Tech billionaire Elon Musk is seeking to have OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and President Greg Brockman fired as part of his lawsuit against the artificial intelligence giant, court documents filed on Tuesday show.

The mogul sued OpenAI in 2024, accusing it of defrauding him of $38 million in initial funding he contributed when co-founding the company in 2015, under the understanding that it would remain a nonprofit. The AI startup, valued at $852 billion, restructured late last year, and is now run as a nonprofit that holds a 26% stake in its for-profit arm, which includes ChatGPT.

Musk’s lawyers are seeking to “strip Sam Altman and Greg Brockman of their positions of authority and the personal financial benefits they extracted from OpenAI’s illicit for-profit operations and conversion,” according to the latest filing.

Musk left OpenAI in 2018 due to disagreements with Altman, bought Twitter (now X) in 2022, and launched his own artificial intelligence firm xAI the following year.

In February, xAI and OpenAI announced deals with the Pentagon to integrate their artificial intelligence tools into the US military’s classified systems. Altman claimed that his company agreed to cooperate under the condition that its tools would not be used for mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.

Anthropic’s newest AI model is “extremely autonomous,” can reason like an advanced security researcher and is far too powerful for public release, the company claimed on Wednesday, as it continues to fight the Pentagon in court.

In Washington, the two-week ceasefire with Iran has been hastily presented as the beginning of de-escalation and as proof that pressure had once again created the conditions for diplomacy. Yet once the political packaging is removed and events are viewed in their true strategic dimension, the picture looks very different.

What really happened is a forced interruption, reached under pressure and surrounded by incompatible interpretations in Washington and Tehran. The temporary nature of this pause, its mediated character, and the striking divergence in how its meaning is understood all indicate that this is not the end of a war, but a breathing space within an unfinished conflict whose core political contradictions remain unresolved.

More importantly, in the eyes of many outside observers and much of global public opinion, Iran now appears to be the clear winner of the present battle. It absorbed the blow, answered with force and dignity, refused capitulation, and most importantly, gradually shifted control over the very logic of a war imposed upon it. The US and Israel had expected to define the rules of the conflict and then present any compelled Iranian retreat as proof of their own victory. What happened in practice was the opposite. Iran not only refused externally imposed terms, but also raised the cost of war to a point where the American military campaign became a political liability for the US itself. That is why this moment is increasingly perceived as a sign that even under conditions of overwhelming technological and military superiority, the US can no longer automatically convert a campaign of strikes into the submission of its opponent.

Why Washington backed off

From the outset, the operation rested on a familiar formula of coercion. The US and Israel proceeded on the assumption that a series of destructive strikes combined with intimidating rhetoric would compel Iran to accept external demands. This logic has long been a hallmark of American policy in the Middle East. First a condition of maximal pressure is created, then the adversary is left with a choice between submission and devastation, after which any tactical retreat is presented as evidence that Washington has imposed its will. But Iran once again exposed the central weakness of that model. A large state with internal mobilization, a resilient political system, and a strong historical consciousness cannot necessarily be broken by a single cycle of punishment, even when that punishment inflicts enormous damage. Iran is not invulnerable, but it has shown itself to be extremely hard to break. Its leadership remained in place, the state system did not disintegrate, its capacity to retaliate was not reduced to irrelevance, and its influence over the strategic environment around the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, by all indications, remained intact.

For that reason, Donald Trump’s sudden reversal in the final hours before the expiry of his own ultimatum should not be read as the confident gesture of a victor, but as the compelled maneuver of a leader urgently seeking an exit from an increasingly dangerous configuration. Shortly before the pause was announced, American rhetoric had already escalated to threats against civilian infrastructure if Iran did not ensure passage through Hormuz on Washington’s terms. Such signals were widely taken as evidence that the crisis had approached an extremely dangerous threshold. The subsequent pivot toward a temporary halt in attacks and toward negotiations means that pressure had begun to work not only against Iran, but against the American side itself. Continuing the war threatened Washington with multiple layers of cost. Military uncertainty remained high, allies were uneasy, markets were reacting nervously, and the prospect of a prolonged conflict without a swift and convincing outcome was becoming increasingly real.

Iran’s losses have hardened it

From a military standpoint, the US and Israel undeniably inflicted serious damage on Iran. Infrastructure was struck, losses were significant, economic pressure intensified, and social strain inside the country increased. But war cannot be measured simply by the number of destroyed targets. In the end, war is judged by whether force achieves the political outcome for which it was launched. And the internal political collapse that the architects of the campaign may have hoped for did not occur.

Iran, by contrast, responded not only militarily, but politically and psychologically. External pressure on this scale almost always produces a double effect. It heightens fear, exhaustion, and anger, yet it can also sharply strengthen a sense of historical community, especially when society perceives events not as pressure on a government alone, but as an attack on the country itself, on its sovereignty, and on its right to independent existence. That is precisely what appears to have happened here. Even if anxiety, confusion, and fatigue accumulated within Iran, the war simultaneously fostered internal consolidation, mass mobilization, and a strengthened conviction that national survival itself was at stake. This is one of the most important reasons why Iran now appears, in the eyes of many external observers, as the winner of the current phase. It turned its own resilience into a political resource, while its adversaries, having begun the war from a position of strength, ultimately found themselves searching for a formula to stop it.

This does not mean that Iran is free of internal problems. It remains a complex country marked by serious social, economic, and political contradictions. But the scale of the attack altered the hierarchy of threats within the country. When a state is subjected to direct strikes, when threats are made against its infrastructure, and when external aggression becomes openly demonstrative, internal dissatisfaction recedes behind the logic of national survival. In that sense, the US and Israel achieved the opposite of what they may have intended. Instead of loosening the internal fabric of Iranian society, they contributed to tightening it. The more the war came to be seen in Iran as an assault on the nation as a whole, the less likely internal political fragmentation became, and the greater society’s willingness to see resistance as the only dignified response.

The outcome for Iran is far from pure triumph. Yet politically it is of enormous importance. Yes, the losses were severe. Yes, economic pressure has not disappeared. Yes, the risk of renewed escalation remains. But in international politics, what matters is not only who suffered more destruction, but who could not be broken. Iran has not been reduced to a passive object of someone else’s will. On the contrary, it has managed to seize the political initiative. If one side begins a war in the expectation of forcing capitulation and ends by turning to mediation and bargaining over the parameters of negotiation, then its original design has already failed.

Ripples across the world 

The regional consequences of the war were equally revealing. The conflict very quickly ceased to be merely about the US, Israel, and Iran. It cast doubt on the entire security architecture of the Middle East, an architecture that for decades rested on the American military umbrella. For a long time, Arab monarchies were offered a relatively simple formula. The US would provide security, and regional partners would pay for it with contracts, political loyalty, and a partial limitation of their own autonomy. But a large war with Iran showed that this structure no longer appears either unconditional or reliable. Any major confrontation with Tehran automatically turns the bases, ports, energy infrastructure, and shipping routes of Washington’s allies into zones of heightened risk. That is why the reaction of Gulf markets to the ceasefire looked almost euphoric in its relief – enormous relief that the region had, at least temporarily, stepped back from the edge of catastrophe.

At the global level, the consequences also extended far beyond the regional theater. Any crisis around the Strait of Hormuz immediately affects the world economy, maritime logistics, insurance markets, energy prices, and the broader psychology of financial systems. The very reaction of markets to the halt in hostilities showed that this war was a systemic danger. This is especially painful for the US because it undermines one of the central pillars of America’s image in the world. For decades, it has sought to present itself not merely as a global source of order. Yet with the Iran war and its consequences, American power increasingly came to be seen as a producer of chaos, which then attempted to repackage a temporary pause as a diplomatic success.

What are the chances for a lasting peace?

The current pause looks not like a strategic settlement, but like a tactical stoppage. The reversal by the White House was simply too abrupt to be seen as part of a long-calculated design. Only recently, the rhetoric had approached an almost apocalyptic register, and suddenly Washington was speaking of a workable basis for future agreement. Such contrasts usually mean that the original scenario either failed or became too dangerous to sustain.

The negotiation process itself is of particular importance. Its structure points to a difficult and complex bargaining process. The American side seeks to present events as the result of successfully applied pressure, while Tehran emphasizes that a ceasefire does not cancel its sovereign claims and does not amount to recognition that the aggressor was right.

There already seems to be struggle over the interpretation of the pause itself. Iran has reportedly submitted to the US, via Pakistani intermediaries, a 10-point peace plan that has to be the basis for any lasting peace it will accept. This plan includes several conditions that Washington has already rejected in the past. But even the fact that such a plan is formally under discussion shows that the US is now compelled to discuss a framework for halting the conflict, while Iran is in a position to advance conditions of its own.

The mediated character of the negotiations suggests that direct trust between the sides is almost entirely absent, and that each fears being trapped within the other’s interpretive framework. In such a context, a mediator is needed to construct a formula sufficiently flexible for both sides to accept in practice without publicly abandoning their own narrative. Washington wants the pause to be seen as the fruit of force. Tehran wants it to be seen as the fruit of endurance and successful resistance. This is the central struggle within the negotiation process.

As for the conditions of the parties, they arise from opposite strategic imperatives. The US wants to restore navigational security, reduce Iran’s capacity for retaliation, and frame negotiations in a way that can be presented to an American audience as evidence that deterrence has been restored. The White House also needs to avoid allowing the conflict to become a prolonged, costly, and politically toxic campaign. Iran, by contrast, wants to fix in place the fact of its own steadfastness, obtain guarantees against renewed strikes, prevent the pause from becoming merely a prelude to a new wave of pressure, and preserve its right to dictate at least some of the terms of future discussion. That is why this conflict cannot be quickly dissolved. The sides are arguing not only over mechanisms, but over the meaning of what has happened. One side is trying to prove the effectiveness of coercion. The other has already, in effect, demonstrated its limits.

Israel was a direct aggressor and an active participant in the pressure campaign, yet in recent weeks its role noticeably receded into the background, because Trump’s sharp statements and ultimatums effectively overshadowed the Israeli factor in the international information space. As a result, Netanyahu largely succeeded in removing himself from the center of critical attention at precisely the moment when that was most advantageous for him. While much of the world was preoccupied with the war around Iran, Israel continued its occupation, destruction, and military pressure in southern Lebanon. This goes to show how easily, amid a larger crisis, attention to Israeli actions can be pushed to the margins even when Israel remains one of the principal sources of destabilization on adjacent fronts.

If the pause does not in fact extend to Lebanon, then that means that the war has not really ended – it has merely been partially reconfigured. One front has been temporarily cooled, another remains active, and the possibility of their renewed convergence remains. This is the clearest sign of a tactical pause. Strategic peace presupposes a new order and a new equilibrium. Nothing of the kind has emerged here. No actor has renounced escalation as such. No one has definitively accepted a new regional configuration. The confrontation has been interrupted, but not overcome.

In the end, the war exposed a structural miscalculation in American strategy. The US and Israel did not abandon the logic of coercion, but they were forced to recognize that this particular phase of coercion had failed to produce the political result they expected. Washington appears to have underestimated Iranian resilience, the scale of Iran’s response, the sensitivity of global markets, the anxiety of its allies, and its own domestic political risks. That is why there arose an urgent need to shift the crisis into a format of temporary ceasefire and mediated negotiation. For Iran, by contrast, the story, despite enormous losses, became a moment of political affirmation.

The most enduring outcome of these weeks will likely be measured by a change in global perception. The world saw that Washington is still capable of driving events to the threshold of a major regional catastrophe. But it also saw that Washington can no longer turn military escalation into stable political order with the same confidence and speed. The world saw that Iran can be gravely wounded, yet is difficult to break. It also saw that even though the war was imposed by the US and Israel, Iran responded in such a way that, in the eyes of many societies, it was Iran that displayed resilience, initiative, and strategic composure. That is why the present pause is perceived not as a triumph of American strength, but as evidence of its limits.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said a ceasefire and negotiations with the US are “unreasonable,” accusing Washington of violating three of Tehran’s 10 conditions to end the war.

Vice President J.D. Vance said he has seen three different 10-point demands from Iran, which have contributed to “misunderstanding,” claiming that the first draft was “probably written by ChatGPT” and went straight “in the garbage.”

Washington and Tehran agreed to a two-week suspension of warfare, after President Trump said Iran’s second proposal delivered via Pakistan offers a “workable basis on which to negotiate.” However, the deal seems flimsy after multiple violations ahead of planned talks in Pakistan.

Israel launched its “biggest yet” series of attacks on Beirut, reportedly killing hundreds of civilians on Wednesday. Iran has decried the “savage massacre,” and the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force has pledged revenge.

Meanwhile, Trump is reportedly mulling ways to punish NATO members who refused to help the US in its war against Iran. The bloc’s chief Mark Rutte praised Trump’s “leadership,” while admitting that “some” members failed the test.

• Iranian parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has accused the US of violating three key clauses of Tehran’s 10‑point proposal, including non‑compliance with the Lebanon ceasefire, the intrusion of a drone into Iranian airspace, and “denial of Iran’s right to enrichment.”

• The US observed an uptick in traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, according to the White House. However, a leading maritime industry source, Lloyd’s List, has reported that only three vessels have transited the Strait of Hormuz since the US-Iran ceasefire was announced early on Wednesday.

• The Trump administration could pull out American troops from the European NATO member states that closed their airspace to US warplanes or limited the use of their bases for strikes on Iran, according to the Wall Street Journal sources.

Follow our live coverage below for continuous updates. You can also read our previous updates here.

Nine deaths and disappearances of high-profile US scientists in the last three years has set a “disturbing pattern,” according to US intelligence sources cited by the Daily Mail.

In the latest incident, the body of missing cancer research scientist Jason Thomas was discovered in a Massachusetts lake last month. The month prior, retired Air Force General William McCasland, who reportedly worked on the US nuclear program, went missing, while astrophysicist Carl Grillmair was gunned down on his porch in California.

“You can say these are all suspicious, and these are scientists who have worked in critical technology,” the Daily Mail cited former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker as saying.

Foreign intelligence services belonging to both US allies and adversaries have targeted Americans in possession of top scientific secrets over the decades, he reportedly said. “It’s been happening since the Cold War… Especially when nuclear technology and missile technology were first coming to the forefront.”

Prior to his disappearance, McCasland led the Air Force Research Lab (AFRL), where he reportedly oversaw the funding of a jet engine project by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) materials chief Monica Reza, who also went missing last year, just months after assuming the position.

Grillmair’s work on the US NEOWISE and NEO Surveyor orbital telescope is also tied to the Air Force, as both are used by the US military to track foreign satellites and missile launches, the outlet reports.

Anthony Chavez and Melissa Casias, who both worked at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), which has cooperated with the AFRL on nuclear research, were reported missing last summer. Both reportedly left their New Mexico homes on foot and left their cars, keys, wallets and phones before disappearing.

Another respected physicist Nuno Loureiro, who was reportedly working on breakthrough fusion energy research, was fatally shot in Massachusetts in December.

The administration of US President Donald Trump is “weaponizing Christianity” to justify its actions in the Middle East, while Israel continues to act with impunity as much of the West turns a blind eye, Irish activist and satirist Tadhg Hickey has said.

Appearing on RT’s East Meets West show, hosted by Tara Reade and Olga Bataman, Hickey described it as ironic that Trump and other officials in his administration have invoked biblical messaging in their public statements on the war against Iran, when in reality their actions are “going further and further away from what Christ’s teachings were.”

“It’s a weaponizing of Christianity that I find really appalling. It’s really vulgar this idea that Jesus is this kind of agent of war for these people, and there’s nothing Christian about their values or their behaviour,” Hickey said.

He described Israel as acting with total impunity in Gaza and elsewhere, and attempting to “get away with as much as they can” while Trump is in the White House, safe in the knowledge that they will face no resistance from Washington or the broader West.

Hickey also discussed his experience of being detained in Israel after attempting to deliver aid to Gaza as part of the Freedom Flotilla in 2025.

“We were abducted in international waters, brought to a terrorist prison… put into prisoner garb, denied medical attention, no access to lawyers, no yard time. There was a 75-year-old Irish guy, he was denied access to his insulin… it was a miracle he survived. I don’t think they actually would have tried to kill one of us, but if one of us had died in one their cells, that would have been a big bonus [for them], because it would have been a deterrent for people going again,” the activist said.

Watch the full episode with Hickey below.

A ceasefire deal struck by Washington and Tehran is a “disaster” and “failure,” several prominent Israeli politicians have said. Israel was left out of the equation, they argued, calling it a strategic mistake on the part of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

US President Donald Trump announced a two-week pause to the US-Israeli war on Iran to negotiate a long-term solution to the conflict on the basis of a 10-point plan put forward by Tehran. It reportedly includes Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz, acceptance of its uranium enrichment, the lifting of sanctions, and the cessation of war on all fronts, including Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

Netanyahu’s office said on Wednesday it “supports” Trump’s decision while maintaining that Israel would continue its military campaign against the Iran-linked Hezbollah group in neighboring Lebanon.

“Netanyahu failed politically, failed strategically, and didn’t meet a single one of the goals that he himself set,” the lawmaker said in a post on X. Former Deputy Economic Minister Yair Golan, who leads the Democrats party, also branded the development a “total failure” in a social media post, adding that Iran emerged from the conflict stronger than before.

MP Avigdor Liberman, the head of the Yisrael Beytenu party, also claimed that peace with Iran under the conditions listed in its plan would only lead to another conflict later.

The US and Israel launched an unprovoked bombing campaign against the Islamic Republic in late February, openly stating they were seeking regime change and an end to Iran’s nuclear program. The conflict killed thousands and caused unprecedented disruption to global energy supplies, mainly due to Tehran’s effective closure of the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

Regardless of how the conflict between the United States and Iran formally concludes, its symbolism is already unmistakable. An ancient civilization, one of the oldest continuous states in human history, has emerged as the final obstacle to the project of American global dominance. That alone tells us something about the direction in which the world is moving.

For historians, the deeper meaning of the current Middle Eastern crisis lies in the confrontation between two powers at opposite ends of the historical spectrum. Iran is arguably the world’s oldest centralized state, with roots stretching back to around 530 BC. Since then, it has never ceased to exist as a unified political entity. That continuity is remarkable. Even Russia, the major Western European powers, India and China have all experienced fragmentation at various points in their histories.

The United States, by contrast, is among the youngest major nations – barely 250 years old. Its history is ten times shorter than that of Persia. In that sense, the present conflict pits antiquity against modernity, a civilization forged over millennia against a state that rose rapidly in a uniquely favorable historical moment.

In purely military terms, such comparisons mean little. The United States retains overwhelming destructive capacity. If it chose to do so, it could devastate Iran. This is, after all, the only country in history to have used nuclear weapons against civilian populations. That fact alone should temper any illusions about the limits of American power.

Yet the long-term significance of this confrontation lies elsewhere. It isn’t about whether Iran can defeat the United States in a conventional sense. It’s about whether the current international order, one shaped by American dominance, can continue to function as it has.

This doesn’t make it invincible. But it does mean that it must be taken seriously, not only as a military opponent, but as a political and historical actor. Iranian decision-making reflects a depth of strategic thinking that few contemporary states can match. It’s precisely this quality that makes Iran such a difficult counterpart, both for allies and adversaries.

The United States, meanwhile, has long sought to imprint itself on history as a transformative force. Yet its successes have been tied to exceptional circumstances rather than intrinsic durability. Its meteoric rise in the 20th century was made possible by a unique convergence of factors.

First, that century witnessed an unprecedented clash of ideas. For the first time in history, global politics was driven not only by states and interests, but by competing ideologies – liberalism, communism, socialism and nationalism – each claiming universal relevance.

Second, Western Europe, which had dominated world affairs for centuries, was exhausted by internal conflict. Russia and China, though powerful, were primarily concerned with preserving their independence rather than projecting global influence. This left a vacuum that the United States was uniquely positioned to fill.

Finally, the collapse of European empires created a vast number of new states, many of them vulnerable. The United States lacked the capacity to subdue major powers directly, but it could exert influence over smaller, weaker countries. This allowed it to construct a global system of influence that, under normal historical conditions, would have been difficult to sustain.

That illusion is now fading.

The United States is facing a profound internal crisis, intellectual and political. Its political system has become increasingly polarized, its strategic thinking narrower, and its ability to formulate coherent long-term policies more limited. These weaknesses are visible in the decisions and contradictions of recent administrations.

Even Western Europe, once firmly within the American orbit, is showing signs of resistance. The assumption that the transatlantic relationship would remain unchallenged indefinitely is proving to be misplaced.

In this context, the conflict with Iran takes on broader significance. It is not merely another regional war. It is part of a larger process in which the United States is being forced to adapt to a reality that other states have always known: that no single power can exercise uncontested control over global affairs.

Iran’s role in this process is, in many ways, symbolic. It’s not a perfect state. It lacks the economic resources of China, the mobilization capacity of Russia, or the intellectual traditions of Western Europe. Even a victory over the United States would not transform it into a global hegemon.

And yet, it may prove decisive in bringing an era to a close.

The consequences extend far beyond the Middle East. What is at stake is not simply the outcome of a particular conflict, but the broader structure of international relations. The idea that one state can impose its will universally, shaping the global order in its own image, is being tested, and found wanting.

History offers many examples of powers that aspired to such dominance. None succeeded in the long term. Even those that appeared closest ultimately encountered constraints, structural or strategic, that they couldn’t overcome.

The United States is no exception.

The end of this illusion will mark the true conclusion of the 20th century, an era defined by ideological confrontation, unprecedented globalization and the temporary ascendancy of a single power. What follows will be more familiar: a world of multiple centers of power, competing interests and shifting alliances.

The war between the United States and Iran is one of the moments through which this transition is taking place.

Regardless of how it ends, one conclusion is already possible. Iran, by standing its ground, has made a significant contribution to the evolution of the international system. It has become, in effect, the final weight that brings down a structure built on overreach and illusion.

The world won’t be the same. Not because of the destruction or the diplomacy that may follow, but because a fundamental idea, that of uncontested global hegemony, is losing its hold.

The US-Iran ceasefire, which was announced last night by US President Donald Trump, brings a cautious sense of optimism and hope that the war may eventually come to an end. However, a ceasefire is not a peace agreement. The two-week pause in hostilities could unfold according to different scenarios: it could lead to meaningful negotiations and ultimately a comprehensive peace deal, or it could be terminated, and the conflict would enter a new phase. 

Moreover, we shouldn’t underestimate the fragility of such agreements. A ceasefire can be broken at any moment – within days or even hours. It’s entirely possible that Washington could abruptly change its stance; for instance, Trump might claim that Iran is acting in bad faith and use that as justification to end the ceasefire and resume military operations.

At the same time, the very structure of the ceasefire raises important questions. Reports indicate that the agreement includes a 10-point plan proposed by Iran, which the US has acknowledged as the basis for current negotiations. These talks are expected to take place in Islamabad, with Pakistan playing the role of mediator.

Both the ceasefire and America’s acceptance of Iran’s proposal as a foundation for negotiations raise many questions. If Iran has truly been “defeated” as Trump has repeatedly claimed during the 39 days of intense conflict, or if it has been “effectively destroyed” as his comments suggest, then why is Washington considering Tehran’s offers as a starting point for peace talks?

The aforementioned 10-point plan – which is said to form the basis for a potential peace agreement and which, at least rhetorically, Trump seems willing to discuss – deserves particular scrutiny. The points include commitments to non-aggression, continued Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, acceptance of Iran’s right to enrich uranium, the lifting of primary and secondary sanctions, the termination of UN Security Council resolutions and IAEA Board of Governors’ decisions, compensation payments to Iran, the withdrawal of American troops from the region, and the cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including in Lebanon.

Agreeing to this point would mean that the US is effectively endorsing a significant reduction of its geopolitical influence in the Middle East. Therefore, it’s reasonable to conclude that the US will be reluctant to take such a step. Moreover, with the 250th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence coming up, it’s unlikely that Trump (who coincidentally is also celebrating his 80th birthday this year) would want to mark this occasion with what could be seen as a geopolitical capitulation.

The proposal to end hostilities across all fronts, including in Lebanon, also raises serious concerns. Even if such a demand is formally included in the negotiation package, its practical implementation is highly questionable. Reports are already emerging about continued strikes on Hezbollah militia positions in Lebanon, with no signs that Israel is prepared to fully scale back its military operations or alter its current strategy. In fact, Israel will likely be focused on securing at least some form of victory for itself. Thus, this appears to be more of a desired political outcome for Iran than a realistic commitment that could be swiftly and consistently executed by all parties.

Similarly, the idea of compensation payments to Iran seems even less feasible. Politically, it’s hard to imagine the US directly agreeing to compensate Tehran for war damage. This would not only impose financial costs on Washington but would also symbolize an acknowledgment of responsibility – something the US is unlikely to accept. Consequently, this point seems more like an element of Iran’s maximalist position rather than a genuine condition for any future agreement.

Of particular interest is the point regarding Iran’s continued control over the Strait of Hormuz. Here, we may find one of the key geopolitical priorities. If we were to hypothetically assume that the US agreed to such a formulation, it would signify much more than mere acknowledgment of the status quo. Essentially, it would equate to recognizing Iran’s dominance over one of the most crucial strategic nodes in global energy trade. In other words, Washington would be indirectly acknowledging Tehran’s geopolitical triumph.

In this context, other proposals appear more realistic – specifically, a partial or phased lifting of key sanctions, as well as a potential reevaluation or suspension of certain international legal restrictions, including UN Security Council resolutions and IAEA governing board decisions. These elements could become bargaining chips, as they allow for flexible interpretation, gradual implementation, and the potential for politically advantageous presentations for both parties.

When it comes to recognizing Iran’s right to enrich uranium, the US is likely to adopt a more complex and ambiguous stance. Washington may not directly deny Iran’s right to limited nuclear activities, but it will likely encumber that right with numerous conditions, technical constraints, verification mechanisms, and international oversight, effectively narrowing Tehran’s operational freedom. In essence, the US will probably seek a diplomatic framework that appears to be a compromise but fundamentally preserves pressure and control.

Therefore, viewing the 10-point plan not as a mere declaration but as a potential foundation for a real agreement reveals that its provisions vary significantly in terms of feasibility. Some points demonstrate Iran’s maximalist negotiating position and are unlikely to be fully accepted by the US. Others may serve as points for negotiation and compromise. Only a few points seem to form a realistic basis for further discussions. Consequently, the very act of discussing this proposal is important not so much as a sign of impending peace but as an indicator of the conditions under which Tehran seeks to solidify its military, political, and geo-economic positions in a post-conflict reality.

Firstly, Pakistan has traditionally maintained working relationships with both Iran and the US. Despite complicated relations with Washington in recent years, Pakistan remains a crucial regional player with communication channels to both sides. Its ties with Iran are bolstered not only by geographical proximity and shared security concerns but also by pragmatic cooperation in energy and border stability. Moreover, Pakistan is the only Muslim nation recognized as a nuclear power, which considerably elevates its stakes as a negotiator.

Secondly, selecting Pakistan as a mediator may indicate a desire to move away from traditional negotiation venues associated with the West or international organizations, opting instead for a more neutral or flexible diplomatic environment. This approach can reduce public pressure and facilitate negotiations in a more confidential format. 

In addition, for Pakistan, this represents a significant opportunity to elevate its international standing. By acting as a mediator in such a sensitive conflict, Islamabad positions itself to play a more prominent role in regional and even global politics. Moreover, it’s important to consider the broader context – specifically, the increasing influence of ‘Global South’ nations in conflict resolution when mediation increasingly extends beyond the traditional Western diplomatic sphere.

As for the ceasefire and the upcoming negotiations, the situation remains highly uncertain at this stage. The ceasefire should be viewed not as a resolution to the conflict but rather as a temporary pause, the outcome of which is still unclear. 

US President Donald Trump has, in the end, found a way out of the situation he created by embarking on a reckless war against Iran. The threat of destroying an entire civilization provided him with the pretext to step back.

Indirect negotiations between Tehran and Washington, conducted through intermediaries, primarily Pakistan and, behind it, China, have produced a ceasefire. Trump may claim that Iran was cowed by his threats, but the reality is different.

A ceasefire under conditions where the Strait of Hormuz remains under Iranian control suggests that Tehran has not backed down. Washington, in effect, has.

It is too early to speak of any “golden age” emerging from these talks. But the outlines of the conflict’s outcome are already visible.

1. Iran has held firm.

For decades, Iran faced the threat of joint aggression by the United States and Israel. That threat has now been tested, and has failed to break Tehran. Neither Washington nor Tel Aviv proved capable of imposing their will by force.

The result is clear: Iran has consolidated its status as a major regional power, standing alongside Israel as one of the decisive actors in the Middle East.

The Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf have discovered both their vulnerability and their dependence. In a conflict between the US/Israel and Iran, they proved unable to defend their own interests. Meanwhile, American bases on their territory, far from guaranteeing security, became magnets for Iranian retaliation.

Conclusion: US security guarantees have been shown to be unreliable. This lesson will not be lost on Washington’s allies.

3. Military power has reasserted primacy.

The conflict has underlined a broader truth about the emerging international order: military force outweighs economic and financial leverage.

As Pushkin wrote:

“All is mine on earth, said gold.
All is mine, said iron cold.
I will buy it all, said gold.
I will take, said iron cold.”

Sanctioned Iran, burdened by economic difficulties, has effectively withstood, and in strategic terms defeated, a global superpower. Meanwhile, its far wealthier southern neighbors have been reduced to little more than spectators, or worse, targets.

Conclusion: In today’s world, hard power determines outcomes.

Iran has emerged from the conflict intact, but transformed. During the war, a shift long anticipated by analysts appears to have taken place. Real power has moved away from the clerical establishment and toward the security apparatus.

The country is no longer defined primarily by its formal leadership, but by the senior ranks of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Conclusion: Iran will remain an Islamic republic, but one in which the IRGC plays the decisive role. Its policy is likely to be firm, disciplined and pragmatic.

Moscow has navigated the conflict with a degree of strategic discipline. It has maintained its principles, calling aggression by its name, expressing solidarity with Iran, and vetoing what it viewed as an unbalanced UN Security Council resolution on the Strait of Hormuz.

At the same time, it has preserved working relations with key actors: explaining its position to Gulf partners, avoiding direct confrontation with Trump, and refraining from damaging ties with Israel.

The broader consequences of the conflict, a temporary spike in oil prices, strains in transatlantic relations, and a further diversion of US attention from Ukraine, have unfolded largely independently of Russia’s direct involvement.

Looking ahead

The war has opened new opportunities for Moscow. Iran, having endured a severe test, has strengthened its regional and international standing. This creates conditions for closer cooperation between Russia and Tehran.

More broadly, the outlines of a new Eurasian security architecture are becoming visible. Russia, China, Iran – alongside states such as Belarus and North Korea – form the core of this emerging system.

In the south, Iran has effectively halted an American geopolitical advance. In the west, Russia seeks to do the same in Ukraine. In the east, China continues to expand its military capabilities while advancing its diplomatic agenda.

It is through such developments, not declarations, but shifts in power and alignment, that a multipolar world is taking shape.

A two-week ceasefire announced by US President Donald Trump appeared to have brought a temporary halt to the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Washington says it now aims to negotiate a long-term peace deal based on a “workable” 10-point proposal put forward by Tehran.

Over the past six weeks, the conflict has killed thousands, leaving much of Iran in rubble and its people defiant. It has also caused unprecedented disruption to global energy supplies, mainly due to Tehran’s effective closure of the strategic Strait of Hormuz. 

Here is what we know so far about the agreement, its terms, and the path ahead.

Who brokered the US-Iran deal?

The ceasefire was primarily brokered by Pakistan, which has been acting as a diplomatic intermediary between Washington and Tehran. In his announcement, Trump directly credited Pakistani leaders for his decision to suspend the bombing of Iran.

What is in Iran’s 10-point plan?

Iran has put forward a 10‑point proposal that Trump described as a “workable basis” for negotiations. According to Iran’s semi‑official Mehr News Agency, the plan includes:

What has Trump said about the peace plan?

Trump announced the “double-sided ceasefire,” stressing Iran’s agreement to ensure the “complete, immediate and safe opening” of the Strait of Hormuz through which roughly a fifth of the world’s daily oil supply passes. 

Trump has also stressed that Iran would no longer be allowed to enrich uranium and will have to dig up and remove all the “deeply buried Nuclear ‘dust’.”

In return, he said, the US has suspended planned strikes on Iranian infrastructure, including bridges, power plants and other key installations, pending negotiations. Trump said the US would also consider tariff and sanctions relief for Tehran. 

He also stated that the current Iranian plan is “not good enough” and warned that the US would resume its strikes if no final deal is reached by the new deadline.

What has Iran said about the ceasefire deal?

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council confirmed its acceptance of the ceasefire and said that negotiations with the US would begin in Islamabad on April 10, with a two-week period that may be extended by mutual agreement. 

The council stressed that the talks “do not mean the end of the war” and that Iran would continue military operations if its demands are not fully met.

Tehran framed the ceasefire as a “historic and crushing defeat” for the US, claiming Washington was forced to accept its 10-point plan as the basis for talks.

How has Israel responded to the truce?

Israel did not appear to be a part of the ceasefire discussions between the US and Iran, but has backed the deal. 

However, despite the temporary truce being ordered on all fronts, Israel has claimed the terms do not apply to Lebanon, where it has been conducting large scale airstrikes and has launched a ground invasion.

The death toll from Israeli strikes on Lebanon has exceeded 1,500 people since the start of the war, the country’s ministry of health has reported. Another 4,812 people have been injured, including hundreds of women and children, as well as dozens of paramedics and healthcare workers.

Is fighting still going on in the Middle East?

Despite the ceasefire, attacks have continued across the region. Israel has said it launched its largest wave of strikes on Lebanon since the war began, claiming to have fired 100 missiles in the span of just 10 minutes, supposedly targeting Hezbollah targets in Beirut and other areas across the country.

At least one oil refinery in Iran has also been hit, with several explosions reported at the Lavan refinery in southern Iran shortly after the ceasefire was announced. The cause of the blast is still unknown.

Iran also appears to have launched a wave of attacks on Gulf states. Kuwait reported it intercepted 28 drones, some of which had successfully struck oil facilities, power stations, and water desalination plants, causing significant damage.

How have markets reacted?

Financial markets have responded sharply to the ceasefire news. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) futures fell nearly 18%, last trading near $96 per barrel. Brent crude dropped more than 16% to around $94 per barrel. Asian stock markets surged, with Japan’s Nikkei 225 gaining 5%, South Korea’s Kospi soaring nearly 7% and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rising by 3%. US stock futures also rallied sharply, while Treasury yields eased.

What has Moscow said?

Russia has welcomed the ceasefire. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Moscow “was pleased with this news” and supports the decision not to continue down the path of armed escalation. He expressed hope that direct contacts between Iranian and American delegations would take place “in the coming days.”

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova added that the approach of an “aggressive, unprovoked attack on Iran has failed” and that the US had suffered a “crushing defeat.”

What happens next?

Negotiations between the US and Iran are scheduled to begin in Islamabad on April 10, with the ceasefire providing a two-week window for diplomacy. However, both sides have presented starkly different versions of what has been agreed upon, and the Iranian council has warned that any final agreement depends on securing Tehran’s conditions and that “this does not mean the end of the war.”

Despite the markets appearing to react positively to the ceasefire announcement, experts warn that the aftermath of the disruptions may be felt for months to come as energy prices are expected to remain high.

Bill Gates will testify before a US congressional committee about his interactions with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, according to media reports.

The Microsoft co-founder is set to sit for a transcribed interview on June 10, multiple outlets said on Wednesday, citing anonymous sources. It follows a March 3 request from lawmakers seeking details about his ties to Epstein.

Gates is the latest high-profile figure to agree to testify before the House Oversight Committee as part of the probe into the disgraced financier, who died in a New York jail cell in August 2019.

The inquiry has already included testimony from former US President Bill Clinton and his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

”While he never witnessed or participated in any of Epstein’s illegal conduct, he is looking forward to answering all the committee’s questions to support their important work,” the spokesperson also said in a statement.

Last November, US President Donald Trump signed a law requiring the Justice Department to release files from its Epstein investigations. More than 3 million documents have since been made public in total, including those describing details of Gates’ communications and relationship with the late financier.

Other documents suggest Gates may have leveraged Epstein’s network for health-related influence, with DOJ files citing meetings in which healthcare issues were discussed.

Earlier this year in an interview with 9 News Australia, Gates apologized for his ties to Epstein, calling it “foolish” to have spent time with him and saying their interactions were limited to dinners and did not include visits to Epstein’s island.

He claimed the meetings were focused on fundraising for global health initiatives linked to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

US Vice President J.D. Vance has condemned Vladimir Zelensky’s “completely scandalous” threat to send soldiers to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s home to “talk to him in their own language.”

Speaking in Budapest on Wednesday, Vance said that he hadn’t heard about Zelensky’s threat – made early last month – until Orban told him this week.

”Viktor actually told me that and I went and looked it up. I almost couldn’t believe it’s true, but it’s true,” he said. “It’s completely scandalous. You should never have a foreign head of government or a foreign head of state threatening the head of government of an allied nation. It’s preposterous. It’s unacceptable.”

Zelensky made the threat in early March while complaining about Hungary vetoing a €90 billion EU loan package for Kiev and on the same day Budapest impounded up to $100 million worth of cash and bullion being brought to Ukraine in security vans by former spies.

“We hope that one person in the European Union will not block €90 billion,” he said, referring to Orban. “And that the Ukrainian soldiers will have weapons. Otherwise, we will give the address of this person to our armed forces, our boys, let them call him and talk to him in their own language.”

At the core of the dispute is the Druzhba pipeline, which carries Russian oil to Hungary and Slovakia via Ukraine. Zelensky claims that the pipeline – which Hungary depends on for more than 80% of its oil imports – was damaged in a Russian attack.
Budapest and Bratislava, however, claim that it is visibly operational in satellite photos, and the Zelensky is keeping it shut to punish Hungary. Orban has refused to consider lifting his veto on the loan package for as long as the pipeline is out of service.

Orban claims that Zelensky is keeping Druzhba shut to hamper his reelection campaign by driving up energy costs. Ukraine has reportedly provided covert aid to Orban’s leading opponent, Peter Magyar of the pro-EU, pro-Kiev Tisza party.

Vance, who arrived in Budapest this week to boost Orban’s campaign, condemned the EU and Ukraine for “interfering” in the Hungarian election. “Foreign influence is when other governments threaten, cajole, and try to use economic influence to tell you how to vote. That is fundamentally an assault on your sovereignty.”

Israel has stepped up air strikes across Lebanon, pounding central Beirut, just hours after the US and Iran announced a two-week ceasefire, according to RT correspondent Steve Sweeney, who was caught up in the attack with his cameraman Ali Rida Sbeity.

The escalation comes in an apparent violation of the truce, which mediators said was meant to include Lebanon, despite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisting it does not apply.

The strikes hit the densely populated Barbour area of the Lebanese capital, where Sweeney’s footage shows thick smoke rising near a bridge following the strike. One of the targets was a mosque. Videos from the scene show heavily damaged and destroyed buildings, with residents still present in the area.

“The very clear message from Israel is that there is no ceasefire in Lebanon,” Sweeney said. “In fact, Israel has escalated its bombing starting in the early hours of the morning...”

Strikes were also reported across southern Lebanon, including the cities of Tyre and Nabatieh. The Lebanese state news agency NNA reported continued Israeli shelling, including artillery fire and a dawn air strike on a building near a hospital that killed four people.

Lebanon’s health ministry said an Israeli strike on the southern city of Sidon killed eight people and wounded 22 others. 

The escalation comes after Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, a key intermediary in the talks, announced that the warring parties had agreed to an “immediate ceasefire everywhere, including Lebanon and elsewhere.”

However, Netanyahu, while expressing support for the US decision to suspend strikes on Iran, stated the ceasefire “does not include Lebanon” and that the Israeli operations against Hezbollah will continue.

Hezbollah has not claimed any attacks since the deal was announced and halted strikes on Israeli targets early on Wednesday, according to sources cited by Reuters. The group said it is on the “threshold of a major historic victory” and warned displaced residents not to return home until a formal ceasefire was clearly confirmed.

Hezbollah is reportedly expected to issue a statement clarifying its position on the ceasefire and Israel’s stance.

Israel launched a military operation against Hezbollah in early March after the militant group carried out waves of strikes against the Jewish state in retaliation for the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in a joint US-Israeli operation against the Islamic Republic.

Democratic congressman John Larson has filed articles of impeachment against US President Donald Trump over his actions connected with the Iran war. 

Larson, a Connecticut Democrat, said on Tuesday he had filed 13 charges, accusing Trump of waging an “illegal war” and escalating threats against Iran that endangered US security and American lives. He added that Trump is becoming “more unhinged” and “more unstable by the day.”

“Donald Trump has blown past every requirement to be removed from office. And it’s getting worse,” Larson said in a statement.

Larson also pointed to threats, including “open the Strait … or you’ll be living in hell,” saying such remarks “foreshadow war crimes.” He said Trump was “unable or unwilling” to faithfully execute his duties.

“They have an obligation to put patriotism over politics and invoke the 25th Amendment,” Larson said.

Some Democrats intensified the call. Representative Jim McGovern said the administration should “immediately invoke the 25th amendment,” while Congresswoman Lauren Underwood said Trump was “unstable, dangerous, and unable to function as Commander in Chief.”

US strikes had already hit key Iranian infrastructure, including bridges, rail lines and a train station, as well as the strategic oil hub on Kharg Island, with civilian casualties among the over 1,500 deaths since late February, according to reports.

Republicans and Trump supporters defended the strikes, saying they were aimed at preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Tehran has denied that accusation, insisting that its program was purely peaceful. 

Impeachment would require a majority vote in the House and a two-thirds vote in the Senate to remove the president.

Hollywood star Milla Jovovich has stepped into artificial intelligence with an open-source memory tool, MemPalace, released on GitHub, a platform where developers share and collaborate on software projects.

Announcing the move on Tuesday, Jovovich, known for roles in films such as ‘Resident Evil’ and ‘The Fifth Element’, said she developed the project with collaborator Ben Sigman, describing it as a free system designed to improve how AI handles long-term memory.

The tool was published under an open-source license, according to project materials released that day. Jovovich said MemPalace is “an agentic memory tool that scored 100% on LongMemEval… higher than any other published results,” adding that it is available for developers to use and modify on GitHub.

The idea behind MemPalace came from frustration with how existing AI systems retrieve information, the actress said. “AI is just not great at finding things… every system out there still has it using keywords,” she said, describing current approaches as “clunky and messy.”

She compared existing systems to “a huge warehouse… a pile of junk,” saying users often struggle to locate relevant information even with well-organized files. “I wanted to create a new way to make filing and retrieving more intuitive,” she said.

LongMemEval, the benchmark cited by the project, is designed to test long-term memory capabilities in AI systems, including multi-session reasoning and temporal tracking across conversations, according to its developers.

Jovovich has not previously been associated with AI development. Born in Kiev and raised in the US, she has worked across film, music, and fashion.

The US and EU are engaged in a political “proxy war” in Hungary, with Washington and Brussels backing rival sides ahead of the country’s parliamentary elections, according to former Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl.

Kneissl made the remarks in an interview with RT as US Vice President J.D. Vance visited Budapest on Tuesday in a show of support for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

During the trip, Vance criticized “bureaucrats in Brussels, who have done everything that they can to hold down the people of Hungary,” ahead of Sunday’s vote.

According to Kneissl, Vance’s decision to visit Europe while the US was simultaneously involved in a contentious war with Iran “says a lot” about the importance Washington places on the elections. She noted that the move aligns with the US National Security Strategy released last December, which identifies “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations” as a priority.

She said the language is “very telling” about how the Americans “feel about Brussels,” noting that Washington is known for being persistent in pursuing its geopolitical objectives. “Yes, you can call it interference – what the Americans are doing. The same thing they did in Yugoslavia, Serbia in 2001,” the former diplomat said.

She also pointed to Brussels apparently backing Ukrainian efforts to bar Hungary’s access to Russian oil – for which Budapest retaliated by blocking a joint EU loan for Kiev – as well as discussions in the bloc about potentially suspending Budapest’s voting rights if Orban remains in power.

”They will just put a member state… paralyze it. And some people even speak of – they use the word ‘Maidan,’ they use the words ‘color revolution.’ Not in a third country, but inside an EU member country,” Kneissl said.

Watch the entire interview.

Iran has thanked Pakistan for its mediation efforts following the announcement of a two-week ceasefire in the war with the US and Israel. 

Pakistan has invited Iran and the US to its capital, Islamabad, on Friday to settle all disputes and end the conflict.

“I express gratitude and appreciation for my dear brothers Prime Minister of Pakistan [Shehbaz] Sharif and Field Marshal [Asim] Munir for their tireless efforts to end the war in the region,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in astatement on behalf of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran.

Statement on behalf of the Supreme National Security Council of the Islamic Republic of Iran: pic.twitter.com/cEtBNCLnWT

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) April 7, 2026

Araghchi said the ceasefire comes in response to a US request for negotiations based on Washington’s 15‑point proposal and President Donald Trump’s acceptance of the general framework of Iran’s 10‑point plan.

“For a period of two weeks, safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz will be possible via coordination with Iran’s Armed Forces and with due consideration of technical limitations,” the Iranian Supreme Council statement shared by Araghchi said.

Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif announced a ceasefire earlier on Wednesday, saying Iran and the US have agreed to halt the hostilities.

“Both parties have displayed remarkable wisdom and understanding and have remained constructively engaged in furthering the cause of peace and stability,” Sharif said in his post.

The Pakistani leader added that he hoped the Islamabad talks would succeed in achieving sustainable peace.

Trump also announced the ceasefire to negotiate a long-term peace agreement based on a “workable” 10-point proposal from Tehran delivered via Pakistan. The US leader stated that he agreed to the ceasefire following talks with Sharif and Munir.

Sharif had previously asked Trump for a two-week deadline extension after the US president threatened “a whole civilization will die” if Tehran does not yield to his demands.

“I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks,” Trump posted on his social media platform Truth Social.

Trump has, however, warned that the Iranian plan is not satisfactory to the US in its current form and that he would order devastating new airstrikes if no final deal is reached by the new deadline.

US President Donald Trump allegedly conceded in private that Canada is unlikely to become part of the US, despite previously hinting at annexing the neighboring country, a snippet from an upcoming book by British journalist Robert Hardman has indicated.

Over the past year, Trump has on multiple occasions floated the idea of absorbing Canada as the 51st state and described its border with the US as “artificial.” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, whose 2025 election campaign was helped considerably by the outlandish statements, has consistently stressed that “we will never, ever, in any way, shape, or form, be part of the United States.”

On Sunday, the Daily Mail newspaper published an excerpt of Hardman’s ‘Elizabeth II. In Private. In Public. The Inside Story’ – the journalist’s sixth book on the British monarchy, due to be released later this week.

This allegedly gave the US president pause, and he eventually acknowledged that the “Canadians have got 200 years of history and all that ‘Oh, Canada’ thing.”

“You can’t deal with that in three-and-a-half years. I guess it’s not going to happen,” Trump concluded, according to the excerpt.

“This was the closest I had heard to an acknowledgement that, as long as Canada had the King, Mr. Trump was not going to usurp him,” Hardman wrote in his book, as quoted by the Daily Mail.

Nevertheless, the US president did allegedly complain about “terrible” Canadian politicians, who are “nice to my face and then they say bad things behind my back.”

Trump previously repeatedly claimed that the US was subsidizing Canada’s economy to the tune of $200 billion a year, musing that it would be more feasible to absorb the country as the “cherished” 51st state.

Dark rumor has long held that the Roman emperor Nero set Rome ablaze in search of inspiration for a song on the destruction of Troy. Judicious historians and classicists dismiss this account as apocryphal.

A prosaic arsonist in the White House

Today, a powerful ruler, US President Donald Trump, stands accused not by rumor, but by unfolding reality. The American leader himself has struck the match, setting not only Iran and the wider Gulf region, but the entire world, alight, all at Israel’s behest. Trump revels in the spectacle of fire on a grand scale, even as he shows no inclination to transmute destruction into epic.

Seven systemic consequences, distinct yet interwoven, will reverberate globally far beyond the contingencies of the present conflict. This holds true even were the US–Israeli war of choice against Iran to cease forthwith. For the visible toll in human suffering and material destruction, grave as it is, constitutes only the most immediate and tangible register of harm. Beneath it lies a deeper and less visible yet more insidious and enduring transformation: the erosion of norms, the enfeeblement of restraint, and the gradual dislocation of an order once presumed resilient.

Forces long gathering beneath the surface have been violently quickened; trajectories once gradual now race toward their culmination. What is currently set in motion most likely will come to be remembered not as an episode among many, but as a threshold: the point at which the long arc of American ascendancy bent irreversibly toward its twilight.

In the current age of viral geopolitics, the apt hashtag for the US-Israeli war on Iran might be: “Make America diminished again” (MADA). The US, afflicted by imperial overstretch, persists in behaving as an empire it can no longer sustain, thereby risking a long-term reversion, at best, to a position reminiscent of the pre–First World War era.

First, Trump is dismantling America’s global alliances. His conduct signals to allies that alignment with the US entails exposure without protection.

Gulf partners, not consulted by the US before the war, face potential devastation from Iranian retaliatory strikes – a cost that Trump, with remarkable selfishness and callousness, appears all too willing to impose on his loyal allies. European and Asian partners, already strained by punitive American tariffs, are again harmed despite opposing the war.

Given Trump’s hostile action towards friends, it comes to no surprise that core partners have hesitated to support the war by providing bases; the response to Trump’s calls for “teamwork” in securing the Strait of Hormuz after the US and Israel had caused its closure has been muted. Subsequently, Trump even exhorted allies to secure the desperately needed oil themselves, calling the massive dislocations a small price to be paid for his “excursion” to Iran.

The pattern of America’s betrayal, evident in its treatment of the Kurds and Afghan allies alike, now extends system-wide. Trust, the foundation of alliance politics – above all the expectation that the US will come to the aid of its allies – is broken; and once broken, it is exceedingly difficult to restore. As in a breach of marital fidelity, the damage endures. Among other consequences, NATO itself may collapse under the corrosive strain.

Remarkably, Trump even betrays his domestic allies, worsening their prospects in the upcoming midterm elections by the day; global partners will take note of how readily he abandons his friends.

Second, America’s claim to act as a liberating force is profoundly discredited. Iranian opposition figures who imprudently had placed their hopes in the US, betraying their own country by inviting foreign intervention, now confront a stark reality: At Israel’s behest, Washington is devastating Iran in the dissidents’ name, killing thousands of innocent compatriots, including countless children, through strikes on densely populated areas, while dismantling the country’s intellectual, cultural, and material foundations – including heritage sites and water plants without any military value – thereby precipitating a humanitarian catastrophe.

Trump asserts, implausibly, that Iranians welcome further bombardment and acquiesce in their own suffering. In reality, the war will induce a classic “rally-around-the-flag” effect, prompting Iranians to set aside internal divisions and unite in the face of external threat, thereby strengthening the very state the enemies sought to weaken.

Third, the war exposes and accelerates America’s overextension, precipitating its self-disarmament and undermining its global deterrence.

The large-scale destruction of US bases in the Gulf has turned strategic assets into liabilities, which may prompt host states to expel American forces rather than remain exposed without credible protection. Similar foreign pressures for the US to close its bases may emerge elsewhere, including in Europe and Asia, while the worsening of America’s fiscal situation, accelerated by the very expensive war, increasingly renders the global military architecture unsustainable even if political will should persist.

The sustained operations deplete American weapons and munitions, with replenishment constrained by industrial limits and external dependencies. At the same time, the war highlights the effectiveness of Iran’s asymmetric capabilities against America’s high-cost platforms. The cumulative effect is a visible erosion of American deterrence: the gap between assumed and actual power narrows and credibility diminishes, while Iran increased its deterrent potential.

Fourth, the moral basis of US leadership is further weakened by perceptions of double standards and opportunistic expediency. A state is attacked over alleged nuclear ambitions while a close regional ally, Israel, retains undeclared capabilities, commits acts of genocide, and continues to destabilize the world as a whole; sovereignty is disregarded abroad even as foreign interference is condemned at home. Reports of market-sensitive signaling on prediction markets, opportunistic rhetoric, and shifting justifications deepen cynicism. The result is not merely reputational damage but strategic loss: In an order where legitimacy underwrites influence, the erosion of moral authority constrains power itself.

The US–Israeli war accelerates the transition toward a multicentric world order, in which power diffuses away from a single hegemon toward several sovereign centers. In this shifting landscape, the principal beneficiaries are Russia and China, both positioned at the core of this emerging configuration.

Through a contrast effect, the US appears increasingly as a destabilizing force, its missteps amplifying the appeal of alternative models and strengthening the strategic position of adversaries. In operational terms, rivals need only observe a familiar maxim: Never interrupt an adversary in the midst of error.

For Russia, the conflict yields both short-term and long-term gains. Supply chain disruptions reopen its markets across the world due to the relaxation of sanctions – undermining the long-term credibility of the punitive regime – and generate windfall revenues from the export of a larger amount of higher-priced natural resources, even as Moscow continues to support Tehran.

The diversion of Western attention and resources weakens Ukraine’s position, as financial and military commitments become harder to sustain, while Russia’s leverage increases correspondingly.

At the same time, Moscow consolidates an alternative international power bloc. Its diplomatic competence, in stark contrast to American ineptitude, is evident in its maintenance of ties across opposing camps and its positioning as a mediator, thereby enhancing its global standing. Europe’s severance from Russian energy appears increasingly costly and may prompt renewed large-scale sourcing from Russia.

Finally, Russia will also grow increasingly attractive as an immigration destination for mentally healthy Western talent with sound moral values who seek stability and a traditional, culturally rich lifestyle.

China’s gains are more structural still. As strategic overreach hastens America’s imperial decline, Beijing advances toward primacy by default as much as by design. Its strategy is one of calculated restraint: allowing rivals to exhaust themselves while it consolidates economic, technological, and geopolitical advantage.

More consequential than material gain is China’s self-presentation as a force of stability, a proponent of sovereignty, and a reliable partner in economic development rather than an erratic agent of military intervention. In contrast to Western neocolonial violence, China’s benign model acquires growing appeal across the Global South and beyond.

The broader lessons are stark: Pressure begets counter-pressure; attempts at domination hasten the rise of alternatives. In a multicentric world, influence accrues not to those pursuing coercive, antithetical strategies of hegemony and suppression, but to those who cultivate durable, wide-ranging relations across divides. By undermining its alliances while confronting its rivals, the US destroys the very order it purports to defend.

3. Undermining of ochlocracy and personalistic authoritarianism

Another consequence of the US–Israeli war on Iran is the simultaneous discrediting of two opposed systems of rule: democratic governance in its degenerate, mob-driven form, and authoritarianism in its personalistic, leader-centric variant. Far from vindicating either model, the crisis exposes the vulnerabilities inherent in both.

Classical political theory, from Polybius to Cicero, describes the recurrent degeneration of regimes in a cycle of political systems, termed anacyclosis. Democracy slides into ochlocracy, the rule of the mob, when demagoguery displaces deliberation and institutional safeguards falter. What presents itself as popular sovereignty thus reveals its terminal form: not self-government, but the volatility of the crowd.

The elevation and sustained support of figures such as Trump, despite manifest unfitness – as evidenced by his felony conviction and mental disorders (such as excessive narcissism) – illustrates the absence of effective mechanisms for selection and correction. According to the ancient theory, this invites the eventual reassertion of one-man rule.

Yet authoritarianism fares no better where it rests on the cult of personality. Systems overly dependent on a single leader, reminiscent of Thomas Carlyle’s dictum that the history of the world is but the biography of great men, prove inherently fragile: Where figures are elevated beyond their measure, distortion follows and collapse becomes a systemic risk. Remove the individual, and the structure falters.

A simple diagnostic applies: Where a regime can be reduced to the name of its leader, it stands exposed to failure. By contrast to personalistic regimes, Iran’s model displays a degree of institutional resilience grounded in continuity rather than singular indispensability.

This pattern disconfirms the prevailing assumptions of many multicentric theorists. The emerging multicentric order does not herald the unqualified ascent of illiberal or authoritarian forms, but rather underscores the necessity of balance: domestic constitutional systems capable of restraining both mass impulse and personal ambition, and an international framework that embeds states within cooperative structures without extinguishing sovereignty. For those inclined toward democracy, it calls for stronger checks and balances; for those inclined toward authoritarianism, for less personality-centric rule.

4. Rehabilitation of belligerent ideologies

Another crucial intangible repercussion of the US–Israeli war on Iran is the normalization and spread of radically belligerent ideologies, embraced either as defensive shields or postures for expansions, following the precedent set by Washington and Jerusalem. Right-wing forces are thereby strengthened globally, including new anti-Israel nationalist parties.

First, even leaders who recognize the dangers of the triad of nationalism, militarism, and imperialism may conclude that such postures are once again necessary for survival in a world reverting to great-power rivalry reminiscent of the pre-1914 and pre-1939 eras.

A key means of motivating a people – soldiers in particular – is to frame actions as the continuation of a “proud” military tradition. Yet where history has been written by the victors, as in Germany, it serves their interests and undermines the defeated. In such cases, strong incentives arise to revise the past into a more empowering nationalist narrative. Trump’s casual, euphemistic rhetoric, reducing large-scale violence to the register of schoolyard conflict, recalls the pre-First World War trivialization of war that prepared entire societies for catastrophe.

Moreover, leaders of states that feel threatened by aggressive actors are induced to emulate them: adopting militarist postures and expansionist doctrines, pursuing territorial revisionism in the name of security. Perceived existential pressures, whether demographic or resource-driven, further intensify expansional ethnonationalism, including renewed quests for Lebensraum (living space).

Second, anti-Zionism moves from the margins into the mainstream. As Israel is increasingly perceived as the central driver of mass destruction and global destabilization, criticism once suppressed by discursive constraints becomes socially acceptable.

Mainstream commentators, including senior former officials, now openly discuss the influence of the pro-Israel lobby on US policy, claims previously neutralized as taboo. Scandalous revelations surrounding the extensive degenerated power network built by Jewish financier Jeffrey Epstein further erode trust and amplify suspicion toward a global political-economic elite perceived as aligned with Israeli interests.

Such criticism can slide from policy critique into broader ideological hostility. The distinction between criticism of the State of Israel and attitudes toward the Jewish people in general can become blurred in public discourse, especially given Israel’s self-definition as a Jewish state and the broad domestic support among its Jewish citizens for the unrestrained violence it unleashes on its neighbor, heightening the risk of conflation and further polarization.

An increasing number of commentators question Israel’s narrative of victimhood, express understanding and sympathy for the historical opposition to Zionism, and challenge the scope and application of antisemitism laws as constraints on criticism and mechanisms for entrenching Zionist supremacy. What began as political critique thus threatens to spill into civilizational hostility, as normative barriers weaken and long-suppressed narratives re-emerge.

5. Discreditation of Christianity and re-normalization of barbarism

The war also highlights the politicization of religion. In particular, the US-Israeli war on Iran risks discrediting Christianity through its instrumentalization by powerful actors. Christian Zionist currents, predominantly Protestant, have provided unwavering support for the war, cast the conflict in sacred terms and blessed destruction as destiny. This continues a long pattern of Protestants accommodating faith to the zeitgeist, exemplified by their churches lending strong support to National Socialism.

Political leaders in turn invoke divine sanction for large-scale destruction, fusing religious belief with state violence and reinforcing the perception of religion being deployed to justify the indiscriminate use of force.

The instrumentalization of religion in the pursuit of war crimes reached a new height when Trump wrote on social media with respect to Iran: “48 hours before all Hell will reign [sic!] down on them. Glory be to GOD!” The rhetoric crossed into blasphemy when the rescue of a US airman was cast in terms evocative of Christ’s resurrection.

Such rhetoric erodes the perceived political neutrality of a pivotal faith tradition and exposes it to global backlash. Audiences unfamiliar with authentic Christian theology may fail to see that Christian Zionist positions run counter to Jesus’ injunction to love one’s enemies; what is preached as morality appears, in practice, as license. They may thus, erroneously, perceive Christianity as an aggressive, censorious creed and mobilize opposition against it.

The consequences are profound, encompassing not only the erosion of legal norms but also the discrediting of the very values invoked to justify them. Absent Christianity’s civilizing influence, barbarism gets normalized once more.

The US, long proclaiming itself the leader of the free world, has a record steeped in large-scale brutality, from the annihilation of indigenous peoples and the slave trade (officially classified as gravest crimes against humanity) to the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (which rendered it the first and so far only state to have unleashed nuclear weapons upon civilian populations). The US has also furnished Israel with extensive financial, military, diplomatic, and discursive support, enabling operations widely criticized as grave violations of international law, including genocide in Gaza.

Yet Washington has traditionally at least maintained the fiction of restraint, denying the breach of legal norms. The war on Iran marks a decisive departure, not merely the breach of norms, but the erosion of any semblance that such norms still bind. What emerges instead is a doctrine of unbounded force: The US, under Trump’s leadership, now appears increasingly willing to dispense with even the pretense of legal justification and prudent restraint and acts unashamedly as state terrorist and state plunderer.

The shift is evident in both atavistic rhetoric and conduct. The line between the military and civilian spheres collapses under a single elastic claim: everything sustains the enemy, therefore everything may be destroyed.

Among other things, US–Israeli attacks on Iran have indiscriminately killed thousands of civilians and destroyed residential quarters, mosques, sports complexes, hospitals, schools, universities, research centers, industrial plants, pharmaceutical facilities, nuclear and other energy sites, water and desalination plants, transport infrastructure, and heritage sites (which, if destroyed at large scale, makes it extremely difficult to rebuild a nation). The toxic pollution from strikes on Iranian oil refineries has been likened to the effects of chemical weapons. Elsewhere, Israel has continued its campaign of assassinating journalists. All of this has occurred not as a last resort, but as an opening move.

Trump openly avows his intent to effect not only the complete destruction of Iran’s civilian infrastructure, but the eradication of the entire civilization – acts that constitute grave war crimes.

In one social media post, the US president wrote: “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran…Open the F***in’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH!”

Trump has also openly boasted that he will “blast Iran into oblivion…back to the Stone Ages” and threatened to “take out Iran” in a single night if his extortionary demands are not met within the allotted time. Such an outcome would exceed even the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and could well be brought about by a renewed resort to nuclear weapons, the chilling logic being that they must be used to preserve their usability.

The US and Israeli leadership appear driven by a satanic relish for cruelty and bloodshed, evident in their use of dysphemisms (the deliberate use of coarse or degrading language to describe violent acts).

Such bloodlust is evident in Trump’s own words: “We will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their electric generating plants, oil wells, and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalination plants!), which we have purposefully not yet ‘touched’.” He also spoke of bombing Kharg Island again “just for fun” and continuing to bomb “our little hearts out,” even suggesting: “You never know with Iran because we negotiate with them and then we always have to blow them up.”

Trump’s war crime rhetoric culminated into the following delirious and outright maniacal proclamation with reference to Iran: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again… God Bless the Great People of Iran!” After failing to subdue Iran, Trump now resembles a burglar who, thwarted in a break-in, proceeds to indiscriminate vandalism in frustration.

Even peremptory demands and binding deadlines no longer command observance: Israel, in a brazen display of contempt for norms, destroyed Iranian civilian infrastructure even before the expiry of Trump’s ultimatum and restricted civilian movement in Iran, prohibiting rail travel. Prior to the normalization of totalitarian control during the Covid-19 pandemic, such conduct would have been unthinkable; today, it is met with numbed acquiescence by outside observers.

Equally striking is the normalization of extrajudicial assassination of Iran’s leaders and their extended family, which are acts of collective punishment. The method recalls crude Stalinist logic, eliminating individuals pre-emptively, before any act is committed. Trump has even boasted of killing Iranian leaders merely for the purpose of revenge, not a legitimate justification, describing such killings a “great honor.” One need only imagine the outcry were Iran to adopt similar methods and target the US president.

Trump has also openly boasted of intended plunder, expressing his preference for seizing the oil from the Iranians, retaining it, and making “plenty of money” from it. His logic is disarmingly blunt and atavistic: that the resource is “there for the taking” and that “there’s not a thing they can do about it.”

At issue are the core principles of the Geneva Conventions: distinction, proportionality, and military necessity. These prohibit attacks on civilian objects and forbid strikes causing excessive civilian harm relative to military advantage.

By contrast, the cumulative effect of overwhelming destruction inflicted by the US and Israel with collectively punitive and retaliatory intent – causing widespread, severe, and long-term harm – and targeted killings outside active battlefields is the perception of two states not constrained by the moral and legal frameworks established after the Second World War.

Justifications, where offered, follow an expansive logic in which legality yields to expediency: Virtually any human and material target is framed as contributing, however indirectly, to the adversary’s war effort. In the extreme, a bridge becomes a legitimate target because officials might traverse it, and even the air becomes culpable because they breathe it, thus, by such logic, sustaining the “regime.” Under such reasoning, the distinction between civilian and military objects collapses, and with it the central restraint of modern warfare and core principles of international humanitarian law.

Domestic checks have thus far failed to impose meaningful limits on Trump, raising the question of whether institutional safeguards are effective. It remains to be seen whether the US military will continue to execute unlawful orders or refuse complicity in Trump’s war crimes. The citizens in uniform should understand that if leaders are unchecked, law, once the boundary of action, becomes an instrument of justification: elastic, adaptable, and ultimately expendable.

A central justification of the US–Israeli war of choice on Iran is that it allegedly will make the world safer. The opposite is more likely.

By hollowing out the authority of the United Nations and openly disregarding international law, Washington and Israel establish a precedent of unrestrained force, effectively licensing others to invade, strike, and plunder at will, with no credible multilateral constraint.

The so-called “rules-based order,” long denounced by Russia and other countries as unilaterally created and selectively enforced in a self-serving manner, is further hollowed out. Yet rules governing war remain indispensable. Even those who publicly contest the rule-based order display indignation when international law is violated to their detriment and invoke the rules to further their interests.

As legal norms erode, violence will become more widespread, more brazen, and increasingly difficult to contain. Western states are not exempt from this pernicious trend: With domestic systems under strain, incentives arise to resort to external conflict and other crises, such as a new global pandemic, as diversions from underlying structural problems.

The strategic consequences of the war on Iran are severe. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons risks sliding into irrelevance as states – including Iran under its new resolute leadership – draw the obvious lesson: Only nuclear weapons guarantee survival. Proliferation will accelerate; more states will seek their own arsenals or host those of others. The threshold for nuclear escalation, once unthinkable, is lowered.

At the same time, a logic of perpetual war takes hold. Israel’s repeated strikes across multiple theaters, often continuing despite so-called ceasefires, have normalized a pattern of ongoing, intermittent destruction, denying societies any chance of sustained recovery. Trump appears to think in such intervals, contrasting current damage in Iran that he deems remediable within a decade with possible additional destruction that would take a century to repair.

Violence becomes cyclical, self-perpetuating, and increasingly indiscriminate. Grievances deepen; demands for revenge intensify; escalation becomes the default trajectory. The result is systemically entrenched instability.

European responses compound the damage. Severe punishment for Russia over Ukraine contrasts with tolerance of US and Israeli actions, entrenching the perception of systemic double standards. Such asymmetry does not preserve order, it accelerates its collapse by signaling that power, not principle, governs outcomes, thereby emboldening unilateral use of force.

The cumulative result is a world less restrained, more heavily armed, and more volatile: legal norms eroded, conflicts perpetuated, nuclear risks multiplied, and the likelihood of retaliatory violence, including global terrorism, significantly increased.

7. Structural economic shock and forced energy shift

The US–Israeli war on Iran is poised to trigger a global economic crisis of exceptional severity. Unlike previous oil shocks, this is not merely a disruption of supply but the destruction of production itself. Key energy infrastructure is being eliminated, with reconstruction measured in years, not months. The result: Structurally broken supply chains, surging energy prices, entrenched inflation, and a slide into recession.

One particular pattern becomes difficult to ignore: Successive crises – from the COVID-19 pandemic, which most likely was man-made, to the Ukraine war and now Iran – are locking the global economy into a state of permanent crisis.

Whether by design or consequence, these shocks function as cover, obscuring deep structural failures in Western economies, above all unsustainable debt and chronic stagnation. These strains stem from policy failures, as leaders sacrifice public welfare on the altar of ideological commitments. As a form of self-inflicted harm, politicized priorities and misaligned appointments in the name of diversity and have weakened institutional competence and contributed to costly strategic missteps, whose economic consequences are now evident.

Adverse economic indicators again can be conveniently subsumed under the broader narrative of a global crisis. A sharp increase in the price level may even appear fiscally attractive, quietly eroding sovereign liabilities at the expense of creditors’ wealth. Yet the subsequent rise in interest rates required to rein in inflation will further depress growth and increase the debt burden, necessitating tax increases, spending cuts, or both.

At the same time, the war on Iran will also speed up de-globalization. Energy insecurity will drive massive investment shifts toward domestically produced renewable energy, alongside an expanded deployment of nuclear power.

Repeated supply chain breakdowns, already occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic and the onset of the Ukraine war, will further spur a shift toward economic sovereignty and autarky, fueling protectionism and import-substitution. Thus, the gains from international specialization realized through trade and investment are sacrificed in favor of resilience.

Conspiracy theorists may discern a pattern: COVID-19 entrenched remote interaction, the conflict in Ukraine underscored the imperative of energy independence, and the Iran conflict accelerates energy investments required to sustain artificial intelligence, which facilitates more intrusive forms of societal control.

Financial markets, long buoyed by speculative narratives, particularly centering around artificial intelligence, are exposed to a harsher reality. Fossil fuels, for the time being, remain a foundational input to economic activity; sustained shocks to their supply can unravel entire systems. Overvalued markets face sharp corrections, with the attendant risk of cascading failures, including bank failures.

Even after the immediate global damage of the Iran war has been eventually repaired, with inflation subdued and growth renewed, the deeper and more consequential loss remains: the erosion of trust in Western political and economic systems. What follows the conflict thus is not recovery, but a more brittle equilibrium: an economy profoundly fragile and prone to recurrent crisis.

The US and Israel have branded Iran’s leaders “lunatics.” In truth, it is they who have normalized madness. Acting as unhinged state terrorists, with Israel as the driving force and Washington in tow, they push the world toward the edge of nuclear catastrophe. By contrast, Iran’s leadership again presents itself as comparatively prudent, measured, and restrained to the extent permitted by circumstance.

America’s action is no aberration, but continues a long record of industrial-scale state violence, including the firebombing of German cities, the atomic annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and later savage campaigns of mass destruction in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

Trump’s apparent irrationality may partly reflect a calculated “madman” posture, intended to terrify adversaries with the promise of limitless escalation. But such theatrics are not a shield; they are an accelerant.

Madness, once performed, has an insidious way of becoming real. Incendiary behavior provokes escalatory retaliation; cruelty leaves scars that endure across generations. Russia to this day remembers the devastation wrought by the Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus.

What we are witnessing is the logic of unbounded power: unjustified, unrestrained, and indiscriminate violence, the defining characteristic of unhinged and barbaric tyranny.

When the pretext for the Iraq War, weapons of mass destruction, was exposed as fabricated, a global outrage ensued. Today, even the perceived need for pretense has vanished. No reasonable, coherent justification is offered for the war of choice on Iran – only force, naked and unapologetic.

Israel’s and America’s sustained, overt disregard for ethical norms have fostered widespread cynicism and moral apathy. Repetition has numbed the public, much of it bereft of a moral compass and critical faculties, blunting outrage and resistance, for now.

The ultimate questions are stark: Why should societies tolerate unhinged leaders who imperil both their own citizens and populations abroad? Why should the world at large continue to countenance – and bear the cost of – the brutal crimes perpetrated by a small circle of Israeli leaders and their US accomplices?

No political order endures without a noble and credible moral foundation. A system that abandons moral constraint cannot command lasting loyalty; it corrodes from within.

Over time, a growing number of Western citizens will question the wisdom of supporting governments that impoverish them in pursuit of external, chiefly Israeli, objectives. The unrestrained conduct of Western elites will ultimately destroy confidence in and loyalty to liberal-democratic regimes.

In apocalyptic language, one might speak of a Persian Armageddon, a final contest between good and evil. Yet the roles differ from those commonly assigned in familiar narratives.

While no actor in this human drama is without fault, the final verdict is clear: Israel, and its backer, the US, are emerging as the truly destabilizing agents and vectors of egregious perversion, whereas Iran presents itself as a staunch defender of civilization, wisdom, tradition, order, legality, sovereignty, and restraint, thus functioning as an indispensable counterweight to the unhinged duo.

The US-Israeli war of choice on Iran is not merely a conflict but a turning point, eroding norms, accelerating America’s imperial decline, and propelling rival powers to prominence in a rapidly fragmenting and increasingly dystopian multicentric world.

As their global influence dissipates, Western leaders would be well advised to heed the following lesson: As a rule, empires do not fall because they are defeated; they fall because, in abandoning all restraint, they first defeat themselves.

[Part 7 of a series on viral geopolitics. To be continued. Previous columns in the series:

• Part 1, published on 10 March 2026: Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 45: The epoch of viral geopolitics – How the Kanzler sloganizes war;
• Part 2, published on 12 March 2026: Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 46: Dirty work by proxy – The ethics of the Kanzler’s outsourced war;
• Part 3, published on 14 March 2026: Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 47: Viral war for narrative primacy – The Kanzler’s rhetoric of war;
• Part 4, published on 20 March 2026: Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 48: Fabricating the war story – Iran ploy patched into plausibility;
• Part 5, published on 20 March 2026: Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 49: Donald at the Eastern crossroads – Win big or lose it all;
• Part 6, published on 24 March 2026: Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 50: Game-changing offramp for the US – Trump’s shortcut to an Iran win]

US President Donald Trump has suspended his looming attack on Iran’s energy infrastructure, announcing a two-week ceasefire to negotiate a long-term peace agreement based on a “workable” 10-point proposal from Tehran.

Just hours after warning that “a whole civilization will die tonight” if Iran refused to open the Strait of Hormuz, Trump reversed course following a direct appeal from Pakistani negotiators.

“Based on conversations with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir of Pakistan, and wherein they requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran, and subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks,” Trump posted on his social media platform.

LIVE UPDATES: Iran claims victory as Trump announces two-week ceasefire

Trump described the move as a “double sided CEASEFIRE,” adding that the US has “already met and exceeded all Military objectives.”

Trump warned, however, that the Iranian plan is not good enough in its current form, and that he would order devastating new airstrikes if no final deal is reached by the new deadline.

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council has announced that negotiations with the United States will begin on Friday, April 10, in Islamabad, allocating a two‑week period that may be extended by mutual agreement.

The plan allegedly includes US commitments to non‑aggression, Iran’s continued control over the Strait of Hormuz, acceptance of uranium enrichment, the lifting of all sanctions, termination of UN Security Council and IAEA resolutions, the payment of war reparations, withdrawal of US combat forces from the region, as well as a halt to the war on all fronts, including against the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon.

The Council stressed that national unity must be preserved and that these negotiations are “an extension of the battlefield.” 

It warned that if the enemy’s “surrender” on the battlefield does not translate into a political achievement, “we will fight side by side on the battlefield until all the demands of the Iranian nation are met.”

The American Orion spacecraft, part of the Artemis II mission, has reached the Moon. The journey took around four days, excluding the first day spent in Earth orbit, and the return will take roughly the same time.

Yet unlike the Apollo missions of half a century ago, Orion will not enter lunar orbit. Instead, it will follow a so-called free-return trajectory, looping around the Moon and using its gravity to swing back toward Earth. This is the same maneuver that saved the crew of Apollo 13.

The choice is deliberate. Artemis II is, above all, a test flight. NASA has opted to minimize risk. Rather than sending Orion directly to the Moon, the spacecraft first entered low Earth orbit using the rocket’s upper stage, and then set off using its own relatively low-thrust engine.

Had that engine failed, Orion would simply have re-entered Earth’s atmosphere after a few orbits and landed. Its trajectory was deliberately conservative: at its lowest point, the spacecraft skimmed just 185 kilometers above Earth, effectively “clinging” to the atmosphere. Once the engine had fired successfully, however, repeated burns became less critical.

This cautious approach comes at a cost. Orion hasn’t passed particularly close to the Moon. Its nearest approach was about 6,500 kilometers, nearly twice the Moon’s diameter. As a result, expectations of spectacular imagery should be tempered. The mission’s lunar science component is largely symbolic. Its real purpose is to test systems and procedures.

Even so, Artemis II has set a record. Never before have humans travelled so far from Earth. The previous record, set by Apollo 13, was surpassed on Monday. As Orion passed behind the Moon, communications were lost for around 40 minutes. Splashdown in the Pacific is scheduled for Saturday. 

The most significant recent development is not in space, but in Washington. The US lunar program is undergoing a fundamental overhaul.

On March 24, NASA Director Jared Isaacman unveiled the ‘Ignition’ initiative. In practice, this marks the end of Artemis as it was originally conceived in 2019.

The first sign of change came with the announcement that Artemis III, previously scheduled for 2028, would be brought forward to 2027, but without a lunar landing. Instead, the mission will focus on testing lunar landers in near-Earth orbit.

Two competing systems are currently under development: one by SpaceX, the other by Blue Origin. If at least one is ready, NASA will proceed. Orion will dock with the lander or landers, conduct maneuvers, and test control systems. The mission could last up to three weeks.

A human landing is now pushed back to Artemis IV, planned for 2028. That mission, if it proceeds on schedule, will see two astronauts spend up to a week on the lunar surface, while two others remain in orbit, comfortably exceeding the Apollo 17 record of three days.

There are also tentative plans for an Artemis V mission in the same year, although given the program’s history of delays, this seems optimistic at best. More striking, however, is what has been removed. The Lunar Gateway, a small space station intended to orbit the Moon, has effectively been cancelled.

Yet the Gateway was deeply embedded in US planning. Its origins go back to earlier programs under the Obama administration, when it was conceived less as a lunar outpost and more as a stepping stone to deep space. The Moon, in this context, was merely a convenient staging point.

Integrating Gateway into the Artemis program created additional complications. Orion, for example, was designed with a relatively weak engine, optimized for reaching the Gateway’s energy-efficient orbit rather than operating flexibly around the Moon.

Meanwhile, the size of SpaceX’s proposed lander raised serious technical questions about docking with such a small station. Despite these issues, significant funds have already been invested in Gateway. To address concerns about wasted resources, NASA now plans to repurpose its components.

One proposal is particularly ambitious: combining the station’s propulsion system with a prototype nuclear reactor and a descent module equipped with four helicopters, creating a new spacecraft designated SR-1 Freedom. This would be sent to Mars as early as December 2028.

In theory, it would become the first unmanned interplanetary station powered by a nuclear reactor. In practice, the timeline appears highly optimistic. Even by the standards of the space industry, such a project would be challenging. And NASA’s budget remains constrained, with priority still given to achieving a lunar landing.

Looking further ahead, US ambitions remain expansive. By around 2033, according to current plans, a permanent lunar base could be established, with astronauts working there for up to a month at a time. The base would be powered in part by a small nuclear reactor, and its primary purpose would be to test the use of lunar resources.

All of this aligns with the broader direction of US space policy. In December 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled ‘Ensuring American Space Superiority’. The objective is clear: to secure technological and strategic dominance in space.

The scale of these ambitions is impressive. But so too are the uncertainties. Artemis II may be proceeding according to plan. The program as a whole is not.

This article was first published by Kommersant, and was translated and edited by the RT team.

Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy has claimed that “not a single cent” from Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya found its way into his 2007 election campaign, at an appearance before a Paris appeals court on Tuesday.

He is appealing a five-year prison sentence handed down in 2025 after being found guilty of criminal conspiracy in a case centered on alleged efforts to secure covert Libyan funding for his presidential bid between 2005 and 2007. He briefly served part of the sentence before being released under judicial supervision pending the outcome of the appeal, and has consistently denied any wrongdoing.

At the opening of his questioning on Tuesday, Sarkozy attacked the case against him, calling it a “construction” built on “lies and hatred” and claiming there had been “not a single cent” of Libyan money in his campaign. He denied that Gaddafi had any hold over him “financially, politically or personally,” telling the court: “I am innocent.”

Nine co-defendants are reportedly being retried alongside Sarkozy, including former ministers and senior aides. Several have also denied wrongdoing.

Sarkozy, who led France from 2007 to 2012, was at the forefront of a NATO-backed regime-change operation which destroyed Libya and led to Gaddafi’s murder.

The war brought thousands of jihadist fighters into the country, devastated Libya’s economy, and opened a migration route toward southern Europe that precipitated an ongoing crisis.

Prosecutors say the suspected dealings predated the conflict. Some observers have suggested the war effectively buried any potential evidence linked to the alleged funding arrangements.

Days out from the most consequential European election of the year, the EU has aimed every weapon in its arsenal at Hungary, as Brussels prepares for its best shot yet at taking out Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

Orban’s animosity toward the EU establishment runs deep. For more than a decade, the Hungarian prime minister has often been the bloc’s sole dissident: railing against its open-door migration policies, embrace of LGBT ideology, and “suicidal” plan to welcome Ukraine into the union. Orban has secured carve-outs from the EU’s anti-Russian sanctions that enabled Hungary to continue purchasing Russian oil, and is currently vetoing a €90 billion loan package for Kiev.

After the European Council failed to find a workaround to Orban’s veto at a March 19 meeting, the EU’s chief diplomat, Kaja Kallas, hinted that work was underway on a “Plan B.” Based on the strategy playing out in Budapest, ‘Plan B’ clearly involves a full-scale campaign of censorship and subversion to influence Hungary’s upcoming elections.

Rapid Response Unleashed

On March 16, European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier quietly announced that the EU had activated its Rapid Response System (RRS) to “combat potential Russian online disinformation campaigns” in the runup to the Hungarian election. The mechanism will be active until one week after the vote, Regnier said.

The RRS has been a key tool in the commission’s censorship arsenal for years. It empowers EU-approved “fact-checkers” to flag online content as “disinformation” and request its removal from platforms – Regnier cited TikTok and Meta as two examples.

Theoretically, platforms such as Meta and TikTok participate in the system voluntarily. However, all major social media companies have to sign up to the EU’s ‘Code of Practice on Disinformation’. However, a trove of documents published by the US House Judiciary Committee in Washington this year revealed that these companies were threatened – often explicitly – with punishment under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) if they refused to tow the bloc's line.

The premise resembles a Mafia-style protection racket, with the deputy chief of the commission’s communications directorate telling platforms in 2024 that refusal to sign the codes of conduct “could be taken into account… when determining whether the provider is complying with the obligations laid down by the DSA.”

Peter Magyar’s allies in Meta

The argument that these fact-checkers favor Magyar is well founded. Over four European elections in which the Rapid Response System was activated, the Judiciary Committee found that fact-checkers “almost exclusively targeted” right-wing and populist candidates and organizations. “Moreover, the requirement that these fact-checkers be approved by the European Commission creates a clear structural incentive for the participants to censor Euroskeptic opinion and content,” the committee noted.

Hungarian MEP Dora David, a former Meta employee and member of Magyar’s Tisza party, boasted last year that “we’ve seen companies change their behavior” based on the threat of DSA enforcement, citing Meta’s removal of pro-Orban content as an example.

The fact-checkers can count on sympathetic staff within the social media companies. After several members of Orban’s Fidesz party claimed that Meta has already started restricting the reach of their Facebook posts, commentators Joey Mannarino and Philip Pilkington identified Oskar Braszczynski as the employee likely responsible. Braszczynski, who works as Meta’s ‘Government and Social Impact Partner for Central and Eastern Europe’, has shared pro-Ukraine, anti-Orban, and pro-LGBT content on his personal social media accounts.

🚨 BREAKING: The guy who is suppressing @PM_ViktorOrban's social media has been leaked. His name is Oskar Braszczyński and he is Meta’s Government & Social Impact Partner for Central and Eastern Europe. Let's have a look at who is putting their thumb on the scale!

🇭🇺 Oskar has… pic.twitter.com/PskLJuazGP

— Philip Pilkington (@philippilk) March 18, 2026

”The European Commission is outsourcing the task of content moderation to so-called external civil society actors, all of whom have a progressive orientation,” Fidesz MEP Csaba Domotor said in Brussels on March 18. Regarding Braszczynski’s role in the censorship program, Zoltan Kovacs, a spokesman for Orban’s office, said that having “a highly politicized figure overseeing the region undermines platform neutrality and raises questions about potential interference in Hungary’s election.”

Strong-arming social media platforms

The links between Magyar’s party and Meta may streamline the EU’s censorship efforts, but Brussels is not above strong-arming platforms that refuse to play by its rules. This exact scenario played out in Romania in 2024, when Euroskeptic candidate Calin Georgescu won a shock first-round victory. Romanian and EU authorities immediately declared that Russia had interfered in the election and had run a coordinated campaign on TikTok to help Georgescu win, and the election was annulled.

The day after the annulment, TikTok wrote to the European Commission stating that it had found no evidence of a Russian-linked campaign in support of Georgescu, and that it had in fact been asked to censor pro-Georgescu content by authorities in Bucharest. This content included “disrespectful” posts that “insult the [ruling] PSD party.”

The commission pressed forward and demanded that TikTok make “changes” to its “processes, controls, and systems for the monitoring and detection of any systemic risks.” TikTok complied, and agreed to censor content implying that democratic processes had been undermined in Romania “for the next 60 days to mitigate the risk of harmful narratives.”

Ten days later, and despite its compliance, the European Commission opened formal proceedings against the platform for “a suspected breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) in relation to TikTok’s obligation to properly assess and mitigate systemic risks linked to election integrity.”

How the EU outsources its smear campaigns

In Hungary and Romania – and in elections in France, Germany, and Moldova – the EU has used the threat of “Russian online disinformation campaigns” to justify its activation of the RRS. When no such threat exists, Brussels can outsource the job of manufacturing it.

Just over a week before Regnier announced the activation of the RSS, journalists at the Polish nonprofit Vsquare claimed to have uncovered evidence that Russian “election fixers” were working in Hungary to swing the election for Orban. In a tale reminiscent of an espionage thriller, the outlet claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin had dispatched “a team of political technologists” from Russia’s military intelligence agency, the GRU, to Budapest, where working under diplomatic cover at the Russian Embassy, they are likely running “vote-buying networks, troll farms, and on-the-ground influence campaigns.”

The report cites “multiple European national security sources,” without disclosing any further details.

Almost all of Vsquare’s published work – which includes investigations tying Orban’s government to Russian intelligence, as well as hit pieces on populist leaders Robert Fico in Slovakia and Andrej Babis in the Czech Republic – is based on information provided by European intelligence agencies, and interviews with pro-EU politicians and NGOs.

The outlet is funded by grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), an agency of the US State Department that helped foment the 2014 Maidan coup in Ukraine, sponsored meetings of anti-Beijing officials and delegates in Taiwan, and financed a UK-based organization working to drive right-wing American news outlets out of business. It is also financed by USAID, the German Marshall Fund of the United States, and two EU-backed journalism funds.

Whatever the role these agencies played in concocting the story, it served the dual purpose of giving the EU an excuse to switch on its censorship machine, and giving Magyar political ammunition against Orban.

Is the EU’s election interference working?

Magyar currently holds a nine-point lead over Orban, according to an aggregate of polls compiled by Politico. However, the polling organizations showing the clearest advantage to Magyar are those affiliated with the opposition or funded by the EU: the 21 Research Center, which is financed by the European Commission, has Tisza leading Fidesz 49% to 37%; the IDEA Institute, which has accepted EU and NED money, shows Magyar’s party leading 48% to 38%; Median, which was founded by a member of the liberal SZDSZ party linked to the opposition HVG newspaper, shows Tisza beating Fidesz by 55% to 35%.

Despite the rosy polling, “many” EU leaders secretly believe that an Orban victory is “likely,” Politico has reported. Hungarian EU Affairs Minister Janos Boka told the outlet that he believes that by sponsoring one-sided polling, Magyar and his allies in Brussels are “building the narrative that if they lose the election, then this is an illegitimate result.”

The fact that the European Commission extended its RSS measures until one week after election day suggests that this might be the case, and that the EU may be preparing to fight a long and bloody battle to win its decade-long war on Orban and bring Hungary back under its control.

Germany’s military spending shot up by over 23% to €39 billion ($45 billion) last year, pushing the budget deficit to the highest level in four years, the Federal Statistical Office has reported.

Following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Berlin began a military buildup, with defense expenditure projected to exceed €500 billion by 2029. The German government has stated it wants the country’s armed forces to be “war-ready” by then, citing a perceived Russian threat.

Moscow has repeatedly dismissed as “nonsense” allegations that it harbors aggressive plans against the European members of NATO.

In a press release published on Tuesday, the Federal Statistical Office estimated that Germany was €127.3 billion in the red in 2025, with all levels of government operating at a deficit. According to the analysis, the shortfall was €22.9 billion higher than in 2024.

Among the reasons for this trend, the agency cited the government’s decision to increasingly fund certain areas, including military spending, through borrowing.

Last year, Germany’s central bank warned that it expected the government shortfall to reach 4.8% of economic output by 2028, the highest level since 1995, when deficits peaked in the years following German reunification.

The Bundesbank attributed the trend to higher defense allocation and continued financial support to Ukraine, among other factors. Germany’s economy saw two years of recession in 2023 and 2024, and a period of near-stagnation in 2025.

Despite the adverse economic outlook, Chancellor Friedrich Merz has pledged to transform the German armed forces into the “strongest conventional army in Europe.”

On Monday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova warned that the “last time the German political elite set out to make their country ‘the main military power in Europe,’ it ended in tragedy for all of humanity.”

Aliens have visited our planet traveling in an otherworldly craft and have made contact with humans, US Congressman Tim Burchett has claimed, citing unnamed government officials.

In the US, interest in UFOs and related phenomena has grown in recent years, due to the federal government backing the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and established channels for pilots and the public to report sightings.

“And they gave specifics, they gave addresses, they gave times and dates and people that were in the meeting,” Burchett said during a Monday livestream interview with TMZ. “And this went all the way up to the executive branch of previous presidents, not this current president.”

Answering the hosts’ questions, the 61-year-old congressman stressed that the claims referred both to “life that is not earthly” and to “something mechanical that’s not earthly.”

In an interview with Newsmax a week earlier, the lawmaker also warned that releasing classified information about alleged alien encounters could shake public confidence.

“I’ve been briefed by just about every alphabet agency there is, and if they released what I’ve seen, you’d be up at night worrying about it,” he said.

Tim Burchett has emerged as a leading voice on disclosure of files regarding unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs) and unidentified flying objects (UFOs), pushing for greater government transparency.

He has alleged that various agencies, including NASA, have been “lying” about what they know and claims that many files on the subject remain undisclosed.

In February, US President Donald Trump announced plans to order the Department of War and other agencies to release government files related to UAPs and UFOs due to “tremendous interest.”

Shortly after that, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth confirmed that the American public would learn whether his department holds records proving the existence of aliens, but cautioned against expecting a swift release.

In March 2024, the Pentagon said it had no proof that any unidentified aerial phenomena are in fact alien technology, adding that many cases involved weather balloons, spy planes, satellites, and other routine activity.

A war launched by the US and Israel with the stated aim of preventing a nuclear crisis could end up causing one.

With repeated strikes reported near the Russian-built Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant in Iran, discussions about the US potentially forcibly taking Iranian uranium reserves, and seemingly zero room for compromise, the likelihood of radioactive fallout across the Middle East is steadily increasing.

Strikes getting closer to Bushehr reactor

Since the US-Israeli war on Iran began on February 28, Tehran has reported four separate military strikes near its Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant on the Persian Gulf coast. The facility’s roughly-square territory spans some 500 meters across, with a single reactor unit located at its center.

In the most recent incident on April 4, one of the projectiles landed just 75 metres from the site’s perimeter, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported, citing satellite imagery analysis. In mid-March, the UN nuclear watchdog reported that an attack had destroyed a structure around 350 metres from the reactor.

Risking damage to Bushehr site ‘suicidal’

The plant was constructed by Russian specialists and still hosts a Russian team, although operator Rosatom has reduced staffing to a skeleton crew since hostilities began. The company stated that the March 17 strike marked the first time a weapon landed within the facility’s protected zone, hitting near a meteorological building.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry also condemned the incidents near Bushehr, warning on April 6 that “the shadow of a radiological disaster more severe than Chernobyl now looms over the Persian Gulf” and surrounding areas.

Worst case scenario for Bushehr

Modern nuclear power plants are designed with multiple layers of protection to prevent the release of radioactive material. However, disasters such as Chernobyl in 1986 – caused by a catastrophic reactor failure during a botch experiment – and Fukushima in 2011 – triggered by a natural disaster – demonstrate that severe accidents remain possible and warrant abundance of caution.

The recent incidents near Bushehr serve as “a stark reminder: a strike could trigger a nuclear accident, with health impacts that would devastate generations,” World Health Organization head Tedros Ghebreyesus cautioned, echoing calls from the IAEA for deescalation.

I join the @iaeaorg in raising the alarm again over the safety of nuclear facilities in #Iran.

The latest incident involving the Bushehr nuclear power plant is a stark reminder: a strike could trigger a nuclear accident, with health impacts that would devastate generations.… https://t.co/mvFRC23EpT

— Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (@DrTedros) April 5, 2026

A worst-case scenario involving a large-scale release of radioactive material from Bushehr could render not only parts of Iran but also neighboring states such as Qatar, Kuwait, and the UAE uninhabitable, even without direct fallout, according to Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University.

“If Cesium-137 contaminates water supplies, it becomes extremely difficult to remove,” he explained to RT. Some regional countries get 100% of their drinking water from desalination systems that would likely be compromised, should Bushehr be seriously damaged. “This war is so reckless and out of control at this point that anything is possible,” he said.

As in Ukraine, so in Iran

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has criticized what he described as a lack of Western condemnation over threats to Bushehr, compared to accusations of Russia related to the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant.

The formerly Ukrainian facility, under Russian control since 2022, has faced repeated attacks or nearby incidents as Kiev continues to pursue its recapture. The IAEA maintains a monitoring mission at the site but does not assign blame for strikes, citing limitations of its mandate – a policy it also follows in Iran. Supporters of Kiev lay the blame squarely on Moscow.

Threats beyond Bushehr

The stated justification for the US-Israeli campaign is that Iran was allegedly close to acquiring nuclear weapons – despite the damage the two nations inflicted on its nuclear infrastructure last year.

Tehran has long denied any intention to develop nuclear weapons, citing religious prohibitions against weapons of mass destruction. However, the targeted assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in the opening shot of the war may have shifted political calculations in Iran.

Ahmad Naderi, an influential MP, has urged Iran to follow North Korea’s example, arguing that “if we were also armed with nuclear weapons, Trump would not dare to threaten bombing.” The NPT’s core deal is that a signatory gets IAEA help in building up the nuclear industry in exchange for oversight preventing weaponization.

Hunt for the uranium stockpile

The greatest contamination risk may stem from Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium, believed to be stored in underground facilities in Isfahan and Natanz following the US-Israeli attacks last summer.

The IAEA estimated in June 2025 that Iran possessed over 440 kg of uranium hexafluoride enriched to 60%, while some assessments suggest the stockpile could be larger by as much as 100kg.

There has been speculation that a large-scale US military operation – officially described as a rescue mission for aircrew of an F-15E jet downed in Iran on April 3 – may have been linked to efforts to locate and secure the uranium. The mission involved around 150 aircraft, including transport planes that were stuck on the ground and destroyed to avoid capture, according to American officials.

Emerging evidence suggests that U.S. operations south of Isfahan (marked in red on the map) were unrelated to any pilot rescue mission.

The downed American pilot was reportedly located in southwest Iran, near Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad Province (marked in blue on the map), not… https://t.co/xcyFel3Plg pic.twitter.com/5pZezRrNYb

— Arash Reisinezhad (@arashreisi) April 5, 2026

The other nation with nuclear sites

Israel, widely believed to possess a nuclear arsenal, faces similar vulnerabilities. Following the attack on Natanz on March 21, Iran retaliated with strikes near Dimona and Arad, two towns close to the heavily fortified Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center.

“Our air defense system is among the best in the world, but it is not hermetic,” a senior Israeli air defense commander commented. “There are errors and malfunctions.”

The implied threat to the facility was later reinforced in an Iranian AI propaganda video depicting the country’s new leader considering a direct attack on the Iranian nuclear reactor.

First appearance of the new Iranian supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei in an AI-generated video.
The main message: the Nuclear Research Center in Dimona. pic.twitter.com/sXXtAwk6Uc

— Baxtiyar Goran ☀️ (@BaxtiyarGoran) April 5, 2026

Running up the escalation ladder

Although already highly destructive, the conflict still has significant room for escalation, including the potential use of nuclear weapons.

Israeli officials and pro-war aid reportedly swayed Trump aides with a promise that his political legacy would be secured if he were to do what no president had done before him and launch a regime-change war against Tehran. “Trump has broken every custom, every norm, every tradition, every international law, most US laws,” Kuznick noted “The same psychology applies to the nuclear taboo.”

Likewise, Israel came close to using nuclear weapons during the 1973 Yom Kippur War but ultimately then-Prime Minister Golda Meir refrained after battlefield conditions shifted against Egyptian and Syrian forces.

What decisions Trump or Benjamin Netanyahu might take, should the latter’s 40-year dream of crushing Iran slip away, is becoming an increasingly concerning question.

Netenyhu - ""Teaming up with US allows Israel to do what I’ve been wishing to do for 40 years"' pic.twitter.com/8t3HXsg0ZZ

— Ounka (@OunkaOnX) March 1, 2026

Shortages have been worsening at filling stations across France, with around 18% of them having run out of at least one type of fuel, Energy Minister Delegate Maud Bregeon has said. Demand has risen amid capped prices, as Middle East war disruptions have pushed global energy costs up.

The disruptions have been most pronounced at sites operated by energy major TotalEnergies, which account for the majority of affected stations after capping prices below market levels and drawing increased traffic, Bregeon said on Tuesday.

Total said it was maintaining a price cap of €1.99 ($2.30) per liter for unleaded petrol in April, while raising the cap on diesel to €2.25, bringing it closer to market levels. The company had previously warned that traffic across its network has increased sharply since mid-March, warning of “localized supply tensions,” particularly for diesel.

Authorities have blamed logistical issues linked to holiday delivery slowdowns rather than a national supply shortage, claiming most stations will be restocked in the coming days. 

However, rising diesel and gasoline prices have driven up costs for businesses and households, prompting protests in parts of France. Roadblocks have set up around Nantes by truckers and construction firms, while fishermen in Corsica have blocked ports. The response echoed the widespread fuel price protests which took place during the 2018–2019 Yellow Vests movement.

The EU has already been grappling with the fallout from its decision to cut energy ties with Russia following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, alongside the costs of its green transition policies. 

The European Commission has said there will be no return to Russian energy, and it will continue to pursue a full phase-out of the country’s fossil fuels by 2027. However, earlier this month it put plans for a complete ban on oil from Russia on hold, due to what some officials have reportedly called “current geopolitical developments.”

One of Australia’s most-decorated soldiers has been arrested on war crimes charges related to the alleged murders of several unarmed Afghan civilians between 2009 and 2012.

Former special forces (SAS) soldier and Victoria Cross recipient Ben Roberts-Smith has been charged with five counts of war crimes and refused bail. He is expected to appear in court on Wednesday.

At a press conference on Tuesday, Australian Federal Police (AFP) Commissioner Krissy Barrett said that the SAS veteran is suspected of personally executing two captured Afghan civilians and ordering his subordinates to shoot three others, including in a so-called ‘blooding’ ritual involving a rookie soldier.

Roberts-Smith allegedly kicked an Afghan man off a cliff and ordered his execution on one occasion, and supposedly murdered another prisoner with a leg prosthesis in a separate episode. 

According to Barrett, “it will be alleged the victims were not taking part in hostilities,” and “were detained, unarmed, and… under the control of [Australian Defence Force] members when they were killed.”

His arrest was preceded by a five-year investigation, during which the authorities tapped phones in Australia and offshore and secured incriminating testimonies from other SAS veterans, according to Australian media.

In 2023, Roberts-Smith lost a defamation case against journalists who had reported that he murdered civilians during his deployment in Afghanistan. The ruling was upheld by Australia’s Federal Court in May last year.

Roberts-Smith has consistently denied the allegations.

In 2023, another Australian soldier was charged with murder while deployed in Afghanistan. The trial is expected to commence next February.

Nigel Farage’s Reform UK would stop issuing visas to nationals from any country that demands slavery reparations from Britain, the party’s home affairs spokesman has announced, dismissing the compensation claims as “insulting.”

Speaking to The Telegraph, Zia Yusuf stated that a growing number of nations are seeking compensation for the UK’s historical role in the transatlantic slave trade, but are ignoring that Britain “made huge sacrifices to be the first major power to outlaw slavery and enforce this prohibition.” 

Yusuf expressed outrage that over the past two decades, successive Conservative and Labour governments had issued 3.8 million visas to people from countries demanding reparations and also sent those nations £6.6 billion ($8.7 billion) in foreign aid.

Under Reform’s proposed ‘Reparations Lock’, the UK would halt the issuance of all new visas, including work, study, family, and visitor visas, to nationals of any country that formally demands reparations. The party has already pledged to scrap foreign aid for such nations.

“The United Kingdom is not an ATM for ethnic grievances of the past, and we will no longer tolerate being ridiculed on the world stage,” Yusuf said, stressing that “enough is enough.”

At least 17 countries have demanded reparations from Britain, including the Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Haiti, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, as well as Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, and Belize. 

A 2023 report by a former International Court of Justice judge concluded that the UK alone owes more than $24 trillion in reparations to 14 Caribbean countries – a sum nearly seven times the size of the British economy. Of that sum, nearly $9.6tn is due to Jamaica, the study claimed.

The UK government had previously ruled out reparations, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves stating the country “cannot afford” the sums demanded. The Conservative opposition has also described reparations as a “scam.”

American journalist Tucker Carlson has accused President Donald Trump of mocking Christians by issuing an expletive-laden threat to Iran at Easter.

On Sunday, Trump again demanded Tehran to unblock the Strait of Hormuz, which has remained effectively shut since the US-Israeli attack on Iran on February 28.

“Open the f**king strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell. JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah,” the US leader wrote on his Truth Social platform, threatening to demolish Iranian power plants and bridges if it does not comply by Tuesday.

Responding on his show on Monday, Carlson said: “How dare you speak that way on Easter morning to the country. Who do you think you are? You’re tweeting out the F-word on Easter morning?”

By mentioning Allah, the US president is also “mocking the religion of Iran,” the journalist said. “OK, if you seek a religious war, that’s a good idea,” he added, sarcastically.

Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, reacted to Trump’s obscene post by saying that he “won’t gain anything through war crimes.” The US president’s “reckless moves” could mean that “our whole region is going to burn,” he warned.

When asked by journalists about Trump’s rant on Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that “we have seen those statements, but we prefer not to comment on them.” Russia has long warned about the “dangerous and very negative” consequences of attacking Iran, Peskov added.

Carlson, who has been generally supportive of Trump, came out as a harsh critic of the US-Israeli war on Iran, prompting the US president to claim last month that the journalist “has lost his way” and is no longer part of the MAGA movement.

US Vice President J.D. Vance has met with Viktor Orban in Budapest in a high-profile visit ahead of a critical parliamentary election. The Hungarian prime minister’s party is trailing that of his pro-EU opponent in the polls, and he has accused Brussels of interfering in the vote.

Vance touched down in Budapest on Tuesday, where he was greeted by Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto. In a short clip published on social media, Szijjarto hailed the visit as a sign of “a golden age for Hungarian-American relations.” Vance is the highest-level American official to visit the Hungarian capital since then-US President George W. Bush went there in 2006.

Vance and Orban then held a joint press conference, in which Vance described the Hungarian prime minister as “one of the only true statesmen in Europe.” By visiting Budapest, Vance said that he aims to “send a signal to everybody, particularly the bureaucrats in Brussels, who have done everything that they can to hold down the people of Hungary.”

The visit comes at a crucial time for Orban and for the EU. Hungarians will go to the polls on Sunday to vote in a general election. Pre-election polls show Orban’s Fidesz party trailing Peter Magyar’s pro-EU Tisza party, and the campaign to date has been bitterly fought.

Brussels has implemented draconian social media censorship measures ahead of the vote, which are widely seen to benefit Magyar. Tisza officials, Ukrainian and EU spies, and opposition journalists have all been accused of meddling in the election, with a wiretapping plot against Szijjarto exposed last month, and Ukraine cutting off Russian oil supplies to Hungary.

🇭🇺🤝🇺🇸 A golden age, a golden occasion! Pleasure to meet with Vice President @JDVance in Budapest. A historic moment, the first such visit in 35 years. pic.twitter.com/cz4Gr9b3FD

— Orbán Viktor (@PM_ViktorOrban) April 7, 2026

For Brussels and Kiev, the stakes are high. Orban opposes Ukraine’s potential accession to NATO and the EU, has obstructed multiple rounds of sanctions against Moscow to continue purchasing Russian energy, and is currently vetoing a €90 billion ($104 billion) EU loan package for Ukraine.

He has portrayed the election as a choice between Hungary’s national interests and the EU’s “suicidal” attempts to prolong the Ukraine conflict.

Vance hailed Orban as “the single profound leader in Europe on the question of energy security and independence,” and described Orban and US President Donald Trump as “the two leaders who have done the most to actually end” the conflict.

Turning to the EU and Ukraine, Vance declared that Brussels is responsible for “one of the worst examples of foreign election interference that I have ever seen,” and claimed that “there are elements within the Ukrainian intelligence services that try to put their thumb on the scale of American elections, [or] on Hungarian elections,” adding “this is just what they do.”

Magyar has dismissed Vance’s visit as foreign interference. “No foreign country may interfere in Hungarian elections,” he wrote on social media on Tuesday. “Hungarian history is not written in Washington, Moscow, or Brussels – it is written in Hungary’s streets and squares.”

The opposition leader toned down his criticism in a follow-up post, stating that a Tisza government would “regard the United States as a key partner, both as a NATO ally and as an economic partner,” while he would be “pleased to welcome the President and the Vice President to Budapest.”

Meanwhile, crowds of Fidesz supporters packed into Budapest’s MTK Sportpark Arena, where Vance and Orban are due to speak later on Wednesday at a “Hungarian-American friendship” rally.

It looks like @PM_ViktorOrban and @JDVance have packed out a whole stadium in Budapest this afternoon. This is pretty hard to square with the fake polling saying Fidesz are 20 points underwater. 🇭🇺🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/nk4bSyguBa

— Philip Pilkington (@philippilk) April 7, 2026

RT’S LIVE COVERAGE OF THE US-ISRAELI WAR WITH IRAN HAS MOVED HERE 

US President Donald Trump's “double sided ceasefire” whereby Iran would agree to the “complete” and “immediate” opening of the Strait of Hormuz seems to be in trouble. 

The 10-point text published by Iranian state-linked media, and endorsed by Pakistan, specifically mentions Lebanon. Israel has refused to recognize that condition and launched what it described as its “biggest yet” series of attacks on the country including its capital, Beirut, killing hundreds, according to the civil defense.

Iran has decried the “Israeli savage massacre” and the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force has pledged revenge for the attack that, according to Tehran, is a breach of the ceasefire agreed with the US.

Trump said Iran’s ten-point proposal delivered via Pakistan offers a “workable basis on which to negotiate.” He warned, however, that he would order devastating new airstrikes if no final deal is reached by the new deadline.

Tehran said the agreement represents a “historic and crushing defeat” for the US, claiming Washington has been forced to accept Tehran’s 10‑point plan as the basis for talks.

Moscow on Wednesday hailed the two-week ceasefire as a “crushing defeat” for the US and Israel, with Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova saying Washington’s “one-track, aggressive, unprovoked attack” approach has failed.

• The US has insisted that Lebanon is not part of the deal, according to multiple sources. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also claimed that the current ceasefire does not cover Israel’s war on southern Lebanon, contradicting earlier statements by Pakistani PM Sharif.

• Tasnim news has cited Iranian mediators who reportedly spoke to the Wall Street Journal, stressing that Lebanon is part of the ceasefire deal, and that shipping through Hormuz will be closed until Israel commits to respecting the condition.

• Tehran’s ten-point plan reportedly includes US commitments to non‑aggression, Iran’s continued control over the Strait of Hormuz, acceptance of uranium enrichment, the lifting of all sanctions, termination of UN Security Council and IAEA resolutions, payment of war reparations, withdrawal of US combat forces from the region, and a halt to the war on all fronts, including against the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon.
   

For nearly two days, somewhere in the mountains south of Isfahan in Iran, a US weapons officer was missing. Around him, a complex rescue operation unfolded under fire, with helicopters landing on makeshift runways and aircraft taking heavy losses. When the dust settled, the US had recovered its man – but at a cost that may reshape its entire approach to Iran.

Isfahan, or there and back again

On April 3, a US F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jet was shot down over Iran by a surface-to-air missile defense system. Both crew members successfully ejected. The pilot was rescued a few hours later, but it took nearly two days to locate the weapons system officer. Finally, on Sunday, April 5, US President Donald Trump announced his successful rescue. 

According to the official narrative, the fighter jet crashed about 20 km south of Isfahan, Iran’s third-largest city. A rescue operation was launched to evacuate the second crew member. Two MC-130J Commando II transport aircraft carrying special forces and four MH-6M Little Bird helicopters landed at an abandoned agricultural airstrip approximately 25 km south of the crash site. The MH-6M Little Bird is a lightweight, egg-shaped helicopter, a descendant of the Hughes OH-6 Cayuse widely used during the Vietnam War and familiar to many people from the movie ‘Apocalypse Now’. 

The ejected pilot took refuge in the mountains about 8 km northwest of the makeshift airstrip; US aviation provided air cover by striking approaching IRGC units with multiple bombs and missiles.

Meanwhile, one of the helicopters managed to pick up the pilot and transport him back to the airstrip. However, according to reports, both transport planes became stuck in the mud and couldn’t take off. Eventually, three Bombardier Dash-8 turboprop aircraft arrived to evacuate the rescued pilot and around 100 personnel involved in the operation.

A well-planned improvisation

The scant and contradictory official information instantly gave rise to different theories. For example, some claimed that the F-15E didn’t crash anywhere near Isfahan and that the entire operation was an ill-fated attempt to extract Iranian weapons-grade uranium from a local nuclear facility located about 35 km from the landing zone.

This theory is rather dubious – the resources required for such an operation clearly outweigh those deployed in this case; moreover, the recovery of downed pilots is a standard, well-practiced procedure in the US. 

In 2023, during Exercise Agile Chariot, a similar scenario was simulated. The training exercises involved two special operations forces – US Air Force Combat Controllers (CCTs) and US Air Force Pararescuemen (PJs) from the 123rd Special Tactics Squadron. 

In Wyoming’s mountainous terrain, a field airstrip was set up where an MC-130J Commando II landed, delivering MH-6M Little Bird helicopters operated by the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment. The helicopters were unloaded and prepared for takeoff within minutes, after which PJs moved to the location of the downed pilot to rescue him.

During the exercises, troops also practiced refueling MQ-9 Reaper drones and A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft from an MC-130J Commando II in a field environment.

Operation Eagle Claw remake

Naturally, one can’t help but recall the failed Operation Eagle Claw that took place in Iran on April 24, 1980. During that mission, US special forces attempted to rescue 53 hostages taken from the US Embassy in Tehran five and a half months earlier.

However, things went awry from the start: one of the eight helicopters crashed, another turned back due to a dust storm, and the landing site was too close to a busy highway, which compromised the mission. During refueling, one helicopter collided with the tanker aircraft resulting in a fire that claimed the lives of eight US service members. The operation was ultimately aborted, and US equipment and documents were abandoned in the desert and later fell into Iranian hands.

If the raid on Isfahan last weekend targeted a nuclear facility or aimed to capture a high-ranking Iranian official, the outcome appears similar: the objectives were not achieved.

Black Hawk Down remake

However, for now we will refer to the official narrative – that the goal of the operation was to extract the downed pilot. From this perspective, despite the loss of equipment, the mission’s objectives were met. This situation inevitably brings to mind another chapter from American military history: the Battle of Mogadishu on October 3-4, 1993.

What began as an operation to capture Somali militia leaders escalated into a fierce urban battle. As a result, 18 Americans lost their lives, around 80 were wounded, and one pilot was captured. Two helicopters (including the famous Black Hawk Super 61) and several vehicles were lost. 

Formally, the operation was deemed successful, as it managed to capture and extract 24 members of the Somali resistance, including Omar Salad and Abdi Hassan Awale, ministers of the so-called “independent government” of General Mohamed Farah Aidid.

However, this success came at a heavy price – the Battle of Mogadishu became a turning point for American policy in Somalia, leading to the decision to withdraw US troops from the country.

The operation near Isfahan will also have far-reaching implications due to its high costs. Once again, Iran has demonstrated that it remains resilient when it comes to potential ground invasions. 

Firstly, the US and Israeli air force will find it increasingly difficult to operate freely over Iran; if each downed aircraft costs the US a dozen more, even the US Air Force won’t be able to sustain the mission for long. Secondly, the success of any large-scale special operation deep within Iranian territory now seems highly questionable.

Trump faces a tough decision: he can either escalate military operations against Iran – “bombing them back to the Stone Age,” as he put it, and launching a comprehensive ground operation aimed at dismantling organized resistance – or, following former US President Bill Clinton’s example, he can scale back involvement and withdraw. 

The latter option will undoubtedly strengthen Iran and significantly diminish America’s regional influence. And one of the lasting symbols of this defeat would be the charred remains of US military jets and helicopters in Isfahan.

Britain’s welfare department has paid out £850 million (over $1.1 billion) in benefits to dead people over the past four years in a massive government blunder, The Telegraph has reported.

Since 2021, the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) made approximately 2.6 million erroneous payments to deceased claimants, the newspaper found. The errors reportedly stemmed from death notifications arriving too late to stop automated payouts, or being processed just as a payment was about to be sent.

Official figures show that total benefit overpayments in 2025 alone reached £9.5 billion ($12.6 billion), with the vast majority being due to fraud or claimant mistakes. The newly revealed £850 million figure represents official administrative error related specifically to deceased recipients. Less than half of that sum has been recovered, adding to the UK’s spiraling welfare bill, which already sets British taxpayers back roughly £300 billion ($398 billion) each year.

The Telegraph noted that the cost of recovering the money in some cases may exceed the amount overpaid, which typically runs to just a few hundred pounds per claim. The DWP has said it will only pursue recovery when it is “reasonable and cost effective.”

A DWP spokesman defended the department, noting that a ‘Tell us Once’ service exists to notify government agencies of a death in one step and ensure benefits only go to those entitled to them.

The revelations come amid broader criticism of Prime Minister Keir Starmer and the Labour government’s welfare policies and spending on other fronts such as accommodating boat migrants. The UK is set to spend a staggering £2.1 billion on housing and welfare for asylum seekers this financial year while the cost of placing such individuals in hotels has reached £5.5 million per day.

A firefight broke out between police and several gunmen near the Israeli consulate in Istanbul, Türkiye on Tuesday, local media have reported. The building has been closed for months and is said to be unstaffed. It is unclear if it was the target of the attack. 

According to reports, numerous police teams were dispatched to the consulate at around 12:15 PM local time. One of the attackers, who was armed with long-barreled weapons, was killed and two others were captured after being wounded, CNN’s Turkish-language outlet reported. Two police officers were also injured in the exchange. 

The Anadolu news agency said that since the Israeli consulate is not operational, initial findings suggest the attack targeted Turkish police who always maintain a heavy armed presence in the area. 

AFP and Reuters also reported that there are currently no Israeli diplomats stationed in Istanbul or Ankara. 

Gun battles in Istanbul from my brother’s camera pic.twitter.com/CofnpYv3ne

— N.Y. Yazgan (@YigitBruxelles) April 7, 2026

Turkish Interior Minister Mustafa Ciftci confirmed that all three assailants were “neutralized,” adding that their identities have been determined. One of the attackers had ties “to an organization that exploits religion,” while the other two were brothers, one of which has a drug-related record. 

A criminal probe has been launched and three investigators assigned to handle the case, Turkish Justice Minister Akin Gurlek said.

Germany’s continued military buildup could lead to another tragedy on a global scale, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has warned.

Last week, German media reported that male citizens who remain abroad for more than three months without prior approval could face penalties in line with a new requirement under the Military Service Modernization Act. The rule, which came into force on January 1, 2026, obliges German males between the ages of 17 and 45 to obtain permission before leaving the country for an extended period. The Defense Ministry said the measure is intended to maintain a reliable registry of individuals eligible for military service.

In a post on Telegram on Monday, Zakharova noted that previously German men were required to register before going abroad only during a “state of tension” or a “state of defense,” but that the measure has now been expanded to peacetime “as part of Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s strategy of militarizing the country.”

The spokeswoman suggested that “in the heat of militaristic frenzy, Germany has completely forgotten the lessons of history.”

“The last time the German political elite set out to make their country ‘the main military power in Europe,’ it ended in tragedy for all of humanity,” Zakharova said, referring to the Second World War, in which between 60 to 65 million people are estimated to have been killed.

Following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Germany launched a massive military buildup, with reported plans of spending more than €500 billion (around $580 billion) on defense by 2029. According to officials in Berlin, the armed forces must be “war-ready” for a potential conflict with Russia by that date.

Sri Lanka will purchase crude oil from Russia after reaching an agreement with Moscow amid the energy crisis spurred by the Middle East conflict, the island nation’s transport minister, Bimal Rathnayake, has said.

Rathnayake told TASS on Monday that “energy is our priority today,” adding that the US-Israeli war on Iran has triggered a disruption in supplies to Sri Lanka.

“Russia’s deputy energy minister [Andrey Rudenko] visited Sri Lanka a few days ago. The deputy foreign minister has also visited Sri Lanka. They reached an agreement on oil supplies to the country,” Rathnayake told the news agency.

🇷🇺🇱🇰 Oil Deal Done: Sri Lanka Turns to Russia Amid Energy Crunch

Colombo has reached an agreement with Moscow to begin oil supplies from mid-April, as it grapples with ongoing disruptions, Transport Minister Rathnayake has told TASS.

He noted that while technical and financial… pic.twitter.com/LrXht0xVTa

— RT_India (@RT_India_news) April 6, 2026

He added that the first crude supplies from Russia are expected in mid-April.

“Technical work is currently underway at the company level, and financial issues are being discussed, how to conduct transactions. But at the political level, almost everything has been done,” the minister said.

Rathnayake added that although Sri Lanka exports tea to Russia, a good “logistic system” is essential for crude imports.

Mayura Neththikumarage, a top Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (Ceypetco) official, said last week that the island nation has only two places where fuel can be unloaded. Ceypetco is the only refiner in Sri Lanka.

Neththikumarage has also indicated that fuel shipments for April and May have been secured and that prices might come down marginally in June.

The South Asian nation gets most of its crude from the United Arab Emirates (UAE), though refined petroleum products are imported from India and Singapore, Bloomberg reported.

In March, Sri Lanka received 38,000 tons of fuel from India.

Colombo has hiked fuel prices and imposed rationing to address the supply disruption.

After the Middle East conflict erupted, Russia expressed willingness to be a key energy partner for South Asian nations, including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka.

Bilateral trade between Russia and Sri Lanka stood at $700 million in 2024.

A huge fireball and towering columns of black smoke erupted beside the Bridge of the Americas in Panama on Monday, with dramatic videos on social media showing flames tearing through the fuel terminal next to the landmark crossing.

The blast, reported in La Boca, Balboa, was caused by a tanker truck explosion and forced the immediate shutdown of traffic on the bridge, one of the country’s most important transport links. While the explosion did not occur directly on the bridge, flames billowing beneath the crossing fueled concern over its structural integrity.

Panama’s fire service said the emergency was first reported at around 4:12 PM local time and that crews arriving at the scene found multiple trucks ablaze, along with additional tanks under threat. Reinforcements from several stations were called in as firefighters battled to stop the flames from spreading further.

WILD FOOTAGE 🔴

A tanker blast near the Bridge of the Americas in Panama City ignited a major fire that spread to 2 additional storage units at the Balboa tank facility. Reports of 3 injuries, no foul play suspected (as of now) pic.twitter.com/GeAcicCVQe

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) April 6, 2026

Officials said two people with second-degree burns were rescued during the operation and treated by firefighters. Fire crews were also searching for a possible trapped person while carrying out cooling operations. Later local reports said one person was confirmed dead and two firefighters were injured while tackling the blaze.

Reportan enorme incendio en el área debajo del puente de las americas. Evitar la vía pic.twitter.com/VyhsyIqNKT

— Rafa Zevallos 🇵🇦 (@rafazevallos) April 6, 2026

Authorities suspended transit across the Bridge of the Americas as emergency teams worked at the scene and inspectors assessed whether the intense heat may have affected the structure. The public was urged to avoid the Balboa area and keep routes clear for emergency vehicles.

Reportan explosión e incendio cerca del Puente de las Américas. Emana gran cantidad de humo. Se detuvo el tráfico en ambos sentidos. pic.twitter.com/tCAjofFRTz

— Tráfico Panamá (@TraficoCPanama) April 6, 2026

NASA’s Orion spacecraft, carrying four astronauts, performed its long-awaited lunar flyby, coming within roughly 4,070 miles (6,550 km) of the lunar surface and entering the Moon’s gravitational sphere of influence.

In a planned and highly anticipated phase of the journey, Mission Control in Houston lost contact with the crew at around 6:43 PM EST for approximately 40 minutes. The communication blackout occurred when the Moon blocked radio and laser signals between the Earth-based Deep Space Network and the Orion spacecraft.

While out of contact, NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch, along with Canadian Space Agency (CSA) astronaut Jeremy Hansen, focused on their scientific objectives, photographing and observing the lunar far side – including the 600-mile-wide Orientale basin.

While the Artemis II crew are experiencing their own personal solar eclipse, Mission Control will temporarily lose communications with the capsule. This is planned and expected. We anticipate regaining communications in about 30 minutes. pic.twitter.com/QjeORjlfZB

— NASA (@NASA) April 6, 2026

The mission’s defining moment also saw the crew break a 56-year-old record, surpassing the 248,655-mile mark set by the Apollo 13 mission in 1970.

"We will always choose each other."

Mission control has reacquired signal with the Artemis II crew after the mission’s planned loss of signal. Our astronauts are once again using the Deep Space Network to keep conversation and science data flowing between space and Earth. pic.twitter.com/aagRApba1z

— NASA Artemis (@NASAArtemis) April 6, 2026

“On the far side of the Moon, 252,756 miles away, Reid, Victor, Christina, and Jeremy have now traveled farther from Earth than any humans in history and now begin their journey home,” NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said in a statement on X.

“It is so great to hear from Earth again,” Koch said upon re-establishing communication with mission controllers. “We will visit again. We will construct science outposts. We will drive rovers. We will do radio astronomy. We will found companies. We will bolster industry. We will inspire. But ultimately, we will always choose Earth.” 

US President Donald Trump has threatened to jail the journalist who first reported the details of a rescue mission for the two crew members of the US F-15E Strike Eagle which was shot down over Iran last week, unless they reveal the source of their information. 

Speaking at a White House press conference alongside top defense officials, Trump said that the pilot was recovered within hours on Friday, while the weapons systems officer – badly injured and hiding in a mountain crevice – was rescued early Sunday after a complex mission involving more than 150 aircraft.

Trump said the government had hoped to keep the second airman’s disappearance secret to prevent Iranian forces from capturing him. But after multiple news outlets reported that one crew member was still missing, Trump alleged the leaks had alerted Iran’s military and put the service member’s life in danger.

“It became a much more difficult operation because a leaker leaked,” he said. “All of a sudden, the entire country of Iran knew that there was a pilot that was somewhere on their land that was fighting for his life.”

The rescue mission involved an immense armada of 155 US aircraft, including four bombers, 64 fighter jets, 48 refueling tankers, and 13 specialized rescue aircraft. The operation also involved hundreds of special operations troops, including Navy SEAL Team 6 commandos, who were inserted to extract the stranded airman.

Despite the mission’s success, with no American lives lost, the US suffered significant material losses. At least two transport planes became disabled at a remote Iranian air base during the extraction and were deliberately destroyed by US commanders to prevent them from falling into enemy hands. Additionally, two US Black Hawk helicopters were reportedly struck by Iranian fire, and an A-10 Warthog attack plane was hit but managed to limp back to Kuwaiti airspace, where its crew ejected.

The president did not identify the outlet or reporter he was targeting. A White House official said an investigation is underway.

Trump also used the briefing to issue a new ultimatum to Iran, threatening to destroy the country’s civilian infrastructure unless Tehran agrees to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by Tuesday evening.

The leader of Taiwan’s main opposition party, the Kuomintang (KMT), is traveling to mainland China, marking the first such visit since 2016. Known as a vocal opponent of the island’s possible independence, Cheng Li-wun was invited by Chinese President Xi Jinping for what she has described as a peace-building mission.

Taiwan de facto became a self-governed territory after Chinese nationalist forces lost in the civil war against the communists and fled there in 1949. Beijing considers the island part of its sovereign territory under the One China policy, which the vast majority of countries also recognize.

Cheng’s visit will start on Tuesday and is expected to conclude on Sunday, with the KMT chair leading a party delegation. She has said she hopes to meet Xi personally as part of her pursuit of “cross-strait peace and stability.”

Speaking to NBC News ahead of the visit, Cheng argued that “in Taiwan, we must do everything in our power to prevent a war in the Taiwan Strait,” adding that she does not want the island to “become the next Ukraine.”

A fervent pro-independence activist in her youth, Cheng had a change of heart later in life, and was elected KMT chair last November.

While the party has for years advocated closer economic ties and cultural exchanges with mainland China, its new leader appears to have doubled down on this stance.

“For the safety, well-being, and future of 23 million people, we must jointly demonstrate the utmost sincerity and goodwill to resolve cross-strait differences,” she has argued.

Cheng has also criticized Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te’s push to increase military spending, and KMT lawmakers have blocked the passage of a $39-billion defense bill in parliament.

“If cross-strait relations are peaceful and stable, we don’t need a pointless arms race,” Cheng has said.

US President Donald Trump’s war with Iran has been driven by a “council of one” style of decision-making and could have serious repercussions for the United States, his former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci has warned. 

The US-Israeli war against the Islamic Republic, now in its sixth week, has already inflicted widespread destruction across the region, with mass displacement and mounting economic strain. Civilian casualties continue to rise both in Iran and across the region as strikes intensify. Trump has claimed Washington is “in deep negotiations” with Tehran, while warning he will “blow up everything” if no deal is reached. Iran has denied any talks and dismissed claims it is seeking a ceasefire. 

Speaking to RT’s Going Underground over the weekend, Scaramucci said he opposed the conflict from the outset, adding “lots of our Gulf allies would have probably agreed with that.”   

“One thing that’s going on that somebody like me wouldn’t like is that the decision-making is being made by a council of one,” he said, arguing that US presidents historically operated with broader consultation. Trump is surrounded by “a team of… yes-men,” Scaramucci claimed, contrasting this with earlier administrations.  

Scaramucci said he does not believe Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “pulling Trump around by the nose” and argued that Trump made the decision on the Iran war himself. 

He also addressed claims that the war has helped push the Jeffrey Epstein files out of the headlines, saying it had put the issue “on the back burner.” The release of the documents was still “a problem” and “a big risk” for Trump, Scaramucci said, claiming that “two days after the war, they took files that had his name in it, 48,700 of them…,” which he described as “circumstantial evidence” of a possible link. 

Despite the criticism of the Trump policy, Scaramucci said he hoped for de‑escalation, “defanging” of what he described as state‑sponsored militias in the region, and a diplomatic outcome.

More than a month into the war with Iran, Washington is confronting the strategic nightmare it tried to avoid. What began as a campaign that many in the US and Israel appear to have imagined as short, punishing, and politically manageable has instead become prolonged, expensive, globally destabilizing, and increasingly difficult to define as success.

The battlefield logic is now inseparable from the political logic, and on both fronts the pressure is mounting on Donald Trump’s administration. Reuters reports that the conflict, launched on February 28, has disrupted global energy flows, driven oil sharply higher, pushed US gasoline prices above four dollars a gallon, and dragged US President Donald Trump’s approval rating down to 36%, the lowest level since his return to office.

How to sell a war

A domestic audience can be persuaded to see a short war as an act of decisive leadership, but a long war becomes a test of competence, a source of inflation, a burden on allied relations, and eventually a question about whether the White House ever had a serious political endgame. Trump, who built much of his political appeal on the promise that he would be stronger than his predecessors and yet less trapped by endless wars, now faces the opposite image. The longer this campaign drags on, the more it looks like a war of choice with no clean exit, one that hurts households at the gas pump, deepens strategic uncertainty, and gives Tehran new ways to impose costs without needing conventional military parity.

That is the crucial point often missed in triumphalist rhetoric coming out of Washington. Iran does not need to dominate the skies or defeat the US in a contest of arms to claim strategic success. It needs only to survive, to keep retaliating, to deny the Americans and Israelis a clean political settlement, and to convert geography into leverage. Reuters described this with unusual clarity when it noted that Tehran has effectively put its hand on a pressure point of the global economy through the Strait of Hormuz and attacks on energy infrastructure. In other words, Iran’s war aim is economic coercion by endurance, not a classic military victory.

That reality explains why repeated mediation efforts have failed to produce a breakthrough. Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, and Oman have all been involved in one form or another, while regional diplomacy has become increasingly crowded with ad hoc initiatives and competing back channels. Yet none of these efforts has yielded a stable formula because the central political problem remains unresolved. Tehran does not believe Washington is negotiating in good faith. From the Iranian perspective, the precedent of the US withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal destroyed confidence in American commitments. In the middle of an active war, that distrust becomes even more intense. Iran continues to insist on its own terms for ending what it calls an unlawful war, while rejecting temporary arrangements that look like tactical pauses rather than real de-escalation.

The suspicion in Tehran is straightforward and, from its own strategic perspective, rational. Many Iranian decision-makers appear to believe that Trump wants negotiations not as a path to peace, but as a way to buy time, reshape the battlefield, calm markets, and prepare the next wave of attacks under more favorable political conditions. Trump’s own public messaging has only reinforced that fear. In recent days he has alternated between suggesting the war will end soon and issuing new threats of punishing escalation.

His recent Truth Social post made that tension impossible to miss: “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the F*ckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.” Beyond the obscenity and the shock value, what matters for analysis is what the post reveals about the White House state of mind. This does not read like a message from an administration in calm command of escalation. It reads like anger mixed with improvisation, frustration at a war that has not bent Iran quickly enough, at allies who are not rushing in, and at a domestic electorate that is beginning to price the conflict into everyday life. The bizarre sign-off only underlined the disorientation.

Trump urgently needs an exit, but not just any exit. He needs an exit that can be presented as a victory to his electorate. A negotiated settlement that looks too much like compromise risks appearing weak after weeks of maximalist rhetoric. But a prolonged war with rising economic costs is politically worse. Reuters has already tied the fuel shock directly to falling approval and broad public skepticism about the war. Even if Republican voters remain more hawkish than the country at large, a president cannot indefinitely absorb rising energy prices, strategic ambiguity, and casualty reports while claiming he is still fully in control of events.

Western cohesion is falling apart

This domestic pressure is compounded by widening signs of institutional strain inside the US defense establishment. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth pushed out Army Chief of Staff General Randy George along with other senior officers in the middle of the campaign. A war of this scale requires continuity in planning and confidence that military leadership is being evaluated by competence rather than by loyalty politics. Mass removals at the top suggest a crisis of internal coherence at the Pentagon. The symbolism is damaging even before one reaches the practical consequences.

The alliance picture is no better. NATO partners have not lined up behind the US campaign, and in some cases they have done the opposite. France openly reminded Washington that NATO is designed for Euro-Atlantic defense, not for offensive missions in the Strait of Hormuz. Such public pushback strips away any illusion that the US can easily multilateralize the conflict and spread its political costs. Trump’s irritation with allies has become increasingly explicit, but frustration is not a substitute for cohesion. The more openly he pressures Europe to back a war it did not authorize and does not support, the more isolated Washington looks.

A new voice emerges in Iran

Meanwhile, the humanitarian and infrastructural toll keeps rising. AP, Reuters, and other outlets have described widening attacks on civilian-adjacent and civilian-critical infrastructure, including power systems, bridges, universities, petrochemical sites, and supply routes. Tehran in turn has broadened its retaliatory logic beyond direct military targets, warning that if civilian targets in Iran remain under attack, economic and civilian infrastructure elsewhere in the region will not be spared. This is the grim dynamic of war without rules. Every new strike creates a justification for the next one, and every side tells itself that escalation is temporary even as the target sets expand.

In that atmosphere, most Iranians are not predisposed to accept negotiations on Washington’s terms. The war is widely seen inside Iran not as a limited bargaining crisis, but as an existential struggle imposed from outside. The killing of the senior Iranian leadership early in the conflict hardened this psychology further by turning the confrontation into one framed in civilizational and religious terms. Once a society concludes that surrender may invite not peace but disintegration, compromise becomes politically toxic. In such an environment, calls for talks sound less like prudence and more like weakness unless they come attached to unmistakable gains.

That is the setting in which Mohammad Javad Zarif has re-emerged. Iran’s former foreign minister and a longtime diplomat who also served as ambassador to the United Nations, Zarif is not just any Iranian voice. He is perhaps the most recognizable symbol of the Islamic Republic’s diplomatic opening to the West in the modern era. He is the face of the diplomacy that produced the 2015 nuclear deal, a figure whose fluency in the language of international compromise made him both indispensable abroad and suspect at home. Today he is affiliated with the University of Tehran and remains one of the most visible standard-bearers of the small, battered, but persistent current inside Iran that still thinks accommodation with the West can yield strategic benefits.

His new Foreign Affairs essay is revealing both for what it proposes and what it assumes. Zarif argues that Iran has the upper hand because it has survived the initial storm, preserved its political continuity, and imposed severe costs on its adversaries. On that basis, he suggests Tehran should “declare victory” and convert battlefield resilience into diplomatic settlement. The broad package he sketches includes limits on Iran’s nuclear program under monitoring, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, sanctions relief, reintegration into the global economy, and a wider regional security framework that could involve countries such as Türkiye. It is, in essence, an attempt to revive the strategic logic of the nuclear bargain in a much bloodier setting.

The article is intelligent, disciplined, and politically doomed in the short term. It correctly identifies the central asymmetry of the moment. Iran may be surviving, but survival alone will not rebuild cities, restore infrastructure, or stabilize civilian life. Endless resistance can satisfy the national psyche while still damaging the state’s long-term position. Zarif also correctly sees that Trump needs a deal more than he publicly admits. An American president trapped between inflation, alliance friction, and unclear objectives is more negotiable than one enjoying a clean military triumph.

The pro-Western camp inside Iran remains a minority. It is small, elite, and socially weak in the present climate, yet it is trying to signal something important to Washington and to Western Europe. It is trying to say that there remains within Iran a constituency that can imagine coexistence, sanctions relief, and a managed relationship with the outside world. In ordinary circumstances that might be politically useful. In this war, however, it often has the opposite effect. Calls for talks are easily interpreted as signals of softness at the precise moment when many Iranians feel that only steadfastness can prevent greater humiliation. The result is that figures like Zarif appear not as national realists, but as men prematurely auditioning for a postwar order that does not yet exist.

This does not make Zarif irrelevant. On the contrary, his intervention is important precisely because it reveals that parts of the Iranian elite understand the material cost of endless war and are already thinking about an eventual settlement. Yet the timing is terrible for his side. As long as Trump continues to threaten fresh strikes, as long as civilian infrastructure remains in the target cycle, and as long as Tehran believes negotiations may merely serve as a bridge to the next attack, the pro-Western argument will struggle to gain legitimacy.

The war is therefore hardening both systems at once. In Washington it is radicalizing rhetoric while exposing strategic confusion. In Tehran it is deepening the belief that survival itself is victory and that negotiations under fire are a form of surrender. This is the deepest irony of the present moment. Both Trump and Zarif want an end state they can describe as success, but they are speaking to publics that increasingly understand success in incompatible ways.

For Trump, success means getting out quickly while still claiming that Iran was forced to bend. For most Iranians at this stage, success means refusing to bend at all. As long as that contradiction remains unresolved, diplomacy will keep appearing on the horizon only to dissolve on contact with political reality. And the longer that continues, the worse the outcome becomes for everyone involved.

The Artemis II mission has made history, with its crew traveling farther from Earth than any humans before, surpassing a record that stood for more than half a century.

NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch, along with Canadian Space Agency (CSA) astronaut Jeremy Hansen, on Monday surpassed the Apollo 13 distance record of 248,655 miles (400,171 km) from Earth, which was set in 1970.

Artemis II has now exceeded that mark by more than 4,000 miles, reaching a maximum distance of approximately 252,757 miles from Earth. The achievement marks a symbolic turning point in NASA’s renewed push toward deep space exploration and its long-term goal of returning humans to the Moon and eventually sending missions to Mars.

Speaking after the milestone, one of the astronauts paid tribute to earlier generations of explorers. “We surpass the furthest distance humans have ever traveled from planet Earth,” the crew member said, according to the BBC. “We do so in honoring the extraordinary efforts and feats of our predecessors in human space exploration.”

The astronaut added that the journey is not over yet. “We will continue our journey even further into space before Mother Earth succeeds in pulling us back to everything we hold dear,” they said, while encouraging future explorers “to make sure this record is not long-lived.”

NASA is expected to release further updates as the crew continues its mission, which is seen as a key step in paving the way for future lunar landings under the Artemis program.

NASA launched Artemis II, its first crewed flight around the Moon in more than 50 years, last Wednesday. As part of their ten-day journey, the astronauts will circle the Moon and return to Earth in an Orion capsule.

Orion is set to circle the Moon later on Monday, April 6.

The US-Israeli war against Iran has set the Middle East “on fire,” reflecting Russia’s warning about the dangerous consequences of the move, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.

On Sunday, US President Donald Trump escalated the tensions by issuing an expletive-laden demand to Tehran to unblock the Strait of Hormuz, which has remained effectively shut since the conflict began on February 28.
“Open the f**king strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell,” he wrote on social media, threatening to demolish the Iranian power plants and bridges if it doesn’t happen by Tuesday. Tehran maintains that the key waterway is only closed for oil shipments by the US and its allies.

When asked by journalists about Trump’s rant on Monday, Peskov said that “we have seen those statements, but we prefer not to comment on them.”

The spokesman stressed that “tensions continue to escalate, with basically the entire region on fire.”

“These are all dangerous and very negative consequences of the aggression unleashed against Iran. The geography of the conflict has expanded, and now we see the results, including the very negative repercussions for the global economy,” he said.

The war has also triggered a global energy shock, sending oil and gas prices surging and pushing fuel costs higher for consumers worldwide.

Russia had “warned from the start that such consequences were inevitable,” Peskov added.

Axios said on Sunday that the US, Iran, and regional mediators have been discussing terms for a potential 45-day ceasefire in the conflict. Tehran has denied holding any talks with Washington.

Tens of thousands of people took to the streets across Iran over the weekend, voicing support for the country’s leadership as the campaign against the Islamic Republic entered its 36th day on Sunday.

Crowds gathered in major urban centers including Tehran, Nazarabad, Qaemshahr and Dehdasht, staying out until dawn, carrying portraits of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and chanting his name, according to Tasnim news agency.

Demonstrations, now stretching for more than five weeks, have continued despite ongoing strikes that have left 3,540 people dead so far, including 1,616 civilians and at least 244 children, the US-based human rights group HRANA has reported.

The rallies have increasingly become a regular expression of defiance and national unity, underscoring the Islamic Republic’s resilience despite a month-long campaign of intensive US and Israeli airstrikes, observers say.

In videos aired by Persian-language channels, protesters vowed to keep returning to the streets despite threats, while also chanting slogans condemning the military strikes.

In the capital, crowds packed the city center, chanting “Heydar Heydar” and denouncing “hypocrites and traitors,” according to Tasnim news agency.

In Nazarabad, west of Tehran, large numbers of people filled the streets, with local media hailing the turnout as a show of strength.

In the northern city of Qaemshahr, residents gathered to voice support for the leadership, with reports describing the scenes as part of sustained public mobilization.

Washington and Tehran received a Pakistan-brokered framework for an immediate ceasefire on Monday, but Iran has rejected reopening the waterway under a temporary deal and dismissed US pressure, saying it will review the proposal on its own terms, according to Reuters.

US President Donald Trump has threatened to bomb Iranian infrastructure if no agreement is reached. “Open the F**kin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH,” he wrote on Truth Social on Sunday.

South Korean President Lee Jae Myung has apologized to North Korea over drone incursions into the neighboring country.

Last week, South Korean prosecutors indicted three people – an employee of the National Intelligence Service, a South Korean military officer, and a graduate student – for sending UAVs into North Korea between September 2025 and January 2026. Seoul previously denied any official involvement in the incursions, claiming they had been the work of civilians.

Speaking about the drone incidents during a cabinet meeting on Monday, Lee stressed that “although this was not an act by our government, I express regret to the North Korean side over the unnecessary military tension caused by such reckless behavior.”

“Individuals carried out such provocative acts... on their own,” he said, calling their conduct “unacceptable” and “irresponsible.”

Lee instructed the relevant government agencies to amend regulations to ensure that drone incursions do not reoccur in the future.

Kim Yo-jong, the sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and a high-ranking official in the Workers’ Party of Korea, said on Tuesday that her brother welcomed the move by the South Korean president.

“The head of our state appreciates the actions of this honest and generous person,” she said in a statement cited by the state-run KCNA news agency.

Kim Jong-un considers Lee’s “apology and the measures taken to prevent such incidents from happening again to be very correct and wise,” the statement read.

Last month, Kim Jong-un described the South as the “most hostile state,” vowing to “thoroughly reject and disregard it.” Seoul will “pay the price” for its provocations, he said.

Kim reiterated that North Korea will not give up on its nuclear weapons because they provide a deterrence against the US, which is carrying out “state terror and aggression” globally. He again slammed military cooperation between Pyongyang and Washington, including what he called the deployment of American nuclear-capable assets in the region.

The US sent “a lot” of weapons to Iranian protesters during unrest in the country in January, President Donald Trump has said. 

The demonstrations, initially driven by economic grievances and marred by violence, were openly incited at the time by Trump, who threatened the Iranian authorities with retaliation for suppressing the unrest. Tehran described the demonstrations as foreign-instigated and accused the US and Israel of fueling the movement, blaming armed provocateurs for deadly clashes.

In a phone interview on Sunday, Trump told Fox News reporter Trey Yingst that Washington had carried out a covert effort to arm demonstrators. He claimed the plan had little effect because Kurdish intermediaries kept the weapons instead of delivering them.

On Monday, the president again spoke about the US role in the Iranian protests, telling journalists that “we sent guns, a lot of guns, they were supposed to go to the people so they could fight back against these thugs.”

Tehran UN envoy Amir Saeid Iravani sent a letter to the UN Security Council (UNSC) on Monday, urging the body to take action against the US after it admitted meddling in Iran’s internal affairs.

Trump’s statements mean that Washington now bears full responsibility for the deaths and destruction caused by the Iranian protests, the envoy insisted.

The arming of demonstrators constitutes “a flagrant violation of the UN Charter and the fundamental principles and rules of international law,” he said.

According to Iravani, Washington’s conduct was a continuation of its “long-standing policy of creating, financing and arming terrorist groups in the Middle East and beyond.”

In mid-March, the New York Times reported that Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency sought to “galvanize the Iranian opposition” during the early phase of the US-Israeli bombing campaign launched on February 28.

Mossad chief David Barnea reportedly presented a destabilization plan to the Trump administration in January. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cited the agency’s optimism in making the case to Trump for military action.

However, instead of being overthrown by a mass uprising alongside targeted assassination of Iranian leaders, Tehran consolidated its control. A Kurdish offensive in Iran, which Trump had also encouraged, did not materialize either.

Israel has conducted yet another wave of strikes against infrastructure targets including an airport in Tehran, after striking at least two petrochemical facilities in Iran the day before.

In the meantime, Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Defense claimed the debris from a successful “interception and destruction” of at least seven ballistic missiles fell in the vicinity of its energy facilities, with the damage still being “assessed.”

Israeli forces attacked Iran’s largest petrochemical facility in the South Pars natural gas field and a petrochemical complex in the city of Marvdasht earlier on Monday – as US President Donald Trump has stepped up threats to strike Iran’s infrastructure if American and Israel-linked shipping is not allowed through the Strait of Hormuz by Wednesday.

“It is Trump who has about 20 hours to either surrender to Iran or see his allies return to the Stone Age. We will not back down!” Mahdi Mohammadi, a senior adviser to Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, claimed.

Tehran has reportedly rejected a US ceasefire proposal, circulated by Egyptian, Pakistani, and Turkish mediators, instead offering a ten‑clause plan that calls for a permanent end to the war. The demands reportedly include an end to conflicts across the region, protocols to ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz, the lifting of sanctions, and provisions for reconstruction.

• Riyadh has yet to officially confirm the scale of the damage, but multiple videos shared by pro-Iranian sources purportedly show several explosions and a large fire at the country’s industrial area of Jubail, which alone produces roughly 7 percent of the world’s petrochemical products.

• Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said the IDF would target Iranian leadership “one by one,” after Maj. Gen. Majid Khademi, head of intelligence for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was killed in one of the strikes.

• Iran’s Health Ministry says at least 2,076 people have been killed since February 28, including 240 women and 212 children, with more than 26,500 injured.

• At least 15 Americans were injured in an Iranian drone strike on Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait overnight, CBS News reports, citing two US officials.

Follow our live coverage below for continuous updates. You can also read our previous updates here.

Explosives found at the weekend near the Serbian extension of the TurkStream pipeline, which delivers Russian gas to Hungary, were US-made, the head of Belgrade’s Military Security Agency (VBA), Duro Jovanic, has said.

On Sunday, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic announced that explosives of “devastating power” had been discovered several hundred meters away from the key energy infrastructure in the municipality of Kanjiza, around 10 km from the Hungarian border. Had they been detonated, they would have caused gas outages in Hungary and northern Serbia, Vucic said, adding that he had swiftly informed Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban of the development.

Later in the day, Jovanic told a press conference that the markings on the explosives make it “unequivocally clear” that they were manufactured in the US. However, he stressed that this “in no way means that the producer is also the mastermind and the executor of the sabotage.”

According to the spy chief, the plot to attack the Balkan Stream pipeline, which is part of the larger TurkStream network, was prepared by a foreign national with military training.

Jovanic denied claims that the VBA has accused Ukraine of being behind the planned sabotage, insisting that “the Serbian military does not interfere in political processes in Serbia, let alone in another country.”

Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Georgy Tikhy said in a post on X that “we categorically reject attempts to falsely link Ukraine to the incident with explosives found near the TurkStream pipeline in Serbia. Ukraine has nothing to do with this.”

In a comment on Tikhy’s statement, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto responded, “Yeah, like North Stream 2,” referring to the 2022 explosions in the Baltic Sea that severely damaged a pipeline bringing Russian gas to Germany. Media outlets have reported that a group of Ukrainian saboteurs were behind the attack, although Moscow has insisted it could not have been carried out without the assistance of Western intelligence agencies.

Yeah, like North Stream 2… https://t.co/h4bthFJwUE

— Péter Szijjártó (@FM_Szijjarto) April 5, 2026

Orban announced on Sunday that he had ordered an increase in military protection for the Hungarian section of the TurkStream pipeline, while accusing Kiev of “working for years to cut Europe from Russian energy.”

On Tuesday, Orban visited a gas facility near the border with Serbia, telling journalists that it was not yet clear who was responsible for the sabotage attempt, and that the investigation was ongoing. However, he added that the incident “fits into a sequence of events as the Ukrainians have such capabilities and are willing and able to do such things.”

Speaking about the thwarted sabotage of the TurkStream pipeline, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that “one can suggest with high probability that... this time some traces of the Kiev regime’s involvement will be discovered.” Ukraine had already targeted critical energy infrastructure, he recalled.

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned in February that Moscow possessed intelligence about Kiev planning underwater bomb attacks in the Black Sea against the TurkStream and Blue Stream pipelines.

The US government has pressured satellite imaging company Planet Labs to stop publishing photos of the Middle East.

The company said it would implement an “indefinite withhold of imagery” for pictures captured from March 9 onward, lasting at least until the US-Israeli conflict with Iran ends, citing a White House request. Planet Labs’ customers were informed of the policy shift via email last week.

The proprietary imagery had been widely used by journalists and open-source intelligence (OSINT) analysts to verify strikes and damage on both sides. These included sites such as Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, used by US forces, and Tehran’s Mehrabad International Airport.

The San Francisco-based company operates a large network of micro-satellites and has contracts with several US government agencies outside the defense sector. Earlier in the conflict, it introduced a 96-hour delay before releasing Middle East images, later extending that delay to 14 days, purportedly to limit potential military use. Under the new system, the company said it may still release select images in cases deemed to serve the public interest.

It remains unclear whether other commercial satellite firms – including Vantor (formerly Maxar Technologies) and BlackSky Technology – will implement similar restrictions.

Iranian officials have responded by signaling defiance, insisting that any resolution depends on opposing forces withdrawing and providing compensation. Tehran is expected to intensify attacks against US allies in the region if the threatened strikes proceed.

Beyond the immediate violence, the war is already triggering global economic consequences. Disruptions to oil and liquefied natural gas flows from the Persian Gulf are driving up energy prices, while supply chains for key goods, including fertilizers and microchips, have been upset.

The US, Iran, and regional mediators have been discussing terms for a potential 45-day ceasefire, Axios reported on Sunday evening, citing four US, Israeli, and regional sources.

The report comes as US President Donald Trump extended the deadline of an ultimatum to Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz from Monday to Tuesday. Trump has threatened to strike Iranian civilian infrastructure, including power plants and bridges, if shipping is not restored.

According to Axios, communication is taking place through Pakistani, Egyptian, and Turkish mediators, as well as via messages exchanged between Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. A US official indicated that several proposals had been presented in recent days, but none had been accepted by Tehran.

The mediators are reportedly discussing a two-phase arrangement, beginning with a 45-day pause in fighting to allow negotiations on a permanent settlement. The halt could be extended if needed, while a final agreement would address the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile.

Iran has repeatedly denied that it is negotiating with the US and has rejected Trump’s claim that it is seeking a ceasefire. On Friday, Fars News Agency reported, citing officials, that Tehran had rejected a US proposal for a 48-hour ceasefire delivered through an intermediary.

Iranian officials stated that they would hold talks on their own terms, when they see fit. Tehran also accused the US of effectively sabotaging the Omani-mediated talks when Trump, together with Israel, ordered an attack on Iran on February 28.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei dismissed Trump’s claim that Iran is seeking a truce as “false and baseless.”

US President Donald Trump’s war with Iran is making life worse for ordinary Americans, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf has said in response to ultimatums over the Strait of Hormuz.

In an expletive-laden post on Truth Social on Sunday, Trump warned that Iran would be “living in hell” unless the vital waterway is reopened to shipping by Tuesday, 8 PM Eastern Time (midnight GMT). He also repeated his threat to bomb Iranian power plants and bridges.

Responding on X, Qalibaf urged Trump to end what he described as a “dangerous game.”

“Your reckless moves are dragging the United States into a living HELL for every single family, and our whole region is going to burn because you insist on following Netanyahu’s commands,” Qalibaf wrote, referring to the Israeli prime minister.

Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to “enemy ships” shortly after the US and Israel initiated their air campaign on February 28. Tehran later said navigation rules would change and that the strait would remain inaccessible to the US and Israel for an extended period.

Traffic through the strait normally accounts for 20–25% of global oil shipments and around 20% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade. Disruptions linked to the ongoing conflict are driving up energy prices, including in the US, where the average price of gasoline has risen to $4 per gallon for the first time since 2022.

Russia’s envoy to international organizations in Vienna, Mikhail Ulyanov, said Washington fails to understand that Tehran would only accept agreements based on “reasonable compromises,” not ultimatums.

British King Charles III has issued an Easter message to Christians, after Buckingham Palace came under fire earlier this week for stating that he would not make one. He recently delivered greetings to Muslims on Ramadan.

The British monarch is traditionally the Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

On Thursday, GB News quoted a Buckingham Palace representative as saying that King Charles would not issue an Easter message.

The announcement drew criticism from social media users, many of whom described the king’s Easter silence as “disappointing.”

“We are hurting as a nation, we needed a message of Easter hope,” one user wrote.

Some critics took issue with the fact that, in February, the Royal family posted a message on its social media accounts marking the beginning of Ramadan, the holiest month in the Islamic calendar.

“Wishing all Muslims in the UK, the Commonwealth and around the world a blessed and peaceful Ramadan,” the greeting read.

Several British Christian clerics criticized the Royal family’s initial refusal to do the same for the country’s largest religious community.

Gavin Ashenden, a former chaplain to the late Queen Elizabeth II, issued a statement in which he suggested that the King’s silence gave his subjects the impression that the monarch “is more sympathetic to Islam.” He added that this was particularly disheartening at a time when “Christianity throughout the West – but particularly in this country, and Anglicanism above all – is beginning to sink into decay.”

Bishop Ceirion H. Dewar similarly wrote on X that the Royal family’s silence on Easter was a “grave disappointment.”

On Sunday, the Royal family ultimately released a short message to wish “a joyous Easter Sunday to Christians celebrating in the UK, the Commonwealth and around the world.”

Prediction platform Polymarket has apologized for allowing users to place bets on whether American airmen from a downed US fighter jet would be rescued from Iran after facing backlash over questionable ethics.

On Friday, a two-seater F-15E Strike Eagle was shot down over Iran, prompting the US to launch a high-risk extraction mission. US officials said that while one crew member was evacuated shortly after the crash, it took the US more than 24 hours to locate and extract the other, an operation that reportedly involved several helicopters and a CIA deception ploy.

Iranian officials, however, have denied that the operation was a success, claiming that Tehran destroyed a C-130 military transport plane and two Black Hawk helicopters, with videos circulating on social media showing the aircraft’s debris.

The uncertainty about the fate of the US service members prompted a now-deleted bet that allowed users to buy ‘yes’ or ‘no’ positions on whether the airmen would be recovered by April 3 or April 4, with roughly 63% of traders predicting a Saturday rescue.

Polymarket promptly deleted the bet, replying to Moulton: “We took this market down immediately as it does not meet our integrity standards. It should not have been posted, and we are investigating how this slipped through our internal safeguards.” 

Moulton, however, did not accept the apology as sufficient, saying that Polymarket’s “integrity standards are severely lacking,” pointing to dozens of other active war bets still visible on the platform.

The episode is the latest in a string of controversies for Polymarket tied to the Iran war. According to several media reports, six suspected insiders collectively won $1.2 million by betting that the US would strike Iran on February 28 – the exact day coordinated US-Israeli airstrikes began – with all of the accounts funded within hours of the attack.

Israeli prosecutors separately filed indictments against an IDF reservist and a civilian for allegedly using classified military intelligence to bet on Polymarket during the Twelve-Day War in June 2025.

The Serbian authorities have discovered explosives of “devastating power” planted near a key gas pipeline transporting Russian energy to Hungary, President Aleksandar Vucic has announced, adding that he has briefed Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban on the matter. This comes after Ukraine essentially shut down Russian oil supplies to Hungary through its territory.

Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Vucic said “two large packages of explosives with sticks” were found in the municipality of Kanjiza, around 10 km from the Hungarian border.

The city of Kanjiza is located near the Balkan Stream gas pipeline – the regional extension of the TurkStream pipeline. The Balkan Stream runs through Türkiye, Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, and currently ends at Slovakia’s border. Hungary imports 7.4-7.6 billion cubic meters of gas annually via Serbia.

The president did not assign blame but said he spoke with Orban about the situation, noting that an explosion would have caused gas outages in Hungary and northern Serbia.

Orban has confirmed the phone call, saying “the investigation is ongoing” and that he “has called an emergency defense council for this afternoon.”

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto also weighed in, saying Budapest “firmly reject[s] this latest attack, as undermining the security of our energy supply is an attack on our sovereignty.”

Later on Sunday, he said the government had held a Defense Council meeting, after which Orban ordered military protection for the Hungarian section of the pipeline. Soldiers would guard it and its transfer points along its entire route from the Serbian-Hungarian border to the Hungarian-Slovak border to ensure the country’s energy security, Szijjarto said.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has suggested that the masterminds of the plot are seeking “to strip Hungary of its sovereignty.”

“They are doing this in various ways: Politically, by trying to interfere in internal affairs and elections; economically, by forcing it to make decisions under pressure that harm the economy and the well-being of Hungarians, and through energy, by trying to prevent Hungary from obtaining quality resources at reasonable prices.”

Hungary and Ukraine have for months butted heads over supplies of Russian oil via the Druzhba pipeline. In January, Kiev shut down the pipeline, citing a Russian drone strike on the infrastructure. Moscow has dismissed the claim; Hungary and Slovakia accused Kiev of lying and using the purported strike as grounds for political blackmail.

Ukraine has on numerous occasions also attempted to attack TurkStream infrastructure. Russia has accused Ukrainian saboteurs of blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines in 2022, suggesting that the attack was supported by Western intelligence services.

Leader of the Democracy in Europe Movement, and former Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, condemned Europe’s mishandling of Russia and Ukraine as a ‘crime against logic’ during the TOLK.PRO forum in Moscow.

“The situation with Russia, with Ukraine, and in this region—it has devastating consequences for peace and security on the continent and globally. And above all, of course, it's devastating for peace in both Europe and Russia. It's a crime against logic,” he said.

Answering questions about global events, Varoufakis shifted the focus from Europe to the US-China standoff. US industry has practically ceased to exist, he noted. The US no longer builds trains or nuclear icebreakers, while Chinese Big Tech has already far outpaced the US.

He paid special attention to the digital yuan: China, he said, has already integrated finance with cloud capital through a central bank digital currency, making its economic model more efficient.

Varoufakis is well-respected in Russia and recently went viral on Russian TikTok. A track featuring his name repeatedly, written by Moscow DJ Sasha Melior, is ubiquiutous with Russian Zoomers. Varoufakis took the stage to this very tune.

Welcome to RT’s live coverage of the US-Israeli war on Iran, a widening conflict marked by intense missile and drone strikes across the Middle East.

Search efforts are continuing for four Israelis feared trapped under the rubble of an apartment building destroyed by an Iranian missile in Haifa. The Israeli military has opened an investigation into the failure to intercept the projectile.

US President Donald Trump renewed his threat to bomb Iran’s power plants and bridges unless the Strait of Hormuz is reopened to shipping. “Open the F**kin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH!” the president wrote on Truth Social on Sunday, after extending the deadline to Tuesday, 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time (Wednesday, 12:00 a.m. GMT).

Iran’s mission to the UN responded by arguing that Trump’s remarks signal a readiness to commit “war crimes.”

Iran closed the strategically important chokepoint to “enemy ships” shortly after the US and Israel initiated their air campaign on February 28. Tehran later said that the waterway would remain closed to the US and Israel “in the long term.” Around 20–25% of the world’s oil and 20% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) pass through the narrow waterway.

Meanwhile, Iranian military spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaghari sought to downplay the success of the US commando raid that resulted in the rescue of a missing crew member of an F-15E Strike Eagle shot down over southwestern Iran on Friday. Zolfaghari claimed Iranian forces had downed two C-130 transport planes and two Black Hawk helicopters, while US media reported that American troops destroyed their own aircraft after failing to take off from a makeshift airstrip.

In Lebanon, where the Israeli military has been conducting a ground offensive and massive airstrikes against Hezbollah militants, “it’s been a very bloody Easter Sunday,” RT correspondent Steve Sweeney reported. Several people were killed in an attack on a densely populated residential neighborhood in Beirut, with more Israeli airstrikes reported in other parts of Lebanon.

• Rosatom says all 198 evacuated staff from Bushehr are safe and expected to cross into Armenia overnight.

• An Israeli airstrike on southern Lebanon killed seven people, including a four-year-old girl, bringing the death toll since early March to at least 1,422.

• Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wished Christians “a blessed and joyful Easter,” touting Israel’s “unwavering” commitment to religious freedom — amid backlash over blocked Palm Sunday access to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and his comparison of Jesus to Genghis Khan.

• Iran struck multiple energy sites in Kuwait, with Kuwait Petroleum Corporation reporting “significant material losses.”

• Iran also said it hit petrochemical and industrial sites in Israel, the UAE and Bahrain, claiming the targets were linked to US economic interests.

Follow our live coverage below for continuous updates. You can also read our previous updates here.

Both crew members of the US F-15E Strike Eagle shot down over Iran on Friday have been rescued, President Donald Trump has announced.

The aircraft was shot down during a combat mission over Iran’s southwestern Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province; officials had until then remained tight-lipped about rescue efforts. According to US media, one crew member was recovered shortly after the incident, while the search for the weapons systems officer continued throughout Sunday.

“WE GOT HIM! My fellow Americans, over the past several hours, the United States Military pulled off one of the most daring search and rescue operations in US history for one of our incredible crew member officers, who also happens to be a highly respected colonel, and who I am thrilled to let you know is now SAFE and SOUND!” Trump wrote on Truth Social, confirming reports that the second crew member had finally been found.

“At my direction, the US military sent dozens of aircraft, armed with the most lethal weapons in the world, to retrieve him. He sustained injuries, but he will be just fine,” he added.

“This is the first time in military memory that two US pilots have been rescued separately deep in enemy territory.”

Earlier on Sunday, Iranian media reported heavy fighting between US commandos and Iran’s Basij paramilitary force in the area where the crew member was believed to be hiding. Iranian officials announced a reward for his capture, while civilians reportedly rushed to help locate him.

In a separate incident on Friday, a US A-10 Thunderbolt II fighter jet was hit by Iranian fire. The pilot ejected after the plane left Iranian airspace, and was also rescued.

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has urged the EU to lift the sanctions on energy exports from Russia and resume dialogue, comparing the bloc’s policies to a “suicide ship.”

Since the beginning of the US-Israel war with Iran in late February, oil prices have risen by 60% and gas prices by 70% in the EU, according to European Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen. The bloc previously experienced price hikes after deciding to phase out deliveries from Russia due to the Ukraine conflict.

In a post on Facebook on Saturday, Fico blasted the EU for “ideological blindness and incompetence” and accused Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky of exacerbating the crisis.

“I am not calling for anything else – only for a return to common sense. The whole EU, and especially the European Commission, are beginning to look like a suicide ship when it comes to energy security,” Fico wrote.

Kiev, which has long tried to pressure Slovakia and neighboring Hungary to abandon energy supplies from Russia, claimed that the pipeline was rendered inoperable by a Russian strike. Zelensky said last month that Ukraine would repair it if the EU prevents Hungary and Slovakia from blocking a $104 billion loan to Kiev.

Earlier this week, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban warned that the bloc could face “one of the most severe economic crises in its history” unless the sanctions on Russian energy are lifted.

The bloc’s energy commissioner, Dan Jorgensen, has ruled out the easing of sanctions, despite warning on Friday of a potential “long-lasting” energy shock that could force member states to ration fuel.

The shadow campaign to swing the Hungarian election against Viktor Orban escalated with the scandal over the wiretapping of Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto. The case offers a rare look into how bureaucrats, journalists, and spies run a regime-change operation in real time.

Neither Orban nor Szijjarto make any secret of their desire to maintain cordial relations with Moscow, particularly on matters of energy security and the peace process in Ukraine. However, when bundled with more outlandish claims – that Russian “election fixers” are already embedded in Budapest, for example – the reports paint a picture of a government compromised by the Kremlin.

Orban’s leading opponent, Peter Magyar, has repeated these claims in his speeches. After the Szijjarto story broke, he accused the foreign minister of “betraying Hungarian and European interests,” and threatened him with “life imprisonment” for treason, should his Tisza party win the election.

All it took was one leaked audio file for the scheme to unravel.

The Szijjarto wiretapping plot

In an audio file released by Hungarian conservative outlet Mandiner, opposition journalist Szabolcs Panyi can be heard telling a source how he passed Szijjarto’s phone number to “a state organ of an EU country.” Once they had this number, he explained, agents of this country were able to extract “information about who that number spoke to, and they see who is calling that number or who that number is calling.”

‼️DISGUSTING. HERE IT IS ON THE RECORDING‼️

A Hungarian journalist, Szabolcs Panyi — a Soros-linked Transparency International award recipient and the same person who spread the bot hoax — is heard talking about foreign intelligence tied to an EU member state targeting… https://t.co/rjqvrVfLeE pic.twitter.com/PoiSEaXwob

— Balázs Orbán (@BalazsOrban_HU) March 23, 2026

In a Facebook post, Panyi confirmed that he was the person on the recording. He said that he was asking his source whether she knew of any alternate numbers used by Szijjarto or Lavrov, “so that I could compare them with information received from the national security service of a European country.”

Panyi’s confession explained how the “European security officials” were able to track Szijjarto’s phone conversations before feeding the information to Politico and the Washington Post.

Orban immediately announced an investigation into the wiretapping. “We are dealing with two serious issues,” the PM stated the same day as Panyi's post. “There is evidence that Hungary’s foreign minister was wiretapped, and we also ⁠have indications of who may be behind it.” Szijjarto explained that as the EU’s longest-serving foreign minister, he regularly speaks to Lavrov with messages from his colleagues in the EU. The real scandal, he said “is that a Hungarian journalist is colluding with foreign secret services in order to wiretap a member of the Hungarian government.”

🚨 @FM_Szijjarto: The scandal is that a Hungarian journalist cooperated with a foreign secret service to wiretap the Hungarian Foreign Minister. This is unacceptable and deeply alarming. pic.twitter.com/jyecmkTK5Y

— Zoltan Kovacs (@zoltanspox) March 23, 2026

“What makes this case even worse is that this Hungarian journalist is friends with the inner circles of the [opposition] Tisza party,” he added.

The man on the inside

Panyi’s central role in the scheme will come as no surprise to anyone who’s been following our reporting on the Hungarian election. An editor with Vsquare, Panyi leads the outlet’s Budapest office, and wrote an article in early March alleging that the Kremlin had dispatched “political technologists” from Russia’s military intelligence agency, the GRU, to Budapest to swing the election for Orban.

Panyi did not explain what this mysterious team of election meddlers was doing, or investigate whether they actually existed. Instead, he took the word of the anonymous “European national security sources,” who fed him the story at face value.

Vsquare is funded by grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), an agency of the US State Department that helped foment the 2014 Maidan coup in Ukraine, USAID, the German Marshall Fund of the United States, and two EU-backed journalism funds. Almost all of Vsquare’s published work – which includes investigations tying Orban’s government to Russian intelligence, as well as hit pieces on populist leaders Robert Fico in Slovakia and Andrej Babis in the Czech Republic – is based on information provided by European intelligence agencies, as well as interviews with pro-EU politicians and NGOs.

Panyi’s apparent role is to launder this information for public consumption. In the case of the GRU meddling story, he took the word of the intelligence agencies and presented it as original reporting before it was picked up and disseminated by multiple Western outlets, including the Financial Times. The EU then activated its online censorship mechanism in Hungary, citing the threat of “potential Russian online disinformation campaigns.” Originating with EU spies and spread by an EU-financed news outlet, the story helped legitimize the bloc’s censorship campaign ahead of a crucial election.

In the case of the Szijjarto-Lavrov story, Panyi went even further by helping the spies obtain their information in the first place. It is unclear which agency he collaborated with, but in a Facebook post, the Vsquare editor said that he spoke to officials from seven EU countries while working on the story. Among them was Gabrielius Landsbergis, Lithuania’s former foreign minister who has referred to Russia as “the world’s cancer that must be removed.”

What’s the endgame for Panyi and the EU?

More broadly, it is unclear whether Vsquare’s reporting will have any meaningful impact on Hungarian voters. However, smear campaigns and dirty tricks are part and parcel of any election, and with Orban vetoing the EU’s €90 billion loan package for Ukraine, Brussels and its allies have every incentive to try to tip the scales in their favor.

Yet even if Orban wins, the flood of Russia conspiracies from outlets like Vsquare, Politico, and the Washington Post serves another vital purpose: to delegitimize his victory and justify reprisals from Brussels.

The self-fulfilling conspiracy playbook was actually written in Washington. Back in 2016, fabricated claims of “Russian interference” and improper contacts between Donald Trump’s campaign and Moscow were used to justify the wiretapping of Trump’s campaign, and a years-long investigation that ultimately ended with zero proof of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

The parallels between ‘Russiagate’ and the information war playing out in Hungary are unmistakable. In the same way that Vsquare’s GRU report propped up the EU’s decision to impose its censorship regime on Hungary earlier this month, the FBI used the ‘Steele Dossier’ – a collection of unfounded rumors about Trump’s relationship with Moscow – to justify wiretapping the Trump campaign.

In 2017, Barack Obama’s intelligence chief, James Clapper, strong-armed the 17 US intelligence agencies into releasing a statement claiming that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally “approved and directed” a cyber-warfare and influence operation against the Clinton campaign. In 2026, the EU’s spy agencies are using the press to smear Orban and Szijjarto as agents of the Kremlin.

‘Russiagate’ stymied Trump’s policy agenda for the entirety of his first term in office. Even after Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report exonerated Trump in 2019, the CIA leaked false reports of Russia paying the Taliban cash “bounties” for killing US soldiers to block the president’s planned withdrawal from Afghanistan, while Clinton and many of her supporters still maintain that Trump’s 2016 victory was fraudulent.

The EU has already blocked funds for Hungary equal to 3.5% of the country’s GDP, over Orban’s banning of LGBT propaganda and refusal to accept non-European migrants. Should he win the election, it is easy to imagine claims of Russian interference being used to cut further assistance to Budapest, or even to strip Hungary’s EU veto rights. The latter idea has already been floated by Sweden, Lithuania, and a host of unnamed “EU diplomats” interviewed by Politico last week.

What’s the bottom line?

The battle for power in Hungary is intensifying as international vested interests begin running ploys tried and tested in other jurisdictions, from the US to Romania (see our series opener on the EU censorship machine).

In Hungary, Panyi has claimed that “the connection between Szijjarto and Lavrov is just the tip of the iceberg.” Orban has vowed to “take retribution” for the wiretapping. Magyar has threatened Szijjarto with prison time. For everyone involved, the scandal has raised the stakes of the election to the point where nobody can afford to lose on April 12.

Though the Hungarian election is only a week away, another threat is already manifesting for the EU’s elite: This time in Bulgaria, where left-wing populist and former President Rumen Radev wants to shut off the money tap to Ukraine, and his opponents want Brussels’ censorship machine to save them. Here we go again.

On April 19, Bulgarians will vote in the country’s eighth parliamentary election in five years. Called after the resignation of Rosen Zhelyazkov following street protests in November, the election pits centrist Boyko Borissov – a former prime minister – and his pro-EU GERB-SDS coalition against the emerging left-leaning Progressive Bulgaria coalition, headed by Radev.

Who is Bulgaria’s Rumen Radev?

Radev served as Bulgaria’s president from 2017 until his resignation this January. He frequently clashed with Borissov during the latter’s tenure as prime minister, accusing him of incompetence and corruption – allegations substantiated in 2020 when an image of Borissov lying half naked on a bed next to a pile of money and a handgun spread on social media.

The Radev-Borissov rivalry would not concern Brussels if Radev wasn’t a vocal opponent of the EU’s Ukraine policy. Radev has opposed the bloc’s “self-destructive” sanctions on Russia since 2022, views a Ukrainian victory as “impossible,” opposes military aid to Kiev, and has declared that “ending the war in Ukraine requires more diplomacy and negotiations with Russia.” For a country with four NATO military bases and a ten-year defense deal with Ukraine, the issue is critical for Kiev’s backers.

With two weeks to go, Progressive Bulgaria is leading Borissov’s GERB-SDS by ten points, according to a polling aggregate compiled by Politico. Faced with this outbreak of popular democracy that challenges its fundamental policy positions, the Bulgarian establishment has called for EU reinforcements.

Is the EU meddling in the Bulgarian election?

Last week, caretaker Bulgarian Prime Minister Andrey Gyurov requested that the EU activate its ‘Rapid Response System’ (RRS), claiming that Russia is interfering against Borissov. Activated in Hungary last month, the RRS empowers EU-approved ‘fact-checkers’ to flag online content as ‘disinformation’ and request its removal from social media platforms such as TikTok and Meta.

Platforms that refuse to comply are liable to fines under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA), which came into force in 2022. The EU has activated the RRS in five elections since 2024 – in France, Germany, Hungary, Romania, and non-EU member Moldova – and in every case, an investigation by the US House Judiciary Committee this year found that fact-checkers “almost exclusively targeted” right-wing and populist candidates and organizations. “Moreover, the requirement that these fact-checkers be approved by the European Commission creates a clear structural incentive for the participants to censor Euroskeptic opinion and content,” the committee noted.

An EU spokesperson told Politico this week that it was ready to take action in Bulgaria, “in particular via the Rapid Alert System for real-time information exchanges.” Not to be confused with the Rapid Response System, the Rapid Alert System allows the EU to compile information about supposed ‘disinformation campaigns’, so that more severe measures, including the RRS, can then be taken.

How the EU is outsourcing its dirty work – again

Gyurov’s government is already preparing the proof the EU needs. Last week, the Bulgarian Foreign Ministry set up a temporary unit to “counter disinformation and combat hybrid threats,” which will be “advised” by former Bellingcat investigator Christo Grozev.

Grozev, whose allegations of Russian poisoning plots were considered too outlandish by even Vladimir Zelensky’s officials, is a wanted man in Russia over his role in encouraging Russian fighter pilots to defect to Ukraine with promises of money and EU citizenship.

According to the ministry, Grozev will “assist the organization with specific information exposing malicious influences,” which will then “be able to be addressed both at the national and European levels through mechanisms developed by the European Commission.”

If Grozev’s research is not enough, the Center for the Study of Democracy – an EU-funded think tank – has already published a report alleging that Bulgaria “faces sustained Russian information manipulation pressure,” and that certain “high-risk narrative pressure points” must be tackled.

Working hand in hand with the Bulgarian government, the EU is paying researchers to justify the use of its own censorship tools, in order to stifle legitimate political speech that harms its broader geopolitical agenda. This will come as no surprise to anyone who’s been following the Hungarian election. There, the activation of the RSS was justified by a report alleging that Russian President Vladimir Putin had dispatched a team of “political technologists” to Budapest to rig the election for Orban. The report was published by an EU-funded opposition journalist, and quoted anonymous EU spies.

Tails are wagging dogs in the EU, and the “request” for Grozev’s involvement could easily be seen as another such case.

Will Rumen Radev get the Georgescu treatment?

Unlike in Hungary, the cards are stacked against Radev in Bulgaria. Whereas Viktor Orban has been in power for 16 years and appointed the justices who oversee election-related cases, Radev’s Progressive Bulgaria is a new party with no seats in parliament, facing a pro-EU incumbent with control of the judiciary. Radev experienced this firsthand last year, when as president, he attempted to hold a referendum on Bulgaria’s accession to the eurozone. Radev’s referendum proposal was dismissed by parliament and rejected by the country’s constitutional court. One of the judges who authored the ruling, Atanas Semov, previously received an award from the European Commission for his written work on the judicial system of the EU.

Radev’s situation is closer to that of Calin Georgescu, a right-wing populist who emerged from relative obscurity to win a shock first-round victory in neighboring Romania’s 2024 presidential election. The Romanian and EU authorities immediately declared that Russia had interfered in the election and had run a coordinated campaign on TikTok to help Georgescu win, and the election was annulled.

The day after the annulment, TikTok wrote to the European Commission stating that it had found no evidence of a Russian-linked campaign to support Georgescu, and that it had in fact been asked to censor pro-Georgescu content by the authorities in Bucharest. This content included “disrespectful” posts that “insult the [ruling] PSD party.” TikTok was ordered by the EU to tighten its “mitigation measures” before the vote was re-done in 2025. The platform complied, but was nevertheless punished by Brussels. For TikTok’s insolence, the European Commission opened legal proceedings against the platform for “a suspected breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) in relation to TikTok’s obligation to properly assess and mitigate systemic risks linked to election integrity.”

TikTok and its ilk are already on notice in Bulgaria, and should Radev repeat Georgescu’s surprise victory, the Bulgarian government and the EU are already armed with all the ‘proof’ of Russian interference they need to bring the full weight of the legal system down upon him.

The bottom line

Regardless, the fact that the EU has already intervened in four elections since 2024, and has its thumb on the scales of another two at present, suggests that Brussels takes the populist threat to its authority seriously. It is becoming clear that the European Commission will invoke the specter of Russian interference any time a dissenting voice arises, whether on the left, like Radev, or the right, like Orban.

Brussels wields a toolbox full of hammers, and to the EU bureaucracy, every problem looks like a nail. With the bloc’s economy reeling and almost every pro-Brussels government under water in the approval tables, the question that will be answered in Hungary and Bulgaria, and in every EU election to come, is for how long the Brussels bureaucracy can keep forcing its will onto voters who clearly want an alternative.

When China and Vietnam sat down in Hanoi on March 16 for their first-ever ‘3+3’ strategic dialogue, it marked the launch of a new kind of coordination – one that goes beyond the usual playbook.

Not your usual security meeting

Most countries stick to the tried and tested ‘2+2’ format, bringing together foreign and defense officials. But China and Vietnam added a third pillar: Public security. This may sound technical, but it’s actually a big deal. It means the conversation now spans everything from military coordination to policing, cybersecurity, and internal stability – the full spectrum of what both governments consider ‘security’ in today’s world.

The inclusion of public security reflects a reality both Beijing and Hanoi recognize: Threats such as cybercrime, telecom fraud, online gambling networks, drug trafficking blur the line between domestic and international. Thus, the meeting focused heavily on practical cooperation, including joint efforts against telecom scams, better coordination on drug control, fugitive repatriation, and even asset recovery. There was also a push to improve information-sharing on data security, energy risks, and environmental concerns.

Why now?

The launch of the ‘3+3’ mechanism comes at a moment when the regional atmosphere is anything but calm. Tensions around Taiwan remain high, and Japan has been taking on a more assertive security posture. The broader strategic environment in East Asia is shifting, often in unpredictable ways.

Against this backdrop, China and Vietnam are choosing to deepen coordination rather than drift apart. This sends a clear signal: Even in a competitive environment, neighboring countries can prioritize stability and structured engagement.

It’s also a reminder that not every country in the region is eager to pick sides. For Vietnam in particular, maintaining a balanced approach is central to its foreign policy.

One of the more telling elements of the Hanoi meeting was Vietnam’s own framing of the relationship. Vietnamese officials openly described ties with China as a “top priority” and “objective necessity.”

Vietnam’s foreign policy is built on independence and diversification – but it also reflects a clear-eyed assessment of geography and economics. China is simply too important a neighbor to ignore or confront head-on.

For many of China’s neighbors, the conclusion is similar: Cooperation is the most workable path forward.

The China-Vietnam relationship often serves as a kind of test case for how China engages with Southeast Asia more broadly. In this sense, the ‘3+3’ mechanism is bigger than just the two countries involved.

It shows a model of engagement that emphasizes structured dialogue and expanding areas of cooperation, even when differences exist. And there are differences – especially in the South China Sea. But mechanisms like this help manage those tensions rather than letting them define the relationship.

The meeting also linked bilateral cooperation to wider frameworks like China-ASEAN cooperation, the Lancang-Mekong initiative, and even BRICS. This reflects a layered approach, where strong bilateral ties are built, then plugged into broader regional and global networks.

There’s another layer to this that shouldn’t be overlooked. By bringing public security into the equation, the ‘3+3’ format also touches on political system stability. Both China and Vietnam place a high premium on maintaining internal order and resisting external pressures that could destabilize their systems. The dialogue provides a platform to align on these concerns.

Moving forward despite disputes

Chinese officials have even linked this cooperation to the resilience and relevance of socialist governance models in today’s world, adding an ideological dimension to what might otherwise look like purely technical coordination.

It’s easy to focus on the forward momentum, but China-Vietnam relations haven’t always been smooth. The 1979 border war is a stark reminder that conflict between the two is not ancient history. There have also been periodic tensions in the South China Sea. These issues haven’t disappeared, but they are being managed.

Both sides have learned to compartmentalize, to keep disagreements from spilling over into the entire relationship. Trade, political dialogue, and now security cooperation continue to move forward even when disputes flare up.

In fact, economic ties have become one of the strongest stabilizers. China is Vietnam’s largest trading partner, and supply chains between the two are deeply intertwined. That creates incentives on both sides to keep the broader relationship on track.

So what does this new mechanism actually change?

First, it institutionalizes coordination across a wider range of issues. Instead of dealing with problems piecemeal, China and Vietnam now have a platform to address them in a more integrated way.

Second, it builds habits of communication. Regular contact between officials across diplomacy, defense, and public security reduces the risk of misunderstandings – especially in a tense regional environment.

Third, it sets a precedent. If the ‘3+3’ model proves effective, it could influence how other countries think about security cooperation. It’s not hard to imagine similar formats emerging elsewhere, especially as non-traditional security challenges keep growing.

At a time when global politics often feels like it’s drifting toward blocs and confrontation, the China-Vietnam ‘3+3’ dialogue offers a different angle, focusing on working with your neighbors instead of prioritizing alliances and containment.

Geography doesn’t change. China and Vietnam will remain neighbors, with all the opportunities and challenges this brings. The question is how they choose to handle this reality.

This doesn’t guarantee smooth sailing. History shows that relations can shift. But mechanisms like the ‘3+3’ increase the odds that differences can be handled without escalating into something more serious.

And in today’s environment, that alone makes this meeting worth paying attention to.

The administration of US President Donald Trump has requested $152 million from Congress to restore the Alcatraz prison. Democrats have slammed the plans as “lunacy” and vowed to block their implementation.

Originally a fortress sitting on the eponymous island in the San Francisco Bay, the correctional facility housed inmates from 1934 until 1963, when it was closed due to high operating costs. Among those held at Alcatraz were notorious criminals such as mobster Al Capone and George ‘Machine Gun’ Kelly. The prison was considered one of the country’s most secure facilities, with no successful escapes officially recorded.

Presently, Alcatraz is a major tourist attraction in the region, run by the National Park Service.

In a request to Congress for the 2027 fiscal year published on Friday, the Trump administration proposed to “rebuild Alcatraz as a state-of-the-art secure prison facility,” requesting “$152 million to cover the first year of project costs.”

Trump first floated the idea in a post on Truth Social last May, writing: “When we were a more serious Nation, in times past, we did not hesitate to lock up the most dangerous criminals, and keep them far away from anyone they could harm. That’s the way it’s supposed to be.”

Several months later, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and former Attorney General Pam Bondi inspected the island, with the latter saying that the “terrific facility” could “hold illegal aliens.”

Commenting on the Trump administration’s latest funding request, former Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi wrote on X that the “proposal is absurd on its face and should be rejected outright.”

“I will work with my colleagues in the Congress to use every parliamentary and budgetary tactic available to block this lunacy,” she vowed.

Democratic Senator Scott Wiener, who represents San Francisco, similarly accused Trump of seeking to destroy a “top tourist attraction to turn it back into a failed exorbitantly expensive prison.”

France is seeking to quadruple its stockpile of kamikaze drones and drastically expand missile arsenals by the end of the decade, Politico reported on Friday, citing a draft military planning law which describes the push as preparations for a “war economy.”

According to the 64-page-long document set to be presented by the government next week, French policymakers intend to focus on expanding their munitions arsenals rather than the armed forces themselves, while taking cues from the Ukraine and Middle East conflicts, which have been depleting Western arms stocks at an alarming rate.

In this vein, the stocks of loitering munitions such as kamikaze drones are set to grow by 400%, Safran-made AASM Hammer guided bombs by 240%, and Aster and Mica missiles by 30% by 2030, Politico reported.

The draft states the effort is being carried out “with a view to preparing for a 'war economy,” with investment channeled into “co-financing of priority production capacities.”

France does not plan to increase the size of its armed forces or acquire major additional equipment such as Rafale aircraft or frigates, the report says.

Paris has also apparently shelved the Eurodrone – a joint long-range reconnaissance program with Germany, Italy, and Spain – with no funds allocated to the much-delayed project. France is, however, considering studies into a successor to the Leclerc main battle tank, which has been in service since 1992, according to the report.

The plan is in line with a long-running push by French President Emmanuel Macron to make France and its European allies less dependent on American weapons and achieve “strategic autonomy.” Earlier this week, he stated that he did not want Paris “to be the vassals of two hegemonic powers.”

“We don’t want to depend on the dominance, let’s say on China, or we don’t want to be too much exposed to the unpredictability of the US,” he added.

Moscow has consistently criticized NATO military build-up, with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accusing the bloc of “seriously preparing for war against Russia and, in fact, not even hiding it.” Russia has also dismissed NATO members’ claims that it could attack the bloc within several years as “nonsense” and fearmongering.

Two US military aircraft were shot down by Iranian fire on Friday, as the US and Israel continue their strikes. The incident resulted in a successful high-risk search-and-rescue mission deep inside Iranian territory.

The losses occurred less than 48 hours after US President Donald Trump announced that Iran is “beaten and completely decimated” and has “no anti-aircraft equipment,” ramping up the stakes for the conflict, which is already unpopular at home. Iranian officials, however, called the incident a “black day” for the US military.

What happened?

On Friday, a US Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle assigned to the 494th Fighter Squadron – part of the 48th Fighter Wing, normally based in Suffolk, England – was shot down over central Iran while conducting combat operations, according to US media outlets.

The rescue of the weapons systems officer, however, occurred more than a day later. US helicopters dispatched as part of the initial effort were hit by Iranian fire. According to the Washington Post, US personnel on board were injured, but both aircraft safely returned to their base.

Videos circulating on social media show what appears to be Iranian militia opening small arms fire on two US helicopters.

Footage of Iranian police firing small arms at a pair of USAF HH-60Ws searching for the downed F-15E crew earlier today. pic.twitter.com/9SwhyhY1Aw

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) April 3, 2026

Axios later reported that the weapons officer was extracted by “a specialized commando unit with a high volume of air cover,” with all forces successfully leaving Iran. 

Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin said, citing sources, that the service member used his special survival training to evade capture, hiding on an elevated ridge after hiking away from the wreckage and putting out an emergency beacon.

She also claimed that the CIA played a part in the operation, launching a “deception campaign” inside Iran stating that US forces had already found the officer and were moving him on the ground – which was not true at the time.

In addition, an A-10 Thunderbolt II – a single-seat ground-attack aircraft – was struck by Iranian fire while supporting search-and-rescue efforts. The pilot managed to navigate the damaged plane out of Iranian airspace before ejecting over Kuwait, where he was subsequently recovered.

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇷 Alleged footage shows U.S. A-10 hit by Iranian air defenses.

The A-10 was literally built to survive anti-aircraft fire.

If Iran is bringing down the most survivable plane in the fleet, their air defenses aren't as "decimated" as advertised.pic.twitter.com/SWUWGgSdWi https://t.co/ZXRdXKgnNT

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) April 3, 2026

What does the US say?

The Pentagon and CENTCOM have mostly been tight-lipped on the downing of jets. The Pentagon, however, notified the House Armed Services Committee of the loss of the F-15E, according to The Hill.

After the end of the extraction operation, Trump confirmed that both airmen from the downed F-15 were rescued “without a SINGLE American killed, or even wounded,” praising the military for the “daring” rescue.

Trump said the downing of the jet won’t affect peace negotiations with Iran – which Tehran insists are not taking place at all.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said he is “praying for the safe return of the crew aboard the fighter jet and all of those working to rescue them in these dangerous conditions.”

“It potentially represents a major escalation. If the missing crew member remains missing, huge political pressure in the United States to do anything to find that person.”

What does Iran say?

Iranian media initially identified the downed aircraft as an F-35 stealth fighter, though the claim was later refuted by US media and OSINT experts.

Iranian state TV has called on people to capture the surviving US crew, with the local authorities offering a reward of around $60,000 for anyone who hands over the American service members alive.

Bakhtiari tribes in Khuzestan headed into the mountains, rifles in hand, searching for the missing American F-15 jet pilot — saying:

“Don’t worry, we’ll find him.” pic.twitter.com/PH7pWWjbiQ

— Clash Report (@clashreport) April 3, 2026

Footage circulating on social media shows what appears to be a group of local residents armed with rifles and carrying an Iranian flag heading out to the mountains for their own ‘rescue mission’, with another clip showing the aircraft debris.

Iran Publishes Debris It Says Is US F‑15E Strike Eagle Downed Over Iran

State media released images of wreckage, including a tail section linked to the USAF’s 494th Fighter Squadron, after claiming Iranian air defenses shot down a U.S. fighter jet; U.S. officials have not yet… pic.twitter.com/nmIgl0WhXr

— Washington Eye (@washington_EY) April 3, 2026

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf mocked the US, saying that “after defeating Iran 37 times in a row, this brilliant no-strategy war they started has now been downgraded from ‘regime change’ to ‘Hey! Can anyone find our pilots? Please?’”

As the US rescue operation was unfolding, Iran claimed to have destroyed a C-130 military transport plane and two Black Hawk helicopters, with videos showing the aircraft’s debris. Officials in Tehran did not say whether any of the US service members were killed or captured.

Footage shows destroyed US C-130 transport aircrafts involved in the rescue operation of a downed pilot inside Iran. pic.twitter.com/DRBjZqD3zp

— Current Report (@Currentreport1) April 5, 2026

Iranian media has also shared photos of a heavily damaged CH-47 helicopter in Kuwait, saying it was hit in a drone strike.

BREAKING: An Iranian drone struck a US Army CH-47 Chinook at Camp Buehring in Kuwait, severely damaging the aircraft. The Chinook is the US military’s primary heavy-lift helicopter, used to move troops, equipment and supplies across the Gulf. pic.twitter.com/Tmm6CiNX8e

— The Hormuz Letter (@HormuzLetter) April 4, 2026

Did the US lose planes in the Iran war before this incident?

Friday marked the first time during the US-Israeli strikes on Iran that Tehran has beyond reasonable doubt downed a manned US aircraft. However, America had already lost several jets.

On March 1, shortly after the start of the conflict, three F-15E Strike Eagles were shot down over Kuwait by Kuwaiti F/A-18 aircraft in what CENTCOM called an “apparent friendly fire incident.” All crew members ejected safely.

On March 19, a US F-35 fighter jet was hit by Iranian ground fire during a combat mission. The pilot, who suffered shrapnel wounds, managed to land the aircraft at a US air base in the region.

German men who remain abroad for more than three months without prior approval may start facing penalties under a military-related legal requirement, according to the Berliner Zeitung.

The rule obliges men of fighting age, between the ages of 17 and 45, to obtain permission before extended stays abroad. It came into force on January 1, 2026, but April is when the first three-month period expires and enforcement may begin, the outlet has said.

Germany is in the process of a massive military buildup, with plans to spend reportedly more than €500 billion (around $580 billion) on defense by 2029. German officials have set 2029 as the deadline for the armed forces to be “war-ready” for a potential conflict with Russia.

Moscow has repeatedly denied any plans to attack NATO as “nonsense” and ridiculed Western politicians over such claims. In February Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that Russia had “no reason” to attack the EU or NATO unless attacked first.

Several EU states, including Germany, have recently moved to reintroduce conscription. The German government has said the armed forces should grow from around 180,000 active soldiers to more than 260,000 by 2035.

Students staged protests in late March in German cities against Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s plans to expand military service. Demonstrators accused the government of preparing forced mobilization, with some chanting that “Merz should go to the front himself and risk his own life.”

When addressed about the backlash by Politico on Tuesday, a spokesman for the German Defense Ministry said that it “is currently developing detailed provisions to allow for exemptions from the approval requirement, also with a view to avoiding unnecessary bureaucracy.”

According to the ministry, approvals to leave the country are expected to be issued in all cases as long as military service remains voluntary in Germany.

French President Emmanuel Macron has called on nations around the world to not become “vassals” of the US or China, following his public spat with US President Donald Trump over Iran and NATO.

During a trip to Seoul on Friday, Macron urged countries including South Korea, Japan, Brazil, India, Australia, and Canada to form a “coalition of independence” based on shared commitments to issues such as international law, democracy, and climate change.

“During decades, we had a so-called stability based on this international order and the few certainties we had. It’s up and down now. We should not just be passive in this new disorder. We have to build a new order,” Macron said in a speech at Yonsei University.

“Our objective is not to be the vassals of two hegemonic powers… We don’t want to depend on the dominance of, let’s say, China, (and) we don’t want to be too exposed to the unpredictability of the US,” he added.

“I don’t believe that we will fix the situation just by bombing or by military operations,” the French leader said, referring to past and present US interventions in the Middle East.

According to the New York Times, France joined Russia and China in opposing a UN Security Council resolution that would have authorized military action against Iran in Hormuz. The vote, originally scheduled for Friday, has been postponed.

Macron has significantly increased France’s defense spending in recent years, focusing on missile, drone, and submarine capabilities. Last month, he said France could extend its nuclear umbrella to protect Germany and other European countries.

Christian schools in Jerusalem are facing a growing crisis after Israel moved to restrict West Bank teachers from working in the city. The decision affects more than 200 educators across 15 historic institutions, raising fears that some schools could be forced to close due to a shortage of qualified local staff.

Church officials warn the move – which they consider politically motivated – could have wider consequences for the Christian presence in Jerusalem, while teachers say it threatens their livelihoods and ability to access the city.

The restrictions follow a 2025 bill targeting Palestinian educators trained in West Bank universities – a justification disputed by those affected.

RT’s Charlotte Dubenskij reports from Jerusalem:

The IDF has erected an Israeli flag beside a UN peacekeeping position in southern Lebanon, a move that could draw fire on peacekeepers, the body has warned.

The incident comes amid escalating exchanges between Israeli forces and Lebanon-based Hezbollah along the border, which have increasingly drawn UN troops into the line of fire. In recent days, three Indonesian members of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) were killed in two separate incidents and another peacekeeper was wounded by a stray bullet.

At a UN press briefing on Thursday, spokesman Stephane Dujarric said peacekeepers had demanded that the flag be removed after it was raised near a position by the village of Kfar Kila. He added that Israeli forces had expanded their incursions west of the UN-demarcated Blue Line, with tanks and clashes reported in Sector West.

The flag “undermines the perception of UNIFIL’s impartiality and risks drawing fire towards peacekeepers amid the ongoing clashes that we are seeing,” Dujarric told reporters, urging all parties to avoid any action that could further endanger the mission.

Kfar Kila is a Lebanese border village where Israeli forces have been operating amid clashes with Hezbollah, and is reportedly among the areas considered by the IDF for demolition as part of a proposed security zone targeting militant infrastructure.

This is a picture taken by a UN peacekeeper at their base in Lebanon, showing IDF soldiers raising an israeli flag, the day after they killed three UN peacekeepers and wounded others

Israel cannot continue to be treated as a full member of the UN. This’s what the UN Charter says pic.twitter.com/sYkAFoEcxW

— Mohamad Safa (@mhdksafa) April 2, 2026

A photo purporting to show the flag was shared on X by Mohamad Safa, a Lebanese diplomat and UN civil society representative. He said the image, taken by a peacekeeper at a UN base in Lebanon, showed an Israeli flag raised by IDF soldiers, “the day after they killed three UN peacekeepers and wounded others.” 

Initial findings in a probe into the deaths of two of the Indonesians reportedly point to a roadside explosion that struck their convoy near the Lebanese town of Bani Haiyyan, while the third peacekeeper was killed when a projectile reportedly hit a UNIFIL base near the village of Aadchit al-Qusayr.

UNIFIL, established in 1978 following an Israeli incursion into southern Lebanon, currently fields around 7,500 peacekeepers from dozens of countries. Under a Security Council decision adopted last year, its mandate is set to expire at the end of 2026, with a full withdrawal planned for 2027 when its positions will be handed over to Lebanese government forces.

Israel launched a military operation against Hezbollah in early March after the militant group carried out waves of strikes against the Jewish state in retaliation for the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in a joint US-Israeli operation against Iran.

Lawmakers in Colorado have approved amendments to the state’s ban on “conversion therapy,” a practice aimed at changing an individual’s non-traditional sexual orientation or gender identity through counseling.

This comes despite a US Supreme Court ruling blocking enforcement of the state’s ban on such therapy on free-speech grounds.

Conversion therapy has long been criticized by medical experts and advocacy groups as ineffective and harmful – particularly for gay children of conservative parents seeking such intervention. Roughly half of US states, including Colorado since 2019, have banned the practice.

On Thursday, Colorado’s Democrat-led House passed a measure allowing people claiming harm from conversion therapy to sue therapists. The change mirrors legislation adopted in 2021 that removed time limits for bringing claims related to child sexual abuse.

State Representative Karen McCormick, who sponsored the bill and is the parent of a transgender child, said the amendment would give individuals more time to process trauma and come forward. “We don’t want them shut out of the legal system,” she said.

“Each American enjoys an inalienable right to speak his mind and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for finding truth,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority opinion. “Laws like Colorado’s, which suppress speech based on viewpoint, represent an egregious assault on both commitments.”

The Supreme Court's 8-1 decision, which included support from two liberal justices, does not affect existing restrictions on physical or medical interventions, such as electroconvulsive therapy, which remain regulated or prohibited in Colorado. Instead, the case will return to a lower court for further examination.

The EU has failed to offer any real solutions to the current energy crisis, Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev has said, arguing that Brussels is too late to start preparing for a supply shock.

The remarks came in response to EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen’s interview with the Financial Times on Friday in which he said that the US-Israeli war on Iran was likely to have “structural, long-lasting effects” on the bloc’s energy security. He added Brussels was preparing for “worst-case scenarios” and “looking at all possibilities,” including releasing strategic oil reserves and possibly rationing jet fuel or diesel.

“Still only warnings, NO REAL FIXES,” Dmitriev, who serves as President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy for investment and economic cooperation, wrote on X on Friday.

“EU warns 15 YEARS TOO LATE it is not prepared for a ‘long-lasting energy shock.’ EU failed to diversify energy flows, guided by Russophobic, Green, and woke ideology,” he added.

🚨EU warns 15 YEARS TOO LATE it is not prepared for a “long-lasting energy shock.” EU failed to diversify energy flows, guided by Russophobic, Green, and woke ideology.

Still only warnings, NO REAL FIXES. Only ideas: limit price hikes at the pump to 1/day in 🇩🇪 & cut energy use. https://t.co/T3XWMvWo3l

— Kirill Dmitriev (@kadmitriev) April 3, 2026

The EU implemented a set of energy reforms in 2009–2011 aimed at accelerating the transition to renewable energy and diversifying away from single suppliers, such as Russia.

Brussels will also phase out Russian pipeline gas imports by autumn 2027. Russia still accounted for an estimated 13% of total EU gas imports in 2025, according to official data.

President Vladimir Putin warned last month that Russia may withdraw from the EU gas market and redirect its supplies to “emerging markets” without waiting for Brussels’ ban to take effect. The energy crisis in the EU is the result of the “misguided policies” pursued by the bloc over “many years,” Putin said.

The Iranian military has shot down a US F-35 fight jet over its territory, local media outlets, including Tasnim news agency, have claimed. US officials confirmed the loss of an F-15 jet and claimed that one pilot has been rescued.

Photos and videos purporting to show the jet’s crash site, including pictures of the debris and an ejected pilot seat have been released. The images show what appears to be a tail fin and other parts of the aircraft with an inscription saying: “US Air Forces in Europe.”

According to The Guardian, the jet could be a part of the US Air Force’s 494th Squadron, based at Royal Air Force base in Lakenheath, UK.

American news outlet Axios reported, citing sources, that the downed jet was an F-15 and not the latest generation F-35. According to CBS, one of the jet’s two crew members was rescued, with search efforts ongoing.

Another enemy F-35 hit and downed by our #indigenous defence systems.

Iran is a force to be reckoned with.#Iran#F35#War pic.twitter.com/q1DhkTXrm3

— Consulate General of the I.R. Iran in Mumbai (@IRANinMumbai) April 3, 2026

Iranian media claimed that the US rescue effort failed. The operation involved at least two Black Hawk helicopters and a C-130 Hercules aircraft, Tasnim reported. At least one of the helicopters was reportedly damaged during the operation, with photos published on social media showing gray smoke coming from it.

According to Tasnim, the Iranian military likely captured the pilot, who ejected from the aircraft and landed in western Iran.

Who was looking for this? Turns out the ‘invisible’ seat wasn’t so invisible after all.

Of course, for security reasons, the fate of the pilot can’t be revealed… but isn’t it obvious?#F35#IRAN#War https://t.co/bEW5qqCyip pic.twitter.com/TLpefhxLbv

— Consulate General of the I.R. Iran in Mumbai (@IRANinMumbai) April 3, 2026

The US and Israel began a bombing campaign against Iran on February 28. Despite claims by US President Donald Trump that Tehran’s ability to strike back has been severely diminished, Iran has hit US bases throughout the Middle East.

One of Germany’s biggest and most iconic car manufacturers, Volkswagen (VW) and one of Israel’s most well-known arms manufacturers, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, part of the global Rafael Group, are planning to collaborate. If the project is realized, VW will convert one of its German factories in the historic city of Osnabrueck from making automobiles to producing components of Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system.

There are good reasons why this has raised eyebrows. For one thing, it reflects not only VW’s growing problems, but those of Germany’s vital automobile sector and the German economy as a whole. As the Financial Times has noted, the VW-Rafael project would mark “the highest-profile example yet of the German car industry, where profits have plunged,” trying to save itself by entering the “booming defense sector.”

These plunging profits are due to many factors: Chinese competition; Germany’s failure to keep up with cutting-edge technology, communication infrastructure, and business practices; American sabotage by tariff warfare and filching German companies via subsidies; and last but not least, the horrendous energy costs that the entire EU has inflicted on itself by going to war – by Ukrainian proxy and sanctions – against Russia.

The shift to making things for the military, meanwhile, is just a small part of Germany’s breathtakingly misguided response: Namely, a policy of going into massive public debt – under a so-called conservative – to finance a bizarre form of military Keynesianism that is based on illusions (no, Russia is not about to attack), produces self-reinforcing Russophobia (which makes a return to normality even harder), and won’t work as an economic boost, as even the usually government-aligned Spiegel has admitted.

In short, like a prism, the Osnabrueck plan bundles together many of Germany’s worst – and self-inflicted – problems, and the single silliest idea of how to tackle them.

Yet, there is obviously a whole other dimension to the VW-Rafael project that is even worse: The plan also encapsulates Germany’s complicity with Israel’s crimes, an obstinate policy that is deeply immoral, has twisted Germany’s domestic politics and discourse toward cynical racism, censorship, and authoritarian restrictions on free speech (as a UN report has confirmed), and, moreover, is stupidly shortsighted as well, since it alienates most of the world, and in particular, its rising part in the Global South.

And yet there it is, so massive that its outlines will have to be sketched in just a few highlights.

Computers, clouds, and AI? IBM, Hewlett Packard, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft – to name only a few – are deeply and profitably involved not merely in doing business with Israel but with the specific business of population control, surveillance, and incarceration. That is, to be precise, the very sharp end of Israel’s apartheid regime imposed on the Palestinians. Apartheid is, of course, a UN-recognized atrocity crime (not just a specific, criminal stage in South Africa’s history). And not only the infernal Palantir but Microsoft as well – with its Azure and Nimbus systems – has directly helped the Israeli military while it carries out genocide.

Demolishing Palestinian homes, roads, wells, public buildings, and all vital infrastructure, in short, the material basis of life? Caterpillar, Hyundai as well as Doosan, and Volvo have all been at Israel’s service, including in the massive, systematic devastation of Gaza that has been part of Israel’s genocide and ethnic cleansing campaign.

But then, Zionism doesn’t only destroy and displace. To be fair, it also builds – namely, illegal settlements on territories that are officially called ‘occupied’ but have in reality been de facto annexed by Israel in its ceaseless, aggressive drive for even more ‘Lebensraum’ in a ‘Greater Israel’ that has never even defined its borders.

And don’t let the Israeli Hasbara propaganda fool you: There is no room for debate here. In 2024, the International Court of Justice, the highest court of the UN, unambiguously confirmed that the Israeli post-1967 occupations, including that of East Jerusalem as well as the exploitation of these territories’ resources, and all settlements – really colonies – there are illegal because of “Israel’s violations, through its policies and practices, of the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people.” Israel must not only leave, as the court also made explicit, but provide “full reparations” to the Palestinians.

Unfortunately, making Israel obey the law – or basic moral precepts everyone else recognizes as binding intuitively (Don’t target children with snipers, for instance, or Don’t torture toddlers) – has always been a challenge, not least because of Washington’s criminal support for Israel’s criminal regime. None of this means the law does not apply.

But those companies helping Israel build its settlements and exploit the illegally held territories – such as the German Heidelberg Materials AG with its subsidiary Hanson Israel, Construcciones Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles from Spain, real estate international Keller Williams RealtyLLC, and again, Caterpillar, Hyundai, and Volvo, are all also involved in a very serious crime.

But then again, maybe there’s less need to worry, as it turns out that Israeli technology – including that produced by Rafael – is not all it is cracked up to be. Consider merely that, as even the Zionist-aligned New York Times has to admit, Israeli missile defenses have not been doing well since Iran has been striking back in earnest against Israeli and American aggression. It is hard to assess the full damage in Israel because its regime practices a censorship blackout, but we know it has been taking bad hits. And then there are those famous Merkava tanks good at smashing through Gaza’s civilians but now being decimated in their invasion of Lebanon, by brave and clearly well-trained but much less well-armed Hezbollah fighters. Guess what company makes the Merkava’s anti-missile defense system? Yes, that would be Rafael. It seems Volkswagen and its Berlin backers have lost not only whatever sense of ethics they have ever had but also quality.

There is something special about the VW-Rafael deal-in-the-making. Obviously, there is the ugly irony of one of Nazi Germany’s main arms makers shifting back to its old business model. Then, while many companies and countries cultivate ties with the genocidal apartheid state of Israel and neglect their legal obligations to stop its crimes, Germany adds the very peculiar hypocrisy of shielding its intense complicity with Israel by abusing the memory of Germany’s own genocide of Europe’s Jews, the Holocaust. It is hard to imagine a greater moral and intellectual perversion.

If Germany had to learn one lesson from its genocides – the Holocaust and that of the Herero and Nama as well – then it was: This crime must never be committed. By no one. Not by Nazis, not by Zionists, either. And it cannot be done to anyone, not to Jews, not to Palestinians – even by Jews. Finally, no one must ever side with the perpetrators. No perpetrators, including Jewish ones.

Welcome to RT’s live coverage of the US-Israeli war on Iran, a conflict spanning the Middle East in which both sides are exchanging missile and drone strikes across multiple countries.

Iran hit several energy sites in Kuwait, including the headquarters of the Kuwait Petroleum Corporation, which was reportedly struck by a drone. The barrage came after US President Donald Trump warned that “all hell will rain down” on Iran unless the Strait of Hormuz is unblocked within 48 hours.

Iran has closed the vital waterway to “enemy ships” following the first wave of US and Israeli attacks on February 28, driving up oil and gas prices worldwide. Trump has vowed to target Iranian power plants if shipping is not fully restored.

Meanwhile, the United States said it had successfully rescued a crew member of a downed F-15E Strike Eagle during what Trump described as “one of the most daring search and rescue operations in U.S. history.” The officer, whom Trump identified as a colonel, had been stranded in mountainous terrain inside Iran and was recovered by a large force of aircraft after sustaining injuries. He said the serviceman is now “safe and sound.”

Trump added that a second US pilot had been rescued in a separate operation a day earlier, which had not been disclosed at the time for operational security reasons, and said both missions were carried out without American casualties. The Pentagon has not publicly confirmed details of the operations.

Earlier reports had indicated intense fighting between US commandos and Iran’s Basij paramilitary force in the southwestern province of Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad, where the aircraft was shot down on Friday, and that Iranian authorities had offered a reward for the pilot’s capture.

In a separate incident on Friday, a US A-10 Thunderbolt II was hit by Iranian fire, with the pilot ejecting after leaving Iranian airspace and later being rescued, according to US media reports.

Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization condemned the latest US-Israeli strike near the Bushehr nuclear power plant – the fourth since hostilities began – accusing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of “inaction” and warning of potential legal action. The projectile hit near the facility’s perimeter, killing a security guard and damaging an auxiliary building.

The IAEA earlier confirmed it had been informed of the incident and reported no rise in radiation levels. Director General Rafael Grossi expressed “deep concern,” warning nuclear sites “must never be attacked,” but did not directly condemn the US or Israel.

• Open-source analysts estimate US aircraft losses in the war exceed $2 billion, with replacement costs likely to be higher.

• Iran’s embassy in Vienna accused EU officials, including Kaja Kallas, of “hypocrisy” over the war.

• Tehran has reportedly allowed humanitarian shipments through the Strait of Hormuz.

• India said its oil imports remain unaffected by the conflict.

• The US military’s top Catholic priest rebuked Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth for invoking religion to justify the war.

Follow our live coverage below for continuous updates. You can also read our previous updates here.

More than 100 US-based international law experts have warned that American strikes on Iran may amount to war crimes, citing violations of the UN Charter, attacks on civilian infrastructure, and alarming rhetoric from senior officials.

In an open letter published on Thursday by the Just Security policy journal, scholars from Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and other institutions stated that the unprovoked US-Israeli campaign against Iran which began in late February is “a clear violation of the United Nations Charter.”

They also stated that the conduct of US forces and statements by officials “raise serious concerns about violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including potential war crimes.”

The experts specifically highlighted President Donald Trump’s remarks last month that the US may conduct strikes on Iran “just for fun.” They also cited War Secretary Pete Hegseth’s March 2 statement that the US does not fight with “stupid rules of engagement,” and his declaration of “no quarter, no mercy for our enemies” – a phrase that, under international law, can constitute a war crime.

The letter expressed particular concern over the February 28 strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ school in Minab, which killed at least 175 people, mostly children. The Pentagon has reportedly determined that US forces carried out the strike based on outdated intelligence but has yet to apologize.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said over 600 schools and educational facilities have been targeted, calling the Minab massacre part of “a systematic and brutal pattern of illegal warfare.” Iran has accused the US and Israel of committing genocide.

Separately, John Mecklin, editor-in-chief of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which sets the Doomsday Clock, described the war as “absolutely idiotic,” warning that “accidents, miscalculations, crazy stuff” happen in wars and a nuclear accident “can’t be ruled out” until the fighting stops.

Both the legal experts and Mecklin called for a return to diplomacy while noting that Trump’s withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal has made a negotiated settlement extremely difficult.

Barack Obama’s former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, has torn into his own party for embracing race and gender activism over “middle class values.” Can the Democrats row back the worst excesses of the woke era? And could Emanuel lead the party in 2028?

”We lost the plot,” Emanuel said on ‘The Fifth Column’ podcast this week. “We as Democrats nationally, from ‘Latinx,’ to defunding the police, to ‘police organizations are all racist,’ to bringing a set of cultural wars to our schools. We are on the losing side of those cultural wars. Full stop.”

“Nobody seems to be calling the whistle on this,” he continued. “You are worried about bathroom access and locker room access, why don’t you focus on classroom excellence?”

“We went from acceptance to advocacy. I remember fighting for Title IX,” he said, referring to the anti-discrimination law that mandated equal athletic opportunities in schools and colleges for women. “Why would you undercut the premise of Title IX with the ability of trans men [to play] in women’s sports?”

Rahm Emanuel on how and why the Democrats have "lost the plot."

Our members-only episode with Rahm Emanuel is available now on Substack. pic.twitter.com/5HALlSCBEj

— The Fifth Column 🖐 (@wethefifth) March 31, 2026

Emanuel is – or was – regarded as a standard-bearer within the Democratic Party. After three terms representing Illinois in the US Congress, he served as President Barack Obama’s chief of staff from 2009 to 2019, mayor of Chicago from 2011 to 2019, and US ambassador to Japan from 2022 to 2025.

He is the latest in a series of powerful Democratic figures to distance themselves from the worst excesses of the ‘woke’ era. Former Clinton strategist James Carville has called on fellow Democrats to abandon “performative woke politics” and embrace a “platform of pure economic rage.” Senator John Fetterman has declared that he is “not woke” and urged his party to toughen up on crime; liberal think tanks have pleaded with Democrats to stop using words that put “a wall between us and everyday people” – including ‘heteronormative’, ‘microaggression’, and ‘LGBTQIA+’.

Peak woke

The Democratic Party’s woke turn reached its apex in 2024. That year, President Joe Biden proclaimed Easter Sunday ‘Transgender Day of Visibility’, Planned Parenthood offered free abortions and vasectomies from a van parked outside the the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, and Kamala Harris defended her record of promising taxpayer-funded sex changes to prisoners and illegal immigrants.

🚨NEW AD ALERT🚨

Crazy liberal Kamala Harris is for They/Them not for YOU pic.twitter.com/vYN5mi1R1g

— MAGA War Room (@MAGAIncWarRoom) October 5, 2024

Current President and then-candidate Donald Trump’s campaign capitalized on this, running ads featuring Harris advocating for late-term abortion and transgender athletes in women’s sports. In one TV spot, images of cross-dressing White House officials Richard ‘Rachel’ Levine and Sam Britton flashed across the screen, as a voiceover told voters: “Kamala’s for they/them. President Trump is for you.”

Voters agreed, handing Trump all seven swing states and the first popular vote victory for a Republican candidate since 2004. Crucial to this victory were the votes of young white males, a demographic ignored and condescended to by Harris’ party.

Will the Democrats return to the center?

Emanuel believes that in order to win again, Democrats have to return to the cultural center. “Every one of our most successful electoral presidents anchored themselves in what I call ‘middle class values,’” he told ‘The Fifth Column’. “Values that are universally, at least in this country, ascribed to.”

Chief among these competitors is California Governor Gavin Newsom. While Newsom has repudiated some of the party’s woke dogmas – referring to the victory of a transgender triple-jumper in a high school championship last year as “deeply unfair” – he has also defended his decision to offer ‘sanctuary’ to illegal immigrants in California, created a government department to explore paying reparations to descendants of slavery, and permitted children to travel to California to receive sex change operations that would be illegal in their home states.

Newsom has not announced his candidacy yet, but is currently the second-favorite to take the nomination, behind Harris. Should Emanuel enter the race, however, it is unclear whether the Democratic base actually wants a more centrist candidate.

Emanuel has been described as a “vocal Zionist,” at a time when Democrats in the US sympathize with the Palestinians over the Israelis by a 65% to 17% margin. He is also an economic liberal, at a time when self-professed ‘democratic socialist’ Zohran Mamdani handily defeated centrist Andrew Cuomo in last year’s New York mayoral election. Emanuel cut funding to Chicago schools to build a new police academy, while Mamdani accused the NYPD of racism and proposed defunding the department.

To close this gap, the party will have to tackle the legacy of an ideology it embraced and operationalized, through which it scapegoated and canceled skeptics, ruined careers and lives, and distracted Americans from an enormous decline in their material and existential circumstances. Emmanuel’s confession that they “lost the plot,” while reeking of political opportunism, may have highlighted an issue that could split his party’s base into cliques and clans, as the ideology he and his peers in the White House espoused did to a generation.

Over half of US federal judges (60%) are using at least one AI tool in their judicial work, a recent Northwestern University study suggests. The research is based on responses from 112 federal judges, drawn from a random sample of 502 federal bankruptcy, magistrate, district court, and appellate court officials.

The use of AI in courtrooms has recently drawn attention for fabricated citations and other errors that have undermined confidence in some filings. The survey published earlier this week shows that these tools are now being adopted not just by lawyers, but also by federal judges.

The survey found that 60% of judges use AI at least occasionally for tasks such as reviewing documents, conducting legal research, and drafting or editing documents. Around 22% use it daily or weekly. Legal research was the most common (30%), followed by reviewing documents (16%).

Around one in three judges said they permit or encourage AI in their chambers, while 20% formally prohibit it. More than 45% reported that they have not received AI training from the court administration.

While judges acknowledge the risks of AI, experts warn that its unreliability could undermine judicial authority.

“Judges make decisions that are very important to people and resolve significant disputes,” Eric Posner, a law professor at the University of Chicago, said. “They cannot gamble with a technology that is not fully understood and is known to hallucinate.”

US courts have recently warned and sanctioned attorneys over AI-generated content. In March, New York judges urged verification of AI citations after several briefs included fabricated cases. Bloomberg reported in December that AI-hallucinated citations are a growing problem, and the previous month, several lawyers were fined for filings containing hundreds of false AI-generated citations.

Concerns are rising worldwide over the impact of AI on work, the labor market, and people’s mental and physical health. AI often produces false or misleading information, and experts warn that relying on it for life-and-death decisions is especially dangerous, raising questions about safety, accountability, and societal effects.

Iran is a victim of illegal aggression by the US and Israel, prominent American economist Jeffrey Sachs has told RT’s Sanchez Effect, rejecting Washington’s claims that Tehran was seeking a nuclear weapon.

Speaking with host Rick Sanchez on Thursday, Sachs lambasted US President Donald Trump’s speech the day before, in which the American leader justified Operation Epic Fury as a necessary response to Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions.

”Iran is not a guilty party in this, it’s the victim of aggression,” Sachs said, calling the operation devastating, illegal, and ineffective.

He pointed to repeated statements by Iran’s religious leadership opposing nuclear weapons.

”The supreme leader famously, unless someone is living in a cave for the past 20 years, said ‘No’ to the weapons,” he said, referring to a religious ruling from the early 2000s.

However, in 2018, during his first term, Trump withdrew the US from the JCPOA. Washington and Tehran restarted negotiations last year, although Trump later claimed Tehran had “rejected every opportunity” to reach a deal.

According to Sachs, the US president “has ripped up the agreement which absolutely prevented Iran from having a nuclear weapon that they didn’t even want.”

Watch the full video below:

The Iran war has ushered in the “end of American Empire”, conservative host Tucker Carlson has argued, suggesting that US President Donald Trump’s call for allies to secure the Strait of Hormuz proved that Washington could no longer function as the world’s policeman.

Speaking on his podcast on Thursday, Carlson commented on Trump’s remarks in which the president threatened to bomb Iran into the “stone age” without providing an exact timeline for a ceasefire while urging other countries to “take the lead” in unblocking the Strait of Hormuz – a strategic chokepoint which accounts for around 20% of global oil trade.

Washington’s NATO allies, however, have been reluctant to step in following US-Israeli strikes on Iran.

Carlson argued that “the nation that forces the peace is the nation in charge,” adding that “the country that forces order on the Persian Gulf, that opens the Strait of Hormuz, is the nation that runs the world by definition.”

He argued that even if the US were to completely destroy Iran as a cohesive nation, the remaining warlords would have no difficulties in disrupting the maritime route by laying mines, using cheap drones, or even just by threatening to do so, meaning that the hostilities would have to end in a diplomatic settlement with Tehran sooner or later.

”What’s happening in Iran is the end of American empire as we understand it. And that’s sad. Empire’s dying. But it’s not the end of the United States,” he added.

Carlson acknowledged that the transition would bring “a lot of suffering and sadness,” but noted that it also carried the promise of a US that could turn its attention to the Western hemisphere, also rich in resources and vital for America’s stability, without the need to occupy “countries you’ve never been to.”

Carlson, generally supportive of Trump, has been a vocal critic of US-Israeli strikes on Iran, prompting the US president to claim that the journalist “has lost his way” and is not really part of the MAGA movement.

The EU will not reverse its ban on Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports, even as Brussels prepares for a “long-lasting” energy shock that could force member states to ration fuel, Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen has said. 

In an interview with the Financial Times, Jorgensen warned that “this will be a long crisis” and “energy prices will be higher for a very long time” due to the supply disruptions caused by the US-Israeli war on Iran and the near‑total closure of the Strait of Hormuz and strikes on Gulf energy infrastructure. 

Jorgensen acknowledged the situation is now more serious than at the start of the crisis, and while the EU is “not yet in a supply security crisis,” Brussels is “preparing for the worst‑case scenarios,” including rationing of critical products such as jet fuel and diesel, and could release more oil from strategic reserves “if the situation becomes more critical.”  

However, no matter how bad things get, Jorgensen insisted there would be no change to EU legislation aimed at ending Russian LNG by the end of 2026, instead preferring the much more expensive alternatives from the US “and other partners.” The EU has also ruled to outlaw Russian pipeline gas imports by Autumn 2027. 

Moscow has echoed that message. Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev predicted that “Europe and Britain will beg for Russian energy” as the crisis deepens, warning that oil could spike to $150‑200 a barrel.  

The conflict has disrupted global supply chains and thrown energy markets into turmoil. As of Thursday, the price of crude has risen to around $111 per barrel, while the price of gas in the EU has spiked to around €50 ($58) per MWh, a 56% increase from February.

Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche has dismissed reports that President Donald Trump fired former AG Pam Bondi over her botched handling of the Epstein files.

Blanche made the remarks on Fox News on Thursday, hours after Trump announced that Bondi, who had served since early 2025, was out. The president called her a “Great American Patriot” but offered no explanation for the dismissal.

“I have never heard President Trump say that the attorney general was – that anything that happened to her – had anything to do with the Epstein files,” he said, referring to the controversy surrounding the late sex offender’s ties to powerful figures.

Blanche also rejected reports that Trump believed Bondi had tipped off Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell about an FBI plan to release files on an alleged Chinese spy with whom the lawmaker had ties a decade earlier. Swalwell has also denied the allegation.

The Epstein saga became the hallmark of Bondi’s tenure, with the former AG tasked with delivering on Trump’s campaign promise to release the potentially explosive files. In February 2025, she publicly claimed that the Epstein client list was “sitting on my desk right now to review.”

However, a DOJ memo released in July concluded that investigators had found “no incriminating ‘client list,’” causing major public backlash, which was only exacerbated by Trump’s own attempts to downplay the scandal.

While the DOJ released several large batches of Epstein-related documents, they were heavily redacted and yielded little new information. The department also faced criticism over reports that some victims’ identities were exposed while alleged perpetrators remained shielded.

In February, as Bondi was grilled in Congress by lawmakers from both parties, she delivered what were widely seen as sketchy and dodgy responses – at one point deflecting a question on Epstein by declaring that “the Dow is over 50,000 right now.”

Even some Trump allies blasted Bondi over the Epstein files. White House chief of staff Susie Wiles said she “completely whiffed” on the matter and that there is no use in pretending otherwise.

Around half of Iran’s missile launchers and kamikaze drones remain intact despite a month of US-Israeli strikes, CNN reports, citing a military intelligence assessment.

The report, published on Friday, says Iran still possesses a considerable stockpile of missiles, citing three sources familiar with classified findings. Earlier reporting by Reuters also indicated that Tehran’s capabilities may be less degraded than publicly stated by US officials.

CNN claimed that some Iranian weapons could currently be inaccessible, as US and Israeli strikes have targeted the entrances of a tunnel network used to conceal them, which Tehran had built in preparation for bombings.

In addition, Iran is believed to retain much of its short-range cruise missile arsenal positioned along the coastline. It also claims to have “hundreds, if not thousands” of small vessels and surface drones, which could be deployed against shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has effectively restricted passage for unauthorized vessels through the chokepoint as part of a broader strategy to increase economic pressure on US allies and global markets.

A Reuters report last week cited US intelligence as saying only around one-third of Iran’s long-range missiles and drones had been verifiably destroyed. Israeli military officials, however, estimated that 70% of Iran’s launch capacity had been “neutralized.”

US President Donald Trump and senior Pentagon officials, including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, continue to claim that Operation Epic Fury is achieving significant success, with long-range launches reportedly reduced by 90% since the operation began in late February.

Responding to questions about the intelligence assessments, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told CNN that “anonymous sources desperately want to attack President Trump” and question the operation’s achievements.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has fired Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George, the service’s top uniformed officer, in a lingering row over promotion linked to race and gender, the New York Times reported on Thursday. Hegseth also reportedly dismissed two other generals in a purge which is feared to be undermining the US war on Iran.

Sources familiar with the matter told the paper that Hegseth ordered George, a 61-year-old veteran who served both in Iraq and Afghanistan, to retire immediately, describing the move as rooted not in policy disagreements but in the secretary’s “long-running grievance with the army and its leadership” and a troubled relationship with Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll.

Hegseth did not give the reason for the dismissal, but previously vowed to cleanse the department of “woke” culture and fight the practice of promotions based on race and gender quotas.

According to the NYT, George and Driscoll pushed back, citing the officers’ “long records of exemplary service.” About two weeks before his firing, George had reportedly sought a meeting with Hegseth to discuss the removals and what he viewed as unnecessary interference in army personnel decisions – a request Hegseth declined.

George had also served as senior military assistant to then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin under the Biden administration.

NYT sources also noted that George and Driscoll had formed a “tight partnership,” with Hegseth reportedly at odds with the latter.

“Hegseth can’t fire Driscoll,” an unnamed administration official told the Washington Post. “So he’s going to make his life hell.”

Hegseth also fired Gen. David Hodne, who headed the US Army’s Transformation and Training Command, and Maj. Gen. William Green Jr., the chief of chaplains, the WaPo reported. No official reason was given for any of the firings.

George’s term was not due to end until 2027. According to the NYT, as army chief, he had spearheaded initiatives aimed at fielding new drone technologies and AI-powered targeting systems while opposing a new light tank program, arguing it was too vulnerable to cheap UAVs. Gen. Christopher LaNeve – once Hegseth’s top military aide – is expected to serve as acting army chief of staff.

US President Donald Trump has fired Attorney General Pam Bondi, who was accused of mishandling the release of files related to disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Both Democrats and Republicans have accused Bondi, a longtime Trump loyalist, of attempting to conceal some emails and photographs from Epstein’s estate. Over the years, Epstein cultivated friendships with high-profile figures, including Trump.

Bondi’s Justice Department was also accused of covering up the circumstances of Epstein’s death in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019, which was ruled a suicide.

In a post on Truth Social on Thursday, Trump thanked Bondi for doing “a tremendous job” fighting violent crime. “We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much-needed and important new job in the private sector,” Trump wrote.

Todd Blanche, a former lawyer for Trump and Bondi’s deputy, will succeed her as acting attorney general.

“Leading President Trump’s historic and highly successful efforts to make America safer and more secure has been the honor of a lifetime,” Bondi wrote on X.

Over the next month I will be working tirelessly to transition the office of Attorney General to the amazing Todd Blanche before moving to an important private sector role I am thrilled about, and where I will continue fighting for President Trump and this Administration.…

— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) April 2, 2026

In 2025, Bondi came under fire after the DOJ released a trove of files on the Epstein case that contained little new information and denied that the billionaire had kept a client list of individuals to whom he allegedly trafficked women. The DOJ later released millions of emails and images after Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November 2025.

Inaccurate media reporting on the latest statements by the defense team in Charlie Kirk’s murder case shows that there is a real risk of “poisoning the jury” and affecting the trial, legal commentator and former lawyer David Freiheit has told RT.

Earlier this week, several outlets reported, citing the lawyers representing Tyler Robinson – the man accused of killing Kirk – that the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) could not conclusively connect a bullet fragment recovered from Kirk’s body to a rifle found at the scene.

According to Freiheit, some of those reports, such as the one by the Daily Mail, were inaccurate. “The headline was overtly misleading,” he said, adding that the British media outlet said “it did not match, whereas in reality… the ATF or the reports [said] that they couldn't match it based on the fragments, which is not uncommon in these types of incidents.” 

“There's a real concern in this particular case about what they call poisoning the jury,” the former lawyer stated, adding that information provided to the media, whether it is accurate or not, could “ferment… conspiracy theories” and eventually affect the trial.

Freiheit also stated that some questions surrounding the murder do need to be answered. The list of such issues includes a possibility of other people on social media possessing “advance knowledge” about the attack and the reasons for a “lapse” in the campus security that allegedly allowed the suspected assassin to take up a position on an unguarded roof, according the former lawyer.

Watch the full interview here:

The EU is facing a looming energy crisis and the only way to survive is to lift sanctions on Russian oil and gas, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on X on Thursday.

He was replying to an earlier post by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who lamented the outcomes of years of EU policy, without seeming to be able to understand its consequences. Tusk bemoaned a “massive energy crisis in Europe,” threat of the US pulling out of NATO, the reported redirection of American arms supplies from Ukraine to the Middle East, as well as Washington easing sanctions on Russian energy supplies.

“It all looks like [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s dream plan,” Tusk claimed.

In his response, Orban urged Tusk to worry about his own country and people, rather than Putin.

Instead of warmongering, love and save your country, Donald!

Kremlin investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev chimed in, calling Orban “one of the few voices of wisdom and reason in Europe.”

“He understands the severity of the upcoming energy and economic crisis and, unlike EU bureaucrats, knows what needs to be done to minimize the damage,” he replied in an X post.

Dmitriev has been sounding the alarm about the looming energy crisis since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran in late February.

The bloc’s Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen has warned member states to prepare for a prolonged fuel disruption. The consequences would outlast the Iran conflict “because energy infrastructure in the region has been ruined by war,” he told reporters after a meeting of energy ministers in Brussels on Tuesday.

Behind Vladimir Zelensky’s public feud with Viktor Orban, the arrest of two suspected spies in Budapest adds to claims that the Ukrainian leader is waging a shadow campaign to take out the Hungarian prime minister.

The men targeted in the raids – a 19-year-old in the suburbs and a 38-year-old British/Hungarian dual citizen in Budapest – were IT specialists working for opposition leader Peter Magyar’s Tisza party. Between both locations, the raids yielded enough hard drives, USB drives, and computers that backing up all the data took over a month.

The operation didn’t make any headlines until this week, when two separate versions of events began to emerge.

Did Orban target his opponents?

According to a report by the pro-opposition outlet Direkt36, the government agents claimed that they were searching for child pornography, but came up empty handed. Instead, they seized files suggesting that both men were in contact with an unidentified handler codenamed ‘Henry’, who was instructing them to steal documents from Tisza’s servers and conduct cyberattacks against the party.

In this version of events, the NBSZ and Constitutional Protection Office (AH) steered the NIN’s investigation away from ‘Henry’, holding only in-person briefings on the matter and “persuad[ing] police leadership not to pursue the investigation in this direction.”

To the reporters at Direkt36, one of whom is currently being investigated for possible espionage, this intervention strongly hinted that the child pornography warrants were a ruse, and ‘Henry’ was a creation of the Hungarian secret services, who were running a “covert operation to bring down the [Tisza] party.”

This is the end. A world built on lies has shattered.
Hungarian intelligence services, acting on the orders of @PM_ViktorOrban and his inner circle, have worked against the TISZA party, which is preparing for a change of government. This affair, the "Orbán-gate", recalls the…

— Magyar Péter (Ne féljetek) (@magyarpeterMP) March 24, 2026

The report does not explain why the secret services would raid their own operatives. Nevertheless, Magyar himself declared that the story “recalls the darkest days of communism and is even more serious than the Watergate scandal.” The supposed plot against Tisza “crosses every line” and “amounts to an attempted coup against Hungary,” he added.

Or was Tisza’s IT team working with Ukraine?

In an intelligence briefing declassified in late March, Hungary’s National Security Committee filled in the details that Direkt36 allegedly left out. The 19-year-old suspect had been under surveillance since 2022, two years before the emergence of Tisza, the briefing states.

The suspect, identified as ‘HD’, allegedly made contact with an Estonian citizen in 2022, who sent him to Kiev the following year to train with the IT Army of Ukraine, a cyberwarfare group run by the Ukrainian government. HD is alleged to have carried out “several operations in the interests of Ukraine,” visited the Ukrainian embassy in Budapest on multiple occasions, and in May 2025, two months before the raid, also visited the embassy of an EU member state in to obtain “secret service tools.” The teenager was questioned twice by counterintelligence officers over these activities.

The suspect who lived on the boat was well known to Hungarian authorities, the report stated, and had a record of misuse of IT systems, computer fraud, and extortion. Identified as ‘MT’, he came under surveillance when he began working alongside HD for Tisza. The 38-year-old had allegedly been interested in purchasing intelligence tools since 2019, and once in contact with his teenage colleague, “participated in negotiations aimed at purchasing intelligence equipment that requires a license (spyware, signal jamming, devices suitable for disguised image and sound recording).”

The two men contacted a “well-known spyware manufacturer and distributor” in February 2025, aiming to purchase the software, the report states. HD, it claimed, has admitted to counterintelligence agents that “he was assisted in this by the secret service of a European Union country.”

Hungarian authorities launched the raids having received an anonymous tip claiming that the suspects planned to use some of these tools to covertly record child pornography. While the accusations have not been substantiated, they are now being investigated for possessing or manufacturing “military equipment requiring a license.”

In this version, it is unclear whether ‘Henry’ was one of HD’s foreign contacts, or whether he was an undercover Hungarian agent building a case against the two suspects.

📷💥 Photos now prove it: Tamás Maróti, the Tisza Party IT specialist identified as a Ukrainian spy, had free access to the party’s former central office.

❓But who is Tamás Maróti (alias “Buddha”)? The man had already been on the authorities’ radar years earlier - he was… pic.twitter.com/bqTIxpqJAa

— Zoltan Kovacs (@zoltanspox) March 26, 2026

Government spokesman Zoltan Kovacz has named ‘MT’ as Tamas Maroti. On Thursday, Kovacz published a series of photos showing the alleged spy meeting with Tisza campaign chief Peter Toth, and leaving the party’s headquarters shortly before Tisza MEP Zoltan Tarr and party vice president Mark Radnai.

Who’s reporting what? Behind Direkt36

Run by opposition journalist Szabolcs Panyi, Direct36 is the Hungarian branch of Vsquare, a pro-EU, pro-Ukraine journalistic nonprofit funded by the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED), USAID, the German Marshall Fund of the United States, and two EU-backed journalism funds.

Vsquare and Panyi will be familiar to anyone following our ‘Battle for Hungary’ series. In an article citing unnamed European spies, Vsquare claimed this month that Russian President Vladimir Putin had sent military intelligence agents to Budapest to rig the election for Orban.

Panyi then admitted that he helped “a state organ of an EU country” wiretap Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto. Foreign intelligence agents then leaked details of Szijjarto’s conversations with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov back to Western media outlets, including Politico and the Washington Post

Panyi, who described himself on the call as a “quasi-friend” of Tisza politician Anita Orban and a potential power broker should Magyar defeat Viktor Orban in April, claims that the call proves collusion between Szijjarto and Lavrov. As a slew of pictures of Panyi with former USAID head Samantha Power hit social media, Hungarian authorities announced that an espionage case has been opened involving his role in wiretapping Szijjarto.

Szijjarto does not deny speaking to Lavrov, maintaining that such diplomatic outreach is part of his job.

Why is Ukraine involved?

It is unclear whether the higher-ups at Tisza knew of the two suspects’ alleged ties to Ukraine. Likewise it is hard to determine what levels of the Ukrainian security apparatus knew of their work.

However, Kiev has a vested interest in the outcome of the election – after all, Vladimir Zelensky wouldn’t make barely concealed threats against Viktor Orban's life over minor ideological differences.

Hungary has used its EU veto powers to delay every package of energy sanctions imposed on Russia by the bloc, relenting only when given exemptions that allow it to continue purchasing Russian fossil fuels. Orban opposes Ukraine's potential accession to NATO, refuses to supply arms to Kiev, and is currently vetoing a €90 billion EU loan package for Kiev, hacked together after Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s failure to push through a move to steal Russia’s frozen sovereign assets.

The EU has made public overtures toward restarting Druzhba, with Brussels proposing a “fact-finding mission” to assess the supposed damage and resolve the dispute. However, as RT explored in the first installment of our ‘Battle for Hungary’ series, the bloc is also working against Orban in the runup to the election, leveraging its online censorship tools to benefit Magyar.

In a phone conversation leaked in March, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s communications adviser told a Politico reporter that the EU won’t force Zelensky to reopen the pipeline, as doing so would benefit Orban’s campaign.

Orban has claimed for months that Ukraine is waging a quiet war against his government “The Ukrainians are actively working to bring about a change of government in Hungary,” he told Hungary’s Kossuth Radio in October. “Their secret service is here all the time. Tisza is a pro-Ukrainian party, this is their party, so they will do everything to help the Tisza party form a government.”

“I call on president Zelensky to order his agents home immediately and respect the will of the Hungarian people,” Orban said in a video address on Thursday. “Ukrainian spies and IT specialists paid by the Ukrainians come in and out of the Tisza party. There has never been an election in Hungary so deeply interfered with by foreign secret services.”

🚨 @PM_ViktorOrban: I call on President @ZelenskyyUA to recall his agents and respect the will of the Hungarian people. Foreign interference in our elections is unacceptable. Hungary will defend its sovereignty and ensure Hungarians decide their own future. pic.twitter.com/pOQF16gEA5

— Zoltan Kovacs (@zoltanspox) March 26, 2026

The bottom line

Brussels, Kiev, and the Hungarian opposition media have made no secret of their desire to oust Orban. The timing of the leaks and revelations suggests closer collaboration between all three players as teh election day looms, and use of the very same tactics that Panyi and the opposition accuse Orban of deploying.

A counterintelligence probe into the case of the two IT specialists is ongoing. One side says that the raid was a textbook example of political repression; the other says it was the culmination of a years-long investigation into well-known cybercriminals working in cahoots with Ukraine.

Hungarian government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs said on Tuesday that “further facts will be made public this week so that it becomes clear to everyone that the Hungarian left is once again attempting to come to power with foreign - primarily Ukrainian - assistance.”

NASA launched its first crewed lunar flight in more than 50 years on Wednesday, as the Artemis II mission began with liftoff from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The mission comes at the dawning of a new age of competition in space.

What is Artemis II?

Artemis II is the second mission in NASA’s Artemis program, which aims to land humans on the surface of the Moon in 2028, and establish a permanent base on the lunar surface in the 2030s. Artemis II is the first crewed mission in the program, and takes place four years after Artemis I – an uncrewed mission which tested the Lockheed Martin-built Orion capsule.

Who is flying Artemis II?

Artemis II will see American astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch, along with Canada’s Jeremy Hansen, orbit the Earth, circle the Moon, and then return to Earth at a record re-entry speed of 40,000 kph (25,000 mph). At one point in the mission, the crew will be further from Earth than humans have ever been, surpassing the record of 400,171 km (248,655 miles) set by Apollo 13 in 1970.

Was the Artemis II launch successful?

A NASA Space Launch System (SLS) rocket roared into motion at 6:35 PM on Wednesday, accelerating the Orion craft to around 27,360 kph (17,000 mph) within eight minutes of flight. A technical error with the rocket’s Flight Termination System (FTS) threatened to delay the launch, but NASA technicians were able to resolve the problem with an hour to spare.

The FTS system allows flight engineers to trigger the rocket’s self-destruction in the event that it veers off course and threatens lives on the ground.

When will Artemis II reach the Moon?

The spacecraft will spend 24 hours in high-Earth orbit – around 74,000 km (46,000 miles) above the planet’s surface – conducting systems tests before Orion’s own engines will fire on Thursday evening, setting the craft on a trajectory for the Moon.

Orion will enter the Moon’s gravitational sphere on Monday, and will begin its lunar flyby later that day. During this phase of the mission, the Artemis II crew will become the first humans to lay eyes on the far side of the Moon, which always faces away from Earth. The Moon’s gravity will then sling Orion directly back toward Earth, and after reentry, the crew capsule will separate from the spacecraft for a parachute-assisted splashdown in the Pacific Ocean on Friday, April 10.

Why is NASA returning to the Moon now?

Artemis II is NASA’s first crewed lunar mission since Apollo 17, in which astronauts Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt walked on the surface of the Moon. The Apollo missions took place at the height of the Cold War, with the US spending 4% of its federal budget on NASA during the 1960s in a bid to land on the Moon before the USSR. After the first successful lunar landing in 1969, however, the agency’s budget contracted amid waning public interest and economic turmoil.

What disasters have befallen NASA’s space program?

Following the 1969 Moon landing, a series of tragedies further curtailed the US space program. NASA’s Challenger space shuttle disintegrated less than two minutes into its tenth flight in January 1986, killing all seven crew members on board. The disaster was broadcast live on CNN: Images of the craft exploding in a mid-air fireball and silence from mission control witnessed by millions of Americans.

An inquest found that faulty rubber O-rings caused Challenger’s rocket booster to leak hot gases, which ignited the booster’s remaining propellant.

Tragedy struck again in 2003 when another space shuttle, the Columbia, disintegrated during re-entry to the Earth’s atmosphere, killing all seven astronauts on board. Columbia’s fate was decided during launch, when a piece of insulating foam broke loose and punctured heat-shielding tiles on the craft’s wing. This damage caused the wing to break apart during re-entry.

Who restarted the US lunar mission program?

An executive order signed by Trump last December declared that “superiority in space is a measure of national vision and willpower.” Trump echoed this language following the successful launch of Artemis II, writing on social media that “we are winning in space, on Earth, and wherever possible – economically, militarily, and now beyond the stars.”

Was the Artemis program delayed?

The Artemis program has been plagued by delays and cost overruns. The Artemis I mission – before it was named as such by Trump – was initially set to take place in 2016, before the date was pushed back to 2021, and then 2022. When Trump unveiled plans to send humans back to the Moon, he originally set a landing date of 2024, which has since slipped back to 2028.

Combined, the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft have cost more than $44 billion to develop. As of last year, the SLS project was six years behind schedule and $6 billion over initial cost estimates, while Orion has cost $3.2 billion more than originally projected. A 2021 report by the Government Accountability Office placed the entire cost of the Artemis program at $93 billion up to fiscal year 2025, and the cost of a single SLS/Orion launch at $4.1 billion.

Who is competing with the US in the space race?

NASA is competing with Russia’s Roscosmos and the China National Space Administration (CNSA), which are working on establishing a joint lunar base by 2035.

Furthermore, the US and China have both created space-focused branches of their militaries – the US Space Force and PLA Aerospace Force. Both have tested anti-satellite missiles, both have declared space a warfighting domain, and both are developing space-based missile interceptors and the means to overcome them.

As was the case during the Cold War, competition between Washington and Beijing has split the world into rival blocs. Some 61 countries have signed the Artemis Accords, a set of non-binding rules governing the exploration and commercial exploitation of the Moon and Mars. Russia and China have both condemned the accords, with Moscow describing them as a “blatant attempt to create international space law that favors the United States.” 

Along with Russia and China, 11 other countries including Serbia and South Africa, are taking part in the development of the ILRS.

Can the Moon be mined for resources?

In November 2015, the US Congress passed a bill allowing American companies to own and sell materials they extract from the Moon or other celestial bodies. The Artemis Accords explicitly permit the “safe and sustainable” extraction of resources from the Moon.

The Moon contains substantial deposits of rare-earth elements and Helium-3, an isotope with the potential to power future fusion reactors. These deposits have piqued the interest of commercial space exploration firms. Astrolab and Interlune plan to jointly extract Helium-3 from the Moon by 2029, and have already signed contracts with the US Department of Energy to sell the gas.

According to a research paper published last year, 6,500 craters on the Moon’s surface could contain platinum, palladium, and rhodium worth more than a trillion dollars.

US President Donald Trump has lashed out at NATO and key European leaders, deepening tensions within the bloc over the war against Iran. According to the Financial Times, Washington has also threatened to curb weapons supplies to Ukraine to pressure European countries into involvement in the war in the Middle East.

At a White House Easter lunch on Wednesday, Trump described NATO as a “paper tiger” and voiced frustration that other bloc members have not joined the US-Israeli war on Iran. He said he had sought European backing as a test of their reliability, which they failed to prove and that the US could leave the bloc over the issue.

“I learned about NATO. NATO won’t be there if we ever have the big one,” Trump said.

Trump also recounted conversations with French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Both leaders declined to commit forces to secure the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic chokepoint which Iran effectively took under control in retaliation for the US-Israeli offensive launched in late February.

[ 🇺🇸 ÉTATS-UNIS | 🇫🇷 FRANCE ]

🔸Donald Trump sur Emmanuel Macron :

💬 « Sa femme le traite extrêmement mal. »

* Rires dans la salle *

« Il ne s’est toujours par remis de cette droite dans la figure ! » pic.twitter.com/HtdB7G3UID

— Little Think Tank (@L_ThinkTank) April 1, 2026

Macron, Trump remarked, is “still recovering from the right to the jaw” from his wife – referring to a familial quarrel caught on camera last May. Starmer, he added, has “two old broken down aircraft carriers” at his disposal that he cannot deploy unless his cabinet agrees.

NATO-sponsored Ukraine arms reportedly in peril

The Financial Times reported on Wednesday that Trump has warned behind closed doors he could suspend deliveries of US-made weapons purchased by Ukraine’s Western backers for Kiev’s forces. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte pushed for a joint statement on March 19 committing to future efforts to safeguard maritime routes in response, sources told the outlet, describing Trump as “rather hysterical.”

The Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL), introduced in July 2025 after Trump declined to fund Ukraine aid directly, allows European states to purchase US arms for Kiev. Among the most critical items are Patriot interceptor missiles, which are now in especially high demand due to the Middle East crisis.

Trump linked the two conflicts on Wednesday, arguing that the US “gave so much away to Ukraine” and is now facing a shortage of munitions. But at least the Europeans are “good for paying” for American arms, he added.

NEW - Trump: "We didn't have to go into Ukraine. Ukraine's thousands of miles away across the ocean, but we helped them." pic.twitter.com/ERGcLnWEth

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) April 1, 2026

The Washington Post has reported that the administration is considering redirecting NATO funds from the PURL program to meet the Pentagon’s immediate needs.

Democrats have filed a lawsuit seeking to block US President Donald Trump’s latest executive order restricting mail-in voting, arguing that the Constitution gives states and Congress – not the president – the authority to decide voter eligibility for mail ballots. 

Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order to create a nationwide list of verified eligible voters and restrict mail-in voting. The measure directs federal agencies to compile state-by-state voter rolls and requires the US Postal Service to send ballots only to those included. It also instructs the Department of Homeland Security to build databases of US citizens eligible to vote in each state.

The move has triggered swift backlash, with critics framing the order as both a legal overreach and a continuation of Trump’s long-running attacks on voting by mail, a method widely used by Americans.  

“President Trump has repeatedly tried to rewrite election rules for partisan advantage,” the lawsuit said.  

“We don’t need decrees from Washington, D.C.,” Oregon Secretary of State Tobias Read said. “We’ll see you in court.”  

California Governor Gavin Newsom’s office said the state would also move swiftly to challenge the measure, adding: “The President wants to limit which Americans can participate in our democracy. California will see him in court.”  

The lawsuit opens a second round of legal fights over the president’s authority to influence election rules. Trump’s opponents prevailed in an earlier case last year, persuading multiple federal judges to block his initial executive order on grounds that it was likely unconstitutional.  

Mail-in voting in the US dates back to the 1860s. Several states, including Oregon, Washington and Colorado, now conduct elections almost entirely by mail, while others widely offer no-excuse absentee voting.   

Trump has repeatedly targeted the system since 2020, claiming widespread fraud. Earlier this year, he claimed that America’s elections are “rigged”, “stolen” and a global “laughingstock.” Trump’s executive order comes ahead of the November 2026 midterm elections, which will determine whether the Republicans retain control of Congress.

The Strait of Hormuz will not return to the status quo enjoyed before the US-Israeli war against Iran, a security official has told RT.

The waterway, through which around 20% of seaborne crude oil trade passes, remains effectively closed due to the fighting during the past month. The deadlock has caused economic strains for many countries – including the US, where gas prices surpassed $4 per gallon earlier this week.

The Iranian official said in an interview with RT on Thursday that the “conditions in the Strait of Hormuz will not return to the pre-war status quo.”

At the moment, transit through the waterway “remains operational,” but ships “are subject to the approval of the Iranian side and require the flag state of the vessel to establish contact with Tehran,” he said, adding: “To date, no vessel belonging to the enemy or its partners has been granted permission to pass,” referring to the US, Israel, and their allies.

He also urged the international media “to ignore the disinformation campaigns by the US-Israeli side and [US President Donald] Trump personally.”

“Iranian regulation and control over the Strait continues and will persist,” he told RT.

In an address to the nation on Thursday, Trump suggested that countries that depend on oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz should “build up some delayed courage… and just take it.” He added that the waterway could “open up naturally” after the war ends, without providing details.

Earlier this week, the Iranian parliament approved a “new regime,” according to which Tehran will collect payment from ships going through the strait.

US President Donald Trump has publicly mocked his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron’s relationship with his wife, Brigitte, sparking outrage in France.

Trump made the remarks during a private White House lunch on Wednesday, the feed from which may have been accidentally posted online. Trump was heard complaining about France’s refusal to join the US-Israeli war against Iran, before saying Brigitte Macron treats her husband “extremely badly” and claiming that the French president is “still recovering from the right to the jaw.” 

The quip was referring to a widely circulated May 2025 video that appeared to show Brigitte Macron pushing her husband’s face aboard a plane after landing in Hanoi. Macron later dismissed the incident as the couple “bickering and joking.”

Trump’s comments, which drew laughter from the audience at the White House, were vehemently condemned in France. Macron told reporters that the remarks were “neither elegant, nor appropriate,” and did not “deserve a response.” French politicians across party lines also denounced Trump for ridiculing a fellow head of state. 

Trump mocks Macron again:

I called up France, Macron, whose wife treats him extremely badly and he’s still recovering from the right to the jaw. pic.twitter.com/bEJgfKaVRg

— Clash Report (@clashreport) April 1, 2026

National Assembly speaker Yael Braun-Pivet called the remarks “beneath contempt,” adding that “people are dying on the battlefield, yet the US president is laughing and mocking others.” Manuel Bompard of the far-left France Unbowed party also said that despite his own differences with Macron, “I cannot tolerate Donald Trump speaking about Macron and his wife in that manner.”

Trump has responded by branding NATO a “paper tiger” and threatening to pull the US out of the bloc. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also signaled that Washington may “re-examine” its NATO membership after the war.

Trump’s mockery of Macron comes amid a history of scandals surrounding his wife Brigitte. In January, a Paris court convicted ten people for online harassment over conspiracy theories falsely claiming the French first lady is transgender. Separately, she sparked a scandal in December by referring to feminist protesters as “stupid b***hes” in a leaked backstage video, prompting a wave of criticism from activists and politicians.

The US has removed the sanctions on interim Venezuelan President Delcy Rodriguez, according to the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control.

The move was announced on Wednesday and marks a significant policy shift as Washington builds closer ties with Caracas after kidnapping Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro earlier this year.

US President Donald Trump previously warned Rodriguez that she could face an even higher price than Maduro if she did not comply with the administration’s conditions. However, he later changed his rhetoric and called relations with her “very good.” Trump said last month that the US  “formally recognized” the interim government.

In March, Reuters cited four people familiar with the matter as saying that the Trump administration was quietly building a legal case against Rodriguez. Federal prosecutors reportedly put together corruption and money laundering charges, and told the interim president that she was at risk of prosecution.

Rodriguez and other Maduro allies were sanctioned by the Treasury in 2018 following Maduro’s reelection, which the US and other countries said was rigged. At the time, Washington claimed that she helped Maduro maintain power.

The sanctions included freezing her assets in the US, banning American individuals and companies from conducting business with her, and blocking her access to the US financial system. Her international dealings and travel were also restricted, effectively isolating Rodriguez from global financial and economic networks.

Rodriguez initially declared that no “foreign agent” would control Venezuela, and demanded that Maduro and his wife be freed. However, she has since moved to align with the administration’s demands, including opening the country’s oil sector to American companies and cooperating on security.

As a result, Washington has imposed control over Venezuelan crude exports, with the proceeds deposited into restricted US Treasury-run accounts rather than going directly to the Venezuelan state. The country holds the world’s largest proven oil reserves – around one-fifth of the total.

Last month, Rodriguez agreed to sell around $100 million in physical gold to the US, with the proceeds similarly controlled by Washington. In January, she also agreed to free more than 400 detainees who the US considers political prisoners.

Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa has denied claims that he told German Chancellor Friedrich Merz that up to 80% of Syrians living in Germany could be convinced to return home within three years.

Merz cited the figure and timeline on Monday during a joint press conference with al-Sharaa, a former jihadist commander who seized power in 2024 after overthrowing the previous government. Following criticism, including from within his own political camp, Merz claimed on Tuesday that the estimate had originated from al-Sharaa.

Speaking later that day at an event hosted by the London-based think tank Chatham House, al-Sharaa dismissed the claim as “exaggerated” and said it did not reflect his position. He emphasized that any repatriation effort would depend heavily on Syria’s economic recovery.

Al-Sharaa said that higher return rates would require substantial investment from Western countries, including Germany, into Syria’s reconstruction.

‘Not wise’ for government to voice specific figures

Migration remains a hot-button political issue across Western Europe. Recent polling indicates a widespread desire for stricter controls and reduced numbers. A major 2025 YouGov survey found that between 64% and 82% of respondents in Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain oppose a large increase in new migrants.

Merz’s remarks on Syrian repatriations were broadly deemed unrealistic and irresponsible. Anke Rehlinger, deputy leader of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), which is part of the governing coalition, said it was “not a wise idea” to announce “specific figures for specific timeframes” that the public is likely to take as a policy goal.

Daniel Thym, a migration expert interviewed by Handelsblatt, described the 80% return rate as “likely unattainable,” given that only a few thousand Syrians have so far agreed to go home in exchange for financial incentives offered by the German government.

What about Ukrainian refugees in the EU? 

Millions of Syrian fled as the Arab Spring gripped the country, plunging it into a catastrophic civil war that sparked a major migration wave towards the EU in 2014-15. Around 1 million Syrians ultimately settled in Germany, encouraged by then-Chancellor Angela Merkel's open arms policy, which has been largely retained by her successors despite increasingly becoming a political liability.

In 2022, a comparable number of Ukrainians received protection in Germany. The prospects for this cohort to return home remains similarly unclear.

Only about 10–15% of the roughly 6.5 million Ukrainians currently residing in Europe are expected to go back, even if the war ends, Vasily Voskoboynik, head of a Ukrainian labor and migration organization, estimated in a recent interview. He also warned that as many as 1.5 million Ukrainian residents could instead seek work abroad once travel restrictions linked to martial law are lifted.

Several tour guides in Nepal ran a fake helicopter rescue racket to defraud insurance companies in Australia and the UK, the Kathmandu Post has reported. 

Investigations by the paper revealed that the guides first staged a medical emergency, called in a helicopter, and checked tourists into a hospital.

An insurance claim was then filed, which made it difficult for the foreign insurers, mostly operating from Australia and the UK, to verify incidents that purportedly happened at altitudes of 3,000 meters above sea level in remote Himalayan locations, according to the report.

The newspaper first published an investigative report in 2019 about the alleged scam. While Nepalese authorities did not immediately act on the allegations, in 2025 the Nepal Police’s Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) reopened the case and found that the practice is widespread.

Nepal charges 32 in fake rescue scam

Fake helicopter rescues and inflated hospital bills used to claim insurance payouts, investigators say.https://t.co/q9mA2YlUaZ —by @gauravpkh

— The Kathmandu Post (@kathmandupost) March 23, 2026

The CIB probe revealed two methods the guides used to fake an emergency, according to the report.

The first involved tourists who did not want to trek back down from high-altitude points. After an Everest Base Camp trek, which can take up to two weeks on foot, the scammers convinced tourists unwilling to trek back to pretend to be sick. They were then ferried back in a helicopter.

In the second method, guides exploited mild and common symptoms of altitude sickness, and then told the tourists that only an immediate evacuation could save their lives.

The guides also ferried multiple tourists in a single chopper, while supplying separate invoices to each passenger’s insurance company, portraying it as a dedicated flight, inflating claims of $4,000 to as high as $12,000, the report said.

Medical officers acting in concert with scammers prepared discharge summaries using the digital signatures of senior doctors, while creating fake hospital admission records.

Official investigators found that 4,782 foreign patients were treated across local hospitals between 2022 and 2025 in the scam. Some hospitals that received millions linked to the scam have also been identified, according to the report.

On March 12, the CIB charged 32 people with offenses against the state and arrested nine of them. The other suspects are believed to be on the run.

Iran has accused the US and Israel of genocide over the “deliberate” targeting of schools and education facilities in strikes on the country.

In a post on X on Wednesday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said more than 600 schools and educational facilities across Iran have been targeted in US-Israeli attacks over the past month, including the Shajareh Tayyebeh School in Minab where more than 160 children were killed.

”This is not an isolated act of cruelty – it is part of a systematic and brutal pattern of illegal warfare against Iran,” he wrote. “The term ‘war crime’ falls far short of adequately describing these atrocities. Given the explicit rhetoric of hostility toward Iranians (as a nation) expressed by US/Israeli officials, these crimes amount to genocide.”

The US-Israeli war on Iran began with massive strikes on urban centers on February 28, including the bombing of the Shajarah Tayyebeh elementary school, which killed at least 175 people, more than 160 of them children. American and Israeli officials initially offered conflicting denials and explanations, with US President Donald Trump even suggesting the attack was “done by Iran.”

This is not an isolated act of cruelty—it is part of a systematic and brutal pattern of illegal warfare against Iran.
In the past 33 days, aggressors have deliberately targeted over 600 schools and educational centers, including the Shajareh Tayyebeh School in #Minab and the…

— Esmaeil Baqaei (@IRIMFA_SPOX) April 1, 2026

However, the Pentagon has opened a probe, and reports claim investigators have already confirmed the US carried out the strike using “outdated targeting data” that misclassified the school as part of a nearby military compound.

While the strike in Lamerd drew scant global attention, the atrocity in Minab has sparked condemnation. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova accused the US and Israel of “cruelty, cynicism, and dehumanization.” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez both declared solidarity with the victims of the “massacre.” However, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and the UN Security Council (UNSC) both failed to adopt formal resolutions condemning the atrocity.

The US and Israel have maintained an air offensive on Iran for over a month, killing more than 1,340 people, according to official data. Iran has retaliated with drone and missile strikes targeting Israel and US bases in the Middle East.

US President Donald Trump has called the war on Iran an investment in the future of American children as he delivered his first address to the nation since the start of the conflict a month ago.

In his speech on Wednesday, Trump claimed that Washington was never looking for regime change in Tehran, with its goals being the destruction of Iran’s navy and air force, and denying it the ability to create a nuclear weapon. “These core strategic objectives are nearing completion,” he insisted.

During the 32 days of fighting since the US and Israel launched their attack, Iran “has been eviscerated and essentially is really no longer a threat… This is a true investment in your children and your grandchildren’s future,” Trump said.

The fighting would continue “over the next two to three weeks” until the US goals are “fully achieved,” he added.

Trump again warned the authorities in Tehran that “if there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously.”

Republican Senator Ted Cruz applauded Trump’s address, saying that the president was “exactly right tonight.”

The US military operation “is an investment in the future of our children and our grandchildren. We are on the cusp of ending Iran’s nuclear blackmail – that makes America much, much safer,” he wrote on X.

Tehran has long insisted that its nuclear program is purely peaceful and not aimed at obtaining a weapon. Earlier this week, high-ranking Iranian MP Alaeddin Borujerdi said the country’s parliament is looking into the possibility of withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, arguing that participation in the 1968 accord became pointless after the US-Israeli attack.

Iran has continued to strike Israel and US military facilities in the Persian Gulf, while rejecting talks with Washington. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi insisted on Wednesday that the war will go on until “the aggressor” is punished and Tehran receives full compensation.

India’s massive condom industry is facing major disruptions due to material shortages and soaring production costs linked to the ongoing war in the Middle East, local media reports, citing manufacturers.

India produces over 6 billion condoms annually in a high-volume, low-margin market worth $860 million. The sector relies heavily on supplies of silicone oil and ammonia, which stabilize raw latex.

Since Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to most ships in response to US and Israeli airstrikes, supply chains for petrochemical-based materials have been disrupted, leading to a “huge shortage” of silicone oil and a projected 40-50% price surge for ammonia, according to industry officials quoted by the Indian Express.

India produced 6.4 billion condoms in 2024, accounting for nearly 17% of global output, according to IndexBox data.

The oil crisis has also prompted hikes in aviation fuel prices for airlines, India’s Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas said on Wednesday. Fuel prices are expected to double to a record $2,224 as of April 1, it said, adding that domestic carriers will face a staggered increase, while foreign companies will have to pay the full market price.

US President Donald Trump has urged countries that buy oil from the Middle East to unblock the Strait of Hormuz by force unless Iran reopens the vital shipping route to all vessels.

He made the appeal in his first address to the nation on Wednesday, after weeks of chastising NATO members for refusing to send warships to the region and join the US and Israel in their war efforts.

“To those countries that can’t get fuel, many of which refuse to get involved in the decapitation of Iran… build up some delayed courage, go to the Strait and just take it. Protect it,” Trump said. He argued that securing the strait would be easy, saying the US had “decimated” Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and “dramatically curtailed” its drone and missile capabilities.

Trump:

The countries of the world that do receive oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage.

They must cherish it. They must grab it and cherish it.

They can do it easily. pic.twitter.com/Smm8xEhY92

— Clash Report (@clashreport) April 2, 2026

In his address, Trump vowed to intensify airstrikes over the next two to three weeks, suggesting the war would continue if Iran refuses to accept his demands.

The US-Israeli war on Iran has triggered a global energy shock that Washington has struggled to contain, sending oil prices surging and pushing fuel costs sharply higher for consumers worldwide. The conflict has effectively choked flows through the Strait of Hormuz, a key artery for roughly one-fifth of global oil supply.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed this week that he had been receiving messages from Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff, but denied that the countries were holding talks behind the scenes.

Iranian officials have said that Tehran would end the conflict on its own terms and accused the US of sabotaging previous negotiations.