“In response to this aggression and violation of the Strait of Hormuz regulations, the enemy’s American-Zionist vessel named Panaya was targeted by missiles from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy,” the report stated.

The broadcaster also said the United States had carried out another strike on Iranian infrastructure.

“It is mentioned that the American enemy, in another act of aggression, targeted a telecommunications tower of the Corps in the south of Qeshm Island,” it added.

Iran said it responded by targeting US-linked military sites in the region.

“In response to this aggression, their airbase and helicopter base located in one of the countries in the region, as well as the headquarters of the Fifth Fleet, were subjected to missile and drone attacks by the Aerospace Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps,” the report said.

Kuwait’s military said drones struck its international airport, causing “significant” damage. However, US Central Command (CENTCOM) appeared to dispute the extent of the attack.

“Two Iranian missiles fired at Kuwait fell short or broke apart en route, and three missiles launched at Bahrain were immediately intercepted by US and Bahrain air defence forces,” CENTCOM said.

US media reported that President Donald Trump had requested changes to the framework of a potential agreement after talks with aides, including issues related to the Strait of Hormuz, the removal of enriched uranium, and negotiations on Iran’s nuclear deal.

Tehran said on Monday, June 1, that the United States was “constantly changing its views and putting forward new or contradictory demands.”

While these huge sums are deployed daily for military activities, hundreds of millions of people still lack access to basic food.

According to the UN World Food Programme, ending global hunger by 2030 could cost around $93 billion per year, which is less than 1% of what the world has spent on military budgets over the past decade.

Yet, the U.S. alone spends roughly $2.7–$3 billion per day on defence when annual budgets are broken down into daily figures.

In simple terms, a fraction of global military expenditure could fund large-scale hunger reduction programmes.

In fact, the same conflicts that drive military spending often worsen hunger directly by displacing populations and disrupting agriculture.

A UN Development Programme report warns that rising military budgets are “diverting resources from the very foundations of stability,” including food systems and development.

The Boston Consulting Group notes that investment in sustainable agriculture can be four times more cost-effective than direct food aid, yet it receives only a small share of global funding.

So could the U.S. “solve world hunger” by redirecting war spending?

Reallocating hundreds of billions of dollars could dramatically reduce hunger. But ending it entirely would require sustained global coordination, institutional reform and long-term investment beyond emergency feeding.

But although the world can afford to end hunger, is it willing to prioritise it?

What they said

According to William D Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, and the writer of the US Military Aid and Arms Transfers to Israel, October 2023–September 2025 report, “Given the scale of current and future spending, it is clear the [Israeli army] could not have done the damage they have done in Gaza or escalated their military activities throughout the region without US financing, weapons, and political support.”