United States air refueller downed over Iraq in Iran conflict
- First seen
- First seen: March 14, 2026 at 12:10 AM UTC
- Last updated
- Last updated: April 7, 2026 at 06:03 AM UTC
- Activity score
- Activity score: 3.12
- Article count
- 72 articles
Overview
Location
Coordinates: 26.6000, 56.3000
View on mapCostly reliance
THE reverberations of the Iran war are being felt around the world. In Pakistan, the government has hiked fuel prices, which will mean higher prices for all commodities. School schedules are being shortened and people are finding it harder to ignore the bill that the US-Israel war on Iran has handed them. Similar difficulties are being faced by other countries across the region. All eyes are on the April 6 deadline the US has given Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz. By now, nearly every aspect of the war — strategic interests, failures and the costly regional fallout — has been analysed at length. Less discussed has been the role of artificial intelligence used by the US to decide on targets and provide predictions. Perceived through this lens, the dynamics of the war were decided not on Feb 28, when it began, but rather on Jan 9, when the US secretary of war issued a memo in which he noted seven projects that would make the US military “an AI first war fighting force across all components from front to back”. This strategy required the compression of timelines of years into months. It prescribed that the military opt for the speed of implementation of AI models at the risk of imperfect alignment. A few weeks later, there was a public showdown between the war secretary and the AI company Anthropic which the former demanded remove internal restrictions in its models on fully autonomous weapons and mass surveillance of the population. Anthropic refused to do this and lawsuits ensued. Pete Hegseth then had the company declared “a supply chain risk to national security” and banned from all federal contracts. Despite this, AI systems were already embedded in warfare systems being utilised. According to news reports, AI models run before the war provided predictions that were extremely optimistic and echoed aggressive projections favoured by those advocating confrontation. These included expectations that the regime would fall quickly, that Iranians would come out into the streets to protest, that Iran would not shut down the Strait of Hormuz and that the war would only last a few days. AI predictions regarding the war have been disproven. It is clear that nearly all of these predictions have been disproven by actual events. The regime may not be as strong as before but it is still intact, having put into motion a diffuse command structure that has taken over. Iranians did not spill out into the streets to topple the regime. Instead, there have been visible signs of a rally-around-the-flag effect. The models also assumed that Iran would not act against its own interests in shutting the Strait of Hormuz to sea traffic — a premise based on rational-interest theory and past behaviour. Finally, the continuation of the war for more than a month after it began shows that the prediction of a short conflict was also incorrect. The reason for this predictive failure lies in a deficiency that Anthropic had warned about. The term is ‘AI sycophancy’ and it refers to the tendency of large language models trained on reinforcement learning from human feedback to echo what they perceive as the preferences of the user. Because such models are rewarded for echoing user expectations, they produce confident predictions even when evidence to the contrary exists. Implementing an AI-first policy while disregarding the guardrails and caveats flagged by industry experts may have provided the war-hungry hawks in the Trump administration with the predictions they were looking for. The appeal of AI systems is that they are able to echo preferences in precise language backed by evidence. In essence, it is able to present persuasive information as factual and objective information. There were, of course, other sources of analysis available that could have provided better assessments. Yet the infatuation with artificial intelligence — the belief that it is inherently superior to human judgement — is not limited to the US. We live in a world increasingly willing to believe that the knowledge offered by systems like ChatGPT and Claude is necessarily better than what we can assess ourselves. It is true that humans are slower and less exact than large language models trained on vast amounts of data. But it is also true that humans possess the ability to assess information with contextual and real-world understanding that AI systems cannot fully replicate. AI is not the only reason the US chose to initiate and pursue this war. However, understanding the role it may have played is essential in evaluating a technology that is often assumed to be objective, infallible and beyond reproach. The writer is an attorney teaching constitutional law and political philosophy. rafia.zakaria@gmail.com Published in Dawn, April 4th, 2026
DawnApril 4, 2026 at 04:43 AM UTCLegal vs political neutrality
THE Arab Gulf states are in a bind. They argue that they are neutral and don’t support the US-Israel war on Iran. Tehran, on the other hand, sees the presence of American bases on their territories as compromising their status as neutral powers. One way to look at it is to innovate — for the purpose of this crisis — a distinction between the political neutrality of the Gulf states and their legal neutrality. Legal neutrality, or the absence thereof, is to be ascertained from the texts of defence pacts and the quasi status of agreements that the Gulf states have executed with the US for the last 40-plus years. Most can be accessed on the website of the UN and US treaty series. My team accessed a few agreements and their analysis shows that they were intended for training, upkeep, immunity, parking aircraft, docking ships, etc, during peacetime — and not meant to extend support to the US during an armed conflict. To the governments or sovereigns of the Gulf states, these agreements provided the comfort of knowing that a superpower was present in their backyard, although the agreements retrieved do not seem to provide any guarantee of protection during aggression. However, even if the agreements are read as providing legal evidence of compromised neutrality, the present position of the Gulf states has been the opposite — they have vehemently opposed attacks on Iran, a demonstration of ‘political neutrality’. In other words, none of the Gulf states wanted the war against Iran. None showed any belligerent intention towards it. Political differences with Iran on regional issues such as support to non-state actors apart, the Gulf states have never raised armed forces and made preparations to attack Iran. This is a sound basis for their claim of being neutral. True, since several of them had given bases to the US military and many of these bases were used for attacks on Iran, this neutrality stood compromised — but only in a very limited sense, ie, in a legal sense. Iran must understand that the political neutrality claimed by the Gulf states is an important aspect. Strategic wisdom warrants that the civilian infrastructure of such Gulf states should not be included in the IRGC’s targets. Some states have asked the US not to use their territory to launch attacks on Iran. Some may have constraints and are thus unable to promptly cancel these long-standing detailed agreements regarding military bases and the status of the forces agreements. It is very much possible that Gulf states hosting such facilities have no detailed or advance knowledge of the bases being used to conduct military operations against Iran. That is why such attacks should not be attributable, under the principles of state responsibility, to the host Gulf state. In the absence of the said state being directly responsible for an attack on Iran, its civilian infrastructure should not be a target. Most of these states, through official spokespersons, sovereigns or senior office-holders, have sufficiently demonstrated and communicated their political neutrality in this conflict. This declared political neutrality is also evident from the fact that Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar, have not directly responded to Iranian attacks. Only the UAE has — and that too recently — as it showed its leaning towards arguments for a face-off with Iran. Iran’s leadership also needs to understand that civilian airports, residential districts, commercial towers, desalination plants and energy facilities do not become lawful targets simply because a state wishes to retaliate or signal resolve. Launching missiles or drones into densely populated Gulf cities cannot be squared with either rule. Even if Iran frames its actions as self-defence or reprisals, international humanitarian law doesn’t permit actions against civilians under any circumstances, making such strikes unlawful. International humanitarian law prohibits attacks against civilians under any circumstances. Given that the office of the ayatollah also leans on Islamic law while taking strategic or military decisions (for example, the fatwa against nuclear weapons) one must note that across Sunni and Shia jurisprudence, the rules of warfare emphasise the protection of non-combatants and the avoidance of wanton destruction. Indiscriminate or retaliatory attacks on civilian areas in Gulf states violate these principles and undermine the moral legitimacy that Iran often claims in its regional posture. No wonder the recent UNSC Resolution 2817 is critical of such targeting by Iran of Gulf states — rightly so because it relies on a common civilisational framework of do’s and don’ts during conflict that assert that notwithstanding the lawful justification of war, combat shall follow certain rules of engagement — the foremost being that civilians and infrastructure used by and for civilians are treated as protected from attacks. Although the resolution has been criticised by Russia for not declaring that the aggression by the US and Israel violates international law, the fact is that such a finding could not be realistically stated with one of the P5 countries itself one of the two aggressors. The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has led to around 3,000 merchant vessels and cargo ships being held up, which is affecting the economy of many states that politically meet the definition of neutral states under the1907 Conventions. Apart from the cargo costs and insurance issues, food and water supplies are drying up for around 20,000 stranded seafarers. Global markets are panicking. Blockades of straits and other waterways are not unheard of but last typically for the duration of an armed conflict, and not in peacetime. Iran’s argument that since it is facing armed aggression and the threat of boots on the ground it has the right to enforce the blockade to deter the US and Israel, is in line with past blockades during conflict. That is why Pakistan is trying hard for a ceasefire so that the armed conflict ceases — even temporarily — and thus enables the mediator (Pakistan) to rightly insist to Iran that it lift the blockade. It is recognised that during peacetime, transit through straits has to be granted. This is provided for in Part III of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention — which Iran very smartly and perhaps in anticipation of the present conflict chose not to ratify. Taken together, these elements point towards a clear conclusion. Iran’s attacks on civilian targets in Gulf states erode its diplomatic standing in the Gulf, and risk widening the conflict by drawing previously restrained states into active participation. The most prudent course is for Iran to accord respect to the political neutrality claimed by the Gulf states. The writer is a former caretaker federal law minister and a public international law practitioner. Published in Dawn, April 4th, 2026
DawnApril 4, 2026 at 04:35 AM UTCWorld anxious to open Hormuz Strait while Trump and Iran trade threats
Dozens of countries sought ways to restart vital energy shipments through the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday after US President Donald Trump vowed more aggressive attacks on Iran, sending oil prices higher again and deepening strain on consumers. After speculation proved untrue that Trump might discuss ending the war in a speech on Wednesday, the president persisted with threats on Thursday, saying in a social media post: “IT IS TIME FOR IRAN TO MAKE A DEAL BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE”. He also posted video of the US bombing a newly constructed bridge on Thursday between Tehran and the major northwest suburb of Karaj. The B1 bridge was scheduled to open to traffic this year. According to Iran’s state media, eight people were killed and 95 others were wounded in the US attack. “Striking civilian structures, including unfinished bridges, will not compel Iranians to surrender,” Iran Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in a statement. In the speech on Wednesday night, Trump repeated his threats against Iran’s civilian power plants and gave no clear timeline for ending hostilities, drawing vows of retaliation from Iran and depressing share prices. “We’re going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks,” Trump said amid mounting domestic pressure to end the conflict. “We’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages where they belong.” Nearly five weeks after it started with a joint US-Israeli aerial assault, the war in Iran continues to spread chaos across the region and roil financial markets, raising the pressure on Trump to find a quick resolution to the conflict. Britain chaired a virtual meeting on Thursday of some 40 countries to explore ways to restore freedom of navigation that did not produce any specific agreement, although participants agreed that all nations should be able to use the waterway freely, one official said. Iran has effectively shut down the Strait of Hormuz, which normally carries about a fifth of the world’s total oil trade, in retaliation for US-Israeli attacks that began on February 28. The war has caused an increase in oil prices, inflation concerns, supply-chain problems and worries about the impact on the global economy. Tehran offered a competing vision for future control of the strait, and said it was drafting a protocol with neighboring Oman that would require ships to obtain permits and licenses. “These requirements will not mean restrictions, but rather to facilitate and ensure safe passage and provide better services to ships that pass through this route,” Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said, according to the official IRNA news agency. An Iranian military spokesperson said the strait would remain closed “long term” to the US and Israel. Oil hits $108 Benchmark Brent crude prices jumped by about 7 per cent to around $108 per barrel, US bond yields spiked and global equity markets gave back gains. “The key question in all investors’ minds is when is this going to be over?” said Russel Chesler, head of investments and capital markets at VanEck Australia. Trump in Wednesday’s speech, told countries that rely on fuel shipments through the Strait of Hormuz to “just grab it”. However, European and other states have said they will only help secure the strait if there is a ceasefire. “It can only be done in consultation with Iran,” French President Emmanuel Macron said. Iran threatens more attacks Iran’s armed forces responded to Trump with a warning of “more crushing, broader and more destructive” attacks in store. The war will continue until the “permanent regret and surrender” of Iran’s enemies, said Ebrahim Zolfaqari, spokesperson for the Iranian military’s Khatam al-Anbiya central headquarters, in a statement carried by Iranian media. Iran’s Fars news agency later listed several bridges in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi and Jordan, which host US military bases, as potential targets for Iran’s military in response to the US attack on the B1 bridge. The Revolutionary Guards said they had targeted an Amazon cloud computing centre in Bahrain. There are fears the conflict may leave Iran with a stranglehold over Middle East energy supplies now that it has shown that it can block the Strait of Hormuz by targeting oil tankers and attacking Gulf countries hosting US troops.
DawnApril 3, 2026 at 11:03 AM UTCMiddle East conflict spiralling into wider regional war, warns UN chief
WASHINGTON: UN Secretary General António Guterres warned on Thursday that the Middle East crisis was spiralling into a wider regional war, urging the United States and Israel to halt hostilities and calling on Iran to stop attacks on its neighbours. Addressing reporters at UN Headquarters, Guterres said the conflict had “lurched into its second month,” with human suffering deepening by the day. “Every day this war continues, human suffering grows. The scale of devastation grows. Indiscriminate attacks grow. The targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure grows. And the perils to our world grow,” he said. “We are on the edge of a wider war that would engulf the whole Middle East with dramatic impacts around the globe.” The secretary-general cautioned that the fallout was already being felt far beyond the region, pointing in particular to threats to maritime security. “Look no further than the impact of the denial of freedom of navigation. When the Strait of Hormuz is strangled, the world’s poorest and most vulnerable cannot breathe,” he said, linking disruptions to rising food and energy costs affecting countries from the Philippines to Sri Lanka and Mozambique. He stressed that while many aspects of the conflict remained uncertain, the consequences of escalation were not. “If the drums of war keep beating, escalation will only make all of this worse. The spiral of death and destruction must stop.” Guterres said diplomatic efforts were underway and deserved “the space and support to succeed — anchored firmly in international law, including the UN Charter”. “Disputes must be settled peacefully. The sovereignty and territorial integrity of all member states must be respected. Civilians and civilian infrastructure, including nuclear installations, must be respected and protected. And freedom of navigation must be upheld,” he added. Published in Dawn, April 3rd, 2026
DawnApril 3, 2026 at 02:56 AM UTCUS blows up key Iranian bridge, steel plants
• Trump says more will follow after earlier threatening to bomb Iran back to ‘Stone Ages’, claims war nearly over • Tehran vows ‘crushing’ attacks on US after Trump threats • Iran launches missiles towards Israel; fire near Mashhad airport after projectile hits fuel tank • Dozens of countries discuss coalition to secure passage through Hormuz WASHINGTON / TEHRAN / BAGHDAD / PARIS: The US and Israel on Thursday stepped up attacks on Iran, targeting a century-old medical research centre in Tehran, a bridge near the capital and steel plants after President Donald Trump threatened to bomb Iran back to “the Stone Ages”. Hours later, Trump said the tallest bridge in Iran had been destroyed. He posted footage on social media of smoke rising from the B1 bridge in Karaj, around 35 kilometers southwest of Tehran and warned that there would be further destruction unless Iran comes to the table to end the five-week war. “The biggest bridge in Iran comes tumbling down, never to be used again - Much more to follow! It is time for Iran to make a deal before it is too late, and there is nothing left of what still could become a great country!” Trump said. Iranian state television had earlier reported two US-Israeli strikes on the bridge. “A few minutes ago, the American-Zionist enemy once again targeted the B1 bridge in Karaj,” state TV said, adding that an initial strike had caused two civilian casualties. It said the later attack took place as emergency teams were deployed to the site to help victims of the first strike. The B1 bridge, which was still under construction, is considered the Middle East’s tallest according to Iranian media, with a 447-foot column. Earlier in the day, Iran threatened “crushing” attacks on the United States and Israel, firing missiles at Tel Aviv. In his White House address, Trump said the US was “very close” to achieving its objectives but warned its attacks would intensify if Iran did not reach a negotiated settlement. “Over the next two to three weeks, we are going to bring them back to the Stone Ages, where they belong,” he said. With his approval rating hitting new lows and Americans feeling a pinch from soaring oil prices, Trump offered a retroactive explanation on why he joined Israel in the attack launched on Feb 28. “I’m pleased to say that these core strategic objectives are nearing completion,” Trump said in a 19-minute speech. There was little in his address about actual diplomacy. Iran’s response was immediate, with Israeli air defences pressed into action. Four people were reportedly lightly injured in the Tel Aviv area. AFP journalists in Jerusalem hear fresh blasts on Thursday evening. At least four blasts were heard as sirens rang out in the city, and the military warned residents to take cover after it “identified missiles launched from Iran toward the territory of the State of Israel”. In Tehran, AFP journalists reported a series of loud explosions, sending reverberations across the city. The targets were unclear. The country’s two largest steel plants have meanwhile been forced offline by several waves of US and Israeli attacks, the companies said. The country’s health ministry said the Pasteur Institute of Iran, a century-old medical centre in Tehran, had been extensively damaged in a strike. Despite the bombardments, families gathered at Tehran’s Melat park, with men smoking water pipes and children running around playgrounds, to mark the 13th day after Nowruz, the Persian New Year, when people traditionally picnic outdoors, AFP journalists said. Iran’s operational headquarters must monitor “enemy movements with utmost pessimism and accuracy” and be ready to counter any method of attack, the country’s army commander-in-chief Amir Hatami was quoted as saying by state media on Thursday. “No enemy troops should survive if adversaries attempt a ground operation,” state media quoted Hatami as saying. Meanwhile, a fire erupted near Iran’s Mashhad airport in the northeast of the country after a projectile hit a fuel tank in the area, AFP reported citing local media. Citing the governor’s office of the northeastern Khorasan Razavi province, the Mehr news agency says no casualties have been reported, and firefighting operations are underway. ‘Immediate’ reopening A UK-led meeting of some 40 countries on the strait of Hormuz crisis wrapped up with a demand for the “immediate and unconditional” reopening of the vital shipping route, but no immediate breakthrough. “Iran is trying to hold the global economy hostage in the Strait of Hormuz,” British foreign minister Yvette Cooper said in a statement after international talks. “They must not prevail. To that effect, partners today called for the immediate and unconditional reopening of the Strait and respect for the fundamental principles of freedom of navigation and the law of the sea,” Cooper added. A spokesperson for the French foreign ministry said securing the Strait of Hormuz could “only take place once the intense phase of the bombing is over”. French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking on a visit to South Korea, said a military operation to liberate the Strait of Hormuz was “unrealistic”, while lamenting Trump’s differing daily statements on the Iran war and Nato. The secretary general of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) called for the UN Security Council to authorise the use of force to protect the Strait of Hormuz from Iranian attacks. “We call upon the Security Council to assume its full responsibility and take all necessary measures to protect maritime routes and ensure the safe continuation of international navigation,” said Jassem al-Budaiwi. ‘Root cause’ China, a major importer of oil through the shipping lane, blamed the United States and Israel for being the “root cause” of the blockage. China’s foreign minister Wang Yi said US and Israeli attacks on Iran were a violation of international law, Chinese state media reported, as he held calls with his EU, German and Saudi counterparts. Meanwhile, Argentina expelled Iran’s diplomatic envoy, Mohsen Soltani Tehrani, following “false, offensive and baseless accusations” by Tehran, the foreign ministry said. A drone attack targeted the US diplomatic and logistics centre in Baghdad’s international airport complex, causing a fire but no injuries, two Iraqi security sources told AFP. Russian President Vladimir Putin called for intensifying political and diplomatic efforts to end the war during a phone call with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The call comes after Ukraine signed an air-defence deal with Saudi Arabia as the Gulf nation grapples with Iranian drone attacks. Published in Dawn, April 3rd, 2026
DawnApril 3, 2026 at 02:25 AM UTCWar Diary Day 34: Trump’s speech deepens escalation, pushing war into prolonged phase
The 34th day of the US-Israel war against Iran unfolded in the immediate aftermath of US President Donald Trump’s speech, which, rather than opening any pathway to de-escalation, appeared to have hardened positions across the conflict spectrum. The remarks triggered swift Iranian retaliation, and reinforced a trajectory of sustained attrition with an increasingly central focus on economic pressure and maritime control. In his speech, Trump declared that US and Israeli objectives were nearing completion, while committing to another two to three weeks of intensified strikes and warning that Iran could be pushed “back to the Stone Age” if it failed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Trump’s formulation looked to be a combination of coercive diplomacy and continued military escalation, even as it left ambiguity over the precise end state being sought. The immediate Iranian response underscored the limited deterrent effect of the speech as Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched one of its largest single-night barrages in recent weeks within minutes of the address, including ballistic missiles targeting central Israel, particularly the Tel Aviv metropolitan area, alongside drone and missile strikes on Gulf targets. The Iranian response underscored both its capability and intent to escalate in parallel domains. Emergency personnel work at the site of damage after a barrage of Iranian missiles was launched at Israel, amid the US-Israel conflict with Iran, in Petah Tikva, Israel on April 2. — Reuters Over the past 24 hours, kinetic operations have continued at a high tempo. US and Israeli forces conducted multiple strikes across Iran, including more than 20 reported hits in the greater Tehran area as well as additional operations in Isfahan and Mashhad, and targeted maritime infrastructure such as facilities on Qeshm Island. Strikes on the B1 bridge in Karaj and the century-old Pasteur Institute, which is also being described as an icon of Iran’s healthcare system, have, meanwhile, emerged as symbolically significant hits on civilian infrastructure. The Pasteur Institute attack was the latest in the series of attacks undertaken by the Israeli/US alliance on the Iranian pharmaceutical industry and healthcare facilities. Iran, meanwhile, expanded the scope of its retaliatory campaign carrying out strikes against US and Israeli assets across the Gulf, including the destruction of early-warning radar systems in the United Arab Emirates, a hit on a tanker linked to Israel that was left burning, and attacks on US command facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait, alongside a drone swarm directed at USS Abraham Lincoln, which was subsequently reported to have re-positioned further into the Indian Ocean. Smoke rises following a reported strike, as burning debris litters the surrounding area, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Baharestan, Isfahan province, Iran in this screengrab taken from a social media video released on April 1. — Reuters Proxy fronts also showed signs of qualitative escalation, where Hezbollah carried out its first use of longer-range Scud-type missiles from Lebanon targeting Israeli military installations, while the Houthis signalled their readiness to expand the maritime dimension of the conflict by potentially moving to close the Bab el-Mandab Strait if Gulf states increased their involvement. Despite the intensity of operations, there were isolated indications of tactical adjustments, including the absence of US bomber sorties during a specific overnight window, which some Iranian sources interpreted as a sign of temporary restraint, though this remained unconfirmed by official channels and did not translate into any broader reduction in operational tempo. On the political front, Iran’s leadership maintained a firm rejection of negotiations under current conditions, with senior figures reiterating demands for sanctions relief and compensation for war damages as preconditions for any talks, while official messaging framed the conflict as an existential defence and emphasised resilience in the face of attacks on civilian and scientific infrastructure. Men ride a scooter past the rubble of a building destroyed by an Israeli strike, amid escalating hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, in Tyre, Lebanon on April 2. — Reuters International reactions to Trump’s speech revealed growing divergence within the Western and allied camp. European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and former German chancellor Olaf Scholz, publicly cautioned against the efficacy of military solutions and called for negotiated off-ramps. Simultaneously, a UK-led diplomatic initiative has begun to take shape involving European and other partners, notably excluding the United States, in an effort to explore alternative pathways to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, China attributed responsibility for the worsening crisis and disruption in the Strait of Hormuz to US and Israeli actions, urging an immediate ceasefire. Gulf states on their part were quietly reassessing their strategic posture amid concerns that the conflict, which is increasingly being seen as externally driven, was imposing disproportionate risks on their own economic and security environments. The economic fallout of the war intensified further after Trump’s speech as oil prices rose sharply and maritime insurance costs escalated in view of the Strait of Hormuz remaining effectively contested, reinforcing the view that economic disruption, rather than purely military outcomes, is likely to be the decisive factor shaping the eventual course of the conflict. A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah in the United Arab Emirates, March 11. — Reuters/File Overall, the happenings of Day 34 confirmed that Trump’s speech entrenched a self-reinforcing escalation dynamic in which neither side sees immediate incentive to compromise. US and Israeli forces continued to apply sustained military pressure, while Iran retained sufficient asymmetric capability to impose costs and maintain strategic leverage, particularly through control over critical energy chokepoints. With no credible diplomatic breakthrough in sight and parallel diplomatic efforts struggling to gain traction, the conflict is set to continue along its current path of high-intensity attrition. The immediate outlook is being shaped by the interplay between Iranian retaliation, allied military operations, and the mounting economic consequences that are increasingly defining the stakes of the war. Header image: A camera screen shows US President Donald Trump speaking during a televised address on the conflict in the Middle East from the Cross Hall of the White House in Washington, DC on April 1. — AFP
DawnApril 2, 2026 at 07:41 PM UTCMiddle East crisis live: Trump set to give prime-time address amid widening economic fallout from Iran war
President is expected to offer a timeline for end of the war, and speak about his threat to withdraw the US from Nato as he faces falling poll numbers and global energy crisis Trump says he is ‘absolutely’ considering withdrawing US from Nato Israel hits Iran with waves of attacks and says it killed top Hezbollah commander Welcome to our continuing coverage of the crisis in the Middle East, as Donald Trump prepares to address America for the first time since the US-Israel war on Iran was launched. The president will deliver the prime-time speech at 9pm ET from the White House. Iran has rejected Donald Trump’s claim that its leadership asked for a ceasefire, calling the US president’s statement “false” and “baseless”. Trump made the claim in a post on Truth Social, which said: “Iran’s New Regime President, much less Radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors, has just asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE! We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!” Trump also said he is “absolutely” considering withdrawing the US from Nato, warning that the matter was “beyond reconsideration” after the refusal of US allies to join the US-Israeli war against Iran. The president’s threats, his most determined to date, have left the alliance facing its worst crisis in its 77-year history, a former US ambassador has said. Here’s our story. Meanwhile, in an open letter to the American people, Iran’s president Masoud Pezeshkian said relations between Washington and Tehran were “misunderstood” and that Iran was not an aggressor. The Iranian “harbor no enmity toward other nations, including the people of America, Europe, or neighbouring countries,” he said, adding that portrayals of Iran as a security threat were inaccurate, and Tehran was acting in self-defence – not aggression. In Tehran, Kamal Kharazi, a top foreign policy official and former Iranian foreign minister, has been severely injured in an airstrike on his home in the Iranian capital. His wife was reportedly killed in the attack. Kharazi, considered a moderate politician and veteran policy expert, also served as an adviser to the assassinated former supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Reports suggest his targeting is being viewed as an attempt to derail diplomacy. Continue reading...
The Guardian WorldApril 1, 2026 at 11:58 PM UTCWar Diary Day 33: Trump keeps everyone guessing ahead of address to nation
As the 33rd day of the US-Israel war against Iran drew to a close, all eyes were on US President Donald Trump’s speech later tonight, which diplomats and military analysts alike foresee as a defining moment that could set the next trajectory of the conflict, even as developments on the ground pointed less to de-escalation and more to an impending shift toward a higher risk escalation likely centred on control of critical maritime arteries. Speculation around the speech dominated the information space, with Trump’s public messaging about a possible “two-to-three-week” exit widely interpreted as tactical ambiguity rather than a genuine off-ramp; particularly in light of parallel military movements that suggested preparation for escalation, including the deployment of 18 A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft which are designed for close air support of ground troops, heightened alert status for elements of a Marine Expeditionary Unit, and sustained heavy lift air traffic involving C-17 and C-5 transports, alongside the forward positioning of carrier strike groups led by the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea. A photo of US Navy FA-18 fighter jets being prepared for combat operations in Iran, published by US Central Command on April 1. — Photo via X/@CENTCOM Leaked deliberations from the Israeli leadership further indicated a continued push for expanded strikes on Iranian national infrastructure, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu advocating attacks on power stations to induce systemic collapse. Israeli assessments acknowledged that Iran, despite the sustained allied military pressure, still retains a significant residual missile capability, estimated at several hundred ballistic missiles and a substantial portion of its launcher network. The two broad scenarios that have emerged for the likely direction of the war are either a transition to a limited ground campaign aimed at forcibly reopening the Strait of Hormuz, potentially involving temporary occupation of key Iranian islands with logistical support from Arab countries, or a continuation of the current narrative of imminent victory masking ongoing preparations for deeper kinetic engagement. Tehran, however, showed no sign of recalibrating its stance, with senior officials reiterating categorical rejection of negotiations under continued attack, declaring the Strait of Hormuz a red line, and warning that any attempt to reopen it by force would transform the Gulf into an active battlefield. This comes at a time when coordination across the Axis of Resistance has reached an unprecedented level, with Iran, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iraqi groups operating in a synchronised manner. Signals from Western allies of the US have reinforced expectations of a prolonged conflict. The coordinated messaging from European and allied governments aimed at effectively preparing their domestic audiences for sustained economic disruption, while distancing themselves from direct involvement in the conflict and warning of extended energy shocks. Oil prices have already surged past $100 per barrel, and European gas markets have recorded sharp increases, amid reported refusals by several European states to provide overflight or basing support for US operations — actions being described as a notable strain within the Western alliance. On the battlefield, the past 24 hours saw continued high intensity exchanges, with Iran launching successive waves of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones, striking targets in Israel including the Tel Aviv area where structural damage and civilian injuries were reported, while expanding its target set to include Gulf assets, notably a strike on telecommunications infrastructure in Bahrain hosting major international data facilities and a drone attack on fuel storage installations at Kuwait International Airport. Smoke rises from an area of Kuwait’s international airport after a reported drone strike on April 1. — AFP Iranian forces also claimed multiple shoot-downs of US MQ-9 Reaper drones over the Gulf of Oman, while dispersing remaining naval assets and shifting oil production to more hardened and decentralised facilities. The Iranian moves suggested that they were taking up an adaptive posture for preserving core capabilities under sustained attack. US and Israeli operations, meanwhile, continued at a steady tempo, with precision strikes reported on residential buildings, Bandar Abbas port, industrial complexes in Isfahan, including steel and pharmaceutical facilities, missile production nodes, and command infrastructure, alongside targeted assassinations of senior Hezbollah and IRGC figures in strikes in and around Beirut. Cumulative US air operations were, meanwhile, assessed to have crossed 12,000 sorties since the start of the campaign. The Lebanese front remained the most active secondary theatre, with Hezbollah forces regaining ground in northern Khiam and engaging Israeli troops in intense street fighting across multiple axes, including Qantara. Hezbollah claimed armoured losses and casualties on the Israeli side, even as Israeli authorities signalled intent to extend operations south of the Litani River in a manner that would effectively prevent the return of large numbers of displaced Lebanese civilians. In Iraq, militias aligned with Iran issued explicit warnings against the use of territory by any of the regional countries as a launch platform for any US ground operations against Tehran as they signalled their readiness to expand the conflict horizontally. In Yemen, the Houthis confirmed joint operations with Iran and Hezbollah, reinforcing the sense of a unified command structure across multiple fronts. A photograph shows damaged buildings following an overnight Israeli airstrike in the Al Hadath neighbourhood of Beirut’s southern suburbs, in Lebanon on April 1. — AFP Taken together, developments on Day 33 pointed to a conflict transitioning from a primarily air and missile campaign into a broader contest over maritime chokepoints and potential ground incursion. The US and allied force posture looked increasingly aligned toward seizing energy routes, while Iran prepared for corresponding escalation across the Gulf and beyond. With diplomatic channels still active but producing no tangible convergence, and with both sides maintaining maximalist positions, the immediate post-speech environment was widely expected to determine whether the conflict remains within the current pattern of calibrated pressure or moves decisively into a more overt and expansive phase of multi-domain warfare. Header image: US President Donald Trump speaks during the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) annual fundraising dinner in Washington, DC, the US on March 25. — Reuters
DawnApril 1, 2026 at 05:35 PM UTCBuy jet fuel from US or get your own, Trump rails against allies
• Hegseth claims next few days to be ‘decisive’, says conflict to intensify if deal not made • Pezeshkian says Iran wants to end war but not without guarantees; Araghchi confirms messages exchanged with US, denies talks • Iranian missiles injure nine in Tel Aviv; US companies in region warned • Israel claims hitting 20 weapon manufacturing sites; Iran says pharma facilities, desalination plant struck WASHINGTON: As US President Donald Trump singled out his allies who did not help him in the US-Israeli war against Iran, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Tehran had the “necessary will” to end the ongoing war, but not without guarantees that the conflict would not be repeated. In a statement posted on Truth Social, President Trump railed against the European countries, particularly the UK and France, for being unhelpful in the month-long war that has roiled global markets and led to the disruption of fuel supply via the Strait of Hormuz. “All of those countries that can’t get jet fuel because of the Strait of Hormuz, like the United Kingdom, which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran, I have a suggestion for you: Number 1, buy from the U.S., we have plenty, and Number 2, build up some delayed courage, go to the Strait, and just TAKE IT,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!” He also criticised France for not letting planes carrying military supplies to Israel fly over French territory. ‘Next few days will be decisive’ Amid reports of negotiations, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the next few days in the war against Iran would be decisive and warned Tehran that the conflict would intensify if it did not make a deal, Reuters reported. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards hit back with a new threat, saying that they will target US companies in the region in retaliation for attacks on Iran from Wednesday, listing 18 groups including Microsoft, Google, Apple, Intel, IBM, Tesla and Boeing. Iran earlier set ablaze a fully loaded oil tanker off Dubai, its latest attack on merchant vessels in the Gulf or in the Strait of Hormuz since the United States and Israel attacked on Feb 28. Mr Hegseth, who said he visited US troops in the Middle East on Saturday, said Donald Trump was willing to make a deal, and talks were ongoing and gaining strength, but that the US was prepared to continue the war if Iran did not comply. “We have more and more options, and they have less … in only one month we set the terms, the upcoming days will be decisive,” Hegseth said in Washington. “Iran knows that, and there’s almost nothing they can militarily do about it.” Iran, however, appeared receptive to the idea of ending the war. According to AFP, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said his country had the “necessary will” to end the ongoing war with Israel and the United States, but was seeking guarantees that the conflict would not be repeated. “We possess the necessary will to end this conflict, provided that essential conditions are met — especially the guarantees required to prevent repetition of the aggression,” Mr Pezeshkian said in a phone conversation with the president of the European Council, according to a statement from his office. Iran’s foreign minister also confirmed that messages were exchanged between the two foes. Abbas Araghchi told Qatar’s Al Jazeera that messages had been exchanged with the US either directly or through friends in the region. That did not mean Iran was in negotiations with Washington, he said. “I receive messages from Wittkov directly, as before, and this does not mean that we are in negotiations,” AJ quoted him as saying. “There is no truth to the claim of negotiations with any party in Iran. All messages are conveyed through the foreign ministry or received by it, and there are communications between security agencies.” The Israeli military said on Tuesday it completed a wave of strikes targeting 20 weapons manufacturing sites and a research and development site in Iran. Iranian media said that airstrikes had put a desalination plant on Iran’s Qeshm island in the strategic Strait of Hormuz out of service, though the report did not specify when the attack took place, AFP reported. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also accused Israel of “unashamedly bombing” pharmaceutical companies in the country. “Their intentions are clear,” he said in a post on X. “What they’ve gotten wrong is that they’re not dealing with defenceless Palestinian civilians. Our powerful armed forces will severely punish aggressors.” Areas near the World Health Organization’s Tehran office have been hit by strikes over the past two nights, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a social media post. Meanwhile, Iran also continued to attack targets across Israel and the Gulf. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy claimed it struck a “covert location” in the UAE, reportedly housing 200 US personnel and officers, according to the Tasnim news agency. Multiple explosions also rattled the Saudi capital Riyadh, according to an AFP journalist, the latest apparent barrage targeting the city as Iran carries out attacks across the Gulf region. Nine people were also wounded in an Iranian attack on Tel Aviv, Al Jazeera reported. General killed Separately, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard confirmed the killing of a brigadier general, who was sanctioned by the US in 2025 over an international network shipping oil to China and using profits to fund Tehran-backed regional proxies, in a US-Israeli airstrike, AFP reported. Revolutionary Guard commander-in-chief Ahmad Vahidi issued a message of condolences for Jamshid Eshaghi, the head of the budget and financial affairs at Iran’s armed forces general staff. Vahidi, whose predecessor was killed at the start of the conflict, said Eshaghi had been killed along with several members of his family in a US-Israeli strike, without giving a date or further details. Published in Dawn, April 1st, 2026
DawnApril 1, 2026 at 02:25 AM UTCWar Diary Day 32: Still no clear winners as diplomacy yet to take off
On the 32nd day of the US-Israel war against Iran, the evolving dynamics of the conflict reinforced the sense that it has become a deep war of attrition, where sustained allied military pressure on Iranian infrastructure has so far failed to deliver it a clear strategic advantage. Meanwhile, Tehran’s ability to impose asymmetric costs, particularly through maritime disruption and coordinated proxy action, has continued to shape the broader trajectory, leaving diplomatic efforts active but stalled amid maximalist positions on both sides. Over the past 24 hours, US and Israeli forces intensified precision and standoff strikes, with bunker buster munitions targeting Iran’s Isfahan region, including the Badr military airbase and an adjacent ammunition depot, which triggered large secondary explosions. Power outages were also reported in parts of Tehran, as Washington projected confidence that a significant portion of Iran’s air defence and missile infrastructure has been degraded. Members of the Iranian Red Crescent Society work at the site of a reported strike, amid the US-Israeli war on Iran, in Tehran in this screengrab taken from a handout video released on March 31. — Reuters Iran, for its part, maintained a calibrated but persistent response pattern, combining direct missile and drone activity with maritime and proxy actions. Most notably, a strike on a Kuwaiti-flagged oil tanker near Dubai caused a major fire and oil spill. This incident underscored Tehran’s willingness to widen the economic dimension of the conflict by targeting energy flows beyond the immediate battlefield. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, meanwhile, claimed the downing of at least one US MQ-9, and according to some reports, two Reaper drones over Isfahan and the execution of strikes on US facilities in the Gulf as part of what it described as continued waves of its retaliatory campaign. The maritime domain remained central to the evolving dynamics, with traffic through the Strait of Hormuz still running at more than 90 per cent below normal levels, effectively paralysing one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints. Iran, in the meantime, has moved to formalise a new regulatory regime involving tolls and selective access restrictions for vessels linked to the US and its allies, signalling its intent to convert temporary disruption into a more enduring strategic lever. On the northern front, Israeli military operations in southern Lebanon expanded both in scope and intensity, with ground incursions and airstrikes pushing toward the Litani River as part of its efforts to establish a buffer zone. Hezbollah, meanwhile, on its part sustained a high operational tempo, claiming dozens of attacks in the past 24 hours, including rocket and drone strikes into northern Israel and anti-tank ambushes against advancing forces. The fighting along the Israel-Lebanon border has projected Hezbollah as the most active and capable proxy front in the conflict. People look at a damaged building following an Israeli strike, amid escalating hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, in Beirut, Lebanon on March 31. — Reuters Elsewhere, the conflict continued to spill across multiple theatres, with Iranian-backed groups in Iraq maintaining pressure on US positions through intermittent drone and rocket activity, and Israeli strikes from Syria against Hezbollah triggering retaliatory Iranian drone attacks on Syrian military sites. In Bahrain, renewed protests following the death of an activist in custody were met with a heavy security crackdown involving Jordanian security personnel. The protests point to the growing domestic vulnerabilities among Gulf states aligned with Washington. Diplomatic signalling has remained active but showed little sign of convergence, with the US administration maintaining a dual posture of openness to talks, while simultaneously threatening expanded strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure if the Hormuz situation is not resolved. US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine hold a briefing amid the US-Israeli war on Iran, at the Pentagon in Washington, DC, the US on March 31. — Reuters Tehran, on the other hand, has maintained its rejection of the reported US 15-point framework as excessive and unacceptable, and has continued to insist on terms that prioritise sovereignty, security guarantees and recognition of its regional position. The meeting between Pakistan and China’s foreign ministers in Beijing produced a joint five-point initiative for restoring peace and stability in the Gulf and the Middle East. The outcome of the meeting suggests that a coordinated diplomatic push will be made by Islamabad and Beijing to open space for US-Iran dialogue. The communique of the meeting has not only bolstered Pakistan’s mediation role, but also solidified China’s backing of the process, although it stopped short of any binding security guarantee from Beijing. Regional actors, meanwhile, have continued to hedge their positions, with Gulf allies privately urging sustained US pressure on Iran while remaining wary of uncontrolled escalation. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar meets China’s FM Wang Yi in Beijing, China on March 31. Photo via X/@CGTNOfficial Iran has sought to ease tensions with key neighbours, including through an outreach framed in conciliatory terms toward Saudi Arabia, reflecting an attempt to manage the regional environment even as the conflict is intensifying. The economic impact of the war has become increasingly pronounced, with elevated oil prices, disruptions to Gulf industrial production, and mounting concerns about global supply chains, as energy markets reacted not only to physical disruptions but also to the persistent uncertainty surrounding the Strait of Hormuz. Humanitarian concerns also continued to grow with reports of strikes affecting residential areas, medical facilities and critical civilian infrastructure inside Iran. Taken together, developments on Day 32 pointed to a war that continues to grind forward without decisive breakthroughs, with both sides retaining the capacity and intent to sustain operations. Economic pressure and maritime disruption have become established principal arenas where strategic leverage is being contested. Absence of meaningful diplomatic progress is keeping the risk of further escalation elevated in the near term. Header image: An explosion takes place in a building following an Israeli strike, amid escalating hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, in Beirut, Lebanon on March 31. — Reuters
DawnMarch 31, 2026 at 03:59 PM UTC