Category: News

Attention now turns to regulatory authorities, with both Washington and London expected to examine the merger’s impact on competition.

Warner Bros Discovery shareholders have backed the company’s proposed $110bn merger with Paramount Skydance, but cast an advisory vote against executive compensation plans tied to the deal.

Per a preliminary vote count on Thursday, the overwhelming majority of Warner Bros Discovery shareholders voted in support of selling the entire business to Paramount for $31 a share, the company said. Including debt, the deal is valued at nearly $111bn.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Under the pay packages proposed to executives, CEO David Zaslav could receive up to $887m if the sale is completed.

Skydance-owned Paramount wants to buy all of Warner. That means HBO Max, valuable titles like Harry Potter and even CNN could soon find themselves under the same roof with CBS, Top Gun and the Paramount+ streaming service. A greenlight from company shareholders increases the likelihood of that becoming a reality.

Attention now turns to regulatory authorities, with both Washington and London expected to examine the merger’s impact on competition.

The United States Department of Justice sent subpoenas in late March seeking information on how the merger would affect studio output, content rights, streaming competition and movie theatres.

Paramount triumphed over Netflix in a months-long bidding war, sealing the Warner Bros deal and cementing chief executive David Ellison as a powerful force in the rapidly contracting entertainment landscape.

The merger has faced considerable opposition from actors, filmmakers and theatre groups that have raised concerns about the loss of a major studio and its impact on the creative community, theatre owners and moviegoers.

“Shareholder approval marks another important milestone towards completing our acquisition of Warner Bros Discovery,” a Paramount spokesperson said.

The deal is expected to close in the third quarter this year.

The merger will reduce the number of major US film studios to four and lead to fewer jobs, creative opportunities and less choice for consumers, over 4,000 film industry professionals and consumers said in an open letter, which called on California Attorney General Rob Bonta to consider taking legal action to block it.

Ellison promised theatre owners that Paramount and Warner Bros would release at least 30 films a year if regulators clear the deal.

However, analysts expect Hollywood’s overall film output to contract, as theatre attendance declines and the major studios focus on fewer, big-budget films.

President Donald Trump has said he ordered the United States Navy to “shoot and kill” any Iranian boat laying mines in the Strait of Hormuz, a move that could jeopardise the fragile ceasefire between the two countries.

The US president also said on Thursday that the military will heighten its efforts to remove explosives from the strategic waterway.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“I have ordered the United States Navy to shoot and kill any boat, small boats though they may be (Their naval ships are ALL, 159 of them, at the bottom of the sea!), that is putting mines in the waters of the Strait of Hormuz. There is to be no hesitation,” Trump wrote in a social media post.

“Additionally, our mine ‘sweepers’ are clearing the Strait right now. I am hereby ordering that activity to continue, but at a tripled-up level!”

Iranian officials have repeatedly promised that their country would defend itself and respond to any US attack.

Hormuz – which had been open without interruption before the war – has emerged as a major point of contention in this war.

Iran closed down the strait in response to the US-Israeli military campaign, and it is now suggesting that it has rights to the passage that links the Gulf to the Indian Ocean – parts of which go through Iranian territorial waters.

The closure of Hormuz has spiked oil prices, putting political pressure on Trump at home in the US, where the price of one gallon (3.8 litres) of petrol has surpassed $4, up from $3 before the conflict.

Dueling blockades

About 20 percent of the world’s oil and natural gas flowed through Hormuz before the war.

After a two-week ceasefire came into effect last month, Trump announced a naval siege on Iranian ports and kept it in place even after Tehran announced reopening Hormuz in response to the inclusion of Lebanon in the truce.

Iran has set lifting the blockade as a precondition for resuming talks with the US.

Trump extended the ceasefire that was set to expire on Wednesday, but Washington has kept its blockade on Iran-linked ships.

The Pentagon said on Thursday that the US military conducted a “maritime interdiction and right-of-visit” to a tanker carrying Iranian oil in the Indian Ocean.

Earlier this week, the US military also said it seized an Iranian vessel and ordered dozens of others to turn around.

Meanwhile, Iran has also captured foreign commercial vessels around the Hormuz Strait, which it said were in violation of naval regulations.

The duelling blockades risk re-igniting the war. The US has not set a deadline for the extended truce.

The White House said on Wednesday that Trump is “satisfied” with the siege on Iran.

Trump says Hormuz ‘sealed up tight’

Although Iran has all but halted vessel traffic in the waterway, Trump said on Thursday that the US has “total control over the Strait of Hormuz”, adding that the passage is “sealed up tight”.

The US president also reiterated his claim that the Iranian leadership is divided.

“Iran is having a very hard time figuring out who their leader is! They just don’t know!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

“The infighting is between the ‘Hardliners’, who have been losing BADLY on the battlefield, and the ‘Moderates’, who are not very moderate at all (but gaining respect!), is CRAZY!”

Earlier in the day, Trump shared a post by conservative commentator Marc Thiessen, calling for the assassination of Iranian officials who oppose diplomacy with the US.

“If there are two factions in Iran, one that wants a deal and one that doesn’t, let’s kill the ones who don’t want a deal,” it said.

Despite Trump’s repeated claims, there has been no evidence of a rift within the leadership in Iran.

Although US and Israeli strikes killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and several top officials, there have been no major defections within the ruling system.

Last month, Khamenei was replaced by his son Mojtaba, who had been wounded in US attacks, according to the Pentagon.

Mojtaba Khamenei is yet to make a public appearance since he succeeded his slain father, raising speculation about his health.

But Iranian officials, including the lead negotiators – Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf – have voiced a unified position in rejecting the US blockade.

Iranian leadership also agreed to the ceasefire and enforced it earlier this month.

On Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry praised the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the ideologically driven military branch spearheading the war effort.

“We salute the noble defenders and guardians of the homeland, and honour the memory of the crimson-shrouded martyrs of the IRGC,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said in a post on X, marking the anniversary of the establishment of the Revolutionary Guard.

The United States and Israel’s war on Iran has pushed up the price of nearly everything.

In the early days of the war, the global supply of oil, gas and fertilisers was the main focus of this crisis.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

In recent days, however, pharmacists have also noted a spike in the price of medicines and contraceptives like condoms, as a result of the war. In the United Kindom, for example, pharmacies are charging 20 to 30 percent more for over-the-counter medicines, and the common painkiller paracetamol has more than quadrupled in price. In India, chemists are reporting price rises of common painkillers of as much as 96 percent.

We break down the reason behind the rise in prices and how badly countries around the world will be affected:

Why has the price of medicines increased?

Since the early days of the war, Iran has blocked the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped in peacetime. Experts say this has also disrupted pharmaceutical supply chains, which are reliant on the oil supply.

“Pharmaceuticals are tied to both petrochemical feedstocks, a large part of which are sourced through the Persian Gulf,” Frederic Schneider, a nonresident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, told Al Jazeera.

“Furthermore, some logistics routes, including for pharmaceuticals, for example, between East Asia and Europe, have important sea and air transhipment stops in the Gulf, particularly in Dubai. These routes are especially fragile because many pharmaceuticals need special handling, including an unbroken cold chain. Both have been disrupted through the war,” he added.

Wouter Dewulf, a professor at the University of Antwerp in Belgium and an expert in pharma logistics, warned that while pharmaceutical supply chains are not in immediate danger, medicines are highly exposed to air logistics.

The US-Israel war on Iran has caused severe disruption for airlines, featuring widespread cancellations, airspace closures and a looming jet fuel crisis.

“35 percent of pharmaceuticals move by air, and about 90 percent of critical or life-saving pharmaceuticals and vaccines do so too. I estimate that 22 percent of global air cargo flows are exposed to Middle East disruptions,” he said.

“So the main global effect for now is delays, rerouting, and higher costs, rather than a worldwide physical shortage.

“There might be some modest price increases on pharmaceuticals, because of the increase in air cargo fares, mainly on the east-west corridors. For generic medicines, where the margins are much thinner, the relative increase in price might be higher,” he added.

Which pharma products have become expensive?

Pharmacies in the UK and India have noted an increase in the price of paracetamol, a drug commonly used to treat headaches and the flu.

“Paracetamol is rising by approximately 96 percent,” a former board member of the Visakha Chemists Association in India told the country’s Economic Times on April 17.

He said a spike in the price of raw materials used to make such drugs is to blame and added that paracetamol could rise further in price, by 30 to 40 percent.

In the UK, the price of paracetamol has also increased.

Olivier Picard, chair of the National Pharmacy Association (NPA) told The Guardian newspaper that the price he pays wholesalers for a pack of 100 500mg paracetamol tablets had jumped 41 pence (55 cents) to 1.99 pounds ($2.69) by the end of March, but has since eased back to 1.09 pounds ($1.47).

Which countries are most affected?

While the price of medicines has already begun increasing in some countries, Schneider told Al Jazeera the impact across the globe will depend on several factors, including whether other suppliers are available.

“The US has domestic hydrocarbon and petrochemical supply, and China can source most of its demand from elsewhere. India, however, is a major producer of pharmaceuticals and depends on supplies from the Gulf, which is a major chokepoint in the global pharmaceutical supply network,” he said.

Schneider said another crucial factor to consider is strategic stockpiling.

“The EU, for example, has a ‘solidarity mechanism’ – a recent stockpiling strategy that includes pharmaceuticals – and country-specific stockpiling requirements of two-10 months’ worth of medicines. While some Global North countries, like the NHS in the UK, are sounding the alarm bells and warn of shortages in the weeks ahead,” he noted.

“The problem is, as with most supply-chain problems, more acute for Global South countries, and sub-Saharan Africa in particular, that have fewer or no stockpiles and not enough financial heft to afford the price increases due to the supply crunch, as well as countries currently experiencing humanitarian crises, like Sudan, Yemen and Palestine,” he explained.

“The situation in the GCC remains apparently stable, with governments assuring that their supply is secure, but that may change if things turn for the worse again,” he added.

Dewulf said the countries most likely to suffer are the ones directly touched by the conflict and regional disruption.

“The real exposure is in Lebanon, Palestine, and Iran, rather than across the global market,” he said.

“I would add a second group: Fragile, aid-dependent countries that were already under severe pressure before this war,” he said.

A third, more conditional risk group is the import-dependent Gulf markets, he said, especially for cold-chain and cancer medicines. “Those flows were rerouted when major hubs such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Doha were hit [by air strikes].

“In the Middle East, the picture is still more manageable than in conflict zones: There are risks and delays, not yet a generalised collapse, especially since the airlift is gradually coming back. Pharmaceuticals always have priority as the yield to transport pharmaceuticals is higher,” he added.

FIFA’s decision to release the latest tranche of World Cup tickets, coinciding with the 50-day countdown mark for the tournament, has left fans more frustrated than excited in advance of the biggest sporting event in the world.

Football’s global governing body announced yet another “last-minute ticket phase” on Wednesday, with tickets for all 104 matches available on a first-come, first-served basis. Tickets are available in the three previously open categories, as well as the new “front category” pricing it added this month.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Fans have expressed outrage at the exorbitant prices for the matches — the most expensive ticket for the final costs nearly $11,000 — since the first phase of ticket sales in December, and the latest round has left them wondering if FIFA’s “dynamic ticketing” is to be blamed for the pricing and availability of seats at the most sought-after sports event.

Here’s what we know about the ticket prices for the World Cup cohosted by Canada, Mexico and the United States:

Why has FIFA reopened World Cup ticket sales?

Ostensibly, FIFA has plenty of unsold tickets in the bank despite its four previous sales windows, and it wants those tickets to sell out between now and the match days.

The global body has repeatedly claimed that the “cumulative attendance record of 3.5 million” set at the 1994 edition of the World Cup, which was hosted by the US, is on course to be surpassed during this year’s competition, but an unplanned fifth phase of ticket sales seems to suggest otherwise.

The unexpected release has raised questions about FIFA’s ticket sales strategy, as it previously said the April 1 phase was “the fourth and final” one that would remain open until the end of the competition.

However, in a comment to Al Jazeera, a FIFA spokesperson said: “This ticket drop is part of the ongoing last-minute sales phase, which runs until the end of the tournament and allows the general public to purchase tickets via FIFA.com/tickets on a first-come, first-served basis.”

“Along with this set of tickets, additional tickets will continue to be released to the public on an ongoing basis up until the final on Sunday, 19 July (subject to availability),” the spokesperson told Al Jazeera.

Why is FIFA struggling to sell tickets?

The most obvious answer would be that fans are not buying tickets, likely because they are significantly more expensive than promised.

Last month, Football Supporters Europe (FSE) said the North American bid had initially promised that tickets would be available from as little as $21. Instead, the cheapest tickets to go on sale — for $60 — have been limited. These tickets are allocated to a small portion of tournament venues and were introduced in a new pricing tier in December due to the immediate backlash over high pricing.

FIFA has brushed aside suggestions that a lack of interest and “pricing out” are to be blamed for low sales.

“Ticket sales for the FIFA World Cup remain strong with a high degree of interest for all matches,” its spokesperson said.

What’s the price range of World Cup tickets?

When the tickets first went on sale, in December, the prices ranged from $140 for category 3 to $8,680 for the final.

It then raised prices to as much as $10,990 when sales reopened on April 1, which is nearly seven times more expensive than the $1,550 maximum price initially laid out when North America bid for the tournament’s hosting rights.

Why are World Cup tickets so expensive this time?

Experts link the pricing to multiple factors, the biggest of which is the allocation of 78 of 104 matches to the US.

“One of the main reasons the World Cup is taking place in the US is because of the revenue-generating opportunities it potentially offers,” Simon Chadwick, professor of Afro-Eurasian sport at the Emlyon Business School in Shanghai, explained to Al Jazeera.

FIFA has tapped into what Chadwick calls a “mature” market, where “consumers have a strong predisposition towards spending on sport, a part of which are the premium price and corporate segments.”

The sporting industry expert believes FIFA has tapped into the “dynamic ticket pricing model”, which has been employed in the US for several years.

“Sports consumers [in the US] are used to the real-time adjustment of ticket prices, which can result in both rises and falls in the price of entrance,” he said.

“When used in conjunction with a premium pricing strategy, dynamic ticketing is very clearly an attempt to revenue harvest, as FIFA seeks to maximise the financial returns from this summer’s tournament,” Chadwick explained.

“The problem is that such an approach may price some fans out of the market, resulting in a crowd that has more affluent socio-demographic
features.”

What is dynamic ticketing at the World Cup?

Dynamic ticketing, also known as dynamic pricing, is a sales strategy in which ticket prices are not fixed; rather, they fluctuate in real-time based on demand, supply, and timing.

There has been much criticism of ticket prices, with a group of US lawmakers last month calling on FIFA to lower the cost, saying that the use of dynamic pricing has turned the World Cup into an exclusionary enterprise at the expense of fans, according to the news agency Reuters.

FIFA also says variable pricing is being used, where ticket prices may be adjusted based on a review of demand and availability, rather than dynamic pricing, which automatically modifies ticket prices, Reuters said.

The variable pricing method was used for the opening two phases of sales – Visa Presale Draw and Early Draw. It was not used for the third phase, Random Selection Draw and PMA ticket sales, but is now being utilised again for the last-minute sales phase.

Will FIFA be able to sell out all World Cup tickets?

Chadwick, who has written several books on the economy and politics of sport, believes selling out tickets may not be a problem for FIFA.

“In theory, there shouldn’t be any unsold tickets, as the logic of real-time dynamic pricing is that market conditions will necessitate a price reduction resulting in all tickets being sold,” he said.

“However, the reality might actually be somewhat different; markets don’t always operate in such a perfect, predictable way. Indeed, some fans may resent the initial premium-pricing strategy and completely withdraw from the market.

“In this regard, FIFA has rolled the dice on the effectiveness of dynamic ticket pricing, a gamble the organisation may not necessarily win.”

How do prices compare with previous World Cups?

Tickets for the final of the Qatar World Cup in 2022 cost approximately $1,604 for the most expensive seat, which was 46 percent up from $1,100 for the 2018 final in Russia. The nearly $11,000 ticket for this year’s final is an astronomical rise compared with both previous iterations.

The cheapest seats on general sale for international fans to watch Qatar open the 2022 World Cup were $302, up from $220 in Russia. In comparison, FIFA’s December ticket sales priced the June 12 USA opener against Paraguay at $1,120, $1,940, and $2,735.

Despite this being noted as the third-most-expensive match of the tournament, The Athletic reported on Tuesday that ticket sales are lagging for the match in Inglewood, California.

It said a document distributed to local organisers, dated April 10, stated that 40,934 tickets had been bought for the US-Paraguay game, and 50,661 were bought for the Iran-New Zealand contest on April 15.

What has FIFA said about ticket prices?

FIFA President Gianni Infantino has defended high ‌‌ticket prices for this year’s World Cup, saying ⁠⁠that ⁠⁠the event is the organisation’s only source of income every four years.

He also reiterated that FIFA is a nonprofit organisation that has 211 member nations who are supported through the revenue FIFA generates at tournaments like these.

What are fans saying about ticket prices?

Fans have taken to social media to vent their frustration at not only the pricing but also the technical issues with FIFA’s official ticketing platform. Prospective buyers said that after queueing for hours, they received an error message or were told tickets were sold out.

Others have accused FIFA of “ruining the sport” for “pricing out lots of genuine fans”.

One user, seemingly based in the US, compared the price of a single World Cup ticket to flying all the way to Europe and watching a Premier League game.

In a statement, prominent string theorists condemn the attacks on universities across the Middle Eastern countries.

A group of prominent Indian physicists specialising in string theory has expressed solidarity with academics in Iran, Palestine and Lebanon, condemning attacks on universities and civilian institutions during conflicts involving Israel and the United States.

In a statement, more than 50 string theorists — physicists working at the cutting edge of humankind’s understanding of nature — said they wished to “express our heartfelt solidarity” with scholars and civilians in the three countries amid what it described as “the recent war initiated by the United States and Israel”.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Ashoke Sen and Spenta Wadia, both award-winning, globally renowned theoretical physicists, were among the statement’s signatories, which spanned India’s top science and technology universities and research labs.

“Universities and educational institutes in Iran, as well as Lebanon and Palestine, have been attacked during the war,” the group said, listing sites including the Sharif University of Technology, Shahid Beheshti University, Iran University of Science and Technology, Isfahan University of Technology and the Lebanese University.

The Indian scientists added that the attacks formed “part of a broader assault on civilian sites that has led to the loss of thousands of lives and displaced millions of people”.

The group also referred to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, saying “almost all universities and schools there have been destroyed.

“We unequivocally condemn these crimes against humanity, which will cause long-term harm to the future of education and research in these regions apart from the tragic loss of lives,” they said.

The intervention came as ceasefires remain fragile across the region, with continued violence reported in Lebanon and Gaza, and heightened tensions involving Iran.

In southern Lebanon, Israeli attacks killed five people on Wednesday, including a journalist, despite an existing ceasefire. In Gaza, an Israeli air strike killed at least five Palestinians on Thursday, including three children.

Meanwhile, in Iran, senior officials have accused Washington of stalling peace negotiations through a naval blockade of Iranian ports.

India is a global leader in string theory, a mathematical framework in which the fundamental constituents of reality are one-dimensional extended objects called strings, rather than zero-dimensional point particles.

Iran on Wednesday captured two foreign container ships seeking to exit the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday and fired at a third one, marking the latest escalation of tensions between Washington and Tehran in the narrow shipping passage, and coming amid a US naval blockade of Iranian ports which commenced on April 13.

On Monday this week, the US military fired on and then captured the Iranian-flagged container ship Touska close to the Strait of Hormuz in the northern Arabian Sea, as it was en route to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas. In response, Iran accused the US of “piracy“.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Then, on Wednesday, the US military intercepted at least three Iranian-flagged tankers in ‌Asian waters, the Reuters news agency reported, and was said to be redirecting them away from their positions near India, Malaysia and Sri Lanka.

While a ceasefire between the US and Iran is in place, the attacks, capture and interceptions of ships by both sides points to an ongoing naval war still playing out in the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20 percent of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped during peacetime.

Has Iran’s capture of foreign-flagged ships raised the stakes in the strait even more?

Here’s what we know about Iran and the US have step by step ratcheted up tensions in the strait.

Who controls the Strait of Hormuz?

The Strait of Hormuz runs between Oman on one side and Iran on the other. It links the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea beyond. Oil and gas producers in the Gulf use the channel to ship exports to the rest of the world.

After the US and Israel launched their war on Iran on February 28, Tehran, whose territorial waters extend into the strait, closed the passage to all vessels. On March 4, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it was in full control of the strait, and ships would need to get clearance from them to pass through it.

At its narrowest point – just 39km (21 nautical miles) wide – the strait falls entirely within the territorial waters of Iran and Oman. Iran insists that legally, that gives it – and Oman – the right to regulate traffic through the strait, even though passage through the waterway has historically been free of restrictions.

Through its imposition of controls over who passes through Hormuz, Iran has effectively, for almost eight weeks now, determined which vessel can exit the strait into the Gulf of Oman.

Yet since the US imposed its naval blockade on April 13, its military has in effect controlled which ships can pass from the Arabica Sea into the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz.

That scenario has left maritime traffic tapped in a situation where rival militaries control the entry and exit points to the strait – and vessels need approval from both to be able to transit.

Iran’s first Hormuz move

Since the IRGC’s announcement on March 4 of its decision to restrict shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s formal position – until recently – was that the waterway was actually closed only to enemy countries, namely the US and Iran.

On March 26, Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi told Iran’s state TV: “The Strait of Hormuz, from our perspective, is not completely closed. It is closed only to enemies. There is no reason to allow the ships of our enemies and their allies to pass.”

Ships from other countries, Iran said, could pass through the strait if they negotiated that passage with the IRGC. Vessels from Malaysia, China, Egypt, South Korea, India and Pakistan passed through the strait through most of March and early April.

In March, the IRGC imposed a “toll booth” system to control vessel traffic through the strait.

Several “vessel transits through the strait have followed a route pre-approved under the IRGC ‘toll booth’ system that requires the ship operators to submit to a vetting scheme,” London-based shipping magazine Lloyd’s List reported on March 26.

According to Lloyd’s, at least two vessels transiting the strait paid the toll fee in yuan, China’s currency.

Amid blocking the Strait and reportedly collecting tolls, Iran has continued to send its own ships exporting oil.

Iran’s oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz account for about 80 percent of its total exports. According to Kpler, a trade intelligence firm, Iran exported 1.84 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil in March and has shipped 1.71 million bpd so far in April, compared with an average of 1.68 million bpd in 2025.

From March 15 to April 14, it exported 55.22 million barrels of oil. The price per barrel of Iranian oil – across its three major variants, known as Iranian light, Iranian heavy and Forozan blend – has not fallen below $90 per barrel over the past month. On many days, the price has surpassed $100 a barrel.

Even at the conservative estimate of $90 a barrel, Iran will have earned at least $4.97bn over the past month from oil exports.

By contrast, in early February before the war started, Iran was earning about $115m a day from its crude oil exports, or $3.45bn in a month.

In all, this means that Iran has earned 40 percent more from oil exports in the past month than it did each month before the war.

When the US raised the stakes with its naval blockade

The US naval blockade of Iranian ports began at 14:00 GMT on April 13. Since then, US Central Command has said US forces have directed 31 Iran-linked vessels to turn around or return to an Iranian port.

On Monday, the US military fired on and then captured the Iranian-flagged container ship Touska close to the Strait of Hormuz in the northern Arabian Sea, and, a day later, detained another oil tanker sanctioned for transporting Iranian crude oil as it sailed in the Bay of Bengal, which links India and Southeast Asia.

In a post on social media after detaining the Touska, the Pentagon wrote: “As we have made clear, we will pursue global maritime enforcement efforts to disrupt illicit networks and interdict sanctioned vessels providing material support to Iran – anywhere they operate.
International waters are not a refuge for sanctioned vessels.”

How Iran raised the stakes higher

Ever since the US naval blockade of Iranian ports began, Tehran, which was earlier allowing vessels from “friendly” nations to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, has tightened its grip on the strait further.

Justifying the decision not to allow any foreign ships to pass until the US ends its naval blockade on April 19, Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref said the “security of the Strait of Hormuz is not free”.

“One cannot restrict Iran’s oil exports while expecting free security for others,” he wrote in a post on X.

“The choice is clear: either a free oil market for all, or the risk of significant costs for everyone,” he added. “Stability in global fuel prices depends on a guaranteed and lasting end to the economic and military pressure against Iran and its allies.”

The day before, Iran had reportedly fired at two Indian-flagged merchant vessels in the strait. The IRGC said the two ships were attacked because they were “operating without authorisation”, according to state media reports.

Then, on April 22, Iran captured two container ships seeking to exit the Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz after firing on them and another vessel.

Iran’s IRGC said the vessels had violated maritime regulations and entered the strategic waterway without its coordination, according to Iranian state media.

According to Reuters, one of the ships captured was the Panama-flagged MSC Francesca, intercepted on its way to the Sri Lankan port of Hambantota. The vessel was hit by gunfire about eight nautical miles (equivalent to about 15km) west of Iran, but it was not damaged and its crew were safe, United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) and maritime security sources told Reuters.

The second ship captured was the Greek-owned and Liberia-flagged Epaminondas, which was reportedly fired upon about 20 nautical miles (37km) northwest of Oman, UKMTO and sources told Reuters. The operator of the ship said all crew members were safe. It had been headed towards Gujarat, India.

A  Liberia-flagged container ship, Euphoria, was also fired upon in the same area as MSC Francesca but was not damaged and resumed sailing, later reaching Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates, Reuters reported.

Where is all this heading now?

This is the first time Iran has attacked and captured ships since the war began. The ships are also not linked to the US and Israel.

Ali Vaez, the Iran project director for the International Crisis Group think tank, told Al Jazeera that Iran’s capture of ships are not isolated acts but are part of a deliberate “tit-for-tat between Iran and the United States”.

“What we are seeing in the Strait of Hormuz is not strategic mastery but mutual brinkmanship, with each side testing the limits of coercion,” he said.

“The danger is that neither believes it can afford to blink, and that makes every incident at sea a potential trigger for wider escalation,” he added.

In a statement on social media on Thursday, Iran’s parliamentary speaker and lead negotiator of the ceasefire talks, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said a full ceasefire could only work if the US naval blockade is lifted.

He stressed that reopening the Strait of Hormuz would be impossible with such a “flagrant breach of the ceasefire”.

Chris Featherstone, a political scientist at the University of York, told Al Jazeera that in capturing ships, however, Iran has raised tension around any negotiations with the US.

“Historically, the US has been perceived to be more of a legitimate actor, and yet in this war with Iran, the Trump administration has lost a large amount of this perceived legitimacy,” he said.

“This looks like a high-stakes game of poker, with both players staring each other down and waiting for the other to blink. Iran had the opportunity to blink, but in capturing the ships, they put the pressure back on Trump to blink or not,” he added.

The firing of US Navy Secretary John Phelan is the latest in a shakeup of the American military during the war on Iran, now in its eighth week.

The Pentagon said Phelan would leave office immediately.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“On behalf of the Secretary of War and Deputy Secretary of War, we are grateful to Secretary Phelan for his service to the Department and the United States Navy,” said chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell. “We wish him well in his future endeavours”.

His firing comes at a critical moment, with US naval forces enforcing a blockade on Iranian ports and ships, and maintaining a heavy presence around the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas passes during peacetime.

Although the Pentagon gave no official reason for the dismissal, reports indicate the decision was linked to internal disputes, including tensions with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Phelan’s removal is part of a broader pattern of dismissals and restructuring within the US military under President Donald Trump’s administration – including during the current war.

So, who is John Phelan, and what impact could his firing have on US military strategy?

Who is John Phelan?

As the US Navy’s top civilian official, Phelan had various responsibilities, including overseeing recruiting, mobilising and organising, as well as construction and repair of ships and military equipment.

He was appointed in 2024 as a political ally of Trump, despite having no prior military or defence leadership experience.

Before entering government, Phelan was a businessman and investment executive, as well as a major Republican donor and fundraiser — a background that is fairly common among Trump appointees and advisers. The US president’s two top diplomatic negotiators, for instance, are Steve Witkoff — a real estate businessman with no prior diplomatic experience – and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

According to the Reuters news agency, Phelan’s tenure quickly became controversial. He faced criticism for moving too slowly on shipbuilding reforms and for strained relationships with key Pentagon figures, including Hegseth and his deputy, Steve Feinberg.

In addition, Phelan was reportedly under an ethics investigation, which may have weakened his standing in the administration.

Navy Undersecretary Hung Cao, who was also reported to have a difficult relationship with Phelan, has become acting secretary. Fifty-four-year-old Cao is a 25-year Navy veteran who previously ran as a Republican candidate for the US Senate and House of Representatives in 2022 and 2024 respectively, but was unsuccessful on both occasions.

Democrats have criticised Phelan’s removal, calling it “troubling”.

“I am concerned it is yet another example of the instability and dysfunction that have come to define the Department of Defense under President Trump and Secretary Hegseth,” said Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Who else has the Trump administration fired since the war with Iran began?

Phelan’s removal is the latest in a series of senior military leaders being fired or are leaving during the US-Israeli war on Iran, in addition to others since Trump was re-elected.

Among the most notable dismissals was Army Chief of Staff General Randy A. George, in the first week of April. George was appointed in 2023 under former US President Joe Biden.

According to reports, Hegseth also fired the head of the Army’s Transformation and Training Command, a unit concerned with modernising the army, and the Army’s chief of chaplains. The Pentagon has not confirmed their dismissal.

Why is Phelan’s dismissal significant?

The 62-year-old’s removal comes during a fragile ceasefire with Iran, as the ⁠⁠US continues to move more naval assets into the region.

The Navy is central to enforcing Trump’s blockade of Iranian ports to restrict Iran’s oil exports and apply economic pressure on Tehran, as the US president looks eager to wrap up the war, which is deeply unpopular to many Americans.

However, there are no indications that Trump is willing to end the blockade or other naval operations in the Strait of Hormuz, as negotiations between Washington and Tehran have come to a standstill.

Tensions have escalated in recent days after the US military seized an Iranian container ship. The US claimed it was attempting to sail from the Arabian Sea through the Strait of Hormuz to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas.

Tehran responded by describing the attack and hijack as an act of “piracy”.

Iran has since captured two cargo ships and fired at another.

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander scores 37 as Oklahoma City beat Phoenix Suns 120-107 in the Western Conference playoff series.

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander scored 37 points and dished out ‌‌nine assists, leading Oklahoma City to a 120-107 home win over the Phoenix Suns and giving the ⁠⁠Thunder a 2-0 lead in ⁠⁠a first-round Western Conference playoff series.

The victory on Wednesday, however, might have been a costly one for the hosts.

Thunder player Jalen Williams, who was limited to just 33 games during the regular season due to injuries, left the ⁠⁠game midway through the third quarter due to a left hamstring injury.

“We’ll take a look at it in the next couple of days, and we’ll update you guys appropriately,” Oklahoma City coach Mark Daigneault said of Williams’ status post-game.

Williams pulled up during ⁠⁠a drive towards the bucket and then grabbed at his hamstring as action went the other way.

Williams, who did not return, missed two long stretches of the season with injuries to his right wrist and right hamstring.

Before getting hurt, Williams was excellent, logging 19 points on 7-of-11 shooting and four assists in 23 minutes.

Oklahoma City seized control in the third quarter, thanks in large ‌‌part to Gilgeous-Alexander and Chet Holmgren.

Holmgren grabbed rebounds on each of the first three possessions of the half and had 11 points and three blocks in the quarter, while Gilgeous-Alexander had 12 points and four assists in the period.

Holmgren finished with 19 points, eight rebounds and four blocks.

The Thunder stretched their lead to 23 with a 13-2 run to end the third and then to 26 early in the fourth.

The Suns cut the deficit to 10 with nearly four minutes remaining, but coming out of a timeout, Ajay Mitchell hit a 3-pointer to stretch the gap ⁠⁠to 113-100.

“We did a really good job building the lead that we did in the ⁠⁠third heading into the fourth,” Daigneault said. “Obviously the fourth was a little wacky. We’ll watch that … But generally, it was a good one. We built a strong lead and were able to hold it.”

Phoenix’s Dillon Brooks scored 13 of his 30 points in the fourth.

After a slow start in ⁠⁠Game 1, Gilgeous-Alexander missed his first three shots on Wednesday, then found the range. He hit 7 of 10 shots the rest of the first half.

After going 5 of 18 from ⁠⁠the field in the series opener, Gilgeous-Alexander finished 13 of 25 in Game ⁠⁠2.

“Shai made the right play all night,” Daigneault said. “His floor game was outstanding. He got us really good shots.”

Early in the third quarter, Brooks and Oklahoma City’s Luguentz Dort got tangled up battling for a potential rebound off a free throw. The two quickly stepped away from each other, but each ‌‌was whistled for a technical foul.

Late in the quarter, Devin Booker was called for a technical after bouncing the ball off Williams while trying to keep it in play.

“This is a playoff series so a lot of stuff happens,” ‌‌said ‌‌Suns coach Jordan Ott, who added that he did not get an explanation of the call. “We can do a better job keeping our composure at times.”

Booker finished with 22 points, while Jalen Green had 21 in the loss.

Game 3 is scheduled for Saturday in Phoenix.

Washington, DC – The latest battle in United States congressional redistricting has been decided, with voters in Virginia approving redrawing the state’s electoral map.

The result of Tuesday’s referendum on Virginia redistricting is widely expected to benefit Democrats in their fight to retake control of the slimly Republican-controlled US House of Representatives in the midterm vote in November.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

While redistricting is typically conducted every 10 years, following the US Census count of the country’s population, the election season has seen an unprecedented flurry of states moving to redraw their legislative maps early, initially spurred by pressure on US President Donald Trump to urge his fellow Republicans in Texas to do the same.

Democrats may be up at the moment, but several scenarios – including a redistricting push in Florida – could soon spoil those gains.

Experts, meanwhile, warn of the long-term implications of the election season’s norm-busting political manoeuvres, which they say could transform how and when electoral maps are drawn for years to come.

“Virginia’s unorthodox redistricting isn’t just a map redraw, it’s a mid-decade power play in a national arms race,” Rina Shah, a political adviser and strategist, told Al Jazeera.

“In a cycle defined by retaliation over reform, this sets a precedent: when one side bends the rules, the other follows, until courts or voters draw the final line.”

Democrats gain – for now

Trump has not been timid about his desire to redraw state congressional maps to benefit his Republican Party.

In July 2025, he confirmed the plan to reporters: “Texas would be the biggest one,” he said. “Just a very simple redrawing, we pick up five seats.”

By August, Texas’s Republican-controlled State House had passed a new map favouring Republicans, setting the party on course to secure five more seats in the US House of Representatives compared to the earlier map.

The move was soon followed by changes in Missouri, whose new maps are expected to net Republicans one additional seat, while redistricting in North Carolina and Ohio is expected to give the party two to three new Republican-dominated districts.

Democrats in several states responded in kind, pushing for redistricting in California and Utah that resulted in about six new Democrat-dominated districts. Virginia’s victory largely neutralised Republican gains, adding between two and four seats for Democrats.

“This could shift Virginia from a 6-5 split to something like 10-1 Democratic,” political adviser Shah said, referring to Virginia’s 11 congressional districts and noting this would result in “delivering up to four net seats and dramatically tightening the fight for House control in the 2026 midterms”.

This comes as Republicans are already expected to face a punishing election season, with wariness over the US-Israeli war in Iran and the stubbornly high cost of living in the US.

Democratic control of either chamber of Congress – or of both – would give the party the ability to largely curtail Trump’s agenda in the final two years of his presidency.

As of Wednesday, Sabato’s Crystal Ball, a midterm predictor published by the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, rated 217 Congressional districts across the country as leaning towards Democrats, with 205 leaning towards Republicans and 13 rated toss-ups.

Good for Democrats, ‘terrible’ for democracy

In the short term, Democrats are “winning” from the redistricting battle, according to Samuel Wang, a professor of neuroscience at Princeton University who runs the Princeton Gerrymandering Project.

“But from a non-partisan good government standpoint, it’s just a terrible event,” Wang told Al Jazeera.

He explained the “incredible” flurry of redistricting in recent months opens the possibility of a new age of heightened gerrymandering, the process by which congressional boundaries are drawn to benefit one political group.

Prior to this election cycle, there had been just three instances of mid-decade redistricting over the last five decades. Wang described the recent spurt as a “complete busting of norms”.

“It’s bad in the sense of reducing competition. Gerrymandering on both sides, basically, removes voters from the equation everywhere it happens,” he said.

Top Democrats have largely argued their hands were forced in mirroring the Republican strategy, rather than yield to the opposing party ahead of a consequential election.

“We fought back,” Hakeem Jeffries, the top Democrat in the House, told the Associated Press after Virginia’s vote. “When they go low, we hit back hard.”

But some Democrats have echoed concerns over the new precedent being set.

John Fetterman, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who has regularly sided with Republicans, told Newsmax on Wednesday, “Whether it’s a red state or whether it’s a blue state, our democracy is degraded.”

Attention turns to Florida

To be sure, while opportunities for further redistricting are diminishing following the vote in Virginia, the final congressional maps ahead of the midterms may not yet be set.

The Virginia vote now shifts pressure on Republicans in Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis is set to hold a special legislative session on April 28 to discuss possible redistricting.

A new map could add up to five Republican-dominated congressional districts in the state, but could be scuttled by strict language in Florida’s constitution related to the process.

Democrat Jeffries, in a statement on Wednesday, vowed to surge resources to the state to take down Republican incumbents if the map is redrawn. “Maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time,” he pledged.

Several challenges to Virginia’s redistricting ballot measure are also currently being heard before the state’s Supreme Court, which could hinder the implementation of the new map.

Trump on Wednesday decried the Virginia vote as “rigged”, without providing any evidence to back up the claim.

Meanwhile, a case pending before the US Supreme Court could beckon in another slate of redistricting in the US South.

In Louisiana v Callais, the justices will determine whether the creation of two Black-majority congressional districts is in line with the Voting Rights Act, which seeks to assure minority representation in states with a history of racist election policies.

A ruling could open the door to redrawing maps in several states that would have previously been banned due to so-called “racial gerrymandering”, a process of drawing congressional lines based on racial makeup to dilute the electoral power of a minority group.

A pathway to reform?

A handful of states have created independent commissions to oversee redistricting, in an effort to assure the process remains non-partisan.

But the vast majority rely on their state legislatures to draw the maps, which can lead to outsized influence over the party in control, barring legal challenges. That largely remains true whether redistricting is conducted every decade or, as the current election season could portend, more frequently.

But amid the current cavalcade of congressional map changes, Princeton’s Wang, who is himself running in the Democratic primary for Congress in New Jersey’s 12th district, sees a rare opportunity for federal reform.

That could take the form of Congress creating independent commissions to oversee redistricting.

“Now that mid-decade redistricting is backfiring on Republicans, it creates the possibility that both parties can see clearly that gerrymandering is a zero-sum game,” Wang said.

“It opens a path for possible bipartisan action.”

Rights advocates have accused the Trump administration of using third-country deportations to intimidate asylum seekers and migrants.

Fifteen South American migrants and asylum seekers recently deported from the United States to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) say they are facing pressure to return to their countries of origin, despite concerns for their safety.

Women from Colombia, Peru and Ecuador told the Reuters news agency that, since being deported to the Central African nation last week, they have been given no credible options other than going back to their home countries.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“We feel pressured to agree to go back to our country, regardless of the risks,” a 29-year-old Colombian woman, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of reprisals, told Reuters.

The group arrived in the DRC last week as part of a controversial third-country agreement with the administration of US President Donald Trump.

Since returning to the presidency for a second term, Trump has implemented hardline measures to restrict immigration to the US and expel immigrants already in the country, some of whom have legal status.

Among the 15 South Americans who were deported to the DRC, some say they had sought asylum — a legal immigration process — in the US after fleeing persecution in their home countries.

The 29-year-old woman, for example, wrote in her asylum application in January 2024 that she left Colombia after being kidnapped and tortured by an armed group, as well as suffering abuse at the hands of her ex-husband, who was a police officer.

A US immigration judge ruled in May 2025 that she was more likely than not to be tortured if she was sent home, according to court records reviewed by Reuters.

The AFP news agency also reported that a 30-year-old Colombian woman named Gabriela only learned that she was being sent to the DRC a day before last week’s flight. During a 27-hour trip, the hands and feet of the deportees were shackled.

“I didn’t want to go to Congo,” she told AFP. “I’m scared; I don’t know the language.”

Immigration advocates have said that third-country deportations are an effort to intimidate migrants and asylum seekers into agreeing to leave the US.

Such removals involve sending immigrants to places with which they have no familiarity. Many, including the DRC, are known for human rights concerns or are sites of active conflict.

“The goal is clear: Put people in a place so unfamiliar that they give up and agree to return home, despite the immense risk they face there,” said Alma David, a US-based lawyer representing one of the asylum seekers in the DRC.