office in 1973.

Voters are clearly tired of that regime, which has succumbed to “policy paralysis” in the name of “inclusion” and trying to please everyone, Guerra said — but not so much that they will consider going MAGA for Pratt.

“People say, ‘Yeah, Democrats have really f—d it up, but there’s no way we’re going to [back] Republicans. Look what they’ve done to the nation.’”

Others aren’t so sure. In its voter guide, the progressive group LA Forward wrote that the “most important thing” in the June 2 primary is to block Pratt — whom it called a “right-wing reality TV buffoon” — from advancing, and the best way to do so is to vote for Raman.

“We would much rather see a Bass/Raman runoff, with no chance of Pratt becoming mayor, than a Pratt/Bass runoff where a Pratt win would be a real possibility — plunging LA into a Trumpian mayoral nightmare,” the group wrote.

An unsettled gubernatorial contest

In the gubernatorial race, none of the many Democratic candidates has been able to consolidate a sizable lead, creating a lingering apprehension that Republicans could somehow eke out a stunning upset in the biggest of blue states.

That’s in part thanks to leading Democratic candidate Xavier Becerra, the former California attorney general and U.S. Health secretary under President Biden, being dogged by insinuations, including from fellow Democrats, that he was somehow complicit in a scheme by underlings to steal from his campaign coffers, despite prosecutors in the case — which resulted in his former chief of staff pleading guilty — never alleging wrongdoing on his part.

It’s also thanks in part to the fact that the leading progressive, Tom Steyer, is a billionaire who has bought his way into contention with nearly $200 million of his own money — in an election cycle in which progressive voters nationwide are decrying billionaires as the clearest symbol of all that is wrong with the nation’s lopsided economy.

“This kind of weird self-loathing rationale of why he’s the right guy to take on billionaires because he is one? You can’t build a Mamdani movement around that,” said Stutzman, referring to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who shot to power on a democratic socialist platform last year.

The Democrats have also struggled to combat the criticism — leveraged time and again by their Republican competitors — that their party has failed for years to solve California’s most substantial problems, and deserves to be ousted from power.

Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra speak during a break in the April 28 gubernatorial debate.

Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra speak during a break in the April 28 gubernatorial debate.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

Former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton has hammered that message in ads and on the debate stage, lambasting the Democratic establishment for pushing so much unnecessary regulation that it has chased out business and investment and made everything from gas to housing to groceries more expensive for average residents.

He has blamed Democrats for California’s high rates of poverty and unemployment, its high cost of living and high taxes, its record homelessness and its poor public school results.

In an interview, Hilton said he understands that California voters may not like Trump — who endorsed him — and may have conflicting beliefs about federal and international policy, but that California’s biggest problems have “nothing to do with President Trump.”

“Voters need to decide on what direction they want to take in terms of the policies that affect their daily lives in California,” he said, and those are “devised and enacted within California by our politicians here in Sacramento.”

He also said it’s no surprise that some of his Democratic rivals have also acknowledged that the Democratic establishment has been a failure, because “if you pretend otherwise, you show that you’re just completely out of touch with public opinion.”

Rusty Hicks, chair of the California Democratic Party, said “every campaign is entitled to run the race that they believe matches their story,” even if that means questioning the party’s past performance. But he also said polling hasn’t shown that message to be an effective one, and he’s confident that voters will show their ongoing trust in the party at the polls.

Redistricting, sniping and name-calling

The decision by California voters last November to pass Proposition 50 and allow the state’s Democratic leaders to redraw the state’s congressional maps to favor Democratic candidates in a handful of additional districts — part of a wider redistricting war sparked by Trump — has intensified the primary races in those areas.

As an example, longtime incumbent Reps. Ken Calvert (R-Corona) and Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) are now competing to represent the same redrawn swath of Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, and have bitterly attacked one another. Kim has called Calvert a “swampy,” “sleazy” and “corrupt” politician guilty of “sabotaging President Trump’s agenda.” Calvert has called Kim a “RINO,” or Republican In Name Only, and a “Trump-hating liberal.”

Democrats have also sniped at each other, including in the race to replace retiring Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall) in his redrawn district in San Diego and Riverside counties — where Trump also holds an outsize presence.

Rep. Young Kim and Rep. Ken Calvert are opponents in a heated race in a newly redrawn congressional district.

Rep. Young Kim and Rep. Ken Calvert are opponents in a heated race in a newly redrawn congressional district.

(Associated Press)

Stutzman said it will be interesting to see how those primaries play out, but also how Democrats there and in other races perform in November — when Democrats are expected to perform well nationally given Trump’s lousy ratings, but Democrats in California could underperform thanks to statewide frustration with affordability, housing and homelessness here.

“People are like, ‘Eh, you know, yeah, Trump — but there’s some problems here,’” Stutzman said.

Hicks said he expects California voters to not only elect another Democratic governor, but to “push back on a Trump administration and congressional Republicans and Republicans around the country that have sought to rig the game in their favor,” including by “ensuring that we fulfill the promise of Proposition 50 by winning congressional seats and retaking the House of Representatives.”

He said the current political moment “can feel like a pressure cooker,” but Californians will “continue to adapt and overcome and be resilient, just as they always have been.”

Source link

US deepens European uncertainty with deployment of 5,000 troops to Poland | NATO News

United States President Donald Trump has announced plans to deploy an additional 5,000 troops to Poland.

Trump announced the surprise deployment on social media late on Thursday, citing his friendship with right-wing Polish President Karol Nawrocki.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The move came days after a planned deployment to Poland was apparently scrapped and will deepen uncertainty surrounding the Trump administration’s approach to NATO allies and its long-term commitment to maintaining a military presence in Europe. It leaves European partners increasingly unclear about which areas they should prioritise as they formulate defence strategies.

“Based on the successful Election of the now President ⁠of Poland, Karol Nawrocki, who I was proud to Endorse, and our relationship with him, I am pleased to announce that the United States will be sending an additional 5,000 Troops to Poland,” Trump wrote.

Nawrocki welcomed the announcement on social media.

“Good alliances are those based on cooperation, mutual respect, and a commitment to our shared ‌security,” he wrote on Thursday evening.

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski also welcomed the news on Friday, saying it ensures that “the presence of American troops in Poland will be maintained more or less at previous levels”.

About-face

The announced deployment is a sudden about-face from US declarations of plans to reduce military support to Europe under Trump’s “America First” doctrine.

The US president has for years been lambasting European NATO partners for failing to spend enough on defence. His opprobrium has risen in recent weeks as European states have criticised the US-Israeli war on Iran and refused to join the conflict.

The Pentagon abruptly announced a week ago that it was scrapping the planned deployment of 4,000 troops to Poland.

Earlier this month, Trump announced he was withdrawing 5,000 troops from Germany following a spat with Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who said Washington had been “humiliated” by Iranian negotiators.

The US president later said that he would be “cutting a lot further than 5,000”.

Polish officials have noted that Warsaw pays significant sums towards the cost of US troop deployments. The suggestion of a pullback has caused concern over security in Poland and elsewhere in Europe, as Russia’s war on neighbouring Ukraine continues, with the Trump administration largely ceasing efforts to mediate a ceasefire.

European states report that they are getting to grips with the need to replace US defence capabilities, albeit slowly. However, sources suggest that the erratic policies emerging from the White House are creating confusion over which elements should be prioritised.

“It is confusing indeed, and not always easy to navigate,” Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard told reporters ahead of hosting a meeting of NATO foreign ministers on Friday, which will be attended by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

US defence officials are also confused, according to the AP news agency.

“We just spent the better part of two weeks reacting to the first announcement. We don’t know what this means either,” said one official.

 

‘America First’

The US president has lashed out at fellow NATO members in recent months for failing to support the US-Israeli war on Iran, suggesting Washington could withdraw from the military alliance as a result.

State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said Rubio would discuss the need for NATO allies to increase defence spending and shoulder greater responsibility at Friday’s meeting of NATO foreign ministers.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who has worked hard in recent months to attempt to soothe the US president’s displeasure with his alliance peers, welcomed Trump’s deployment to Poland and cautioned that Europe must become less reliant on the US.

Rubio said before meeting his NATO counterparts in Sweden: “Like any alliance, it ⁠has to be good ⁠for everyone who’s involved. There has to be a clear ⁠understanding of what the expectations are.” ⁠

He also suggested, however, that the meeting is likely to prove less than comfortable.

“The president’s views, frankly disappointment, at some of our NATO allies and their response to our operations in the Middle East – they’re well documented – that will have to be addressed,” he insisted, before adding “that won’t be solved or addressed today”.

While Rubio meets with NATO counterparts, senior Pentagon officials will brief partners at the alliance’s headquarters in Brussels about Washington’s commitment to European defence.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon announced it plans to reduce the number of combat brigades based in Europe from four to three.

Many of Washington’s allies in Europe remain frustrated with Trump’s handling of the war with Iran, which has damaged their economies and prompted some European leaders to question the reliability of the US.

European NATO countries also remain concerned about Trump’s threats to annex Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, a NATO ally.

It remains unclear whether the deployment to Poland announced on Thursday includes the same soldiers as those the Pentagon said would no longer be deployed to the Central European country, or if they will include redeployments from Germany.

Source link

EU approves trade deal with the US despite uncertainty in transatlantic relations

Published on Updated

Diplomats and MEPs reached an agreement late on Tuesday to implement the contentious EU-US agreement, which eliminates duties on most US industrial goods imported into Europe.


ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

The negotiations concluded two weeks after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose 25% tariffs on EU cars if Europeans did not implement the agreement — clinched by Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Turnberry, Scotland, last summer — by 4 July.

The so-called “Turnberry Agreement,” criticised by MEPs as unbalanced, raises US tariffs on EU goods to as much as 15%.

“The EU and the United States share the world’s largest and most integrated economic relationship. Maintaining a stable, predictable and balanced transatlantic partnership is in the interest of both sides,” Cyprus trade Minister Michael Damianos said, adding: “Today, the European Union delivers on its commitments.”

MEPs had kept the deal frozen for several weeks following Trump’s threats over Greenland earlier this year. They also suspended it after the US adopted new tariffs following a Supreme Court ruling that declared illegal the tariffs imposed by the White House since Trump’s return to power.

Demanding clarity from the Americans, EU lawmakers finally agreed to enter into negotiations with the EU Cyprus presidency — representing EU member states — after the Commission assured them that the US would honour its side of the agreement and cap its tariffs at 15%, as agreed.

Fragile EU-US relations

However, EU-US relations remain fragile and there is concern in Brussels that the US administration could still use tariffs to put political pressure on the EU if the bloc does not comply with the White House’s demands on other issues.

Trump’s threats over EU cars two weeks ago also targeted Germany, whose Chancellor Friedrich Merz has criticised the war in Iran launched by the Americans alongside Israel.

Trump has repeatedly called on European countries to deploy ships to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, a move Europeans have been reluctant to make.

Many disagreements also continue to strain EU–US relations over Ukraine — including the recent US extension of a sanctions waiver allowing purchases of Russian oil — and over NATO, which Trump has repeatedly threatened to leave.

On Tuesday night, MEPs tried to secure the deal by attaching conditions, risking US anger with additional provisions to which Washington had not agreed.

Under the Turnberry Agreement, the EU also committed to investing $600 billion across strategic sectors in the United States through 2028 and to purchasing $750 billion worth of US energy.

Source link

Iran’s World Cup team arrives in Turkiye amid US visa uncertainty | US-Israel war on Iran

NewsFeed

Iran’s national football team has arrived in Turkiye for a pre-World Cup training camp, but players are yet to receive visas for entry into the US. FIFA says it is confident Iran will be able to play in next month’s tournament despite the uncertainty.

Source link

Dollar Steady as Iran War Uncertainty Weighs on Markets

Global currency markets remained broadly stable on Monday despite escalating geopolitical tensions linked to the ongoing conflict involving the United States and Iran. The limited movement in the US dollar came after President Donald Trump rejected Iran’s response to a United States peace proposal, reinforcing concerns that the conflict in the Middle East may persist for an extended period.

At the center of global financial attention is the interaction between geopolitical risk, energy prices, and monetary policy expectations. Rising oil prices, driven by uncertainty in the Strait of Hormuz and broader regional instability, continue to shape inflation expectations across major economies. However, currency markets have shown relative restraint, suggesting that investors are balancing immediate geopolitical risks against expectations of eventual diplomatic stabilization.

The US dollar index, which measures the currency against a basket of major global currencies, remained largely unchanged. At the same time, oil prices rose sharply, reflecting renewed concerns about supply disruptions and prolonged conflict conditions.

Geopolitical Risk and Market Equilibrium

Financial markets are currently operating in a state of tension between short term geopolitical shocks and longer term expectations of resolution. The stability of the US dollar suggests that investors are not fully pricing in a sustained breakdown in global energy flows, despite elevated uncertainty in the Middle East.

The oil market, by contrast, continues to respond rapidly to political developments. The rise in crude prices reflects concerns that prolonged instability could restrict supply routes and tighten global energy availability. This divergence between currency stability and commodity volatility highlights the uneven transmission of geopolitical risk across financial systems.

Market analysts note that expectations of diplomatic engagement between the United States and China remain a key stabilizing factor. Investors increasingly view high level diplomatic meetings as potential mechanisms for de escalation, particularly given the influence both countries exert over global energy and trade systems.

The Role of the United States and China in Market Sentiment

A major factor influencing market behavior is the anticipated summit between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The meeting is expected to cover a wide range of strategic issues including energy security, artificial intelligence, nuclear policy, and regional conflicts.

Markets are closely monitoring this engagement because both the United States and China possess significant leverage over geopolitical and economic developments in the Middle East. China’s role as a major energy importer and diplomatic stakeholder in the region gives it potential influence over Iranian policy, while the United States remains the dominant military and financial actor in global markets.

This dual influence creates expectations that broader geopolitical tensions may eventually be moderated through strategic dialogue. As a result, investors are partially pricing in the possibility of containment rather than escalation, which helps explain the relative stability of major currencies.

Inflation Expectations and Central Bank Positioning

Energy price movements remain central to global inflation dynamics. Rising oil prices directly influence transportation costs, production expenses, and consumer prices, creating upward pressure on inflation across both advanced and emerging economies.

In the United States, recent economic data has reinforced expectations that the Federal Reserve will maintain a cautious monetary stance. Strong employment figures combined with persistent inflation risks have reduced expectations of near term interest rate cuts. This has contributed to support for the US dollar, as higher interest rate expectations typically attract capital inflows into dollar denominated assets.

The interaction between monetary policy and geopolitical risk is becoming increasingly complex. Central banks are now required to respond not only to domestic economic indicators but also to external shocks originating from energy markets and international conflicts.

In this environment, currency movements reflect not just economic fundamentals but also expectations regarding central bank behavior under conditions of sustained uncertainty.

Diverging Currency Movements and Global Economic Signals

While the US dollar remained stable, other major currencies exhibited modest weakness. The euro, yen, and British pound all recorded slight declines, reflecting broader caution in global markets.

The movement of the Chinese yuan, which briefly strengthened to its highest level in several years, adds another dimension to the global currency landscape. This reflects both domestic economic data and broader expectations regarding China’s role in global trade and energy markets.

China’s economic performance, particularly in exports and industrial activity, continues to be closely linked to global energy prices and supply chain dynamics. Strong export growth suggests resilience in external demand, even amid geopolitical uncertainty and rising production costs.

These currency movements collectively indicate that global markets are navigating a period of uneven economic signals, where regional conditions and geopolitical developments interact in complex ways.

The Interplay Between Markets and Political Uncertainty

One of the defining characteristics of the current financial environment is the speed at which geopolitical developments translate into market expectations. Currency traders and investors are increasingly sensitive to political signals, particularly those involving energy producing regions and major global powers.

However, despite heightened volatility in oil markets, the US dollar’s stability suggests that investors still view the global financial system as structurally resilient. Rather than anticipating systemic disruption, markets appear to be pricing in cyclical instability followed by eventual stabilization.

This reflects a broader pattern in which financial markets absorb geopolitical shocks through short term volatility without fully abandoning long term confidence in global economic integration.

Analysis

The stability of the US dollar amid escalating geopolitical tensions highlights a critical feature of contemporary global markets. While energy prices and regional conflicts generate significant short term volatility, currency markets remain anchored by expectations of monetary policy stability and eventual diplomatic resolution.

The current environment is characterized by three overlapping dynamics. First, geopolitical risk is elevated due to sustained conflict in the Middle East and uncertainty surrounding diplomatic negotiations. Second, energy markets are highly sensitive to supply disruptions, producing rapid price fluctuations. Third, central bank policy expectations continue to play a stabilizing role in currency valuation.

The anticipated meeting between the United States and China represents a key focal point for market sentiment, as investors look for signals of broader strategic coordination or de escalation. However, the underlying structural tensions in the global system remain unresolved.

Ultimately, the current stability of the dollar should not be interpreted as a sign of reduced risk, but rather as evidence that markets are temporarily balancing competing expectations of conflict, diplomacy, and monetary policy. In such an environment, volatility in commodities and geopolitical headlines may continue, even as major currencies appear relatively stable on the surface.

With information from Reuters.

Source link

As U.S.-Iran ceasefire deadline nears, uncertainty hangs over possible talks

Last-minute ceasefire talks between the United States and Iran looked uncertain Tuesday as a two-week truce was set to expire and both countries warned that, without a deal, they were prepared to resume fighting.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance, expected to lead U.S. negotiators if talks continue in Pakistan, remained in Washington on Tuesday, a White House official said. And Pakistan, which has been urging both sides to return to Islamabad, said it was still awaiting confirmation on whether Iran would participate.

Earlier in the day, two regional officials said Washington and Tehran had signaled they would hold a second round of talks, with Vance leading the U.S. team and Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf as its top negotiator. Both spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief reporters.

But Pakistan’s information minister, Attaullah Tarar, said later Tuesday on X that Iran had not formally confirmed its participation, which was set to expire Wednesday.

Vance had policy meetings scheduled at the White House on Wednesday morning, said a White House official who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The vice president’s office and the White House did not immediately respond to messages asking whether Vance still intends to travel to Pakistan.

Trump says he doesn’t favor extending ceasefire

Both sides remain dug in rhetorically. President Trump has warned that “lots of bombs” will “start going off” if there’s no agreement before the ceasefire deadline, and Iran’s chief negotiator said that Tehran has “new cards on the battlefield” that haven’t yet been revealed.

The ceasefire, which began April 8, could be extended if talks resume, though Trump said in an interview Tuesday with CNBC: “Well, I don’t want to do that.”

“We don’t have that much time,” Trump said, adding that Iran “had a choice” and “they have to negotiate.”

White House officials have said that Vance would lead the American delegation, but Iran hasn’t said who it might send. Iranian state television on Tuesday broadcast a message saying that “no delegation from Iran has visited Islamabad … so far.”

U.S. says its forces board sanctioned oil tanker

On Tuesday, the U.S. said its forces boarded an oil tanker previously sanctioned for smuggling Iranian crude oil in Asia. The Pentagon said in a social media post that U.S. forces boarded the M/T Tifani “without incident.”

The U.S. military did not say where the vessel had been boarded, though ship-tracking data showed the Tifani in the Indian Ocean between Sri Lanka and Indonesia on Tuesday. The Pentagon statement added that “international waters are not a refuge for sanctioned vessels.”

The U.S. military on Sunday seized an Iranian container ship, the first interception under a blockade of Iranian ports. Iran’s joint military command called the armed boarding an act of piracy and a violation of the ceasefire.

Strait of Hormuz control key to negotiations

The U.S. imposed the blockade to pressure Tehran into ending its stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping lane through which 20% of the world’s natural gas and crude oil transits in peacetime.

Iran’s grip on the strait has sent oil prices soaring. Brent crude, the international standard, was trading at close to $95 per barrel on Tuesday, up more than 30% from Feb. 28, the day that Israel and the U.S. attacked Iran to start the war.

Before the war began, the Strait of Hormuz had been fully open to international shipping. Trump has demanded that vessels again be allowed to transit unimpeded.

European Union transportation ministers were meeting Tuesday in Brussels to discuss how to protect consumers after the head of the International Energy Agency warned that Europe has “ maybe six weeks ” of jet fuel supplies remaining.

Over the weekend, Iran said that it had received new proposals from Washington, but also suggested that a wide gap remains between the sides. Issues that derailed the last round of negotiations included Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, its regional proxies and the strait.

Qalibaf on Tuesday accused the United States of wanting Iran to surrender.

“We do not accept negotiations under the shadow of threats,” he wrote in an X post.

Pakistan hopeful talks will proceed

Pakistani officials have expressed confidence that Iran will also send a delegation to resume talks that mark the highest-level negotiations between the U.S. and Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The first round April 11 and 12 ended without an agreement.

Pakistan said Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar met Tuesday with the acting U.S. ambassador in Islamabad to urge a ceasefire extension. Dar also met with the ambassador from China, a key trading partner with Iran.

Security has been tightened across Pakistan’s capital, where authorities have deployed thousands of personnel and increased patrols along routes leading to the airport.

Israel jails soldiers for defacing Jesus statue in Lebanon

Israel’s military said Tuesday it has sentenced two soldiers to 30 days in jail and removed them from combat duty for smashing a statue of Jesus Christ in Lebanon. Images of an Israeli soldier with a sledgehammer smashing the statue’s head emerged over the weekend, bringing widespread condemnation.

Israel said one of the soldiers being punished hammered the statue to the ground. The other filmed the destruction. The Israeli military said it replaced the statue.

Meanwhile, historic diplomatic talks between Israel and Lebanon were set to resume on Thursday in Washington, an Israeli, a Lebanese and a U.S. official said. All three spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the behind-the-scenes negotiations.

The Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors met last week for the first direct diplomatic talks in decades. Israel says the talks are aimed at disarming Hezbollah and reaching a peace agreement with Lebanon.

A 10-day ceasefire began on Friday in Lebanon, where fighting between Israel and Iranian-backed Hezbollah militants broke out two days after the U.S. and Israel launched joint strikes on Iran to start the war. Fighting in Lebanon has killed more than 2,290 people.

Since the war started, at least 3,375 people have been killed in Iran, according to authorities. Additionally, 23 people have died in Israel and more than a dozen in Gulf Arab states. Fifteen Israeli soldiers in Lebanon and 13 U.S. service members throughout the region have been killed.

Ahmed, Gambrell and Bynum write for the Associated Press. Gambrell reported from Dubai, and Bynum reported from Savannah Ga. AP journalists Michelle Price, Aamer Madhani and Darlene Superville in Washington; Samy Magdy in Cairo; David Rising and Huizhong Wu in Bangkok; Sam McNeil in Brussels; Julia Frankel in New York; Bill Barrow in Atlanta and Russ Bynum in Savannah, Ga., contributed to this report.

Source link

More Britons opt to holiday in UK this summer amid uncertainty over flights | Travel & leisure

Holiday companies have predicted a surge in bookings for UK summer breaks after a jump in interest from Britons fearful of flight cancellations linked to the Iran war.

Summer bookings are expected to rise in the coming weeks amid warnings of possible jet fuel shortages and resulting cancellations by airlines across Europe.

Raoul Fraser, the chief executive of Lovat, a holiday park operator with sites across south-west England, said traffic to its website had increased after reports of jet fuel warnings last week. “It is definitely having a positive impact for us,” he said.

“Our holidays bookings are up over 30% this year. It is a little bit like Covid, when people couldn’t get away and now they just want the certainty of a nice holiday in the UK.”

The holiday resort company Butlin’s, which has sites at Bognor Regis, Minehead and Skegness, said it was seeing “strong growth for the summer school holidays”.

However, its chief executive, Jon Hendry Pickup, said many families were still booking their holidays closer to the time, due to travel uncertainty and cost pressures.

“Normally we get somewhere in the region of 15% to 20% of people booking a holiday in the last four weeks before they come. Now it is roughly double that,” he said.

Jeremy Hipkiss, the managing director of the holiday parks company Landal UK, said: “Increasingly guests are choosing destinations closer to home that are easy to reach by car or public transport, giving them greater control over their plans.”

Hipkiss said that Landal’s parks in Cornwall, Scotland and Lincolnshire were “particularly popular”.

Peter Munk, the chief executive of Willerby, a specialist caravan manufacturer based in Hull, added that the cost of living pressure was also putting people off overseas travel. Inflation, which was steady at 3% in February, is expected to increase after the Iran war drove up global energy costs.

“It’s about the reality of inflation kicking off again,” he said. “Most people still want a holiday, so it might be that they have fewer days or move closer to home and not have that dream holiday.”

Graph of jet fuel prices in 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 and 2026

Travel spending fell in March for the first time since the pandemic travel restrictions lifted in 2021, dropping by 3.3%, according to data from Barclays. Spending on travel agents fell by 4.6%, airlines by 4.1%, and public transport by 2.9%.

However, Sinead O’Connor, a travel analyst at the research company Mintel, said even with the cost of living pressures, appetite for holidays remained strong.

She said its research showed 52% of Britons surveyed planned to holiday in the UK, with 49% heading overseas.

“We expect the value of the domestic holiday market to grow by about 7% this year, reaching close to £14bn and to outpace growth in overseas travel,” she said.

The overseas travel market is forecast to grow by 4.8% this year to £64.3bn, Mintel said.

Fears are rising that the oil crisis triggered by the conflict in the Middle East could lead to fuel shortages in Europe this summer.

This week, the head of the global energy body warned that Europe only has six weeks’ worth of jet fuel supplies before shortages will hit.

Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency, said there would be flight cancellations if oil supplies were not restored within the coming weeks.

On Friday, the International Air Transport Association’s director general, Willie Walsh, said flights in Europe could be cancelled because of a lack of jet fuel starting from the end of May.

“Along with doing everything possible to secure alternative supply lines, it’s important that authorities have well-communicated and well-coordinated plans in place in case rationing becomes necessary, including for slot relief,” he added.

This month, Michael O’Leary, the chief executive of Ryanair, warned that Britain would be the most exposed to jet fuel shortages because it relies on Kuwait for about 25% of its supply.

Airlines around the world have already been forced to cancel some flights.

Last week, jet fuel averaged at $197.83 a barrel, according to the International Airport Transport Association, more than double the average last year.

Munk added that reports of delays at European border crossings, triggered by the EU’s new entry-exit system (EES), was also putting people off from booking overseas holidays this summer.

The airport industry has told the European Commission that the system, which requires people from the UK and other non-EU countries to submit biometric data before entering the bloc, was causing delays of up to three hours for passengers.

Last week, more than 100 passengers missed an easyJet flight from Milan to Manchester because of delays triggered by EES checks.

Source link