war

Tehran, Iran – Ministers and senior security officials from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye – the three nations that signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement – are in Tehran to discuss regional security issues amid threats of new US strikes on Iran.

Saudi Defence Minister Khalid bin Salman Al Saud, Pakistani military chief Asim Munir and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin met Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian and will discuss tensions with security chief Mohsen Rezaei.

The meetings are among the highest-profile dialogues held in Tehran in recent months. While there is still little information on what might be discussed, the meetings come amid a flurry of diplomatic activity to deal with a new escalation between the United States and Iran.

But analysts broadly believe the visit to Tehran by the three signatories of the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, a regional defence alliance, will be enough to prevent a new outbreak in violence between the US and Iran.

“The Mecca pact’s 11th-hour visit to Tehran is an attempt to tip the balance in favour of those willing to compromise before the guns start blazing again,” said Ali Vaez, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the International Crisis Group.

“But unless they arrive with a credible formula to bridge the US-Iran divide, they may find themselves with little more than goodwill in a race against the clock.”

The talks are expected to address the waves of missile and drone attacks carried out by Yemen’s Houthi rebels, who are allied with Tehran, on Saudi Arabia, which supports Yemen’s internationally recognised government.

“I believe that parties to the Mecca agreement lack options of military engagement with the Houthis, but Riyadh is certainly asserting greater pressure for more, and its expectation of its partners has grown in parallel with the offensive from Yemen,” Ayesha Siddiqa, a senior research fellow in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera.

But despite the collective security arrangement in the Mecca defence pact, Saudi Arabia’s allies Turkiye and Pakistan cannot “afford to commit troops on the ground” in Yemen, said Siddiqa.

The latest diplomatic push is likely linked to visits by Pakistani army chief Asim Munir to Saudi Arabia and Iran last week, Siddiqa said, and coincides with Islamabad’s restrictions on overland border trade with Tehran amid the US blockade on Iran.

Iranian authorities have said they favoured “security originating from within the region” as they prepared for the meetings.

Umer Karim, who researches Saudi foreign policy and its implications for regional security, said the Tehran meetings are unlikely to reduce the risk of a renewed war between Iran and the US, which would likely lead to more regional turmoil.

“Therefore, these talks perhaps are more concerned about the security of Saudi Arabia and involve an attempt by Turkiye and Pakistan to compel Iran to reach a compromise,” he told Al Jazeera.

US President Donald Trump is said to be considering new attacks to break the diplomatic deadlock with Iran, which has refused to agree to any peace agreement with Washington unless several of its demands are met.

The US and regional powers want international shipping and transit through the Strait of Hormuz to resume without impediments or attacks. Washington also wants to rein in Tehran’s nuclear programme and bring in international inspectors to assess Iran’s highly enriched uranium. Israel says it wants to overthrow the Islamic Republic.

Tehran wants to lift the US naval blockade of Iran’s southern ports, which has halted crude oil exports and disrupted most trade, and return to a memorandum of understanding agreed between the two countries in June.

The US has refused this, with President Trump saying he is left with a choice to “finish the job” by launching major strikes on Iran’s civilian infrastructure. This could prompt Iran to lash out at its neighbours, as it did earlier in the war with strikes on US bases in Arab states and infrastructure.

Meanwhile, the US Department of State issued an October 21 order for nonemergency US government employees and their family ⁠members to leave Saudi Arabia for their safety’s sake, given the Houthi threat.

As talks involving Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkiye continue in Iran, analysts say these Mecca Joint Defence Agreement signatories will likely try to minimise the impact on Saudi Arabia if war does break out again.

“However, since little has changed from an Iranian strategic calculus and the actors involved don’t have the kind of leverage needed to affect Iran’s strategic thinking, these negotiations are going to yield little,” Karim said.

WASHINGTON — At first glance, President Trump’s decision to relax U.S. sanctions on Russia despite its continuing invasion of Ukraine was a dramatic break from principles that guided American foreign policy for most of a century.

Since the end of World War II, U.S.-Russian relations have oscillated between hostility and friendship, but one element was consistent: When Russia tried to take over one if its neighbors, the United States pushed back.

This time, though, the United States appeared to favor the aggressor, not the victim.

“The Trump administration has abandoned any pretense of being an honest broker,” Richard N. Haass, a former senior State Department official under then-President George W. Bush, wrote last week. “It has gone all in on Russia’s side.”

The break from long-standing tradition was real, but it should not have been entirely surprising.

Trump has long expressed admiration for Russia’s autocratic leader, Vladimir Putin — part of a syndrome one of his former aides, Fiona Hill, has called “autocrat envy.”

“He wants to rule like them,” she said, referring to the president’s bromances with Putin, China’s Xi Jinping and other strongmen.

Meanwhile, Trump often expresses disdain for democratically elected leaders of smaller countries, and he reserves a special loathing for the president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky.

He has repeatedly said Zelensky was foolish to resist Russia’s 2022 invasion because, in his view, the larger country is almost certain to win the war.

“Russia is a massive country,” he said this month. “Even if it loses a million soldiers, it still has a million more. Ukraine doesn’t have that kind of manpower.”

Moreover, Trump has long believed U.S. companies could reap an economic bonanza from Russia’s resource-rich economy. As a real estate magnate, he spent 30 years seeking deals in Moscow; in 2008, his son Donald Jr. said Russians had provided the Trump Organization “a lot of our assets.”

In the short run, the president hopes to boost Republican prospects in next week’s midterm elections by buying diesel fuel from Russia — a move aimed at lowering prices at the cost of bolstering Putin’s war economy. (It hasn’t worked; the price of diesel has risen slightly since Trump’s decision.)

But he has a longer-term goals as well. He has long believed better relations between the United States and Russia would be good for both countries, no matter who’s in power in Moscow. And he has long yearned openly for a Nobel Peace Prize — and one way might be to arrange a durable ceasefire in Ukraine.

All those factors have led Trump to overturn two major elements of traditional U.S. foreign policy.

Instead of supporting Ukraine, the victim of a foreign military invasion, he’s been pressing the Zelensky to accept Putin’s demands for territory.

“President Trump still wants a personal relationship with Putin, and he wants to change the nature of the bilateral U.S.-Russian relationship. Ukraine is in the way. So what President Trump is trying to do is get Ukraine out of the way. … President Trump wants Zelensky to capitulate,” Hill said.

“Zelensky has to want to settle this war, and if he doesn’t, I think it’s going to be a very bad thing,” Trump said last week.

As he issued that advice, Ukraine’s army was experiencing interruptions with three forms of U.S. military help: Starlink, the communications system it uses to guide its anti-drone missiles; U.S.-provided early radar warnings of Russian missile attacks; and supplies of Patriot anti-missile weapons. U.S. officials claimed the three incidents were not deliberate — but to Ukrainians, they felt like a warning.

Meanwhile, instead of putting pressure on Putin through the traditional means of economic sanctions, Trump said he was trying to entice the Russian leader to negotiate by giving him preemptive rewards.

“I am in the process of negotiating Peace in the war between Russia and Ukraine, and don’t want to do anything that will drive, foolishly, Russia away from the bargaining table,” he explained on Truth Social. “Great progress is being made.”

But signs of that progress were hard to find. In St. Petersburg last week, Trump’s personal envoy, Steve Witkoff, presented Putin with a ceasefire proposal that the Americans negotiated with Ukraine and European countries. A top Putin aide dismissed the document, saying it “contained little of real value.”

Instead, the Russian president offered to increase Russian fertilizer exports to U.S. farmers. And he said he hoped Trump would join him at a summit meeting in China with Xi.

Ukraine has not been invited to that meeting, which prompted Haass to resurrect an old diplomatic aphorism: “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.”

Haass and other veterans of U.S. negotiations with Russia fear that Putin is merely stalling for time and pocketing Trump’s concessions while he tries to grind Ukraine down with missile attacks on Kyiv and other cities.

“If Trump and Witkoff were serious, they would give Putin 15 days to say yes to their ceasefire proposal — and if he doesn’t, they would impose new and tougher sanctions,” said Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. “There are still a lot of things they can do that would put Russia in a corner.”

But that has not been Trump’s inclination so far.

The irony, Hill said, is that even if Trump gets his way, that may not produce the victory he appears to expect.

“Putin and Trump are not the only actors in this,” she said. “Ukraine is not anybody’s to give. Its not Putin’s to have, and it’s not Zelensky’s. … This whole war is about Ukrainians wanting the right to determine their own future. It’s not Putin’s right or anyone else’s. It’s not Donald Trump’s to give away.”

When Altayeb Alhadi was just six years old, his father died after a well collapsed in his village in White Nile state, south-central Sudan. Two months later, and his mother also died, leaving the five children in the family as orphans. As the eldest of the siblings, it was Altayeb’s responsibility to find work and help the family survive.

At 14, he travelled hundreds of kilometres from his home in Galli village to seek work in the north, where gold mines dot the landscape, so he could feed his siblings and keep them in school.

“We warned him about the dangers, but he was ambitious. Some relatives were already working in the area although they had found jobs in restaurants and other services rather than underground extraction,” Ayateb’s uncle Alhadi Hamid told Al Jazeera.

The boy initially worked in transport and other jobs, but when he heard lucrative stories from miners in the area, he began to search for gold in the surrounding mountains.

Altayeb died in an air strike attributed to the Egyptian military at a gold-mining site near Jabal Al-Aigdat in Sudan’s Red Sea region on October 10, which killed at least 72 miners, a few months after he began working at the site.

“It was less than 30 minutes since we separated, and he said he was going to the mine. We suddenly heard a loud sound of bombardment, and we ran. It was too chaotic with people running in all directions and many attacks taking place within a few minutes,” a fellow miner told Al Jazeera, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“We found Altayeb with his hand and leg [blown off] and a severe injury to his abdomen [which] was open. We tried to help him and took him to a safer place near a mountain. We were terrified. He died within hours. … We couldn’t believe how quickly things could happen.”

Altayeb worked alongside about 15 young men and children, using basic tools to extract gold from the rocks. The miners worked night and day, taking the material they gathered to nearby mills for processing.

Proceeds from any gold found were shared, but earnings depended on the amount of gold recovered and individual agreements. On productive days, the group could earn more than $100, the miner said.

“We used to dig for two to three weeks until we found a gram or less. If the gold percentage in the well wasn’t good, we would change locations. When we found a gram or less, we sold it and shared the profit, which was about $100,” Altayeb’s former colleague said.

For young people supporting relatives, even irregular earnings in these dangerous gold mines can seem preferable to unemployment.

Altayeb told his siblings 10 days before his death that he would soon return home, his sister Rogaia Alhadi told local media.

Friends told the family that Altayeb visited them at a restaurant near the mining site on the morning of the attack, his uncle said. They shared a cup of tea before heading towards the mine for the final time. Minutes later, the air strike hit the area.

Authorities in Egypt have accused Sudanese miners of crossing its border and reportedly linked some to gold smuggling, drugs and human trafficking. The Sudanese side did not respond to these allegations.

Since a civil war between Sudan’s military and the Rapid Support Forces paramilitary group broke out in 2023, the economy has tanked and forced thousands with no other source of income to find work in the artisanal gold mines of northern Sudan.

This can vary from independent prospecting to working in investor-owned pits for a share of the proceeds. Earnings depend on the amount of gold found, equipment and fuel costs, and profit percentages agreed with financiers.

Although some miners strike gold, they still face an array of dangers, ranging from collapsing shafts and unstable ground to air strikes. Limited medical care makes mining, particularly in remote areas, especially hazardous.

Living conditions are also extremely hard. Mohamed Awadalkarim, who was a miner in River Nile state for 10 years, said workers often shelter in makeshift huts made from burlap sacks and plastic sheeting. Their diet consists mainly of lentils and sorghum porridge.

But for families without reliable incomes, mining offers a possible source of immediate earnings. Miners may spend hours searching for gold and not find enough to cover their expenses. Others share proceeds with investors or equipment owners, leaving them with limited money left.

Artisanal and small-scale mining accounted for 53.71 tonnes, or about 83 per cent, of Sudan’s declared gold production in 2024, but this was just in areas under government control, according to research by the Chatham House think tank. About one million people were involved in artisanal mining across Sudan’s 18 states, generating $1bn annually for the country.

Artisanal mines, while generally viewed as being outside the main war-funding networks, have still been exposed to violence.

On June 16, several people were reportedly killed and injured in attacks on mining sites near the Egyptian border, according to local sources and miners.

The repeated air strikes near Sudan’s border with Egypt have raised concerns about civilian protection, territorial sovereignty and accountability.

Egyptian authorities have accused Sudanese prospectors of crossing the border to mine near a concession managed by an Egyptian company, but there is little independent evidence to back these claims.

Sudanese military leader Abdel Fattah al-Burhan reportedly ordered a fact-finding committee involving prosecutors, judicial representatives and security agencies to investigate the attack. Findings from an inquiry into a similar incident announced in June have not been made public.

Altayeb paid the highest price in this regional conflict and the hunt for gold, which provides huge profits for some and meagre incomes for many.

Altayeb’s siblings are now living with their extended family, including uncles, aunts and cousins. People who know them are trying to help his brothers and sisters and are carrying out community initiatives in Galli to keep his memory alive.

“We will raise the children and care for them as he would have wanted. He was young, caring and brave, and he will always be remembered,” Altayeb said.

Iran’s authorities are increasing investment in a campaign to arm and train civilians who would serve in the state security apparatus against domestic and foreign threats amid growing fears that fighting with the United States and Israel could resume imminently.

The public mobilisation drive – called Janfada, or “those who sacrifice their life” – was launched in late March at the peak of the war with the US and Israel. It has now spread to large parts of the country and is aiming to attract volunteer men and women. It has a stated focus on youth but is open to all ages.

At their numerous street booths and stations, representatives of the Basij militia of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and other state bodies offer training on using weapons and other equipment to defend the government and its “revolutionary” values.

State-organised events and armed “exercises” linked with the mobilisation campaign have been held in Tehran, Isfahan, Zanjan, Shiraz, Kerman, Mashhad, Bojnord, Ahvaz and other big and small cities across many of Iran’s 31 provinces.

Ali Kowsari, Basij’s deputy for training, announced during a news conference this month that the IRGC wants to use at least 14 main squares across Tehran as training and equipment stations for Janfada volunteers. The goal is to use at least one to three squares in the capital city of every single province, he said, without divulging how many cities are currently being used as part of the campaign.

State-run nighttime events are sometimes held with rallies and motorcades during the day. A resident of Gilan province in northern Iran told Al Jazeera that people regularly see state-run stations on the streets in big and smaller cities across the province during their commutes.

“Sometimes they hold competitions to win some small prizes. They bring in live bullets, teach people how to load them into magazines, how to arm pistols and assault rifles, and how to aim and fire,” the resident said, asking to remain anonymous for security reasons.

“The organisers are mostly old men. Since the start of the war, they’ve gathered around the main square almost every night, also often playing revolutionary tunes and chanting from loudspeakers.”

In Gilan’s city of Rasht on October 15, residents objected to the noise and blocking of the street for the nighttime pro-government gathering. Videos circulating on social media showed a confrontation that escalated into a brawl although the authorities did not comment.

On Saturday, authorities cautioned residents in Alborz province’s Karaj near Tehran that they could expect explosions and loud noises from one of the Janfada exercises.

‘Revolutions are like riding a bicycle’

Last week, there was a big mobilisation campaign in northwestern Iran’s Kurdistan province, which borders Iraq.

The IRGC-linked Tasnim News Agency characterised a procession in the provincial capital, Sanandaj, as an exercise in “unity” between the Shia and Sunni Muslim populations.

But a number of foreign-based Iranian human rights groups have characterised such armed mobilisation efforts as “intimidation” campaigns that are held months after January’s nationwide protests, during which thousands of civilians, including many young people, were killed from gunshots and stab wounds.

The government has acknowledged that protests took place in more than 400 counties across all provinces but describes them as a “coup” attempt wholly orchestrated by the US and Israel to overthrow the establishment. It also rejected findings by an independent United Nations fact-finding mission that said the authorities committed crimes against humanity while cracking down on the protests.

Mehran Kamrava, a professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar, said the US-Israeli war on Iran has “presented another opening for the more revolutionary elements of the Iranian body politic”.

“Revolutions are like riding a bicycle. To avoid a nasty fall, you must pedal hard. And this is precisely what the Janfadas and their leaders are trying to do – to remain relevant,” he told Al Jazeera.

“The Janfada’s training mobilisation also gives the more revolutionary-minded figures within the Iranian leadership a chance for choreographed displays of political and ideological loyalty to the revolution and its principles,” the professor said.

‘Siege mentality’

The government said 33 million Iranians have signed up on the campaign’s website but has provided no evidence to support this number.

It represents more than a third of the country’s population, or more than half of the over-12 population, men and women.

Earlier this year, foreign-based activists accessed the website’s source code, which showed that fewer than four million people had registered. Only a phone number was required for registration, and no national identification number was needed.

Speaking last week about the political goals of the campaign, Nematollah Bagheri, IRGC commander for the province of Lorestan, said: “The aim is to show that, just as the government supports the people, the people support the Islamic Republic and the Islamic revolution.”

Organisers said registrants could be used in future rescue operations and for social services and media and financial support. The government has also asked them to help ease the pressure of the US war, naval blockade and sanctions by consuming less fuel, electricity and other resources.

The establishment’s efforts to expand the campaign have only grown after nearly eight months of attritional war, which has killed thousands of people, made Iranians poorer and seen parts of the country’s civilian infrastructure destroyed.

Children have become a major focus for the campaign, and schools have increasingly been accommodating mobilisation. Last week, Education Minister Alireza Kazemi said the Basij militia was registering “student Janfadas” and had plans for more mobilisation and ceremonies involving children over the coming weeks.

Kamrava, the university professor, said this kind of mobilisation does not necessarily broaden the scope of the state’s legitimacy among the larger society.

“It does, however, serve to deepen the legitimacy that the state already has among its existing supporters. It reinforces belief in the revolution’s ideological and political mission and reifies the siege mentality that all revolutionaries have,” he said.

Speaking at the World Investment Forum in Doha, state minister says peace and security are essential for trade and investment prosperity.

Qatar’s Minister of State for Foreign Trade Affairs Ahmad bin Mohammed al-Sayed has called for greater international cooperation and economic stability, warning that trade and investment cannot flourish without peace and security.

Speaking at the United Nations-led World Investment Forum in Doha on Sunday, al-Sayed said geopolitical upheaval and growing economic fragmentation were threatening global investment prospects.

“The global economy is undergoing changes. There are geopolitical changes. These are all issues that redefine the landscape of global investment,” he said.

“We believe that investment in the future is related to investment in peace and security,” the minister added.

“Trade will prosper, and long-term investment will create its potential only with a safe and stable environment.”

Organised by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the World Investment Forum brings together heads of state, policymakers, CEOs and investors to discuss global investment, opportunities, challenges and sustainable development.

Al-Sayed’s remarks come as several conflicts continue to rage around the world, and with growing fears of an escalation in the US-Israel war on Iran in the coming weeks.

Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments, has been disrupted since the US and Israel launched the war on February 28. Iran responded by effectively blocking the strait and attacking targets across the region.

Prior to the war, one-fifth of the world’s traded oil and gas flowed through the strait.

In the past week, escalating attacks on shipping in the strait and uncertainty over diplomatic efforts to end the nearly eight-month war have led to a surge in oil prices, putting further pressure on the global economy.

On Thursday, oil prices climbed about 4 percent to a five-month high, with Brent futures crossing $113.17 a barrel.

‘Further cooperation, less isolation’

Al-Sayed stressed the need for predictable international rules and stronger economic partnerships at a time of heightened uncertainty.

“In our world, which is facing further uncertainty and economic fragmentation, our message stays clear. It is a call for further cooperation and less isolation, further cooperation and less division,” he said.

Iranian strikes on Qatar’s Ras Laffan industrial complex in March damaged facilities, with repairs expected to take several years.

The minister outlined Qatar’s efforts to strengthen supply chains, diversify economic partnerships and “open new markets for our exports”.

He said Qatar attracted 373 foreign direct investment projects in 2025, a 50 percent increase from the previous year, generating more than 15,000 jobs.

Qatar has also unveiled infrastructure projects worth $38.5bn over the next five years, alongside an anticipated $22.5bn in private sector investment in hospitality and real estate, al-Sayed added.

The two leading candidates condemn recent deadly Black Sea drone strikes but differ on the Ukraine war more broadly.

Bulgarians are voting in a presidential election amid the spread of Russia’s war on Ukraine to the waters off Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast.

Ahead of Sunday’s vote, President Iliana Iotova, 61, and ex-caretaker Prime ⁠Minister Andrey Gyurov, 50, were leading a field of 27 candidates in the polls.

⁠The presidency is a largely ceremonial post in Bulgaria. While major policies must be approved by Parliament, direct election gives the president greater political authority. The president leads the armed forces and can veto legislation, sign international treaties and appoint ambassadors.

The election has also gained attention after a series of drone attacks on merchant ships off Bulgaria’s coast that likely killed some two dozen international seafarers.

The drone strikes ‌sparked international condemnation and concerns about the growing reach of the war in Ukraine, prompting Bulgaria to seek allied assistance to bolster its maritime security.

The Bulgarian government has stopped short of explicitly blaming Russia for the attacks, but Prime Minister Rumen Radev said the outcome of the strikes “benefits the Russian Federation”.

Relations with Russia, West at stake

The two leading candidates for president have both condemned the strikes, but they differ on the broader war in Ukraine.

Gyurov, who served as caretaker prime minister this year, is backed by ⁠pro-Western, reformist parties and has long expressed support for Ukraine. He ⁠signed a security cooperation agreement with Kyiv during his time as premier.

“I want Bulgaria to have a voice of its own in Europe, a reliable NATO ally that defends its interests through preparedness, strong diplomacy and ⁠a clear position,” he said at a rally on Thursday.

Iotova, a former vice president, became acting president in January after Radev resigned to ⁠enter the parliamentary race, which he won on what many ⁠political analysts considered a Kremlin-friendly ticket.

Radev supports Iotova, and they both call for a diplomatic end to the war.

“My opponents argue that there must be ‌a war of attrition,” Iotova told a rally on Thursday. “The truth is, we are all the ones who are most exhausted.”

While there is a broad consensus among the parties in Parliament on the country’s pro-Western path, widespread pro-Russian sentiments based on traditional historical and cultural ties with Russia have divided society, particularly since the start of Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Dobromir Zhivkov, managing director of the Market Links polling agency, said Iotova is among those who advocate that Bulgaria take a more neutral position.

“They call for an end to aid for Ukraine and a halt to arms deliveries to Ukraine; we often hear them use Kremlin rhetoric and terminology borrowed directly from Kremlin propaganda,” he told The Associated Press news agency earlier this week.

Run-off vote expected

Candidates are also addressing public fears about the steep rise in energy prices and surging inflation, with many Bulgarians in rural areas struggling to make ends meet.

Polls by Alpha Research give Iotova 41 percent of the vote and ‌Gyurov ‌28 percent.

Voting starts at 7am (05:00 GMT), and polls close at 8pm (18:00 GMT).

Analysts expect none of the 27 candidates to secure the outright majority needed to win in the first round, however.

Turnout must also be above 50 percent of the 6.6 million registered voters, and Sunday’s turnout is expected to be less than 40 percent, which means a likely run-off on November 1.

Tehran warns that even limited strikes would trigger a response ‘several times greater’.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has blamed Washington for the unravelling of an interim deal aimed at ending the war with the United States and Israel, amid growing fears that the fighting could resume imminently.

In comments broadcast by Iranian Press TV on Saturday, But Pezeshkian also said that both sides should return to the deal and “conclude it”.

His remarks come amid growing fears that military action could resume as soon as this weekend, after US President Donald Trump said on Friday that he “may do another little Epic Fury”, using the codename of the US-Israeli war against Iran that started on February 28.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has warned that even limited strikes would trigger a response “several times greater”, according to comments reported by the semi-official Fars News Agency.

Iranian Armed Forces Chief of Staff Ali Abdollahi said on Saturday that the US military would not be allowed in the Gulf “under any circumstances and at any time”. Abdollahi said Trump could only “dream” of seeing US forces enter the Gulf, adding that he would take his dream to the grave.

Trump has suggested he could take further military action against Iran, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he remains committed to overthrowing the country’s government.

Both leaders face elections, with Israelis set to choose their next government on Tuesday. Meanwhile, Trump’s Republican Party faces crucial midterm elections on November 3, with Democrats potentially winning control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Such an outcome would be a major blow to Trump, who still has more than two years left in his final term in the White House.

Iranian government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani said on Saturday that Tehran would not “wait for permission to defend itself”, adding that the country “seeks peace but will respond to any aggression with severe consequences”.

“Our position is clear: we do not flee from dialogue for peace, and we do not hesitate in defending the country. Those who harbour the illusion of destroying Iran must correct their calculations,” Mohajerani wrote in a memo.

Her comments came as Iranian judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei met Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei. The pair discussed how to tackle corruption and pursue compensation for Iranians affected by the US-Israeli war, among other issues.

Khamenei replaced his father as supreme leader after the latter was assassinated during the opening strikes of the war on February 28. He has not been seen in public since assuming the position in early March.

Parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf was reported to have met Khamenei earlier this week.

Trump says the US is considering a possible attack on Iran as soon as Sunday, or it could reach a major deal with Tehran.

Negotiators from Ukraine, Russia and the US are expected to meet in Abu Dhabi next month.

Ukraine says restrictions on its military’s Starlink satellite connections have been lifted after more than a week of disruption that hampered drone operations against Russian forces.

Defence Minister Yevhenii Khmara said on Saturday that Starlink and Starshield connections were stable on equipment travelling above 400 kilometres per hour (250 miles per hour). He credited talks with Washington and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s diplomacy.

Ukraine relies heavily on Elon Musk’s SpaceX satellite services for communications and drone missions. However, who ordered the restrictions remains unclear, with US President Donald Trump denying responsibility while defending Elon Musk.

The disruption further strained relations between Kyiv and Washington, already under pressure over Trump’s agreement to temporarily lift sanctions on Russian diesel and allow US imports.

Trump also called earlier this month for Ukraine to have a new president, then suggested on Monday that someone other than Zelenskyy should negotiate for Kyiv. The exchanges follow their public confrontation at the White House in February 2025.

Talks planned in Abu Dhabi

The lifting of the Starlink restrictions comes as the United States seeks to revive peace negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv. Negotiators from Ukraine, Russia and the US are expected to meet in Abu Dhabi in the first half of November, more than four years after Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed the planned negotiations on Friday, while Zelenskyy also announced agreement on technical-level meetings.

It comes as Trump credited his wife, Melania Trump, with securing a local ceasefire in Oleshky, in southern Ukraine’s Kherson region, which Russian forces have occupied since 2022.

Subsequent Ukrainian and Russian statements putting the ceasefire’s start on October 27, with the humanitarian operation planned for October 29.

Deadly attacks continue

A Russian missile strike on Lozova, in Ukraine’s northeastern Kharkiv region, killed a man and wounded two others on Saturday, regional Governor Oleh Syniehubov said, while in northern Ukraine, a Russian attack on Chernihiv on Friday killed a man and wounded at least 25 people, local authorities said.

Shelling in Kramatorsk killed one person and wounded six, including three children, according to Donetsk officials. In nearby Sloviansk, attacks on Friday killed a 62-year-old woman and wounded four people, Mayor Vadym Lyakh said.

Ukraine reported strikes inside Russia on Friday and overnight into Saturday, including on Togliatti’s Togliattikauchuk petrochemical plant, a major synthetic rubber producer. Mayor Ilya Sukhikh confirmed industrial damage but reported no casualties.

Ukraine also said it struck Oryol’s Proton electronics plant, which it says makes missile components. Regional Governor Andrei Klychkov reported three deaths in an attack on an unidentified facility.

Authorities in Russian-occupied Crimea reported power cuts after overnight Ukrainian attacks.

Russia’s Defence Ministry said air defences intercepted a SCALP cruise missile, four Neptune missiles and 1,297 Ukrainian fixed-wing drones over 24 hours, TASS reported. The figures could not be independently verified.

Global crude prices continue to climb, with Brent benchmark hitting $117.30 a barrel to build on four-year highs as market fears grow over a potential resumption of the US-Israeli war on Iran.

With the US midterm elections approaching, the balance of power in Congress is at stake, and the outcome could shape the legacy of President Donald Trump’s second term. As Republicans face growing voter dissatisfaction, Trump’s record has become a central battleground in the fight to control Congress.

Trump faces mounting challenges, including low approval ratings, an unpopular war in Iran, high inflation and petrol prices, economic uncertainty surrounding his tariff policies, and widespread backlash over his immigration crackdown.

How does Trump’s second term measure up against the promises he made on the campaign trail?

In this interview, Mehdi Hasan goes head-to-head with Steve Cortes, a former Trump campaign adviser, who defends the president’s second-term agenda, including his economic and immigration policies, and Islamophobic rhetoric.

Joining the discussion:

Olivia Troye – Former homeland security and counterterrorism adviser to Vice President Mike Pence
Mike Nellis – Democratic strategist and former senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris
Rob Arlett – Former Trump campaign chair and political commentator

Oil prices have climbed towards their highest levels in five months as attacks on tankers in and around the Strait of Hormuz mount and efforts to end the United States-Israel war on Iran are deadlocked.

Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose by more than $2 to $110.85 a barrel on Wednesday, close to a five-month peak.

A day earlier, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said two tankers were “set ablaze” after hitting mines at what it called an illegal crossing point in the strait. Then, on Thursday, the IRGC said it hit seven more tankers although Washington dismissed the claim. In a statement, the IRGC said four of the vessels were transferring oil when they were targeted and caught fire overnight.

In September, the Houthis, an armed group also known as Ansar Allah (Arabic for Supporters of God), seized territory in Yemen close to the Bab al-Mandeb strait, a critical chokepoint into and out of the Red Sea and a gateway to Egypt’s Suez Canal.

The escalation came as the world’s emergency oil stocks, already tapped heavily since the Iran war began on February 28, sit at their lowest levels in decades.

Al Jazeera put a question to analysts: If fighting resumes in full, the Strait of Hormuz is shut off completely and Houthi attacks choke off Bab al-Mandeb, how long could the world’s reserves last?

Here’s what you need to know:

What emergency oil reserves are there?

Strategic oil reserves are stockpiles of crude oil and fuel held by governments or by companies on their behalf for use in a supply emergency.

The International Energy Agency (IEA), which was established in 1974 after the Arab oil embargo, coordinates most of them. Its importing members must hold at least 90 days of net imports. China and India are not members.

How much of the reserves has already been released this year?

A record amount.

On March 11, days after the start of the US-Israel war on Iran, the IEA’s 32 members agreed to make 400 million barrels available from emergency supplies, more than double the volume released after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The US pledged 172.2 million barrels from its Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and Japan 79.8 million, according to IEA figures.

The SPR has since fallen to 283 million barrels, its lowest level since October 1982, according to the US Department of Energy.

Much of that oil was lent rather than sold and must be returned with extra barrels, according to the US Energy Information Administration.

How much oil is left?

Far less than before the war began in February, and not all of it can be used.

Aaron Kildow, a senior crude oil analyst at Sparta Commodities, told Al Jazeera that global strategic stocks excluding China and Iran have fallen by nearly 327 million barrels since the end of December 2025 with the US, Europe and Japan accounting for about 95 percent of the draw.

He estimated that leaves only about 400 million barrels of usable reserves worldwide, excluding China’s stockpile, which is unlikely to be exported, and Gulf stocks, which could be cut off by a total closure of Hormuz.

Nearly half of these available stocks are in Japan.

Europe has about 76 million barrels uncommitted, but members such as Germany are holding some back for a local emergency, Kildow said.

“Europe is the real wildcard, both on timing and willingness,” Kildow said.

Meanwhile, China’s onshore crude stocks stand at 1.13 billion barrels, down from 1.23 billion in late February but still enough for about 80 days of refinery intake, Muyu Xu, a senior crude oil analyst at the analytics firm Kpler, told Al Jazeera.

India’s reserves cover just eight days of its imports, the Reuters news agency reported.

What would a full closure of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb mean?

Before the war, about one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas supplies, or roughly 20 million barrels of oil a day, passed through the Strait of Hormuz.

Saudi Arabia has increased the amount of crude it transports from its oilfields in the east to its Red Sea port of Yanbu in the west via the East-West Pipeline, thereby bypassing Hormuz.

But there have been strikes on that pipeline, and tankers heading south from Yanbu must pass through Bab a-Mandeb, where the Iran-backed Houthis declared a blockade on Saudi shipping in July.

Only a confirmed 373,000 barrels a day of Saudi crude have transited Bab al-Mandeb so far this month, the lowest level since February, Xu said, with most Yanbu cargoes now heading north via Egypt instead.

If Hormuz were shut and the Houthis blocked all Saudi tankers, Gulf producers could export only through a few pipelines and Yanbu’s northbound route, Xu said.

That would leave about 7.5 million barrels a day of Middle Eastern crude, against 16.8 million now, a shortfall of about 9.3 million barrels a day, she estimated.

“If such attacks occur, the supply disruption could be even more severe and prolonged,” Xu said, referring to strikes on oilfields, terminals and pipelines.

So how long would reserves last?

Not for long – possibly just weeks, according to experts.

If Kpler’s estimated shortfall had to be covered entirely from the roughly 400 million usable barrels that Kildow identified, they could not, in practice, be released that fast. Japanese and South Korean reserves can move quickly, Kildow said, but US barrels are staged over three months, and Europe’s contribution is uncertain.

Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG Group, said the world was fortunate after the first closure. “The salient feature of March and beyond was how a crisis didn’t actually develop. We got away with it,” he said.

“I don’t think the global economy will be as lucky next time if there is a protracted conflict,” Beauchamp said. “A month or two is all we have.”

The world would not literally run out of oil. Instead, prices would rise until enough demand disappeared. “One hundred fifty dollars [per barrel] becomes a very distinct possibility, which then sees significant demand destruction,” Beauchamp said.

The sharpest squeeze would be on diesel, which is already nearly double the price of crude, the IEA said.

Refiners would compete for crude grades rich in diesel, “a cost that ultimately lands on consumers,” Kildow said.

Who would feel it first?

Asian importers with thin reserves.

Most Gulf exports in September and October went to Asian buyers, and India and Pakistan are among the most exposed, Kildow said, adding that their nearest alternative supply, from West Africa, is 25 to 28 days away by sea, compared with two days from Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates.

“The squeeze won’t hit uniformly. It lands fastest and hardest where reserves are thinnest and substitute supply is farthest away,” Kildow said.

Who would gain?

Oil producers far from the Gulf.

In the second quarter of this year, as the US-Iran war was under way, ExxonMobil reported earnings of $14.5bn, its highest in four years while Chevron posted $12bn, its best in six years and Shell more than doubled its earnings to nearly $10bn. Their profits are largely down to the high oil prices.

A second shock would send refiners scrambling for supplies from the US, Latin America, West Africa and Russia, Xu said.

“This would allow non-Middle Eastern producers to benefit from higher crude prices, potentially alongside lower transportation costs,” she said.

In August, US President Donald Trump said companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron were “making too much money based on a shortage”.

For the past four-and-a-half years, the war on Europe’s doorstep has haunted policymakers. Yet they have treated it as a looming threat rather than one already eroding the very foundations on which Europe stands.

Russia’s war has devastated much of Ukraine’s south and east, even as the front lines have shifted only slowly. For Europe, however, the challenge has never been confined to the battlefield. Supporting Ukraine and constraining Russia have tested the continent’s economic resources and political unity. Now, as United States President Donald Trump seeks to force a disadvantageous settlement on Kyiv and repeatedly threatens to withdraw US support, Europe faces the prospect of shouldering even more of that burden alone.

Even if the latest crisis is averted, Europe can no longer assume that Washington will guarantee its security. It must develop the financial capacity to sustain Ukraine’s defence, the industrial strength to defend itself and the economic leverage to constrain Moscow. To meet these challenges, Europe must build a war economy.

The past four years offer lessons in how Europe can finance such an effort, but also warnings about the divisions that could undermine it. The European Union has already been at the forefront of Ukraine’s recent financing, moving from an 18.1-billion-euro ($21bn) share of the G7’s $50bn Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) loans in 2024 to finalising a new 90-billion-euro ($100bn) loan this April, one that came without US commitment. Yet internal divisions remain over numerous issues, particularly as they pertain to constraining Russia. This month, the EU adopted its largest-ever round of sanctions listings. But while the measures added a record number of designations, they did little to broaden the scope of restricted activity and did not accelerate the phase-out of Russian energy imports, with pipeline gas imports still permitted until autumn 2027. European leaders have also expressed concern over Trump’s decision to waive new Russia-related sanctions as he seeks to grapple with the costs his foreign policy has wrought.

However, the US-Israel war on Iran has, if anything, shown that Europe’s measures against Russian hydrocarbons could have gone further. Before February, some 20 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude and oil products and roughly 110 billion cubic metres (bcm) a year of liquefied natural gas (LNG) passed through the Strait of Hormuz. By comparison, Russia exported about 6.5 million bpd of oil and products in September, and some 43bcm of LNG last year – about a third of Hormuz’s oil and two-fifths of its LNG. As the crisis continues and Trump seeks additional Russian supplies, Europe must complement its efforts to constrain Moscow with greater investment in its own security.

The first and most important step is to establish a standing framework for joint EU borrowing – not only to finance Ukraine’s continued defence, but also to fund the defence industry Europe will need to sustain its own defence and, if necessary, prevail against future threats from Russia. Crisis begets innovation, as demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic, when EU member states pushed past their long-held aversion to mutualised borrowing, creating the 750-billion-euro NextGenerationEU recovery fund in 2020. The EU’s contribution to the ERA loans and this year’s 90-billion-euro facility, both financed by common EU borrowing, extended that logic to wartime finance. But these remain crisis-by-crisis improvisations. Deepening fiscal and capital markets union and building a genuine fiscal-military state would provide the foundations of Europe’s power and its ability to deter and win wars.

The same logic plays out in the US today, where deep capital markets have given companies such as SpaceX, which invested heavily for years before seeing returns, the space to develop technologies such as its Starlink network that have reshaped modern warfare. The importance of this technology is now keenly felt on Ukraine’s battlefields, where Kyiv’s communications have rested on a network subject to the whims of one man, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk. Europe therefore needs the fiscal capacity to fund its own technological development and procurement.

There are understandable jitters about the existing indebtedness of European states such as France and the United Kingdom. However, Russia’s frozen sovereign assets offer a potential way to support further borrowing. Divisions remain over using these assets, with Belgium, which hosts the lion’s share at Euroclear, opposing such a move over fears of Russian legal action and damage to its position in the global financial system. The bloc must come together to share that risk, which is overblown in any case. Not all EU fiscal support needs to come in the form of direct joint debt either. Greatly expanding the EU capital markets union and creating tax-advantaged structures across the region for defence firms and technological innovators may prove even more effective.

Beyond the assets themselves, Europe must also take greater control over its continued economic linkages with Russia. That means intervening far more actively in cases such as that of Austria’s Raiffeisen Bank. In 2025, following a Russian court ruling, more than 2.1 billion euros were taken from Raiffeisen’s Russian subsidiary to compensate Rasperia, a company tied to the sanctioned oligarch Oleg Deripaska. A Vienna court’s ruling last month now paves the way for Raiffeisen to seek compensation from Rasperia’s frozen assets in the EU – using the same sanctions derogation through which Euroclear released some $3bn in 2025. It is precisely this kind of legalised dealing with Moscow that keeps threats like those levelled at Belgium credible: if the Kremlin can seize European assets and prompt the release of Russian-linked assets frozen in the EU, every expropriation becomes a bargaining chip.

Furthermore, the UK and the EU have increasingly made use of measures against circumvention that share some features with US secondary sanctions. Europe should now be more assertive in making it clear that firms helping Russia evade its sanctions risk losing access to European financial systems and markets. US firms will choose Europe over the Kremlin, even if Trump waives more sanctions.

Finally, Europe should seek to reduce US influence over its foreign and security relationships. Speaking in Qatar this week, US Ambassador to Turkiye Tom Barrack said Washington was moving away from its decades-old bargain of security for Gulf oil. Europe may not be able to offer the same level of security, but it can offer a mutually beneficial partnership that addresses both sides’ concerns. And it is Europe that is now stepping up in the Gulf, with the UK and France deploying jets, air defences and refuelling support to help Saudi Arabia against Houthi attacks. Unlike Washington, Europe can promise a deeper partnership in the future and serve as a reliable buyer of Gulf oil and gas exports in exchange for Gulf states doing more to address Europe’s security concerns about Russia through enhanced sanctions compliance and, first and foremost, ending the Kremlin’s role in OPEC plus.

Europe has the means to finance its own security. It must now find the will to borrow for it.

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

A sweeping campaign by federal immigration agents to identify voter fraud by noncitizens through door knocks, street stops and other field interviews in California and eight other states must be reined in ahead of the Nov. 3 election, after a federal judge in Northern California ruled it has intimidated U.S. citizens and interfered with the work of voting rights groups.

Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguin said in a ruling Wednesday that limiting the Department of Homeland Security’s surging operations in those states — which she wrote “sweep in U.S. citizens for investigation” — does not prevent the Trump administration from “exercising their authority to investigate voter fraud by lawful means.”

A Homeland Security spokesperson said the agency is “laser focused on identifying, prosecuting, and removing aliens who vote,” and has “no plans to question or investigate people we believe to be U.S. citizens.”

The ruling was the latest to come out of an unprecedented legal war playing out between the Trump administration and California in recent days, in which an array of election cases are working their way through the federal courts at breakneck speed.

There is, for example, the lawsuit the U.S. Justice Department filed against California and state and local elections officials last week, demanding that they set aside any ballots from a list of 20,000 individuals identified by immigration officials as “likely noncitizens.”

There are also two cases out of Washington, D.C., in which a coalition of Democratic leaders, immigrant rights groups, voting rights experts and naturalized citizens in California are challenging the Trump administration’s use of Homeland Security data to target voters.

The litigation is playing out amid an intense political debate about election security at the national level — driven in part by President Trump, a longtime election denier — and a sweeping campaign by his administration to root out and parade examples of alleged voter fraud in the final days before the election.

White House, Homeland Security and Justice Department officials have all defended the administration’s efforts as necessary to ensure that noncitizens are not illegally diluting the votes of U.S. citizens. First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the lead federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, has claimed to have “overwhelming evidence” that tens of thousands of noncitizens are doing so in California.

‘That is not normal’

Democratic leaders and prominent elections experts, meanwhile, have cast the administration’s claims as baseless and intentionally exaggerated to stoke uncertainty about election security and ultimately challenge midterm results the president doesn’t like, and the Justice Department’s legal arguments as fundamentally flawed and wildly out of line with long-established department policy to stay out of elections in the lead up to voting.

“That is not normal. We have literally never experienced that in American history. Not once,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research and a former Justice Department elections attorney. “The fact that the administration appears poised for the first time to act as an adversary to the states and counties who have [the] undisputed constitutional authority to run elections? That is unusual.”

At the same time, Becker and other experts stressed that those efforts to date have failed, and state and local elections have largely proceeded in recent weeks without incident, with millions of Americans having already cast their ballots.

“California voters need to know that they’re in good hands, that we have leaders at the state and local levels who are protecting our ballots and are ensuring that these attempts by the federal government to root out supposed noncitizen voting are not going to prevent Californians from casting our ballots,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. “Part of the strategy here is to distract people and scare people and raise fears, and the important thing is to continue to stay focused on … making a plan to vote.”

Status of cases

Federal courts have already rejected multiple Trump executive orders seeking to enforce nationwide voter ID and citizenship requirements. The Supreme Court blocked an administration plan for the U.S. Postal Service to vet mail ballots. The Justice Department has compiled a stunning record of losses in its 30 lawsuits demanding state voter rolls — with 26 of those cases, including the one in California, so far dismissed.

And election experts said they expect the Trump administration to rack up more losses in coming days — including in the Justice Department’s case challenging California officials’ refusal to segregate the ballots of some 20,000 voters based on the administration’s unsubstantiated claims they are noncitizens.

U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, shown in 2023, is overseeing a lawsuit in which the Department of Justice says 20,000 California ballots may have been sent to “likely noncitizens.”

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

That case was taken up — and scheduled for a Tuesday hearing — by Judge David O. Carter, an appointee of President Clinton who in January rejected the administration’s demand for California’s voter rolls, calling it a clear federal overreach that would have a “chilling effect” on voters and threaten American democracy.

California has called for the case to be dismissed outright, on the grounds that the administration has zero authority to make such demands, and that the demands are unlawful. The Trump administration has asked Carter to immediately rule in the matter.

“Every minute of [ballot] processing that occurs without segregating the ballots of suspected non-eligible voters causes untraceable disenfranchisement and dilution of the votes of United States citizens,” wrote Julie Hamill, an assistant U.S. attorney in Essayli’s office.

In D.C. federal court, Judge James E. Boasberg set an Oct. 30 hearing in a case in which UCLA Voting Rights Project attorneys, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, and a California voter named Pedro Trujillo are challenging the administration’s use of unproven federal databases to allege California voters aren’t citizens.

Carl Bergquist, an attorney for CHIRLA, said he looked forward to bringing a host of recent Trump administration actions to the court’s attention — including the administration’s lawsuit against California, the charging this week of 28 legal permanent residents in California with election-related crimes, and Trump’s threats to arrest California elections officials who don’t comply with his administration’s demands.

“The events of the last few days, from threats to state and local officials, increased general immigration operations, the random knocking on doors by federal agents and the recent arrests are causing a chill in the community,” Bergquist said. “People, including naturalized citizens, are making their plans to vote and the Federal Government is doing its utmost to quash their attempts to exercise this fundamental right that they have lawfully acquired.”

The argument that naturalized citizens are being intimidated also features prominently in a second lawsuit filed in D.C. federal court Tuesday, in which top Democrats in Congress joined Nevada party officials and a California immigrant named Erick Jose Jimenez to challenge the Trump administration’s unprecedented voter fraud probes.

That lawsuit, also assigned to Boasberg, says Jimenez, a naturalized citizen since 2006, fears being “unlawfully targeted for voting and disenfranchised (or worse).”

Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor who studies elections and was a senior policy advisor on democracy and voting rights in the Biden White House, said there is “so much noise” around the election right now, in part because the administration has been making wild legal arguments about its authority over elections.

But he said “none of the federal government’s attempts to assert power that they do not have are working,” and voting “for 99.999% of the public” will remain “wonderfully normal.”

Iran is rebuilding Eagle 44, a hardened underground airbase carved into the side of a mountain that can shelter fighter aircraft, drones, and potentially cruise and ballistic missiles, despite the remote facility absorbing at least three rounds of airstrikes this year. High-resolution satellite imagery captured by Planet Labs in late September and reviewed by TWZ shows a new section of taxiway completed, several support buildings still destroyed or damaged, wrecked equipment cleared off the pavement, and obstacles that were placed to obstruct the runway now removed. Construction is ongoing at a time when the Pentagon and Trump administration maintain there is little remaining of the Iranian air force for such a facility to protect.

Eagle 44, also called ‘Oghab 44’ after the 44th anniversary of the 1979 revolution, was unveiled by Iranian state media in February 2023 when senior officials visited what was described as the country’s newest underground airbase. Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) F-4D/E Phantom IIs, armed with AGM-65 Maverick air-to-ground missiles, laser and electro-optically guided bombs, unguided ‘dumb’ bombs, as well as domestically produced anti-ship missiles, were shown using the facility in the footage. The IRIAF had roughly 60 examples in service at the time, its most numerous combat jet by some margin, though how many remain today, and are actually operational, is unknown. In addition to the Phantoms, one-way attack drones were also seen in the background.

The IRIAF, rather than the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force, operates the base, which is located in Hormozgan province and sits in the foothills of the Zagros Mountains, approximately 100 miles northwest of the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian state media described it as “one of the army’s most important air force bases, with fighters equipped with long-range cruise missiles and built in the depths of the Earth.” Then-Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri, who was present at the unveiling, warned that “any attack on Iran from our enemies, including Israel, will see a response from our many air force bases including Eagle 44.” He was eliminated in the opening strikes of the Twelve-Day War, which Israel dubbed Operation Rising Lion, in June 2025.

Work on the cavernous underground tunnel complex began in 2013. Construction of a 2.7-mile main runway, situated on the northern side of the base on a valley floor below the mountain range, started roughly eight years later. Two taxiways run through a smaller ridge connecting the runway to four entrances to the primary tunnel complex, where the jets and weapons are stored, although only one taxiway is currently operational.

The promotional video released in 2023 revealed at least one internal blast door, as well as branches from the main tunnel to revetment areas to park fighters and drones. A support compound of several buildings is on the west side of the base, next to the unfinished taxiway. The purpose of each structure is unclear, but a functioning airbase requires maintenance and repair facilities, crew quarters, reserves of fuel and munitions, security and force protection assets, and infrastructure to coordinate air traffic control and command and control functions.

The United States kicked off Operation Epic Fury alongside Israel on February 28, launching a massive wave of strikes against Iran from the west and south. Eagle 44 is located within striking distance of the munitions carried by air wings embarked on U.S. Navy aircraft carriers operating in the northern Arabian Sea and missiles fired by the guided-missile destroyers that escort them, as well as Air Force tactical and strategic aircraft and Army assets in the region. However, low-resolution images reviewed by TWZ through March 16 indicated that while the base was targeted, little damage was visible.

As the U.S. and Israel continued the relentless air campaign over the next several weeks, the base was targeted again at the end of March, with greater effect, according to a report from The New York Times. High-resolution images the paper reviewed revealed impact craters on the taxiways near the tunnel entrances, one building leveled, and small mounds placed along the runway, presumably to prevent enemy aircraft from landing. Battle damage assessments suggested the strikes were intended to cut the underground caverns off from the runway, trapping whatever was inside and preventing takeoff. The report did not state whether U.S. or Israeli aircraft carried out the attack, and Israeli officials declined to comment. However, the U.S. was primarily responsible for pressuring Iran’s southern flank, while the Israelis attacked the western front.

After the fragile April ceasefire collapsed and the U.S. imposed a second blockade, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), based out of MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, and responsible for executing day-to-day operations of the war, launched multiple strikes across Iran on July 15, and Eagle 44 was hit for at least a third time. An analysis published by Soar Atlas, a satellite imagery provider, identified four aimpoints on July 16, with cratered taxiways and damage to additional infrastructure. According to that analysis, the structures targeted were related to the base’s construction unit, but TWZ has not independently verified this claim. The Pentagon and CENTCOM have not specifically named Eagle 44 in any press briefing or release, and Iran has not acknowledged the base was struck.

The Planet Labs satellite imagery from September 29, obtained exclusively by TWZ, indicates that Iran began reconstruction after the July attacks and that the effort is ongoing.

The main runway, previously blocked by obstacles meant to deter and prevent unauthorized aircraft from landing, is now clear. On the western taxiway (marked in red below), a new section leading into the ridge ‘pass-through’ is complete, with its finished upper cement-concrete layer visible. On the other side of the pass, construction of the next segment is underway, with a subgrade layer of stabilized, compacted dirt laid down but not yet paved (orange). Farther south, in front of the western tunnel entrances, impact craters (blue) are still visible. When finished, the second taxiway will provide a direct link between the western hangars and the runway, allowing additional aircraft to move freely without sharing a single taxiway, a major bottleneck for higher operational tempos and more complex sortie launches and recoveries. A second functional taxiway and tunnel would also provide critical redundancy if the other is hit.

On the primary eastern taxiway, two dark streaks (green) that appeared following the strikes in July run off the edge of the pavement, likely debris left by equipment that was struck and removed. Notably, the streak marks match the width of the wreckage, suggesting it was bulldozed or pushed off the taxiway to reopen it. There is no sign of the equipment being recovered, only that it was cleared out of the way.

In the main support compound (yellow) next to the western taxiway, two buildings are clearly destroyed and a third is damaged. They have not been rebuilt yet, which is consistent with previous reporting from The Times and Soar Atlas that the attacks degraded construction capabilities, and suggests the regime may be focused on completing and repairing the taxiways rather than the installations.

The four entrances to the main tunnel complex (white), arranged in two pairs less than half a mile apart at the end of each taxiway on the southern part of the base, appear to be intact, although the angle makes it unclear whether they are open or sealed. What’s inside the mountain, and how many fighters remain in Iran’s inventory, is unknown. Regardless of the status of the fighter fleet, as we noted earlier, the base can also store drones and could be packed with cruise or ballistic missiles.

The U.S. and Israel have a range of bunker buster bombs that could be used in an attempt to collapse the tunnel entrances, a major choke point for any underground weapons storage site. While not destroying what is being held within, doing so would block anything inside from leaving — and being used — for a period of time. Additionally, the pass-through tunnels make for easy targets, and hitting them would keep fixed-wing aircraft from reaching the runway. No impact points on the mountain itself or damage to the portals inside is apparent, but they could have been sealed and hit farther in, which may not be highly visible via satellite imagery. Reaching the main storage caverns themselves would likely be far harder. Larger bunker busters in the U.S. inventory include the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) guided munition, which could be capable of reaching deeper into the main site, but these are very limited in number and can only be delivered by the Air Force’s B-2A Spirit stealth bombers. It’s highly unlikely the U.S. would expend such resources on a site like this over many others of higher strategic importance.

Eagle 44 is not the only base that Iran is fixing during the lull in hostilities. By the end of May, Iran had cleared 50 of 69 tunnel entrances struck at 18 underground facilities, including some “missile cities,” according to a report by CNN − and that number is likely higher now. Planet Labs, Airbus, and Vantor imagery reviewed by The Wall Street Journal in July showed rebuilt entrances near Kangavar, fresh excavation at Dezful, and repairs near Kermanshah. “They have very impressive industrialization and reconstruction capabilities,” Israeli Brig. Gen. Ran Kochav told the paper. “They refilled their stockpiles,” he added.

A Western official told Bloomberg earlier this month that Iran “remains well-stocked with ballistic missiles and some anti-ship missiles, and can quickly add more,” and a U.S. official posited in May that “the Iranians have exceeded all timelines the IC [Intelligence Community] had for reconstitution.” Both assessments are at odds with what the White House and Pentagon have repeatedly claimed. Secretary Pete Hegseth stated in April that Iran’s air force was “wiped out” and its missile program was “functionally destroyed; launchers, production facilities, and existing stockpiles depleted and decimated,” while acknowledging a week later that the regime was “digging out” launchers, missiles, and bombed facilities but had “no ability to replenish offensive or defensive capabilities.” In May, CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper told Congress, “Before Operation Epic Fury, the Iranian Air Force flew between 30 and 100 sorties each day; today that number is zero.” More recently, at a campaign rally in Kansas on Monday, U.S. President Donald Trump said, “They have no air force… their 229 beautiful fighter jets are now scattered all over the runways, the beautiful runways of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

At the very least, strikes on Eagle 44 cratered the taxiways and degraded support infrastructure, which likely put at least some of whatever airpower is stored there, if any, out of action. But even after enduring months of war and extreme economic pressure due to the ongoing U.S. blockade and sanctions, as well as dealing with damage across the country, Tehran continues to prioritize construction on the remote base. That fact alone could put it back on the target list if the U.S. and Israel launch another operation. But above all else, it points to how important this facility is to the regime, for whatever reason.

Contact the author: ian@twz.com or @ianellisjones

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) says renewed attacks by the United States could prompt Tehran to invade neighbouring countries and hit bases used in US military operations as part of its new “offensive” strategy.

The warning on Wednesday came amid escalating attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, a global energy chokepoint, and uncertainty over diplomatic efforts to end the nearly eight-month war.

“Our defence doctrine was previously defensive; we used to say that if a country attacks us, we will respond. Now we say that if a country attacks us, we will both respond and launch an offensive,” IRGC spokesman Hossein Mohebi said.

Washington ordered some diplomatic personnel to leave Saudi Arabia amid attacks from Yemen’s Houthis while US President Donald Trump has signalled that a decision on the conflict could come soon.

According to media reports, the US and Israel are planning potential attacks on Iran in the coming weeks.

As negotiations seem stalled and both sides exchange threats, could the region be heading towards another military escalation?

What is Iran’s new doctrine?

The IRGC on Wednesday announced a shift towards an “offensive and asymmetrical” defence doctrine, threatening to invade countries that launch attacks against it.

Mohebi said Tehran would no longer limit its military operations to retaliatory strikes.

Mohebi stressed that Iran’s missile stockpile has increased 1.5 times since the 12-day war between Iran and Israel in June 2025. He did not provide specific figures.

“The quality of the missiles has improved significantly, and their range, destructive power and accuracy in hitting targets have increased,” the spokesman said.

Moreover, Mohebi said Iranian forces were in the “stage of preparing to unveil the ‘father of all bombs’. This is something new for the enemy.”

Meanwhile, attacks in the Strait of Hormuz continued unabated.

The IRGC’s navy said on Thursday that four vessels it accused of being involved in illegal oil transfers were struck and caught fire in the northern Gulf. Three other vessels hit mines west of the strait, it added.

Before the war, one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas supplies passed through the Strait of Hormuz. While shipments through the strait are still below those levels, oil shipments from the region returned to pre-war levels last month as exporters found alternative ways to ship out their oil and gas, including using pipelines.

However, a flurry of recent attacks in the key waterway and the fighting between Yemen’s Houthis and its Saudi-backed, internationally recognised government, which has resulted in Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia, have once again sent oil prices surging. Brent crude climbed above $110 a barrel on Thursday amid fears of further disruptions to regional energy supplies.

Why the shift?

Iran’s shift towards an offensive military doctrine reflects Tehran’s determination to make future US-Israeli attacks significantly more costly, according to analysts.

Negar Mortazavi, senior fellow at the Centre for International Policy, told Al Jazeera that Tehran was drawing lessons from the wars of 2025 and 2026 after its previous strategy of retaliation failed to prevent repeated attacks.

“Tehran now wants to establish a new equation: Any future attack on Iran will come at a much higher cost for the aggressors,” she told Al Jazeera.

Unable to match conventional US military capabilities, Iran is increasingly relying on asymmetric warfare, including missiles, drones and its leverage over the Strait of Hormuz, Mortazavi explained.

She said Tehran was pursuing a broader strategy aimed at imposing military, economic and political costs on Washington, including potentially influencing the November 3 US midterm elections.

“Iran wants to teach Washington a lesson: Attacking Iran comes with a high price, one that can even cost elections,” Mortazavi said, referring to US surveys that are predicting electoral losses for Trump’s Republican Party.

She added that Iranian officials were closely monitoring the elections, believing the economic fallout from the war could damage the Republican Party’s prospects of retaining control of Congress.

“The long-term objective is to establish deterrence so that future American administrations think twice before daring to attack Iran again,” she said.

Political analyst Rami Khouri said the doctrine was also intended to ensure that the consequences of attacks extend to the US, Israel and regional countries supporting their military operations.

“That’s one part of the strategy, that the suffering and the damage have to be equal and reciprocal,” Khouri, nonresident senior fellow at the Arab Center, told Al Jazeera.

Khouri argued that Tehran was also seeking to challenge what it views as longstanding Western domination of the region.

“The Iranians are actually working to try to end the colonial period,” he said.

He added that Iran’s strategy could extend the economic consequences of conflict far beyond the Middle East, affecting energy supplies, transportation, insurance costs and shipments of essential goods.

“The pain is going to go way beyond just the Middle East and Israel and the US and will hurt people in other parts of the world,” Khouri said.

What has the US said about resuming the war?

Trump has offered conflicting signals about Washington’s next steps.

On Wednesday, he said the US was no longer negotiating with Tehran and suggested developments were imminent. “We are going to have something one way or the other that’ll happen fairly soon,” he told reporters.

He also said Washington could end the war immediately but wanted a lasting outcome. “It’ll end very soon. We could leave now, but we want to make sure it lasts for a long time,” Trump said at a campaign rally in South Carolina.

Trump previously pledged not to attack Iran before the November 3 elections.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this week that reaching a peace agreement is extremely difficult and insisted that Iran must stop targeting commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

In recent weeks, Iran’s enrichment of uranium has re-emerged as a point of contention.

Rubio has maintained that Washington will reject any agreement allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons, which require highly enriched uranium. “The United States will not support any deal that creates a pathway for Iran to ever have a nuclear weapon,” he said on Wednesday.

Tehran insisted its right to enrichment is guaranteed under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Iran has offered a seven-day plan to restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for Washington ending its blockade of Iranian ports, easing sanctions and unfreezing Iranian assets.

Meanwhile, the US Department of State on Wednesday ordered nonemergency personnel and their families to leave Saudi Arabia after recent Houthi attacks.

The US embassy in Riyadh has warned of further attacks while American officials told the Reuters news agency that family members could be withdrawn from other Gulf missions.

State Department spokesman Tommy Piggott said departure orders for mission personnel across the Gulf have not been ordered, saying the current orders were for “employees and their family members in Saudi Arabia only”.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated on Sunday his pledge to topple Iran’s government, saying it was key to preventing it from rebuilding its nuclear programme and the “axis of resistance”, further raising prospects of an escalation.

Netanyahu made the comments as Israel’s longest-serving prime minister is locked in a tough battle to remain in power in Tuesday’s elections.

Is war imminent?

Analysts warned that renewed US-Israeli attacks on Iran are increasingly possible with both sides preparing for another confrontation despite the continued possibility of diplomacy.

“Another round of war seems to be approaching,” Mortazavi said.

“Both sides appear to be preparing for renewed confrontation while escalating tensions in the Strait of Hormuz increase the risk of a wider conflict,” she said.

Mortazavi added that the elections in the next two weeks in the US and Israel could influence the timing of military action but warned that the current trajectory appeared to favour escalation over negotiations.

Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, on Wednesday said, “Everyone must know that any action against Iran comes at a cost.”

“If diplomacy can create this understanding, we prefer diplomacy, but if the war continues, Iran has the necessary means to sustain its response,” Rezaei said, according to the IRNA news agency.

Echoing Mortazavi, Khouri warned that another confrontation could be approaching although he said US threats might still be part of a negotiating strategy.

“I think imminent conflict is on the cards, but I don’t know if war is the right word to use,” Khouri told Al Jazeera.

He said renewed strikes could target Iran’s critical infrastructure, including electricity networks, transportation systems, bridges and essential services.

“We’re probably going to get some severe attacks on a few targets that will try to make life in Iran very difficult,” he said.

However, Khouri cautioned that Iran’s ability to withstand another major military offensive while inflicting comparable damage on its adversaries remained uncertain.

“It’s not clear if Iran has the ability to withstand major new assaults against it,” he said, while stressing that Tehran was unlikely to surrender to military pressure.

Mekelle, Ethiopia- In Mekelle, shops are reopening, and banks are resuming services, but residents remain anxious about what comes next. Ethiopian federal forces and allied fighters retook the Tigray regional capital on October 4, as renewed fighting raised fears that the region’s fragile recovery could be derailed once again.

Tigray, in northern Ethiopia, is still recovering from the 2020–2022 war between federal forces and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), the region’s dominant political movement. For residents, the return of fighting has brought new uncertainty over jobs, education, security and the future.

Daily life resumes, but hardship remains.

Businesses and financial services are gradually reopening in Mekelle, but many households are struggling to afford necessities. Delayed salaries have left public employees struggling to cover food, rent and school costs, while years of conflict have depleted family savings.

“Things may be reopening, but that does not mean our problems are over. We still have expenses every day, and without our salaries, it is difficult to know how we will manage,” said Gebregziabher, a public servant in Mekelle.

The funding crisis has affected the wider public sector. In March, Tigray’s interim administration said it could no longer cover monthly salaries for about 137,000 civil servants because expected federal budget transfers had not arrived. In April, the regional finance bureau reported an 8.5-billion-birr (about $52,000) funding shortfall affecting salary payments and development projects.

For many residents, the reopening of businesses offers only a partial return to normality. Without reliable incomes and greater security, everyday expenses remain difficult to manage.

Students fear losing more time

For students in Tigray, renewed fighting has revived fears of another interruption to their education. Many already lost valuable study time during the previous war and worry about falling further behind.

In Adigrat, Shewit, a grade 10 student, said uncertainty about classes and security had left him worried about his future.

“I have already lost so much time because of the war. I am afraid that if our education is disrupted again, I will lose another year and fall further behind,” he said.

Some university students have left Tigray for Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’s capital, to seek transfers to other public universities. The Ministry of Education announced temporary placements at universities elsewhere in the country for students enrolled at institutions in Tigray. More than 5,000 returning students had applied by September 17–18, according to reporting on the ministry’s programme.

Abel, a third-year student at Axum University, travelled to Addis Ababa to request a transfer.

“I didn’t want to leave, but I also can’t keep putting my education on hold. I came to Addis to see if I can transfer to another university and continue my studies. I just want to finish what I started,” he said.

For students who have already lost years to conflict, the uncertainty means more than interrupted classes. It threatens to delay graduation and make an already difficult path to employment even harder.

Border communities fear a wider conflict

Near the Eritrean border, military movements and conflicting accounts of troop deployments have heightened fears that the fighting could spread beyond Tigray.

On October 8, The Associated Press reported claims by a commander allied with Ethiopia’s government that Eritrean troops had entered Adigrat earlier that week and Idaga Hamus the following day. The AP said it could not independently verify those accounts. The conflict-monitoring organisation ACLED separately reported Eritrean troops crossing the border at Zalambessa.

On October 13, Reuters reported that Ethiopian government forces had advanced into Zalambessa, citing people in contact with residents and other sources. The report said it remained unclear whether Eritrean troops or Tigrayan opposition fighters were still present in the town. The differing accounts underscored the difficulty of establishing control of individual towns as the fighting shifted.

The developments have unfolded amid worsening relations between Addis Ababa and Asmara. On October 8, Ethiopia’s foreign minister, Gedion Timothewos, accused Eritrea of sending troops as far as 60km (37 miles) into Ethiopian territory in several areas of Tigray and appealed to the United Nations Security Council to respond.

Eritrea has denied invading Ethiopian territory. Its government said Ethiopia’s accusations amounted to a declaration of war and called on the Security Council to take action against Ethiopia. The competing claims have raised fears that renewed fighting in Tigray could lead to a direct confrontation between the two neighbours.

Ethiopia and Eritrea fought on the same side during the 2020–2022 Tigray war, when Eritrean forces supported the federal government against the TPLF. Their deteriorating relations have added a regional dimension to the renewed conflict.

In Zalambessa, residents are watching developments with concern. One resident, who declined to be named, said the uncertainty made it difficult to know what to expect in the coming weeks.

An uncertain road ahead

On October 16, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed announced a six-month caretaker administration for Tigray, tasked with restoring public services, helping displaced people return and preparing the region for elections. The announcement followed the federal forces’ takeover of Mekelle and other major towns.

The federal government says the temporary administration will help restore stability and pave the way for elected regional leadership. The TPLF has opposed the federal advance, and it remains uncertain how effectively the new administration will operate across the region.

For residents, the immediate concerns are whether salaries will be paid, schools and health facilities will function, and displaced families will be able to return safely.

In Zalambessa, Gebrehiwot said residents knew from experience what another conflict could bring.

“People are worried because we know what war means for this area. We have already suffered enough, and nobody wants to see things reach that point again,” he said.

What role will the Latino vote have in the upcoming midterm elections?

In the latest episode of “The De Los Podcast,” hosts and Times editors Fidel Martinez and Suzy Exposito welcome Times columnist Gustavo Arellano to dissect the increasingly important electorate, one that will help decide races locally and at the national level.

Long considered a reliable vote for the Democratic Party, Latinos shifted rightward in 2024.

“The Republican Party has always known — going back to the days of [President Dwight D.] Eisenhower — that there is something there in this demographic as it starts getting bigger,” Arellano said.

Arellano documented the history of Democratic support among California Latinos, highlighting the passage of 1994’s California Proposition 187 — which prohibited undocumented immigrants from using the state’s public services including non-emergency healthcare and education resources — as a turning point.

“It turned a whole generation of Latinos into voting Democrat, but it also showed the Republican Party that anti-immigrant politics work,” he said. “The problem with the Democratic Party in California for basically the next 30 years is all they would do is say, ‘You as a Latino should never vote Republican because they did 187.’”

A Pew Research Center study showed that in the 2024 presidential election, a slight majority of Latinos voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris — but they also voted for President Trump at a much higher rate than they did in 2020.

Trump garnered 48% of the Latino vote compared with Harris’ 51% share and significantly jumped past the 36% clip he received in the 2020 presidential election. The study’s results reveal that the initial 2024 exit polls actually underestimated Latinos’ Trump support, with the Republican candidate tracking at 46% of the Latino vote on election day.

Arellano contributed this shift in voting pattern to a lack of effective messaging from Democrats and widespread material hardships among Latinos.

“[You now have] an entire generation who have grown up and life has been harder for them because they are working-class folks,” he said. “And they’re saying, ‘The Republicans are racist? Well, life hasn’t improved for me as a Democrat, let me just take my chance with the racist.’”

But recent polling shows Latinos might have buyers’ remorse. The community cited increased cost of living, immigration tactics, involvement in wars across the world and a struggling economy as reasons for retreating from Republican leadership. Trump’s approval rating among Latinos dipped to 27% in an early October NBC News study. That same poll found that Democrats have a 24-point lead on whom Latino voters want to see in control of Congress.

“The Republican Party was given this extraordinary gift of the Latino vote, and what did they do? They blew it,” Arellano said.

He spotlighted Texas as a prime of example of how Republicans squandered their grip on Latino voters. The demographic voted heavily in favor of Trump in 2024, even in the long-Democratic borderland region of the state.

“Texas [Republicans] gerrymandered their state because they thought, “We have now this permanent Latino shift to our party, so let’s make these districts even more Latino because they’re going to vote Republican,’” Arellano said. “And now Latinos are running away [from the Republican Party] hard.”

Across the country, Latinos have also soured on the Republican Party due to the public display that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have put on in recent years, Arellano noted.

“To see people dragged and beaten … that weighs on you,” he said. “On top of that, the economy sucks, we’re in a stupid war, this president is increasingly saying crazy things … and now this immigration stuff. So [people are wondering] what good is it to be with [Trump] now.”

You can watch the entire episode below.