united states

Ninety-six games in the books, just eight more matches to come. FIFA World Cup 2026 has lived up to its billing as the biggest of all time, and may yet end up in the conversation as the best tournament, too.

We’re down to the final eight nations with hopes of winning the trophy – four of them for the first time – while the other four are aiming to write a new glorious chapter in their football history.

But now the last 16 and the first rest day of the competition are out of the way, who has the best chance of being crowned champions in New York/New Jersey on July 19?

Al Jazeera ranks the contenders for the title:

8. Switzerland

It feels like a place in the last eight for the first time in 72 years is already a win for the Swiss, and don’t expect them to make further history.

Murat Yakin’s men benefitted from a kind draw which pitted them against the cohosts Canada, Bosnia and Qatar, and they only managed to ensure top-spot in that group by withstanding late pressure from the Maple Leafs after being held to a 1-1 draw by Qatar in their opening match.

They overcame Algeria without too much alarm in the last 32 but needed penalties to eliminate an off-form Colombia in the last round, with the Swiss failing to register a shot on target after the 32nd minute of normal time.

The potential loss of speedy 20-year-old Johan Manzambi, one of the tournament’s breakout stars, to a knee injury in training will diminish their hopes against Argentina, and even if they did manage to shock the world and send Messi and co home early, the chances are they would struggle in a semifinal against either England or Norway, let alone a final against France or Spain.

7. Morocco

When Morocco flew out of the blocks in the opening 45 minutes of their Group C game with Brazil, the world thought this was a new and improved version of the Atlas Lions which had made a shock run to the last-four in Qatar, however they failed to put that game to bed, despite their dominance.

A 1-0 win over Scotland followed in their second match before twice having to come from behind to see-off Haiti in the final gropup match day.

They then played the Netherlands in the last 32, and although they recovered from falling behind in the final 20 minutes to force extra-time with a goal in stoppage-time, they needed penalties to progress from another game they might well have won.

In the last 16, the played their best match of the tournament against Canada. The North African side was clinical, scoring three second-half goals to set up a France quarterfinal meeting.

They will need all that and more to avoid a one-sided defeat against France, who knocked them out in the last-four in 2022.

While only a handful of the XI beaten four years ago are likely to feature, the loss of leading scorer Ismael Saibari will also not help their cause against a nation where six of their squad were born. Indeed teenage midfielder Ayyoub Bouaddi captained the French under-21 side in a European Championship qualifier just 101 days before he is set to face Les Bleus in Boston, but switched allegiance on the eve of the tournament.

If Morocco are able to rediscover their form and spring an almighty surprise to see-off their old foes then all bets are off. They already know what it takes to beat Spain or Belgium, they did so in Qatar, while a potential final would not only make history as the first African and Arab country to take part in the showpiece, it might provide the wave of momentum which takes them all the way to the trophy itself.

6. Belgium

Belgium would have been at the No 8 ranking a few days ago but they had a reshuffle against the US and looked far better than they did in any of the group stage games or the first 75-minutes or so against Senegal in the Round of 32.

Inspired by the attacking play of Leandro Trossard, coach Rudi Garcia might have stumbled across a formula which works, leaving Kevin De Bruyne on the sidelines for the first time in 38 Belgium games and having Jeremy Doku and Romelo Lukaku as other potential game-changers off the bench.

The Red Devils certainly began slowly and only a 5-1 thumping of New Zealand in their final group game saw them through as group winners on goals scored, after failing to beat Egypt or Iran.

They made even harder work against Senegal, who should have been out of sight long before the comeback, when Lukaku and Youri Tielemans capitalised on some slack defending to score in the final four minutes of normal time before the latter dispatched a penalty five minutes from the end of extra-time to complete the unlikely turnaround.

Fuelled by a sense of injustice at the reversal of the ban for USA player Folarin Balogun they were far better against the host nation, but again benefitted from some poor defending, something which they cannot expect against Spain’s miserly defence.

It feels like the end of the road, and an era, for Belgium’s ageing golden generation, and if they did somehow get past Spain, then France would surely represent an insurmountable hurdle in the last four anyway.

5. Norway

We’re officially in uncharted territory for these dark horses. They came into the tournament never having won a knockout match at the World Cup – now they are eyeing a third straight.

Ruthlessly efficient is one way to describe Norway’s passage to the last eight. They arrived at their first World Cup in 28 years with a plan, and they have they stuck to it.

After an opening group game victory against Iraq, the pivotal match of their summer was always likely to be the second group game against Senegal. They won it 3-2. It ensured their passage to the knockout stages as runners-up and allowed Stale Solbakken to rest 10 players for the group finale against France.

Much was made of the decision not to try and match-up to Les Bleus for a potential top-spot in Group I, but despite the 4-1 defeat, it still looks like a great call.

Norway left it late before seeing-off Ivory Coast in the round of 32. Against Brazil in the last 16, they also left it late but finished strong with two goals in the final 11 minutes from Erling Haaland.

The 25-year-old has scored seven goals from just 18 shots across four games in this tournament, though the game management of midfielder Martin Odegaard, particularly against Brazil, has gone under the radar. The Arsenal player has three assists already, the same as left-sided super-sub Andreas Schjelderup, while corner taker Patrick Berg has two more.

Quarterfinal opponents England will have to figure out a way to deal with crosses into the middle better than they have done in their previous games and their management of Odegaard, and their own fitness levels, could be key to determining which European nation goes through to the semifinals to face, in all likelihood, Argentina.

However for all their attacking efficiency, Norway have kept one clean sheet in their past dozen matches and, were it not for the heroics of keeper Orjan Nyland, they might already be on their way home.

Harry Kane and Jude Bellingham will fancy their chances against defenders Kristoffer Ajer and Torbjorn Heggem and we could be in for another ding-dong battle with goals galore in sapping conditions, rather than any cagey defensive battles.

4. Argentina

Algeria, Austria, Jordan, Cape Verde, Egypt, Switzerland. It’s not a bad run for a defending champion, is it?

However it has been far from plain sailing for the Albiceleste, who have had to lean heavily on the 39-year-old legs and ageless football brain of Lionel Messi just to make it to the quarterfinals.

Messi leads the Golden Boot race with eight goals – though it should be double figures already with two penalty misses to his name.

Staring at the end of his World Cup career and trailing Egypt 2-0 with 11 minutes remaining, Messi put the nation on his back and registered his first assist of the tournament as Cristian Romero halved the deficit before thumping the equaliser himself four minutes later before the turnaround was completed in controversial fashion in stoppage-time.

The outpouring of emotion from Messi at fulltime showed just how close the two-time winners came to being eliminated, and expect them to try and learn their lesson against Switzerland, who possess less of the counterattacking threat than either of the African teams, especially if Johan Manzambi is ruled-out by the knee injury sustained in training.

Expect a potential semifinal with England to be a massive occasion – it’s a rivalry which runs deep, on and off the pitch. While this Argentina side boast extraordinary experience and clearly demonstrated their hunger, their starting XI against Egypt was the second oldest they have ever fielded in a World Cup, and they continue to look suspect at the back, something that Harry Kane, or even potentially Haaland –  should Norway get through – would be sure to test.

If it is to be a rematch against France in the final – as many predicted before and during the competition – then we can look forward to another extraordinary climax, with Les Bleus set on revenge for their penalty shootout heartache in Qatar after a pulsating 3-3 draw.

Who knows what mastery Messi is capable of summoning on any given day, but this France team is older, wiser and extra-motivated to land their third title, and it would take something extraordinary to stop them.

3. England

The Three Lions were seeded fourth in this tournament and, as a result, a run to the semifinals should be the minimum expectation for Thomas Tuchel’s men. It also comes with the added bonus of avoiding France or Spain until the final.

England capped off an up and down World Cup in the round of 16, recording one of their most memorable wins of all-time to overcome Mexico in the cauldron of the Azteca, playing out 58 minutes with 10 men and holding on for a 3-2 victory.

Norway will be a very different proposition in the sweltering conditions of Miami, and England have the most potential injury disruption of any side, with fitness issues over the likes of key players Declan Rice, Bukayo Saka and Reece James while stars Harry Kane and Jude Bellingham know a booking in the quarterfinal would rule them out of any potential semifinal.

If they can keep Haaland quiet and prevent Odegaard from dictating the play, they will fancy their chances of reaching the last four for the fourth time.

If they do, and with Kane and Bellingham available, don’t discount them winning it to reach their first World Cup final since 1966.

Switzerland would hold little fear for the now tournament-savvy Three Lions in a potential semifinal, while an ageing Argentina side have been caused issues by the width, trickery and counter attacking threat of both Cape Verde and Egypt in the past two rounds, opening the door of opportunity for the likes of Saka, Anthony Gordon and Marcus Rashford to exploit, should England make it to the last four.

France or Spain in the final might be a different matter, however.

Les Bleus knocked England out in the quarterfinal in Qatar after an epic encounter while Spain bested them in the dramatic Euro 2024 final.

There would be the motivation of revenge, of course, but France’s front four would likely cause England’s makeshift back-line plenty of issues. The Spain game would likely be more equal, though reliant on England to win the midfield battle and for whoever plays full-back to try to keep Lamine Yamal quiet.

2. Spain

It’s not how you start it’s how you finish. Spain did not begin well, having to settle for a goalless draw with Cape Verde – although hindsight makes that result look a lot more respectable.

They made light work of Saudi Arabia in the group stage and then Austria in the round of 32, although they had to grind out victories over Uruguay in their group finale and then Portugal in the last 16 courtesy of a stoppage-time winner.

Their hopes are built on their defence and they have not conceded a goal in the tournament. Spain have six straight World Cup clean sheets dating back to Qatar 2022, the longest streak in history – and they have allowed just five shots on target across their opening five matches.

At the other end, Mikel Oyarzabal has bagged four goals but he’s missed a few chances to truly cement himself in the Golden Boot race and while their defence and midfield look solid enough, the X-factor Lamine Yamal has been visible in flashes only.

The European Champions should have enough to see-off Belgium in the quarters, despite the Red Devils’ improved showing against the USA, but a semifinal against, in all likelihood, France, will be a different matter.

While teenage defender Pau Cubarsi looks at home on the biggest stage of all, he’s yet to face the kind of test that Kylian Mbappe, Michael Olise and Ousmane Dembele will pose, while either Desire Doue or Bradley Barcola would cause problems for Spain’s right-back, whether Luis de la Fuente opts for Pedro Porro or Marcos Llorente.

If they make the final, Spain will be favourites to win it, but ‘if’ remains the biggest two-letter word in all of sports.

1. France

France are the class of the field with a fearsome foursome in attack and a defence which, although it hasn’t really been tested yet, has only allowed two goals in five matches.

The most uncomfortable France have looked in any game was the opening half of their opening game against Senegal, when Mbappe looked off the pace and Senegal were guilty of missing good chances.

In every match since, it has been largely plain sailing: seeing off Iraq and Norway’s B-team to top the group, then sweeping Sweden aside and keeping their composure to see-off Paraguay in a feisty round of 16 encounter.

Morocco will be a big step-up, but with Mbappe eyeing both the Golden Boot and all-time World Cup scoring record, and Olise, Dembele, Doue and Barcola all providing a threat across the pitch, they will fancy their chances of extending their unbeaten record against the Atlas Lions to seven matches and will hope Olise avoids another caution which would rule him out of the semifinal after a booking against Paraguay.

Spain, and in particular their defence, would pose a different challenge, but one which Didier Deschamps’ men would back themselves to overcome, while a potential grudge match against Argentina or England in the final would provide the greatest stage of all for some of the greatest players of all to shine.

Don’t be surprised if the all-time World Cup scoring record is broken in the showpiece, a fitting finale to a summer for the ages.

Published on
09/07/2026 – 13:31 GMT+2

In a draft regulation obtained by Euronews and due to be presented in September, the European Commission plans to tighten access to the EU market by allowing public authorities to exclude foreign companies that present risks of interference from public procurement.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The draft proposal comes amid heightened geopolitical tensions, with concerns over data leaks from sensitive public services to Beijing and Washington and as well as the weaponisation of the EU’s dependence on rare earths and technology products from China.

The draft document proposes that “public buyers shall take appropriate measures, where relevant at any stage of the procurement procedure, from planning and market consultation to contract award and execution, to ensure the protection of the security and public safety interests of the Union.”

The document adds that risks to security or public safety in a public contract may arise from firms whose “ownership, control, or financing structure” bears “risks of undue interference or influence over it,” as well as companies whose “exposure to third-country legislation […] may compel disclosure of sensitive information or interference with contract performance.”

Finally, public buyers would be allowed to introduce a European preference in public procurement, although the draft regulation would not make it compulsory.

Such provisions could confirm the EU’s protectionist shift towards a “Made in Europe” strategy, which the EU executive already proposed last March for strategic sectors such as clean technologies, the automotive industry and energy-intensive industries.

The risks of foreign interference and data transfer have become more acute in recent years, with the US and China both adopting legislation allowing them to request that companies under their jurisdiction transfer data stored in the EU.

Some European governments are already taking steps to mitigate these risks. In April, the French government ended its contract with Microsoft to protect French health data, and in June, it replaced US tech company Palantir with French company ChapsVision for the processing of sensitive information held by the the country’s domestic intelligence service, the Directorate General for Internal Security.

Over the last few years, several EU countries, including Germany, France, Italy and Denmark, have also cancelled or denied public contracts to the Chinese telecoms giant Huawei over security concerns.

The draft regulation also seeks to protect “critical infrastructure, critical supply chains, critical technologies or essential services, resilience against physical, cyber, or hybrid threats, and prevention and protection against risks of their disruption including due to harmful strategic dependencies on third-country suppliers.”

Last year, China cut off the EU from exports of rare earth minerals, which are essential for green technologies and the defence sector. It also stopped the Dutch-based Nexperia, owned by China’s Wingtech, from importing Chinese chips essential to the EU’s car industry.

The US military says it has struck 90 targets across Iran, hitting ports and infrastructure along the Strait of Hormuz. Iran says at least 14 people have been killed in two nights of attacks, and that it has responded with drone strikes on US-linked sites in the Gulf region.

The United States and Iran have traded attacks for a second day, straining their fragile ceasefire further after US President Donald Trump said the truce was “over”.

The US military said late on Wednesday that the attacks were aimed at Iran’s “ability to threaten the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz”.

The US struck approximately 90 military targets, including missile and drone storage as well as logistics sites along Iran’s coastline, said the Central Command (CENTCOM), which oversees US military operations in the Middle East.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump called the US attacks “retribution for yesterday’s bombing of ships by Iran. If it happens again, it will get much worse!”

The latest attacks come a day after the US said it hit more than 80 targets in Iran in response to Iranian attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Thursday it carried out attacks on “key infrastructure and facilities” at bases used by the US military in Arifjan and Ali Al Salem in Kuwait, and Juffair and Sheikh Isa in Bahrain in response to the latest US bombardment.

The Iranian army later said its forces targeted a Patriot missile system in Kuwait, a satellite antenna in Qatar and US military fuel depots in Bahrain.

Kuwait’s Ministry of Defence said it was intercepting missiles and drones, while Qatar issued an “elevated security threat” alert.

The renewed fighting threatens to undermine a memorandum of understanding (MoU) the two sides agreed last month to extend an April ceasefire and gradually reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping.

The attacks come a day after Trump said the ceasefire with Iran was “over” and criticised the Iranian leadership. However, he left the door open to more talks and suggested that any strikes would end quickly.

Speaking to reporters on board Air Force One as he travelled back to the US after attending the NATO summit in Turkiye, Trump said the Iranian side had “called a little while ago” and that they wanted “to make a deal so badly”.

US attacks across Iran

US strikes hit a railway bridge in Iran’s northeast, according to several official media, and the news agency IRNA reported strikes on a military base in coastal Bushehr, which hosts the nation’s only civilian nuclear power plant.

The Iranian railway (IRIR) said the train service on the Tehran-Mashhad line had been temporarily suspended as a result.

It said technical teams were on site to repair the damaged section so that the rail service could resume as soon as possible, adding that buses had been arranged to transport affected passengers.

Warplanes hovered over Iran’s Kish Island, and explosions rocked the port cities of Bandar Abbas, Konarak and Chabahar, part of which lost electricity, IRNA reported.

At least three people were killed in an attack on the outskirts of Ahvaz, capital of the southwestern province of Khuzestan, IRNA reported, citing the deputy governor of the region.

At least one firefighter was killed in an attack on an airport facility in Iranshahr, IRNA reported.

Iran’s Health Ministry said at least 14 people were killed and 78 others injured over the past two days.

Calls for diplomacy

In mid-June, the US and Iran signed an MoU to extend their ceasefire. It also led to the lifting of the US naval blockade of Iran and the gradual reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The MoU came following mediation by Pakistan and Qatar, which served as a launch point for 60 days of talks on more intractable issues, including the future of Iran’s nuclear programme, the administration of the Strait of Hormuz and access to billions of dollars in frozen Iranian funds.

Since US-Israeli strikes triggered war in February, Tehran has effectively blocked the strait, threatening to hit vessels that deviate from its authorised route.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar Atas said the US and Iran are “stuck in an equation – almost a deadlock” over the Strait of Hormuz.

“For the Americans, they say that Iran will not have control over the Strait of Hormuz. For the Iranians, control of the strait is indispensable.”

He said Iran sees control over the strait as the “ultimate deterrent, and if it gives that up, then it loses its negotiating position” with the US.

The US hopes that by targeting infrastructure that affects Iran’s ability to control the strait, including maritime traffic control centres, it will be forced to “return to the MoU”, Scott Uehlinger, a former senior CIA officer, told Al Jazeera.

United Nations chief Antonio Guterres called “on all parties to exercise maximum restraint”, as did Pakistan.

Qatari ⁠Prime ⁠Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani told Iranian Foreign ⁠Minister Abbas Araghchi in a phone ⁠call on Thursday that Iran and the US should commit to diplomacy.

Sheikh Mohammed, who is also the foreign minister, said Washington and Tehran should implement the MoU to end the war.

Iran said the two officials had spoken over the phone and “underscored the importance of using diplomatic means to resolve regional issues”.

Trump’s name was removed from the centre’s facade and signage last month, after a judge ordered its removal.

A US appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump’s name must remain off the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, while the organisation appeals an earlier ruling that found a name change illegal.

Trump’s name was removed from the centre’s facade and signage last month after US District Judge Christopher Cooper ordered the removal and blocked Trump’s plans to close the centre for renovations. An appeal against this ruling was struck down by a three-judge panel on Wednesday.

It is another setback for the centre’s board of trustees, of which Trump is chairman, in a saga that began earlier this year when the Kennedy Center became: “The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts.”

The conspicuous addition, and ensuing legal battle, became symbolic of Trump’s broader push to imprint his legacy – and, in this case, his actual name – on the nation’s capital in his final term.

The decision by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied the Trump administration’s request to pause the lower court order in a lawsuit brought by Democratic Representative Joyce Beatty, a Kennedy Center board member.

“Today’s ruling again affirms that this administration’s efforts to rename the Kennedy Center were unlawful,” Beatty said in a statement.

“His name no longer desecrates this sacred memorial, which belongs to the American people.”

The panel of judges wrote on Wednesday that the board of trustees’ request “failed to show how they will be irreparably injured” if Trump’s name remains off the building through the appeal process.

The board had argued that the removal “threatens to impede” fundraising efforts, but the judges found that claim came without the support of “specific facts or evidence”.

The Kennedy Center did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment from the Associated Press news agency.

When Trump first took office in 2025, he replaced the Kennedy Center’s board of trustees, who then named him chairman. His name was quickly added to the building, but a federal judge then ruled that the name change was illegal, prompting the ensuing legal battle.

The order comes three years after a jury found out Trump has sexually abused and defamed the writer.

A federal judge has ruled that writer E Jean Carroll can collect the more than $5.8m that US President Donald Trump was ordered to pay after a jury found he sexually abused and defamed her, clearing the way for the money to be released after the US Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal.

Judge Lewis A Kaplan ruled on Wednesday that Carroll can be paid the original $5m award granted to her by the jury, along with interest that has accrued since the verdict in 2023. Carroll’s lawyers had asked for the funds to be released after the Supreme Court refused on June 29 to hear Trump’s appeal.

“This is the end of the line,” Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan wrote in a court filing, adding, “It is time for him to pay Carroll.”

Less than an hour after the judge issued the order, Trump appealed it.

“The American People stand with President Trump as they demand an immediate end to all of the Witch Hunts, including the Democrat-funded travesty of the Carroll Hoaxes,” a spokesperson for Trump’s lawyers said in a statement.

Carroll first accused Trump in 2019, writing in a memoir that he had sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan in 1996. Trump denied the allegation, saying he had never met Carroll, accusing her of lying to sell books and for political reasons, and calling the claim a “hoax.”

Carroll sued him for defamation over those comments later that year, accusing him of damaging her reputation by suggesting she had lied for personal gain. She filed a second lawsuit in 2022, accusing Trump of battery/sexual abuse and defamation over another denial he posted on Truth Social in 2022, again calling the allegation a hoax.

In 2023, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll and for defaming her through his 2022 statements. It did not determine that Trump was liable for rape.

A second jury awarded her $83.3m in 2024 for the defamatory statements Trump made in 2019 when he was president, after she first went public with the allegation.

Trump has continued to fight both verdicts.

After the Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal, He called the lawsuit “a Fake Case” and pledged to continue fighting what he described as a “Weaponisation and Lawfare Case.”

On Wednesday, Trump’s lawyers filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision not to hear the appeal. They argued that Trump would suffer “irreparable harm” if the money is paid out, because Carroll has said she intends to donate it, which would make it difficult to recover the funds if the verdict is later overturned.

Trump is also still appealing the $83.3m judgment, arguing his 2019 comments were made while he was president and are therefore protected by presidential immunity. The Department of Justice has also launched a criminal investigation into Carroll over whether she committed perjury during her testimony.

On Tuesday, two tankers were attacked as they transited the Strait of Hormuz via a passage in Omani waters. Gulf countries responded by sharply condemning the attacks and blaming Iran. The United States then launched attacks on Iranian territory, to which Tehran responded by striking Bahrain and Kuwait. US President Donald Trump has now said the memorandum of understanding (MoU) that Iran and the US signed is void.

This latest escalation illustrates how the Strait of Hormuz has become the central issue in the US-Israel war with Iran that began on February 28. Disagreements over the strait’s future have proven to be the hardest to resolve in the US-Iranian negotiations, as questions about Iran’s nuclear programme have been put to the side.

The disruption of traffic in the Strait of Hormuz has an immediate and costly price tag attached, for Iran, for its Gulf neighbours, and for a global economy that has spent four and a half months absorbing the largest oil supply shock in the history of the modern market.

Iran’s leverage is also its liability

For Tehran, the strait is its strongest card – one that is also incredibly costly. Since the war began, Iranian forces have mined the strait, attacked vessels and cut traffic through the passage by roughly 95 percent. This has led to what the International Energy Agency’s Fatih Birol has called “the largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market”.

That leverage is real: about a fifth of the world’s oil and a fifth of its liquefied natural gas (LNG) normally move through Hormuz, and no amount of Gulf pipeline capacity can fully replace it.

But Iran has effectively been strangling its own lifeline along with everyone else’s. Iranian crude, once sold for $3 a barrel less than international benchmarks, is now selling at a 20 percent discount. The country’s oil exports collapsed by more than 90 percent in May as US naval enforcement squeezed its shadow fleet.

Even before the war, the World Bank projected that Iran’s economy would contract in 2026. The impact of the collapse of oil sales will be far-reaching because of the closure.

A 60-day US Treasury waiver issued on June 22, permitting Iran to sell oil at full market rates through August 21, but has now been renounced following the attacks on Tuesday.

This is the economic backdrop to Iran’s insistence on asserting joint authority over the strait and floating a system of transit fees or “service charges” for passing ships. Washington has made clear that Iran cannot charge tolls in international waters governed by the right of transit passage under the Law of the Sea.

For Tehran, the dispute is not really about toll revenue, which would be rather modest when compared to its oil income; it is about establishing precedent and sovereignty over a chokepoint that is its only real point of leverage once sanctions relief and frozen-asset release are negotiated.

The latter is itself contested: Iran wants half of an estimated $25bn in frozen assets released immediately, while the US has resisted. A separate $300bn reconstruction fund floated in the MoU has already become a political flashpoint in Washington.

The Gulf is paying for a crisis it didn’t start

For the Gulf states, the Strait of Hormuz crisis has meant improvising around geography. Saudi Arabia has redirected crude through its roughly 1,200km (746-mile) East-West pipeline to the Red Sea port of Yanbu, and the UAE has leaned on the Habshan-to-Fujairah line to the Gulf of Oman.

Together, though, these pipelines carry a fraction of what Hormuz once did, at best 7 million barrels a day of design capacity for the Saudi line and under 1.8 million for the Emirati one, against roughly 20 million barrels a day that transited the strait before the war.

Both alternatives have themselves come under attack: Iranian strikes cut the East-West pipeline’s throughput by an estimated 700,000 barrels a day in April, and drone attacks disrupted loading at Fujairah. Seaborne crude exports from Gulf states excluding Iran fell by roughly half between February and March.

Qatar, host to the talks between Iran and the US, has its own acute stake: its entire LNG export industry depends on the Strait of Hormuz, and it has been pushing the hardest for a settlement.

Oman, drawn into Iran’s sovereignty claim as co-owner of the strait’s territorial waters, is caught between commercial interest in a resolution and a legal position, as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that publicly rejects Iranian tolls. Iraq, highly dependent on its Gulf terminals, has quietly explored an export route north through Turkiye.

None of these workarounds are cheap, and all of them are political as well as commercial, tying Gulf capitals’ economic fortunes to a settlement between the US and Iran.

The rest of the world: Insurance bills and inflation

Beyond the region, the crisis has been transmitted mainly through two channels: price and insurance. Higher oil prices are passed on to various consumer goods down supply chains and suppress growth. According to estimates, the global economy can slow down to 2.8 percent in 2026 from 3.4 percent last year due to the closure of the strait.

Insurance for Hormuz transit, which cost roughly 0.25 percent of a vessel’s value before the war, has spiked as high as 8 percent, turning a single large tanker’s coverage into a $3m-to-$8m expense. Shipping lines including CMA CGM and Hapag-Lloyd have layered on conflict surcharges of $1,500 to $2,000 per twenty-foot equivalent unit (TEU). Washington’s own International Development Finance Corporation has had to step in as, in effect, an insurer of last resort, offering up to $40bn in reinsurance capacity to keep vessels moving.

China has absorbed the largest share of this pain: It takes close to 40 percent of its crude imports through the Strait of Hormuz and buys more than 80 percent of Iran’s oil exports outright, making it simultaneously Tehran’s most important customer and one of the war’s most exposed bystanders. Japan, which sources 70 percent of its Middle Eastern crude via the strait, has already tapped strategic reserves.

For import-dependent economies across Asia and Europe, the strait’s fate is not an abstraction of Middle East diplomacy; it shows up directly in fuel, freight and fertiliser prices.

Oil and gas dominate the headlines, but roughly 30 percent of the world’s seaborne fertiliser trade also passes through Hormuz.

The World Bank’s fertiliser price index has risen more than 12 percent in the first quarter of 2026 and has since climbed to its highest level since October 2022, driven largely by the closure. The Food and Agriculture Organization has warned that the resulting scarcity of urea and other nitrogen products will show up as lower yields through the 2026–2027 growing season, hitting import-dependent and already food-insecure countries in Africa and Asia the hardest.

Unlike an oil-price spike, which mainly stings at the pump, a fertiliser shortfall reaches into next year’s harvest, meaning an unresolved Hormuz standoff carries a slower-moving but longer tail of economic damage than crude prices alone suggest.

That is the arithmetic weighing on both sides. A deal that reopens the Strait of Hormuz without resolving who controls it risks recreating the same instability that shut it in the first place; one that concedes Iranian toll authority risks a precedent Washington and shipping nations will not accept. Until that circle is squared, the global economy is left pricing in a chokepoint that neither side can fully afford to keep closed, nor fully agree how to reopen.

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

US President Donald Trump says the US will ‘probably’ carry out another round of strikes on Iran on Wednesday night, following overnight strikes he said were launched in response to Iranian attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

Messi is the top goal scorer after tallying his eighth against Egypt, with Erling Haaland and Kylian Mbappe next best.

Argentina superstar Lionel Messi has, once again, taken the lead in the race for the World Cup’s Golden Boot award after scoring his eighth goal in his country’s thrilling 3-2 win over Egypt in the round of 16 on Tuesday.

Messi’s goal brought Argentina back on level terms after they were 2-0 down in the match in Atlanta, and also helped him break away from the rest of the pack.

For three days, French talisman Kylian Mbappe and Argentinian great Lionel Messi rubbed shoulders as the joint leaders – with seven goals apiece – in the race to be the tournament’s top goal scorer, but Haaland’s double in Norway’s round of 16 win against Brazil put him level with both on Sunday.

When the World Cup’s knockout stage began, Messi became the first to reach seven goals when Argentina beat Cape Verde on Friday, and Mbappe matched him a day later as France beat Paraguay.

England’s Harry Kane took his tally to six goals after scoring in England’s thrilling 3-2 win over Mexico late on Sunday.

Spain’s Mikel Oyarzabal and Mbappe’s teammate Ousmane Dembele are hot on their heels with four goals each.

Here’s everything you need to know about FIFA’s Golden Boot award:

What’s the FIFA Golden Boot award and how is it decided?

FIFA’s Golden Boot is awarded to the player with the most goals at the end of the tournament.

France’s Mbappe is the current holder after scoring eight goals in Qatar at the 2022 World Cup.

If two players are tied on the same number of goals at the end of the tournament, then the player with the most assists will win the award.

If those tiebreakers cannot split two players, then the Golden Boot is handed to the player who achieved their goals and assists in the least number of minutes.

Which players are the top goal scorers at World Cup 2026?

1. Lionel Messi (Argentina) – 8 goals, 1 assist
2. Kylian Mbappe (France) – 7 goals, 2 assists
3. Erling Haaland (Norway) – 7 goals, 0 assists
4. Harry Kane (England) – 6 goals, 1 assist
5. Ousmane Dembele (France) – 4 goals, 2 assists
6. Mikel Oyarzabal (Spain) – 4 goals, 1 assist

How many Golden Boot awards have current World Cup players won?

Mbappe, Kane and James Rodriguez are all looking to bag the top goal-scorer prize for a second time.

England’s Kane won the award in 2018 in Russia, while Colombia’s Rodriguez was the top scorer in 2014 in Brazil.

No player has ever won the award more than once.

Entering the quarterfinals, Mbappe gets his chance first to increase his goal tally when France plays Morocco on Thursday.

Which player has scored the most goals in a single World Cup?

French forward Just Fontaine holds the record after scoring an incredible 13 goals at the 1958 tournament in Sweden.

Sandor Kocsis scored 11 at the 1954 tournament in Switzerland, while West Germany’s Gerd Muller bagged 10 at the World Cup 1970 in Mexico.

Who has scored the most goals in FIFA World Cup history?

1. Lionel Messi (Argentina) – 21
2. Kylian Mbappe (France) – 19
3. Miroslav Klose (Germany) – 16
4. Ronaldo (Brazil) – 15
5. Harry Kane (England) and Gerd Muller (West Germany) – 14

Egypt head coach Hossam Hassan has called for players and reporters at the World Cup to speak out about the killing of children in Gaza and Palestine. Hassan made the comments after his team’s controversial 3-2 defeat to Argentina in the last 16.

An Argentina fan waves the Israeli flag during his team’s Round of 16 match against Egypt. Some viewed it as a provocation towards Egypt’s coach, Hossam Hassan, who dedicated Egypt’s first-ever World Cup knockout victory to the people of Gaza.

Air raids come after US revokes a waiver that allowed Iran to sell oil, citing the attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

‘Perhaps they wanted to keep the world champions in the competition,’ Hassan said after his team was knocked out.

Egypt coach Hossam Hassan claims his side was “cheated” out of a place in the World Cup quarterfinals after Argentina staged a stunning late comeback from 2-0 down to win 3-2 in a gripping last-16 match in Atlanta.

The Pharaohs started as underdogs but took the lead against the world champions within 15 minutes, which was doubled in the second half before Argentina walked away with the win on Tuesday.

“I do not want to put it nicely and talk about hard luck. We have been cheated unfairly today; we have suffered injustice,” Hassan said in an explosive post-match news conference.

Egypt had a Mostafa Zico goal ruled out when they were leading 1-0 as the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) intervened to spot a foul on Lisandro Martinez much earlier in the move.

Zico did then put Egypt on the brink of a place in the last eight for the first time by doubling their lead.

However, the defending champions hit back as Cristian Romero reduced the arrears before Lionel Messi, who had a first-half penalty saved, smashed in the equaliser with his eighth goal of the tournament.

The controversy did not end there, though, as in the buildup to Argentina’s winner scored by Enzo Fernandez, Egypt believe they should have instead been awarded a penalty for a pull by Alexis Mac Allister on Hamdy Fathy.

“We haven’t seen respect or fair play. There has not been respect or fair play,” Hassan said.

“A penalty was ruled out, was not even checked by VAR. A second goal was remarkably disallowed. There has not even been a VAR check when we have all seen the image of the [shirt] being pulled back.”

Hassan said he would not watch any more matches of the tournament, such was the injustice he felt.

“I am not going to continue following the matches of this World Cup,” he added.

“This is my own way of speaking up.”

‘They wanted Messi to stay’

After Yasser Ibrahim’s header put Egypt in front, Argentina were awarded a penalty for a trip on Nicolas Tagliafico.

Messi’s problems with World Cup penalties continued as his effort was saved by Mostafa Shobeir.

The eight-time Ballon d’Or winner has now failed to score four of his eight non-shootout spot-kicks at the World Cup, including two misses at this tournament.

Hassan speculated that the officials had been put under pressure to keep one of the biggest names in the competition.

“Perhaps they wanted to keep the world champions in the competition. Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running,” he told BeIN Sports.

“In football, there are sometimes external factors that go beyond the technical aspects. The world champions received support at every level.”

Egypt had been surprisingly attacking early on in the game, a departure from Hassan’s usual tactic of playing with a tight defence and looking for counterattack opportunities.

It helped them take an early lead, but it was the heroics of goalkeeper Mostafa Shobeir that ensured they remained in front by half-time.

“I’m very, very satisfied with the effort they put in. Most of our players come from the Egyptian domestic league, while many players in other national teams are based in Europe and live in that professional environment,” Hassan added.

“Yet with predominantly local players – besides Mohamed Salah and Omar Marmoush – we were able to compete with anyone.”

Hassan also complained about the scheduling of the match for a noon kick-off (16:00 GMT), just four days after both sides had won their round of 32 matches.

“Whoever schedules those matches has never played football. You never schedule a game for 12pm. At noon you go for a walk or to eat brunch; you do not go to play football.

“When are the players supposed to eat? At 7:30am?

“There have been a lot of things to be questioned on and off the pitch.”

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

The US military says it has launched airstrikes against Iran as explosions were reported in several locations in the south of the country.

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) said the strikes began on Tuesday, and are being conducted “in response to Iranian attacks on three commercial vessels that were transiting the Strait of Hormuz”.

Iranian media have reported several explosions in the southern port city of Sirik, as well as Qeshm Island and Bandar Abbas.

“According to state TV, six explosions have been heard on the island of Qeshm which is the largest island in the vicinity of the Strait of Hormuz, with very geostrategic significance when it comes to Iran’s control and authority over the Strait of Hormuz,” Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi reported from Tehran.

“The state TV also says that at least seven explosions have been heard in the areas close to Sirik Port which is very important because it oversees the Strait of Hormuz, another strategic point from which Iran imposes its control and authority over the Strait of Hormuz,” Asadi said.

Starting from the time after the signing of the [memorandum of understanding], we have been witnessing limited confrontation and escalation in this highly escalated situation at the Strait of Hormuz,” he added.

Following the blasts, Iran’s foreign ministry said it held the US government responsible for the consequences of breaching the memorandum of understanding (MoU) agreed between the two countries in June, which was supposed to put to an end to the war the US and Israel began against Iran in late February. The MoU mandated lifting the US naval blockade on Iran in exchange for Tehran reopening the vital Strait of Hormuz.

The US also agreed at the end of June to waive sanctions on Iranian oil for 60 days.

However, the US Treasury Department on Tuesday moved to revoke the temporary suspension of sanctions on Iranian oil, less than 20 days sales after the MoU was signed. The department cancelled a licence announced in June that had allowed Iran to produce, sell and deliver crude oil and related products through August 21.

The move by the Treasury Department comes after tankers in the Strait of Hormuz were attacked. A Qatari tanker caught fire off the coast of Oman Monday after being struck by an “unknown projectile” in the Strait of Hormuz, according to the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO).

Iranian television reported claims that the LNG tanker came under attack after ignoring warnings, but Tehran did not directly claim the assault. Neither the US Central Command (CENTCOM) nor the IRGC commented on the incident.

A second ship, a Saudi-flagged crude oil tanker, was also damaged in the Strait of Hormuz when the IRGC fired missiles, sources told Reuters news agency.

A US ⁠official warned that Iran’s attacks on vessels in the Strait ‌of Hormuz were “wholly unacceptable” and would ‌be ‌met with consequences, Reuters reported Tuesday.

In response, Iran’s foreign ministry said it would take any measure it deemed necessary to safeguard the country’s interests and national security.

“The United States’ action in revoking the waiver for the exemption of sanctions on Iran’s oil sales constitutes a blatant violation of Article 10, and the subsequent military operations of this country against Iran also constitute a serious violation of Articles 1 and 2 of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding.” Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, said in a post on social media.

Gharibabadi said the US has “repeatedly” violated the MoU, citing Israeli attacks in Lebanon and threatening statements made against Iran.

The 2026 World Cup has a prize pool of $871 million, the biggest in football history. How much is every country getting and where does the money come from? Al Jazeera’s Yasmeen ElTahan explains.

NATO leaders are meeting in Ankara, Turkiye on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The summit gets underway as US President Donald Trump renews pressure on member states over defence spending. European nations are expected to respond with billions of dollars in new military contracts.

At the NATO summit last year, members agreed to increase their target to 5 percent of GDP: 3.5 percent on military spending by 2035 and 1.5 percent on security-related needs.

Who is there and what is at stake?

Leaders from all 32 NATO member states are at the summit in Turkiye this week.

Two non-alliance heads of state will also be there: Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy and South Korea’s Lee Jae-myung.

Australia, Japan and New Zealand are sending defence or foreign ministers, as are Gulf countries affected by the US-Israel war on Iran: Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa is not expected to attend the summit but is holding a bilateral meeting with Trump in Ankara.

What Trump wants from NATO allies

Trump has questioned NATO’s value since his first presidential campaign. He argued that the US carried an unfair share of the costs. At the time, only five countries spent the agreed two percent GDP on defence.

His questions about shared defence responsibility have produced some results in recent years within the alliance as member states pledged an increased defence budget.

Ozgur Unluhisarcikli, the German Marshall Fund’s regional director for Turkiye, believes NATO this year will focus on implementing its promises from last year. “NATO allies just decided to increase their defence spending to five percent last year at The Hague and European allies took action to upgrade their defence industries,” he said. “This year in Ankara the discussion will be on how to translate spending to capabilities. It is therefore stronger than it was last year.”

But Paolo von Schirach, president of the Global Policy Institute, noted that any capability gains from increased spending are years away, saying that more orders mean more military hardware but only eventually. “You can spend a lot and obtain not too much,” he said.

What Ukraine needs from this summit

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is meeting Trump for a bilateral meeting on Wednesday. Ukraine is not a NATO member.

Zelenskyy will be using his face-to-face with the US president to request additional Patriot air defence systems as Russian attacks are intensifying on Ukrainian cities. A drone attack on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv killed at least 11 people on Monday morning.

Jack Watling, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute said that Ukraine is looking for ongoing political and military technical support from alliance members, to signal to Russia “that this support will be sustained”.

The idea, he said, was “to show Russia that there will be no diminution in its defensive capacity over the next 12-24 months”.

“There is a direct correlation between the number of interceptors supplied to Ukraine and the damage that Russia can inflict with ballistic missiles,” says Watling.

What European nations are trying to solve for

The billions in contracts expected to be announced by European nations at this summit are seen by some analysts as trying to appease the Trump administration.

When European nations didn’t join the war on Iran, Trump stated he didn’t want their money, just their “loyalty”. He added he might not have attended the summit if it wasn’t hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Turkey has in recent years not only increased its defence spending, it also has grown into one of NATO’s largest military exporters.

For now, the tone around defence spending remains sharp. On the eve of the summit, Trump called Germany’s defence spending “ridiculous”. Chancellor Friedrich Merz defended his country’s budget, saying that “this is the greatest effort we have ever made to strengthen our defence capabilities”.

Meanwhile, the US has gone a step beyond rhetoric and announced a phased withdrawal of warplanes, destroyers and submarines from NATO countries. “Less US infantry or armour in Europe has an impact on messaging but little else,” Watling said. But, he added, “the withdrawal of US air power has a more tangible impact”.

Whether the alliance can project unity amid the rhetoric and withdrawals is a key question, said analysts.

“The main value of this summit is political, it shows that the allies are still talking, still meeting, still trying to project unity, even if the underlying disagreements and doubts haven’t disappeared,” von Schirach of the Global Policy Institute said. “Ankara is more about reassurance and signalling than about concrete, immediate changes on the ground.”

Defence spending and support for Ukraine’s military needs are expected to top the agenda of summit in Turkish capital.

Comedian Trevor Noah joked that US President Donald Trump’s intervention in Folarin Balogun’s red card saga amounted to “government interference”. His comments came during his livestreamed “Trevor Noah’s World Cup Watch Party” ahead of the USA-Belgium match.

Monday’s accusations are the latest in a long string of controversies surrounding the Maine Democratic Senate candidate.

Leading US Democrats are withdrawing their support from Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner after a former girlfriend accused the politician of sexual assault.

In an exclusive interview with media outlet Politico published on Monday, Jenny Racicot alleged that Platner forced her to have nonconsensual sex in late 2021. She alleged that Platner had entered her Maine home uninvited while intoxicated and forced himself on her, despite her repeatedly telling him to stop.

Platner, whose status as a progressive outsider has gained him popularity, has denied the allegations.

Following Politico’s interview, top US Democrats and Democratic-leaning political groups have pulled their endorsements of Platner.

“I’ve been very clear that sexual assault or violence against women is a red line,” California Democrat Ro Khanna, a member of the US House of Representatives, said. “These allegations are very serious and credible. Graham Platner should drop out from the race. I am withdrawing my endorsement.”

Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego also announced he was pulling his endorsement, while the Maine Democratic Party called on Platner to withdraw his candidacy.

Democratic-leaning political group End Citizens United pulled its endorsement as well, calling the allegations “profoundly disturbing and disqualifying”.

“The conduct described is fundamentally inconsistent with the standards we expect from the candidates we support,” End Citizens United said in its statement.

Hasan Piker, a leftist commentator and streamer who has backed Platner, seemed to reverse his position on Monday following the Politico report. “If new evidence presents itself, I’m going to change my perspective – it’s that simple,” Piker said during a livestream on Twitch.

“This is a clear-cut instance of verifiable sexual assault allegations. It’s completely irredeemable,” he added.

Platner won Maine’s Democratic primary in April, defeating a centrist Democrat from the party’s establishment wing. The race is a must-win for Democrats, facing off against incumbent Republican Susan Collins. Maine state law allows Platner to be replaced on the ballot if he withdraws by July 13. The replacement candidate must be named by July 27.

In a video released on social media, Platner denied the latest allegations but said he was rethinking his campaign.

“Regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting but mindful of the political reality it will inflict, we’re taking the time to reflect on the best path forward,” he said in the video.

Racicot’s accusations are the latest in the long string of controversies surrounding Platner. A Marine veteran who also worked for a private security contractor, he has a chest tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol – which he denied knowledge of and later had covered up. He has also had a history of controversial statements on social media, as well as reportedly sexting with other women shortly after getting married.