Category: News

Iran’s foreign ministry says that US strikes in Iran’s southern Hormozgan province represent a “gross violation” ⁠of the fragile ceasefire in place since early April.

The commander of the Revolutionary Guard’s Aerospace Force, Seyed Majid Moosavi, said it is prepared to respond, criticising ongoing diplomacy, saying “negotiation with the enemy is pure loss” in a post on X.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

He said the air force – which oversees Iran’s strategic ballistic missile and drone programmes – remains “highly vigilant, fully prepared for a decisive, swift response,” and is awaiting final orders from their commander-in-chief.

Attacks come amid intense negotiations

Both sides had indicated progress on a memorandum of understanding that could halt the war and restart shipping through the blockaded Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Baqr Qalibaf, its foreign minister and its central bank governor were in Doha on Monday for talks with Qatar’s prime minister on a potential deal, an official briefed on the visit said.

Qalibaf has now returned to Iran after consultations with Qatari officials, Iran’s state television has reported.

He has been seeking agreement on the release of about $24bn in Iranian funds frozen overseas as part of the memorandum of understanding, Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported, citing a source close to the negotiating team.

Iran’s Fars news agency cited a source saying that the unfreezing of the funds was the last serious ‌sticking point for the memorandum of understanding to be finalised.

According to Iranian sources, an initial deal would cover ending the war on all fronts, establishing a 30-day framework for movement through the Strait of Hormuz, and possibly providing some financial relief, with more complex issues such as Iran’s nuclear programme to be negotiated in a second phase.

Iran has been letting some ships through, giving preference to ships linked to countries with ‌which it ‌has alliances or close ties, and striking government-to-government agreements, the news agency Reuters has reported.

US President Donald Trump has said his key aim in the war is to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon with its highly enriched uranium. Tehran has consistently denied it has plans to do that

Trump had said talks with Iran were going “nicely” ⁠in a lengthy post on Truth Social on Monday, but warned of new attacks if they failed. It “will only be a Great Deal for all, or no ⁠Deal at all,” he wrote.

Strait of Hormuz to open ‘one way or the other’

Following strikes against targets that the US said included boats attempting to lay mines and missile launch sites, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on his plane in India’s Jaipur ⁠that the Strait of Hormuz had to be open “one way or the other”.

US Central Command said on Monday it had carried out new strikes designed “to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces”.

⁠United ⁠Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said on Tuesday ⁠that a tanker ⁠had reported an external explosion on the vessel’s ‌port side, close to the waterline, 60 nautical miles (111km) from Oman’s capital ⁠Muscat.

UKMTO said the vessel and its crew were safe, although the tanker reported that some bunker fuel was discharged into the sea.

The war, which began with US and Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28, has caused an unprecedented oil supply shock, pushing up oil prices along with the costs of fuel, fertiliser and food.

‘The clock cannot be turned back’

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said on Tuesday they reserved the right to retaliate.

They said air defence units had downed a US drone and fired at another drone and a fighter jet, which they said had entered Iranian airspace over the Gulf region.

In comments posted on his Telegram channel on the occasion of the annual hajj pilgrimage, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei said, “The clock cannot be turned back, and the nations and lands of the region will no longer be a shield for American bases.”

Israel’s role in regional tensions

In another indication of the region’s tensions, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that Israel would intensify strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

After the announcement, Israel increased the frequency and severity of attacks.

Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health said 12 people were killed in Israeli overnight strikes on the town of Mashghara, as reported by Lebanon’s National News Agency.

Lorenzo Kamel, a professor of history at the University of Turin in Italy, told Al Jazeera that for a US-Iran peace agreement to work, Washington must “rein in” Netanyahu.

“While we’ve seen Israeli authorities trying to escalate in Lebanon in order to water down any agreement by Trump and Iranian authorities, the elephant in the room is, as always, Netanyahu,” Kamel said.

“Netanyahu needs to play as the indispensable wartime leader, at least until the Israeli elections. He knows, without this continuous escalation, he would weaken his position, and also the opposition within Israel would place him out of power.”

The US continues to allow Israel to act unrestrained, and until Trump orders Netanyahu to truly cease fire in Lebanon, an Iran-US peace agreement will “remain extremely shaky”, Kamel told Al Jazeera.

Meanwhile, analyst Mohammad Eslamy of the University of Tehran told Al Jazeera that it is possible that Iran could attack the United Arab Emirates again if Israel keeps on bombing Lebanon.

“There are two conflicts right now. The first is in the Strait of Hormuz, and the second is in Lebanon. It seems that Netanyahu wants to have the chance to put Lebanon out of this deal before the Iranians and the Americans agree on something,” he said.

Asked about the overnight US strikes on Iran and if they are a sign of what is to come, Eslamy told Al Jazeera, “Donald Trump is thinking about some kind of military escalation in the Persian Gulf in order to put pressure on the Iranians while they are discussing many important aspects of a so-called deal with the United States.”

“I think that the Iranians will think more about the US blockade to put pressure on and challenge the Americans,” Eslamy said about the Strait of Hormuz.

The administration of US President Donald Trump has renewed its push to lift a court ruling barring progress on a new White House ballroom, once again citing gun violence as a reason for pursuing the construction.

In a court filing submitted on Sunday, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche argued it was “urgent” that the ballroom be completed.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“This is a terrible, tremendously harmful case to the United States of America, and all it stands for!” Blanche wrote, denouncing the lawsuit that has paused construction.

As justification, Blanche pointed to the events of last Saturday, when a 21-year-old suspect named Nasire Best approached a White House security checkpoint in Washington, DC, pulled out a gun, and started shooting.

One bystander was injured. The suspect was killed after an exchange of gunfire with Secret Service agents. The sound could be heard across the White House lawn, where reporters were seen running for safety.

Blanche argued that the incident represented the second time in the span of a month that Trump’s life had been threatened.

On April 25, 31-year-old Cole Tomas Allen had attempted to breach security at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, where Trump and his top officials were in attendance. After an exchange of gunfire with security, Allen was taken into custody.

“This second attack on the President this month underscores the critical need for top level, state of the art security at the White House, including the Ballroom,” Blanche wrote in the filing.

He added that the ballroom “is being constructed to ensure that the President can perform his constitutional duties in a safe and heavily secured facility”.

The Department of Justice, under Blanche, advanced a similar argument after the incident at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

And Trump himself made a nearly identical statement on Saturday, using his Truth Social platform to link the recent shooting to the ballroom.

“This event is one month removed from the White House Correspondent’Dinner shooting [sic], and goes to show how important it is, for all future Presidents, to get, what will be, the most safe and secure space of its kind ever built in Washington, D.C,” Trump wrote.

“The National Security of our Country demands it!”

Barriers to building

But Trump is facing an increasingly uphill battle as he pursues his ballroom project.

On March 31, a federal judge, Richard Leon, issued a temporary injunction against further construction on the ballroom.

While Leon did offer a carve-out for any work “necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House”, the judge did say that “bald assertions of ‘national security’” would not be accepted as a means of bypassing his decision or the law.

He called on the Trump administration to petition Congress for approval for the project. Until then, Leon ruled, “construction has to stop”.

In recent weeks, Trump has sought additional funding from Congress for the ballroom, though not approval for the construction itself.

But even members of his party have baulked at the price tag. Trump demanded that $1bn for the ballroom project be added to a bill for immigration enforcement funding, but last week, Republicans in the Senate agreed to drop the provision.

Some objected to the expense. Others pointed out that, with the $1bn in unrelated spending, the immigration-related funding bill would no longer qualify for a process called budget reconciliation, which allows bills to pass through the Senate with a simple majority.

Growing ballroom costs

Trump had previously maintained that the ballroom would be funded entirely through private donations.

But the associated costs have ballooned. Last year, Trump estimated the construction would cost $200m. Then, in December, he increased the anticipated price to $400m.

Over the last month, however, the total has now leapt to include the $1bn in taxpayer funds, which are reportedly intended for security improvements.

Still, as Trump gave reporters a tour of the construction site on May 19, he insisted that the costs of the ballroom project would come out of private pockets.

“All of this was paid for by myself. We are making a gift of this. This is a gift. This is not going to be paid for by the taxpayers,” Trump said, gesturing to the site.

He has repeatedly claimed the construction project is ahead of schedule and under budget, an assertion Blanche repeated in Sunday’s court filing.

But on May 12, when confronted by reporters about the mushrooming price tag, Trump appeared defensive.

“I doubled the size of it, you dumb person. Doubled the size. You are not a smart person,” he told one journalist.

New details emerging

The project has also been criticised for its lack of transparency and its failure to get outside approvals.

Even this month, new details were still emerging about the structure, which is slated to be about 90,000 square feet (about 8,360 square metres), dwarfing the White House’s executive mansion.

Trump has also recently revealed that the new ballroom complex will include six floors of subterranean facilities, including a military hospital. Its completion is slated for September 2028, shortly before Trump’s term expires in January 2029.

Some of the newly proposed features were detailed in Blanche’s recent court filing.

The ballroom, Blanche wrote, “includes bomb shelters, a state of the art hospital and medical facilities, Top Secret military installations, structures, and equipment, protective partitioning, and other features”.

In addition, the “heavily secured” roof is slated to contain “a major drone port and Government sniper facilities”.

Blanche argued in Sunday’s filing that he was forced to reveal those security features in order to petition for the court injunction to be lifted.

“The longer this frivolous litigation persists, the more our National Security will be jeopardized as the Government continues to be forced to justify — through the divulgence of such security installations, layout, and other specifications of construction — the necessity for a secure addition to the White House,” Blanche wrote.

The plaintiffs have argued that the Trump administration has largely acted without any oversight.

In December, the National Trust for Historic Preservation filed its complaint, alleging that the law mandates approval not only from Congress but also from the National Capital Planning Commission.

In addition, it argued that “no adequate public environmental assessment” had been carried out before the Trump administration abruptly demolished the White House’s East Wing in October to make way for the large-scale construction.

“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever— not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else. And no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in,” the lawsuit says.

“President Trump’s efforts to do so should be immediately halted.”

The Liberal prime minister called for an independent investigation into Israeli mistreatment, but stopped short of penalties.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has expressed indignation at the Israeli government’s “appalling” treatment of participants in a humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza.

But in a news release on Monday, he declined to announce any new forms of pressure on Israel’s government.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The statement contained a read-out of a phone call between Carney and Israeli President Isaac Herzog earlier in the day. During their talk, Carney demanded an independent investigation into the mistreatment of the activists, who were bound, taunted and forced to kneel on the ground in a video shared last week by Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir.

“The Prime Minister reiterated that the appalling treatment of civilians, including Canadian citizens, aboard the Gaza-bound flotilla was unacceptable,” the statement said.

Carney also used the phone call to reaffirm that Canada opposes the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, as well as the rampant violence by Jewish settlers against Palestinians.

The video shared by Ben-Gvir has sparked global backlash, with several countries issuing formal statements of condemnation.

A handful took further action. On Saturday, for instance, France banned Ben-Gvir from entering its territory, citing his “unspeakable actions towards French and European citizens who were passengers on the Global Sumud Flotilla”.

Poland has likewise pursued a five-year ban against Ben-Gvir. Leaders in France and Italy have also called on the European Union to sanction the Israeli minister.

But Israel has rarely faced serious pressure or consequences beyond rhetoric, despite widespread reports about Israeli settlers and military members attacking and killing Palestinians and pro-Palestinian advocates.

Human rights advocates have highlighted evidence of torture and inhumane conditions in Israeli prisons.

Groups like Amnesty International and B’Tselem have accused Israel of implementing a system of apartheid to discriminate against Palestinians and dispossess them of their land.

The Global Sumud Flotilla was organised as part of an effort to confront Israeli abuses in Gaza, where Israel has led a genocidal war against Palestinians since October 2023.

More than 75,000 Palestinians have been killed in the war, with survivors suffering from malnutrition and displacement. In Monday’s statement, Carney called the humanitarian situation in Gaza “catastrophic”.

Activists have repeatedly attempted to reach Gaza to deliver humanitarian supplies, but they have so far been intercepted by Israeli forces, which have blockaded Gaza’s access to the outside world.

A new mission was launched in the Mediterranean Sea on April 12, involving a reported 70 boats and 3,000 participants.

Amnesty International Australia estimates that nearly 430 people were detained when Israeli forces boarded their vessels in international waters, in apparent defiance of international law.

Activists said they experienced abuse during their detention. Their accounts reflect those of previous flotilla members, who also alleged mistreatment and abuse in Israeli custody. At least 15 have reported sexual assault, including rape.

Israel has asserted, without any evidence, that the activists were inspired by the Palestinian armed group Hamas. In posting his video of the activists, Ben-Gvir described them as “supporters of terrorism”.

But leaders like Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni have warned that Israel’s actions “violate human dignity”. Meloni and others have summoned their local Israeli ambassadors to express their concern.

In a separate statement on Monday, Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs Anita Anand said she had spoken with her Israeli counterpart, Gideon Saar, and expressed that the Canadian government would provide Israel with evidence of the mistreatment of Canadian citizens who took part in the flotilla.

“I raised that denying Canadian citizens access to consular services while they were detained violates the Vienna Convention and must never happen again,” Anand wrote in a social media post.

Since reports of a possible deal with Iran started to emerge, pro-Israel advocates in the United States have been warning President Donald Trump against signing the agreement.

Hawkish figures, including some prominent senators, have voiced opposition to any deal that fails to remove or at least severely weaken Iran’s political leadership and destroy its military powers.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

But after Trump floated the prospect of more Arab countries establishing formal relations with Israel as part of the agreement, some of the critical voices softened their tone.

US Senator Lindsey Graham was among those politicians. On Saturday, Graham — a vocal proponent of the war — warned that ending the conflict in order to reopen the Strait of Hormuz would be a “nightmare” for Israel.

“It is important we get this right,” he wrote in a social media post on Saturday that was shared by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a US lobbying group.

Two days later, on Monday, Trump said it “should be mandatory” for countries including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Pakistan to set up diplomatic relations with Israel as part of a US agreement with Iran.

Graham then praised the push, calling Trump’s diplomatic manoeuvre “simply brilliant”.

“With Saudi Arabia and others like Pakistan making peace with Israel, the region will know a level of stability never dreamed of before President Trump,” the senator wrote on the social media platform X.

Normalisation with Israel, Graham added, “will eventually lead to regional integration, making the Middle East a powerhouse for economic opportunity and good instead of a powder keg”.

Abraham Accords

Pro-Israel political commentator Mark Levin, who is close to Trump, similarly praised the normalisation push on Monday after criticising the potential deal with Iran on Saturday.

“This would be a truly massive accomplishment!” Levin said, commenting on Trump’s proposal.

The turnaround came on Monday, after Trump laid out his vision for expanding the Abraham Accords, a series of normalisation deals between Israel and nearby Arab states.

“It should be mandatory that all of these Countries, at a minimum, simultaneously, sign onto the Abraham Accords,” he wrote on Truth Social, listing six countries, including Turkiye and Egypt, which already have formal diplomatic relations with Israel.

None of the countries Trump mentioned responded to his call. But for years, many countries refused to normalise ties with Israel, especially after its genocidal war on Gaza.

Saudi Arabia has repeatedly said that it stands by the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which calls on Israel to recognise the Palestinian state based on its 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Trump’s demand on Monday comes as his administration struggles to negotiate a peace deal after the US and Israel launched a war against Iran on February 28.

Critics have questioned Trump’s objectives in the war, which started with the idea of regime change in Iran, ending the nuclear programme, and curbing the country’s missile arsenal. Later, another pressing goal imposed itself as one of the main objectives: to forcibly reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade route through which more than 20 percent of the world’s oil is shipped.

It is unclear whether Trump has the leverage to mandate policy to other countries in the region as part of the peace negotiations with Iran.

The renewed normalisation push, however, could soften the blow for pro-Israel politicians who oppose ending the war with Iran.

Dania Thafer, the executive director of Gulf International Forum, said Trump is trying to present the war, which has been a “strategic failure” as a success for the US and Israel.

But Gulf states – particularly Saudi Arabia and Qatar – are “not interested” in normalisation at this stage, Thafer told Al Jazeera.

Beyond the Palestinian cause, Thafer explained, Gulf countries – which came under Iranian attacks during the war – do not want to “tip the balance in favour of Israeli-led regional order”.

She said the normalisation push could potentially derail a US agreement with Iran if Trump insists on it.

“How much is this rhetorical and symbolic versus how much of this is really the substantive policy position of the Trump administration? I think that’s the question that we’re unclear about,” Thafer said.

Republican criticism

Since his first term as US president, Trump has made normalising Israel’s foreign relations a top priority.

In 2020, with Trump’s backing, Israel signed the Abraham Accords with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco, establishing bilateral diplomatic relations.

But Trump and the predecessor to his second term, former President Joe Biden, have failed to expand the accords. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also continued to reject the idea of a Palestinian state.

Israel has long sought to separate its efforts to build regional ties from its continued occupation of Palestinian land and its mistreatment of Palestinians, which rights groups say amount to apartheid.

Forging more formal ties with Arab and Muslim nations could boost Israel politically and economically, while further isolating Palestinians.

Trump faced rare — albeit indirect — criticism from legislators in his Republican Party over the weekend, when the details of a possible peace deal with Iran leaked.

Its terms reportedly included the unfreezing of billions of dollars in Iranian assets and an end to the war, with the promise of further negotiations.

Senator Ted Cruz, a staunchly pro-Israel Trump ally, said on Saturday that he was “concerned” about reports of the agreement.

“If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime — still run by Islamists who chant ‘death to America’ — now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake,” Cruz wrote in a social media post.

AIPAC also shared a post by Republican Senator Roger Wicker criticising the deal.

“The rumored 60-day ceasefire — with the belief that Iran will ever engage in good faith — would be a disaster,” Wicker said. “Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!”

Mike Pompeo, who served as secretary of state during Trump’s first term, joined in the criticism, likening the rumoured deal to the 2015 nuclear agreement that was negotiated by Democratic officials.

He added that it was “not remotely America First”, a reference to Trump’s campaign pledge to put US interests above all.

“It’s straightforward: Open the damned strait. Deny Iran access to money. Take out enough Iranian capability so it cannot threaten our allies in the region,” Pompeo said. “Overdue. Let’s go.”

The Trump administration was quick to hit back against the former top diplomat, describing him as misinformed.

“Mike Pompeo has no idea what the f*** he’s talking about,” White House Communications Director Steven Cheung wrote on X.

“He should shut his stupid mouth and leave the real work to the professionals. He’s not read into anything that’s happening, so how would he know.”

Twenty-six years ago this week, Israel was forced to end an 18-year occupation of south Lebanon. Much has changed since, yet Lebanon and Israel still cling to the very policies that dragged them into today’s war, a war that has engulfed Iran, drawn in the United States, and now threatens the global economy itself.

Palestine remains the central issue reverberating across the region and the world. It is why Israel began attacking pro-Palestine forces in Lebanon in the 1970s, years before Hezbollah formed, and why that local conflict has widened ever since. Iran’s backing of Hezbollah after 1982 turned Lebanon into a front line between Iran and Israel; today, with the United States fighting alongside Israel, that front has grown into a regional war. At its heart stands Hezbollah, the central pillar of the Iran-anchored “Axis of Resistance” that opposes Israeli-American hegemony.

Lebanon might seem like a sideshow in this regional and global frame. But it deserves greater scrutiny precisely because it was, and remains, the spark that expanded 78 years of Israel-Lebanon-Palestine friction into today’s regional war.

Much has changed in Lebanon since 2000. Advanced missile, drone and radar technology now shapes the balance of power, above all Iran and Hezbollah’s growing ability often to evade US-Israeli air defences. Lebanon’s economy has been shattered, its people driven from their homes again and again, and Israel has devastated towns and villages across the south, unleashing the doctrine of urban annihilation it forged in Beirut’s Dahiyeh in 2006, and subsequently applied in Gaza. Hezbollah was hit hard, but has been reborn as a leaner, more agile force that once again thwarts Israel’s drive to subdue Lebanon, or carve out another permanent security zone inside it.

The regional picture has shifted too. Syria’s role as Hezbollah’s link to Iran has collapsed, and Iran itself was damaged by the US-Israeli assault. Yet Tehran seems determined to see Lebanon covered by any regional deal that ends the war. The United States has openly sided with Israel, pressuring President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam to “disarm” Hezbollah and remove a lingering threat to Israel, or else possibly face more Gaza-style destruction across Lebanon. Other powers, including China, Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, Pakistan and Russia, have pressed in different ways to end the war on Iran and restore calm and Lebanese sovereignty.

In the midst of this political whirlwind, several conditions from the pre-2000 era still prevail in Lebanon. The population remains split over Hezbollah’s role as an armed movement offering the only impactful resistance to Israel. The government seems unable to act, politically or militarily, for lack of funds, domestic consensus or military clout. At times it bends to Israeli or American pressure: “disarming” already marginalised Palestinian camps, or meeting Israeli officials in Washington under the aegis of Washington’s pro-Israel bias.

Washington has also tied financial support for Lebanon’s reconstruction to Beirut’s compliance with US-Israeli terms. Its pro-Israel bias is clear in its readiness to ignore Israeli violations of the last two ceasefires, and in formally backing Israel’s right to attack any Lebanese it deems a threat, while denying Lebanese threatened by Israel the same right.

The Lebanese government also feels the pressure of a disgruntled, deeply impoverished population, exasperated by relentless Israeli attacks that, in 2026 alone, have killed more than 3,000 people, forcibly displaced 1.2 million and devastated dozens of villages and small towns. It justifies its talks with Israel as an attempt to offset its military disadvantage, using US pressure to stop the attacks and let Beirut re-establish sovereign control over all its land.

Hovering above these old and new dynamics is a historic reality: Iran and Hezbollah, with support from allies abroad, absorbed the devastating Israeli-American assault and twice forced their far more powerful, nuclear-armed adversaries to accept a ceasefire and negotiate anew, first over Iran in early April, then over Lebanon days later. The Lebanon truce is now meant to fold into the wider US-Iran settlement. Both ceasefires seem to herald weakened US-Israeli positions in the region, deep political blows to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and new diplomatic leverage for Iran, Hezbollah and their allies.

What lesson might we draw from all this? Perhaps that military power, however savage or genocidal, cannot forever dictate realities across the Middle East. Buffer and “security” zones, new Israeli settlements, local pro-Israel accomplices, military outposts, relentless air strikes, the whole US-backed Israeli playbook, may all be consigned to the past if current trends hold.

How a new diplomatic balance will emerge in Lebanon remains to be seen. But Iran and Hezbollah, having survived their “existential” battles and now pressing for permanent ceasefires, could weaken Israeli postures and help reshape Lebanon’s internal dynamics. Ideally this could prod Hezbollah, the Beirut government and all Lebanese to settle, once and for all, on a serious long-term approach to mutually beneficial relations with an Israel that fully respects Lebanese sovereignty.

Were that to happen, it would press all sides to resolve, fairly, the central issue they have ignored for 78 years and that has fuelled permanent war: Palestinian rights. Only mature and decisive diplomacy, alongside legitimate defence strategies, will determine whether current trends lead to that desired outcome.

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

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif says China and Pakistan are ‘iron brother’ countries.

China’s President Xi Jinping has hailed Beijing’s “unbreakable” friendship with Pakistan as he met ⁠visiting Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, seeking to deepen their “all-weather” partnership.

Pakistan is among an exclusive group of countries China regards as an “all-weather strategic partner”, with ties featuring close economic, trade and security cooperation.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Greeting Sharif at Beijing’s Great Hall of the People on Monday, Xi called him an “old friend” and said the two countries had “understood, trusted and supported each other” over decades, forging an “unbreakable traditional friendship”.

“No matter how the international situation changes, China always prioritises the development of China-Pakistan relations in its neighbourhood diplomacy,” Xi said.

Beijing was willing to work with Islamabad to build a more close-knit China-Pakistan community with a shared future and achieve more in their “all-weather” cooperation, he added.

Sharif, in turn, called China and Pakistan two “iron brother” countries with a relationship that is “next to none”.

The visit comes as Pakistan continues to play a leading role in mediating talks aimed at ending the US-Israel war on Iran.

Pakistan’s army chief, Asim Munir, who has been at the centre of mediating talks between Washington and Tehran, is accompanying Sharif.

Speaking to Chinese leaders in Beijing alongside Munir, Sharif said, “The world is passing through a critical moment.”

“Things are moving in the right direction. I would like to thank China’s support to promote peace,” he added.

Pakistan has emerged as a central mediator between the United States and Iran, hosting face-to-face talks last month that failed to yield a lasting agreement.

China has played a quieter role, shepherding phone calls and meetings with officials of Gulf countries. It has said it will work with Pakistan to “make positive contributions to the early restoration of peace and stability in the Middle East”.

According to Chinese state media reports, in his meeting with Sharif on Monday, Xi said he appreciates Islamabad’s “constructive role in mediating peace in the Middle East”.

For Pakistan, engaging China in its mediation efforts is also important given close Beijing-Tehran ties.

In March, China and Pakistan issued a five-point initiative as their foreign ministers met in Beijing, calling for peace talks and restoration of normal navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, the vital waterway through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas normally passes.

As negotiations between the United States and Iran appear to move towards a possible breakthrough, the stakes extend far beyond diplomacy between two longstanding adversaries. At issue is not simply a ceasefire or a nuclear agreement. It is whether the world economy can avoid sliding deeper into widening energy, food and cost-of-living crises centred on the Strait of Hormuz.

Recent reports suggest Washington and Tehran are discussing a deal that would reopen the strait as part of a broader arrangement. The proposal reportedly includes a 60-day truce, the reopening of shipping lanes, some sanctions relief and renewed talks on Iran’s nuclear programme.

The urgency is obvious. Roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and a substantial share of liquefied natural gas supplies normally pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Over recent weeks, disruptions to shipping, military tensions and competing naval controls have driven up freight costs, energy prices and insurance premiums.

If a durable agreement is not reached soon, the consequences are likely to spread rapidly across the global economy.

To be sure, wealthier economies will feel the effects. Higher fuel prices will intensify inflationary pressures already weighing on households in Europe and North America. Governments confronting slowing growth and persistent cost-of-living concerns will face renewed political pressure as transportation, electricity and food prices rise once again.

But the effects will be far more severe in the Global South.

Many developing economies remain deeply dependent on imported fuel, imported fertiliser and imported food. Energy shocks, therefore, cascade through entire economies. Transport costs rise. Agricultural production becomes more expensive. Food inflation accelerates. Public finances deteriorate as governments try to shield populations from rising prices through subsidies or emergency support.

This dynamic is already visible. Across several import-dependent countries in Africa and South Asia, governments are scrambling to secure alternative fuel supplies while confronting worsening fiscal pressures. The longer the uncertainty around the Strait of Hormuz continues, the greater the likelihood that inflationary shocks will deepen existing debt crises and social instability.

Indeed, the global economy remains extraordinarily vulnerable to narrow geopolitical chokepoints. The Strait of Hormuz is not simply a regional waterway; it is one of the central arteries of global capitalism. When it becomes militarised or partially blocked, the consequences reverberate worldwide within days.

Food prices are especially sensitive to these disruptions because energy markets and food systems are tightly interconnected. Fertiliser production depends heavily on natural gas. Shipping and refrigeration costs depend on oil prices. When energy markets are destabilised, grocery bills rise almost everywhere.

This is why the current negotiations matter so profoundly.

The issue is not only whether the US and Iran can avoid further military escalation. It is also whether a fragile global economy already strained by debt, climate shocks and geopolitical fragmentation can withstand another prolonged energy disruption.

Recent years have demonstrated how quickly such shocks become political crises. Food inflation played a major role in unrest preceding the Arab uprisings more than a decade ago. More recently, rising living costs have fuelled political volatility from Latin America to Europe. Governments across the world are already confronting widespread distrust, stagnant wages and growing inequality. Another sustained surge in energy and food prices could intensify these pressures dramatically.

The irony, once again, is that many of the countries likely to suffer most have little influence over the conflict itself.

The populations now facing the gravest economic risks are often those least responsible for the geopolitical confrontation, yet they are the ones most exposed to rising import costs, worsening hunger and shrinking fiscal space. The global economy repeatedly externalises the costs of major-power conflict onto poorer societies through commodity markets and debt structures.

Accordingly, reopening the Strait of Hormuz is not simply a matter of strategic stability for Washington or Tehran. It is also a global economic necessity.

This does not mean the negotiations will be easy. Deep disagreements remain over sanctions, uranium enrichment, regional security arrangements and the future governance of shipping through the Gulf. Reports also indicate continuing tensions over who would ultimately control transit through the Strait of Hormuz and under what conditions.

Nor is there any guarantee that a ceasefire would hold. Previous rounds of negotiations have repeatedly stalled amid renewed military escalation and mutual distrust.

Yet the alternative is increasingly dangerous.

A prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz would not remain a regional crisis for long. It would deepen inflation, worsen food insecurity, strain humanitarian systems and increase the likelihood of broader political instability across vulnerable economies already under immense pressure.

In that sense, the negotiations now under way are about far more than diplomacy between the US and Iran. They are about whether the world can avoid another cascading global crisis driven by energy insecurity, geopolitical fragmentation and rising inequality.

The Strait of Hormuz cannot remain closed – economically or politically – without consequences for everyone.

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

Antonelli finished more than 10 seconds ahead of Ferrari’s Hamilton, who secured his second podium finish in 2026.

Kimi Antonelli went from furious to victorious as the 19-year-old Italian star won a wild Canadian Grand Prix for his fourth straight victory, a day after clashing with Mercedes teammate George Russell in a heated sprint race.

Russell dropped out with an engine failure after the title-chasing Mercedes duo put on a show in a thrilling fight through 30 laps, trading the lead several times and coming dangerously close to making contact in the race on Sunday.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Then trouble struck for Russell, giving Antonelli a clear path to the finish – and a commanding championship lead.

“It was a really fun battle, to be fair, with George. We were pretty much on the limit,” Antonelli said. “It was very close, and it was a shame for him to have the failure because it would have been a very cool battle. But we’ll take it.”

Antonelli finished more than 10 seconds ahead of Ferrari’s Lewis Hamilton.

Antonelli opened a 43-point lead over Russell through five of 22 races. After Russell won the season-opening race in Australia, Antonelli won in China, Japan and Miami, and now Montreal.

Russell’s exit marked a nightmare end to an otherwise stellar weekend for the Montreal winner last year. He took the sprint race from pole on Saturday and started first on Sunday.

Once his power unit died, the 28-year-old English driver threw his headrest across the track and slammed his fists into the front of the car before leaving the circuit, whipping his gloves to the ground in rage.

Russell said he wished he had had “40 more of those laps” to battle Antonelli.

“I loved it. I thought it was great, and I’ve not had a battle like this in years,” he said. “Right now [the championship] is his to lose, so many points ahead. It feels like the gods don’t want me to be in this fight.

“Pressure’s off. Go out, enjoy every single race, try and win every single race, and I’ve got nothing to lose.”

The spotlight shifted to two longtime rivals once Russell’s day ended, with Hamilton chasing down Red Bull’s Max Verstappen in a throwback to 2021.

The seven-time world champion finally overtook Verstappen for second with six laps to go in cold and windy conditions at Circuit Gilles Villeneuve for his best result since joining Ferrari last year.

“It’s been pretty tough for the past year and a bit, so to finally find our sweet spot and have a good weekend, it’s an amazing feeling,” the 41-year-old Hamilton said.

Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc was fourth, followed by Red Bull’s Isack Hadjar.

Formula One standings 2026

Mercedes (219) lead Ferrari (147) by ‌72 ‌points in the constructors’ standings. McLaren, who did not have a driver score on Sunday, are third with 106 points.

US secretary of state says a ‘pretty solid’ deal is on the table in terms of opening up the Strait of Hormuz.

The United States will either secure a strong agreement with Iran or confront the country “another way”, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio says after President Donald Trump tempered expectations that an agreement to end the war is close.

“We thought we might have some news last night, maybe today. I wouldn’t read too much into it,” Rubio said in New Delhi on Monday, referring to a potential agreement to end the US-Israeli war on Iran, which began on February 28.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“We have what I think is a pretty solid thing on the table in terms of their ability to open up the straits, get the straits open,” he told reporters in the Indian capital, where he has been on an official visit.

Washington and Tehran have observed a ceasefire since April 8 while mediators push for a negotiated settlement although Iran has continued to block the Strait of Hormuz to most shipping and the US has blockaded Iran’s ports.

On Sunday, Trump wrote on Truth Social ⁠⁠that the US blockade would “remain in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed”.

“Both sides must take their time and get it right,” he added.

Addressing a news conference in Tehran on Monday, Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Iran and the US “have reached a conclusion on a large portion of the discussion topics” but warned that “this does not mean that the signing of an agreement is imminent.”

He also emphasised that at this stage, Iran and the US have not been “talking about the nuclear issue” and their focus is “on ending the war”.

Baghaei reiterated that there were, however, “no guarantees” that the US would honour its commitments in any potential deal and said Tehran does not care about “threats”.

He made the comments after Rubio warned that the US would secure a “good agreement” or would find “another way”.

“We’re either going to have a good agreement, or we’re going to have to deal with it another way. We’d prefer to have a good agreement,” the top US diplomat said.

As diplomacy ramps up, officials from key mediator Pakistan were in China on Monday. Military chief Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif were in Beijing for talks with Chinese leaders, Pakistan television showed on Monday.

China has said it would work with Pakistan to “make positive contributions to the early restoration of peace and stability in the Middle East”.

Munir was in Tehran last week with Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi as part of mediation efforts to end the war.

Points of contention

As news of a potential deal emerges, a senior Trump administration official outlined what he said were the latest contours of the issues being negotiated.

Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the official told the Reuters news agency that Iran had agreed “in principle” to dispose of its highly enriched uranium and open the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for the US lifting its naval blockade.

The US understood that Supreme Leader ⁠⁠Mojtaba Khamenei had endorsed the broad template of the deal, he added.

There was no immediate confirmation from Iran or elaboration on what an “in principle” ⁠⁠agreement meant.

The US official said Washington envisioned first reopening the strait and lifting the US naval blockade. Negotiating the details of the nuclear measures would take more time, he said.

The official pushed back on suggestions that Iran had not accepted disposing of its stockpiled enriched uranium. “It’s a question about how,” the official said.

Charles Kupchan, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the back and forth between the US and Iran means a deal will not likely be agreed anytime soon.

“I think this is kind of par for the course for the Trump administration. One day they walk this way. The next day they walk that way,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Part of the conversations are private. Part of it is public diplomacy, but until we have a concrete sense that the Iranians are likely to say yes to getting rid of their highly enriched uranium … and to opening this Strait of Hormuz with no restrictions, I think one can say that we’re still far away from a lasting deal,” Kupchan said.

Officers returned fire after suspect pulled weapon from bag, with a bystander also wounded.

A man has been shot dead by US Secret Service officers after opening fire on a security checkpoint near the White House, with a bystander wounded in the gunfire.

Shortly after 6pm on Saturday (22:00 GMT), the suspect approached a Secret Service checkpoint at the intersection of 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC, pulled a weapon from his bag, and began shooting at officers posted there.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

The Secret Service, the federal agency responsible for protecting the president, confirmed the sequence of events in an official statement, saying a preliminary investigation indicated that the suspect had concealed his weapon in a bag before drawing it at the checkpoint.

The agents returned fire, striking the man, who was later pronounced dead at a nearby hospital.

A bystander was also hit during the shooting, though authorities said it remained unclear whether they were struck by the suspect’s initial gunfire or during the exchange that followed.

President Donald Trump was inside the White House at the time and was not harmed. The White House was immediately placed under lockdown.

No Secret Service personnel were injured.

Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin said he was closely monitoring the situation and would issue a statement soon. “Tonight’s shooting is a reminder of the dangers our law enforcement officers face every day,” Mullin said on X.

Republicans in the House of Representatives posted on X to confirm Trump was safe, while the White House itself issued no immediate statement on the president’s condition.

Steve Scalise, the Republican House Majority Leader, posted on X, expressing his thoughts for the president and adding, “We live in dangerous times.”

More than 30 shots were heard from the White House North Lawn, according to Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett, reporting from the scene.

Journalists on the lawn were ordered to run and take shelter inside the press briefing room. Police cordoned off access to the surrounding area, and National Guard troops blocked reporters from approaching.

Halkett said the suspect had recently been issued a stay-away order, which he had ignored. He approached the area and started shooting, at which point the Secret Service officers returned fire.

The suspect was later transferred to George Washington Hospital, Halkett said.

FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed that his agency was on the scene supporting the Secret Service, saying on social media that he would “update the public as we’re able”.

White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung sought to project calm, posting on X that Trump was “working at 8pm. Can’t stop, won’t stop.”

Saturday’s shooting comes less than a month after what law enforcement authorities described as an attempted assassination of Trump on April 25, when a suspect was arrested at the Washington hotel hosting the annual White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner, a gathering of journalists and public figures.

“These incidents are happening with increasing frequency,” Halkett said.

That incident raised new questions about the security arrangements around the president.

The identity of the suspect and his motive have not been publicly released. The Secret Service said the investigation is ongoing.