“There are two components here. One component is development and investment, and the second component is security, deterrence, and prevention,” he said. “We are very determined to carry this out.”

Netanyahu said the initiative was designed to ensure long-term stability and prosperity for northern communities while promoting coexistence among the region’s diverse populations.

“As we say to Jews, Druze, Circassians, and Muslims - we all live together in the same package, and I am committed to that,” he said.

The prime minister described the programme as a major milestone and expressed confidence that northern Israel would undergo a transformation similar to what he said had been achieved in the south.

The remarks come days after the Israeli government approved a 13 billion shekel ($4.5 billion) plan proposed by Netanyahu and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich to strengthen towns near the Lebanese border.

The package includes the construction of 1,800 new public bomb shelters, subsidies for safe rooms in homes located within nine kilometres of the border, and a five-year development programme aimed at attracting 100,000 new residents.

Combined with previously approved funding, the total investment in the initiative is expected to reach 20 billion shekels ($6.9 billion).

Netanyahu called the announcement “a day of celebration” and thanked local leaders and government officials involved in advancing the project.

“The Beaufort is a dramatic step. It is a dramatic shift in the policy we are leading,” he said. “We have returned united, determined and stronger than ever.”

The remarks came after the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) launched extensive strikes on what it described as Hezbollah infrastructure in the Beaufort Ridge and Wadi al-Saluki areas. The military said one Israeli soldier was killed during the operation.

Netanyahu said he had instructed the military to expand its operations in Lebanon and confirmed that Israeli troops had crossed the Litani River.

“They seized commanding areas, they conquered the Beaufort Ridge, and now my directive is to deepen and expand our hold in places that were under Hezbollah's occupation,” he said.

The prime minister added that Israeli forces were operating simultaneously in Gaza, Syria and Lebanon, and claimed Israel had established a security zone beyond its borders.

“We will restore security to the residents of the north, just as we did for the residents of the south,” Netanyahu said. “It will take time, but we will complete the mission.”

Israel previously controlled Beaufort Castle from 1982 until its withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 following the First Lebanon War.

The latest escalation follows Netanyahu’s announcement last week that he had ordered intensified strikes against Hezbollah and an expansion of ground operations aimed at securing what he described as strategic areas.

The fighting comes despite a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon first announced by U.S. President Donald Trump on April 15 and later extended several times following talks hosted by Washington.

He said Israel’s campaign against Iran was not yet complete and revealed he remains in frequent contact with U.S. President Donald Trump .

“We still need to complete the mission. I speak with President Trump about this every day - almost every day, every two days. We still have work to finish,” he said.

Netanyahu also highlighted the growing threat posed by drones, citing Iran’s Shahed drones and more advanced systems under development.

“I have no doubt that here too we will become the first country in the world to truly deliver a solution,” he said, referring to drone defence capabilities.

Turning to the war in Gaza, Netanyahu claimed Israeli forces had expanded their control over the territory.

He said the Israel Defense Forces now control about 60 percent of Gaza, up from 50 percent, and that he had instructed the military to increase that figure to 70 percent.

“We are squeezing them from every direction. We will deal with the remnants,” he said, referring to Hamas.

Netanyahu also outlined a broader vision for Israel’s role in regional energy networks, predicting that future oil and gas routes would increasingly connect the Gulf to the Mediterranean through Israel.

“We can further strengthen Israel’s power and truly turn ourselves into a global player,” he said.

On domestic policy , the prime minister said he had instructed officials to establish new communities as part of efforts to expand settlement and development projects across what he described as the Land of Israel.

“Our plan is first to draft a memorandum of understanding, a framework agreement consisting of 14 articles,” Baqaei said.

He said the proposed document would address issues including the end of what Iran describes as a U.S. naval blockade and the release of frozen Iranian assets.

“The end of US naval aggression… along with issues related to the release of Iran’s frozen assets, are the main topics addressed by this memorandum,” he added.

Baqaei said the nuclear issue would not be dealt with in detail at this stage, despite repeated U.S. demands for it to remain central to negotiations.

“The nuclear issue was a pretext for two aggressive wars against the Iranian people ,” he said.

He added that Tehran was prioritising efforts to end the conflict “on all fronts, including Lebanon.”

Baqaei thanked Pakistan for mediating talks between Tehran and Washington, with support from regional actors including Qatar, and said detailed discussions could continue for between 30 and 60 days.

The comments come amid ongoing tensions over the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran has restricted access for what it calls “unfriendly” countries while the United States maintains a naval blockade on Iranian ports.

Earlier this week, Baqaei said Iran was coordinating with Oman and other regional parties on a mechanism governing navigation through the strategic waterway.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday that Washington wanted the Strait of Hormuz to remain “free” and insisted that “no fees should be imposed.”

Trump also claimed the U.S. had “full control” over the strait and described the naval blockade on Iran as “100% effective.”

For weeks, journalists have repeatedly asked senior American officials for clarity. Questions have been put to military spokespeople, White House officials and President Donald Trump himself. Each time, the answers have been evasive, contradictory or incomplete.

The strange part is that most investigators already believe they know exactly what happened.

According to reporting from outlets including The New York Times , the BBC, Al Jazeera and the investigative group Bellingcat, the strike was almost certainly carried out by the United States .

Washington, however, still refuses to publicly admit responsibility.

The strike

To understand the controversy, it is important to understand where the school was located.

The building stood only a few hundred metres from a facility operated by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC. Military analysts say the compound functioned as a communications and logistics centre and would likely have been considered a legitimate military target during the opening phase of the conflict.

The problem is what happened alongside that strike.

The attack took place on the first day of the war. In the middle of ongoing diplomatic talks, the United States launched a sudden large-scale assault against Iranian military infrastructure.

At approximately 9:40am on 28 February, cruise missiles struck radar installations while bombs dropped by American and Israeli aircraft destroyed air defence systems and IRGC facilities across Iran.

Roughly an hour later, a military base near Minab was hit.

At some point during the attacks, children at the school were reportedly instructed to shelter inside a prayer hall while waiting for parents to collect them. Then the explosion hit.

The evidence

Investigators say the evidence pointing towards American responsibility is extensive.

Modern warfare leaves behind an enormous amount of forensic data, and analysts were able to reconstruct the attack using missile fragments, radar tracking, launch timing, satellite imagery, acoustic analysis and dozens of videos posted online.

The most significant evidence was the missile debris recovered from the scene.

Several independent analysts identified fragments consistent with a Tomahawk cruise missile, a weapon operated by the United States Navy.

Footage posted online showed another Tomahawk missile striking the nearby IRGC compound during the same attack window, while Israel publicly stated that it was not operating in the area at the time.

Initially, American officials blamed Iran itself for the explosion. Later, some suggested unnamed regional actors might have been responsible. Eventually, the White House settled on a more familiar response: that an investigation was ongoing.

Playing for time

If the evidence appears so overwhelming, why does Washington still refuse to openly acknowledge what happened?

The answer is political.

Outside the United States, many governments, analysts and observers have already reached their conclusions. Domestically, however, the calculation is very different.

As long as the administration refuses to confirm responsibility, supporters can continue dismissing reports of American involvement as propaganda, misinformation or hostile narratives pushed by Iran.

Without an official admission, there is no definitive political reckoning.

For now, at least.

That strategy, however, may not be sustainable indefinitely.

Pressure is already growing in Congress. Human rights organisations are demanding transparency, while international investigators continue collecting evidence.

If casualty estimates are accurate, the attack would represent the deadliest killing of civilians by a single American airstrike since the atomic bombing of Nagasaki.

That is not the sort of event likely to disappear quietly.

The political calculation

Timing is central to the administration’s approach.

From the White House perspective, admitting responsibility while the war is still ongoing could be politically catastrophic. Admitting it afterwards may be survivable, particularly if the administration can argue the conflict achieved a historic strategic success.

Officials are expected to frame the war as having prevented a wider regional conflict and stopped Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Under that argument, the deaths in Minab could then be presented not as meaningless, but as the tragic cost of a necessary victory.

The political optics are very different.

More than 100 children killed during an open-ended and inconclusive war would provoke outrage. More than 100 children killed during a conflict later presented as preventing nuclear war is a narrative the administration may believe the American public is more willing to accept, especially when the victims were Iranian rather than American.

That is why the investigation appears stalled.

Not abandoned. Delayed.

Waiting for a moment when the truth becomes politically manageable. World Reframed episode 41.

World Reframed is produced in London by Global South World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

ISSN 2978-4891

“We started working on it in 2011,” Putin said. “It is the most powerful missile system in the world .”

He claimed the Sarmat’s warhead power is more than four times that of any existing Western counterpart, adding that the missile’s flight path gives it greater range and accuracy.

Putin said the system would be placed on combat duty by the end of the year.

Russia also released footage of what it said was the latest successful test launch of the missile.

The Russian leader also said two other nuclear-powered systems, the Poseidon unmanned underwater vehicle and the Burevestnik global-range cruise missile, are in the final stages of development.

He added that the medium-range Oreshnik missile system is already on combat duty and can also be fitted with nuclear warheads.

The Sarmat, developed by the Makeyev Design Bureau with industry partners, is a fifth-generation intercontinental ballistic missile. Moscow says it can deliver multiple warheads and carry Avangard hypersonic glide vehicles.

The missile’s first successful launch took place on April 20, 2022, at the Plesetsk Cosmodrome in Russia’s Arkhangelsk region.

Whether you are a geography geek or a US president, maps are a good place to start.

From the Middle East, Central Asia, South Asia, and the Caucasus, Iran borders seven countries on land and six more across water.

It is also one of the world ’s oldest continuous civilisations, with a history that spans more than 4,000 years.

Today, with nearly 90 million people and a landmass exceeding 1.6 million square kilometres, Iran stands as one of the Middle East’s largest and most consequential states.

Iran’s terrain is defined by mountains and arid expanses, with little continuous flat land. The Zagros and Alborz mountain ranges dominate much of the landscape, while the Iranian Plateau forms its core.

To the east, vast deserts such as the Dasht-e Kavir and Dasht-e Lut stretch across large swathes of the country. These physical features are not just geographic, but they also shape settlement patterns, climate conditions and the development of infrastructure.

Historically, Iran was the centre of powerful empires that influenced language, trade, science and culture far beyond its borders. That legacy still runs through modern Iran, visible in its identity and regional reach. Despite invasions by Greeks, Ottomans, Russians and the British, the country has maintained a strong sense of sovereignty and identity.

Iran is far more complex, both from the inside and the outside. Farsi remains the dominant language, but the country is home to a diverse mix of ethnic groups, including Azeris, Kurds, Baloch and Arabs, all of whom contribute to its cultural and political fabric.

As an energy giant, Iran sits on some of the world’s largest oil and gas reserves , holding roughly 10% of global oil and 15% of natural gas resources.

That alone makes it a major player in global energy markets. Despite heavy international sanctions, Iran continues to export large volumes of oil, primarily to China, demonstrating its resilience and continued relevance in global supply chains.

Its economy, valued at over $400 billion, blends state control with private enterprise, anchored by energy, manufacturing and a growing technology sector.

Modern Iran, however, cannot be understood without the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

It overthrew a Western-backed monarchy and replaced it with a theocratic system that still defines the country today.

And since the Revolution, Iran has pursued an independent and often confrontational foreign policy , positioning itself as a regional power and a counterweight to Western influence.

Its network of regional alliances, often referred to as the “Axis of Resistance”, extends its influence beyond its borders, reaching into Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. Many of these connections relate to Iran's position as the dominant power of the Shia sect of Islam. In other cases, allies were drawn to Tehran by a mutual hatred of Israel.

The country is also enduring one of its worst environmental crises in decades, after more than five consecutive years of drought have pushed it toward what experts describe as “water bankruptcy.” Reservoirs are drying up, major cities are nearing “day zero” water shortages, and as many as 28 million people now face unreliable access to water. 

Even geography beyond its borders carries political weight.

The body of water to its south has been known in Iran and elsewhere for over 2,500 years as the “Persian Gulf.” Still, some Arab states refer to it as the “Arabian Gulf,” creating an ongoing geopolitical dispute.

For Iran, the name is not just symbolic; it is tied to history, identity and sovereignty.

At the edge of Iran’s southern coastline lies its most powerful strategic asset: the Strait of Hormuz.

This narrow waterway connects the Persian Gulf to the open ocean and carries more than 20% of the world’s oil supply.

It is one of the most critical chokepoints in global trade. Iran controls the northern side as well as a series of islands, and that gives it enormous leverage.

Over the decades, Tehran has repeatedly threatened to disrupt traffic through the strait during times of conflict.

And in 2026, those threats became reality, sending shocks through global energy markets.

At the same time, geopolitical tensions have sharply intensified. Following Israeli strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites in February 2026, the United States joined the conflict with direct attacks, triggering a broader regional confrontation that continued for days.

The situation has since escalated into a wider crisis affecting global energy routes. Iran has launched retaliatory missile and drone attacks, while disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil transit chokepoint, have sent shocks through global markets.

See more maps on our Instagram account.

According to Boulos, the coalition includes the African Union, the European Union, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and several regional and international partners, including Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, South Sudan, Chad, Uganda, the United Arab Emirates, the United Nations, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, and the League of Arab States. He said the group had delivered a “clear and unified message” that the war in Sudan “must end, now.”

The Berlin Principles call for an immediate humanitarian truce, followed by a ceasefire, full humanitarian access, increased funding for relief operations, and an end to external military support for the warring parties.

They also urge a renewed push for negotiated peace through an inclusive political process, a civil society-led national dialogue, and a transition to a civilian-led government.

Boulos said the principles were “not just words,” but reflected a firm collective commitment to ending the war and supporting a peaceful future for Sudan. Sudan’s civil war has entered its fourth year, with the country’s two main rival forces locked in a prolonged war of attrition.

Background

The conflict erupted on April 15, 2023, between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), led by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, widely known as Hemedti.

The fighting has left Sudan largely divided, with the SAF controlling much of the east and the RSF holding large parts of the west.

The war has triggered what is now described as the world ’s largest displacement and hunger crisis. Reports of rape and sexual violence have become widespread, while the country’s cultural heritage has also suffered severe destruction.

Beyond Sudan’s borders, the conflict has drawn in foreign interests, with more than 10 countries accused of backing opposing sides in the war.

The Jewish Association of Peru condemned the remarks, saying they lacked historical rigour and echoed “dark medieval times.” It called on Balcazar to issue a public apology.

The German Embassy in Peru also urged the president to retract the statement, describing it as “absurd” and stressing that “the Holocaust cannot be trivialised under any circumstances.”

Balcazar had not publicly responded to the backlash or issued an apology at the time of publication.

The 100-year-old showed his military awards and documents from his time in the Red Army. Serving under Soviet military leader Georgy Zhukov, Gspoyan carried out reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines to collect intelligence. During the Battle of Berlin, he sustained serious injuries from shell fragments to his back.

Doctors removed two fragments but left two near his spine due to the risk of damaging nerve endings. He marked Victory Day in the hospital.

After the war, Gspoyan remained in the military until 1951. His service earned him several honours, including the Order of the Patriotic War II degree, the Medal "For Bravery", and personal recognition from Joseph Stalin for his role in the Battle of Berlin.

Gspoyan is now the last living veteran of the 89th Taman Division. On May 9, 2025, marking the 80th anniversary of Victory, Russian President Vladimir Putin personally congratulated Armenian veterans after the parade on Red Square.

Netanyahu also warned that Israel would continue operations against threats from Lebanon. “We maintain full freedom of action against any threat. Even emerging threats,” he said, adding that Israel was determined to restore security for residents in the north.

His remarks come as a fragile U.S.-Iran ceasefire remains under strain, following weeks of fighting and disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz. Talks held in Islamabad earlier this month failed to produce a breakthrough.

In Lebanon, cross-border fire between Israel and Hezbollah has continued despite calls for de-escalation. Lebanese officials have accused Israel of violating sovereignty through air strikes and incursions, while Israel says its operations are aimed at pushing Hezbollah away from the border.

Correlation is not causation, and the report is clear about that. But drawing on 15 years of research, it concludes that climate change is making conflict more likely - not as a sole cause, but as a force that intensifies existing pressures such as poverty, weak governance , and competition over land and water.

Few people have explored this relationship as closely as Peter Schwartzstein, author of The Heat and the Fury: On the Frontlines of Climate Violence . After more than a decade reporting from over 30 countries, he argues that climate change is deeply embedded in modern conflict, even when it is not immediately visible. As he puts it: “We are not adequately taking into account how climate change is acting on other drivers of instability, like corruption and inequality and state mismanagement. And as a consequence, I think we are systematically underestimating the sheer volume of violence that has at least some kind of climate and environment component.”

Climate amplification

The European Commission identifies Iraq and the wider Middle East as regions where these risks are particularly acute. Schwartzstein spent three years in Iraq, conducting hundreds of interviews to understand how environmental stress can evolve into outright conflict. His reporting suggests that climate change often acts as an accelerant. “Perhaps the simplest way to think about climate’s contribution to violence,” he explains, “is that climate is amplifying whatever a society’s existing weaknesses are.”

In Syria, for example, a prolonged drought in the years leading up to 2011 placed immense strain on already fragile rural communities. Farmers described how worsening conditions eroded their tolerance for corruption and state neglect. As Schwartzstein recounts, “The very fact that they were facing demands for bribes at a time when their agricultural fortunes were just worsening and worsening was just a proverbial bridge too far.” In the hardest hit areas, resentment deepened, creating fertile ground for extremist recruitment. “The more drought-battered an area… the greater ISIS recruiters’ capacity to bring people into their ranks,” he says, adding: “Think of climate as a force that’s just seizing upon whatever the existing troubles are and running with it.”

In Iraq, these dynamics became even more complex. Schwartzstein found that ISIS recruiters learned to exploit not just poverty, but perceptions of inequality. Villages on the outskirts of Mosul - close enough to see the city’s relative prosperity - experienced some of the highest recruitment rates. “The very fact that they were on the doorstep of the city… meant that expansion in relative inequality was just an extremely useful recruiting lever,” he explains. Recruiters also manipulated environmental hardship for political ends, framing drought as a deliberate act by the government. “On a certain level it didn’t really matter whether local people believed this narrative… they were happy to seize upon it because it suited their priors.”

While much of the focus is on fragile states, Schwartzstein warns against viewing climate-driven instability as a distant problem. Its effects are already visible in wealthier countries. “If we look in the US, violence against women almost always spikes very aggressively in the aftermath of hurricanes,” he notes, with shelters overwhelmed in their aftermath. In Europe, rising temperatures are also linked to increased aggression. “Aggressive behaviour… is significantly more intense in summer months,” he says, pointing to physiological responses to extreme heat. Making these connections visible, he argues, helps bring the issue closer to home: “We’re that bit more likely to convey what’s going on… when describing [it] in ways that the average person… can understand.”

Political capital

Climate stress can also reshape politics. As livelihoods and landscapes change, uncertainty and anxiety create opportunities for more extreme narratives. “Populist movements are beneficiaries of climate stresses in quite a few ways,” Schwartzstein explains. Economic pressures such as inflation, combined with a broader sense of disruption, can drive shifts in voting behaviour. “Climate change contributes to… a sort of devil-may-care attitude… a shock among so many people who… notice that so much of what they love and care about is changing.” In that atmosphere, he argues, populist leaders gain traction by offering simple explanations and clear scapegoats: “That climate of shock and confusion… is the sort of political ambiance that populists tend to make hay from.”

Yet climate is not only a driver of conflict - it is also a casualty of it. In times of crisis, environmental concerns are often pushed aside as governments and populations focus on immediate survival. Schwartzstein points to Iran as a current example, where escalating tensions risk sidelining urgent climate challenges. “This is just more months - at best - in which these fast-intensifying climate shocks will be left to fester,” he warns. While acknowledging the severity of ongoing conflicts, he adds that from a global perspective, such distractions come at a high cost: “This is just the kind of… shenanigans… that we absolutely cannot afford at this time.”

World Reframed episode 36. More episodes of World Reframed.

World Reframed is produced in London by Global South World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

ISSN 2978-4891

The new policy allows Tokyo to export weapons such as fighter jets, missiles and destroyers to 17 partner countries, including the United States , Australia and the Philippines. Previously, exports were limited to non-lethal items such as rescue, transport and surveillance equipment.

Takaichi argued the shift would strengthen allied defence capabilities and help prevent conflict. “No country can protect its own peace and security alone,” she said, adding that closer defence cooperation was essential.

Takaichi also said Japan was working to ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz, as tensions persist following a fragile ceasefire between the United States and Iran .

The venue had undergone years of rehabilitation after it was struck by mortar fire in 2015, an attack that killed a child and damaged the indoor court at the height of fighting in the Syrian civil war.

Speaking at the event, al-Sharaa described basketball as “one of the games closest to our hearts,” but said it had been abandoned during years of conflict . The reopening, he suggested, was part of a broader return to normal life in the capital.

On the court, the president drew cheers from the crowd as he stepped to the free-throw line before finishing with a layup, with several cabinet ministers in attendance.

Al Sharaa’s appearance also builds on a growing public image that blends politics with informal outreach. In November 2025, ahead of a landmark visit to the United States , he was filmed playing basketball with senior American military officials, including commanders from the U.S. Central Command.

The video, shared online by Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani, showed al-Sharaa running plays alongside U.S. officers as Damascus and Washington explored closer coordination, including potential cooperation against the Islamic State group.

Trump said Washington was offering Iran a “reasonable deal” but threatened severe military action if Tehran rejected it.

“The United States will destroy all power plants and all bridges in Iran,” he said, adding that Iranian leaders “will be overthrown quickly” if they do not agree to a deal.

“If they do not accept the AGREEMENT, it will be my honor to do what needs to be done, what should have been done to Iran by other presidents over the last 47 years,” Trump wrote. “Enough of being nice!”

Confusion emerged shortly after Trump’s statement over who would represent the United States in the talks.

A White House source told AFP that Vice President JD Vance would lead the American delegation in Pakistan, alongside special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

But Trump later said Vance would not make the trip, citing security concerns.

“It’s just for safety,” Trump told ABC News . “JD is excellent.”

The Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping route through which nearly 20 percent of global hydrocarbon trade passed before the war, remained closed on Sunday amid the ongoing conflict triggered by the United States and Israel ’s military campaign against Iran on February 28.

Iran said on Saturday that it had once again shut the strategic waterway, only hours after announcing it would reopen it.

The closure came despite a truce that followed inconclusive negotiations held in Pakistan on April 11 and 12.

Tehran said it would not reopen the key maritime corridor until the United States lifts its blockade of Iranian ports.

On Sunday, Trump repeated his accusation that Iran had violated the ceasefire.

“Iran decided to fire bullets yesterday in the Strait of Hormuz: a total violation of our ceasefire agreement!” he wrote.

At least three commercial vessels attempting to pass through the strait came under gunfire on Saturday, according to the account.

Trump had earlier said a deal was “very close” and suggested Iran was ready to transfer its enriched uranium stockpile. Tehran has firmly denied agreeing to such terms, AFP reports.

Diplomatic efforts are continuing behind the scenes, with Pakistan playing a mediating role. Officials from Islamabad have engaged with Iran as well as regional powers including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. Egypt has also joined mediation efforts, saying it is “working tirelessly” toward a final agreement.

However, recent direct talks between Iran and the United States in Islamabad, the first at that level since 1979, ended without a breakthrough, and no date has been set for further negotiations.

Despite the stalled talks, Iran announced a partial reopening of its airspace and key airports, offering a limited sign of normalisation after weeks of conflict .

Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh said Iran would not accept U.S. pressure, insisting: “The Americans cannot impose their will to lay siege to Iran.” The move comes despite ongoing diplomatic efforts following a fragile two-week ceasefire between Tehran and Washington.

Shipping disruptions quickly followed. U.S. Central Command said 23 vessels had turned back under its directives since the blockade began, while maritime data showed some ships reversing course in the strait. The UK Maritime Trade Operations agency also reported that Iranian boats had opened fire on an oil tanker, though no injuries were reported.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned in a written message that the navy was “ready to make the enemy taste the bitterness of further defeats.”

Defrin said the military needs parliament to pass legislation dealing with compulsory service and to revise reserve duty rules, arguing that the current legal framework no longer matches the scale of Israel’s present security demands. He said the existing reserve service law was designed for an earlier period and now needs to be reworked to better support reservists and active-duty soldiers.

According to Defrin, the manpower gap has practical consequences on the battlefield, including thinner staffing in combat units. He said the shortage effectively means fewer troops available at the battalion level, at a time when the army says its missions are continuing to expand.

The comments come amid a broader debate in Israel over military conscription and the growing strain on reserve forces. Recent reporting has shown senior military officials warning of mounting pressure on troop numbers as the army tries to sustain operations across multiple theatres.

“Our forces are continuing to strike Hezbollah. The fighting is focused on Bint Jbeil,” Netanyahu said. “We are about to overcome Bint Jbeil. We are, in effect, about to eliminate this great stronghold of Hezbollah.”

Bint Jbeil has long been regarded as a key flashpoint along the Israel-Lebanon border and was a major battleground during the 2006 Lebanon War.

He said the US position remained “unreasonable and unrealistic”, adding that Iran had already conveyed its own position in response.

According to Baqaei, the issues under discussion are not new and Washington is already aware of Tehran’s stance from earlier negotiations, which were largely centred on the nuclear file.

He also ruled out any talks conducted on what he described as one-sided terms. “Iran will not accept negotiations in which one side seeks to impose conditions on the other,” he said.

Baqaei also dismissed reports suggesting that an extension of the ceasefire had already been agreed, saying such claims had not been confirmed and that exchanges were still being handled through Pakistani mediation.

He criticised the US naval blockade as provocative and said it was contrary to the principles of international law, warning that it could undermine the truce. The comments come as a two-week ceasefire, which began on April 8, remains in effect and is due to end on April 22.

Pakistan, which hosted the first round of talks in Islamabad, has remained a key intermediary between the two sides and is one of the few actors still trusted by both Washington and Tehran to pass messages.

His remarks, which also referenced civilian casualties in the Middle East , triggered immediate outrage in the chamber. Poland’s parliamentary speaker condemned the display as “unjustified” and said penalties would be proposed for using a banned symbol.

The Embassy of Israel in Warsaw denounced the incident as an “antisemitic horror,” urging Polish authorities to respond.

The controversy comes as Poland marked the annual March of the Living at the former Nazi death camp Auschwitz, amplifying sensitivities around Holocaust imagery.

Berkowicz’s intervention also unfolded against a backdrop of escalating regional tensions. Israeli military operations in Gaza and Lebanon have continued despite a ceasefire agreed in October 2025, with reported casualties in the thousands and widespread displacement.

Lebanese officials have signalled openness to a pause in military activity—if not a full ceasefire—ahead of planned talks with Israel. The initiative reflects growing pressure to contain escalating violence along the border, as diplomatic efforts intensify. Authorities stressed that halting hostilities could create conditions for meaningful negotiations, although divisions remain internally over how to approach Israel. The talks are seen as a rare opportunity to de-escalate a conflict that has rapidly worsened in recent weeks. However, the absence of consensus within Lebanon complicates the government’s position. The outcome will likely depend on both regional dynamics and international mediation efforts.

Marco Rubio to join historic Lebanon–Israel talks

Senior US officials, including Marco Rubio, are set to participate in high-level talks between Lebanon and Israel in Washington. The meeting marks the first direct engagement between the two sides in decades, underscoring the urgency of the crisis. According to reports, discussions will focus on securing a ceasefire and addressing broader security concerns, particularly the role of armed groups. Washington’s involvement highlights the international dimension of the conflict and efforts to broker stability. However, expectations remain cautious given entrenched positions on both sides. The talks come amid ongoing violence and humanitarian concerns.

Government bans non-state weapons in Beirut

The Lebanese government has moved to ban the presence of non-state weapons in Beirut, reinforcing its authority over security matters. The decision forms part of broader efforts to assert state control and limit the influence of armed groups such as Hezbollah. Officials emphasised that all military activity must fall under state institutions, signalling a significant policy shift. The measure follows escalating tensions and internal criticism over the role of militias in dragging Lebanon into conflict. Analysts warn that enforcing the ban could prove challenging given Hezbollah’s entrenched position. Nonetheless, the move reflects increasing pressure for centralised control

Civilian toll mounts as Israeli airstrikes continue

The number of casualties in Lebanon has surpassed 1,900 as Israeli airstrikes continue across the country, according to media reports. The bombardment has caused widespread destruction in urban and rural areas, displacing large numbers of civilians. Hospitals and emergency services are under severe strain as they respond to the growing humanitarian crisis. The escalation follows renewed hostilities linked to the broader regional conflict involving Iran and allied groups. International actors have raised concerns over the scale of the violence and its impact on civilians. Despite diplomatic efforts, there are few signs of an immediate de-escalation.

Hezbollah tensions rise amid protests and army warnings

Tensions within Lebanon are intensifying as Hezbollah faces growing opposition and protests. Demonstrations have erupted against the group’s actions, which many blame for drawing the country deeper into conflict. In response, the Lebanese army has warned it may intervene firmly to maintain order and uphold state authority. The standoff highlights deep divisions within Lebanese society over Hezbollah’s role and influence. Political leaders are increasingly under pressure to balance internal stability with external threats. The situation remains volatile as both political and security tensions continue to escalate.

He added: “There is more to do, and we are doing it… we have effectively changed the face of the Middle East . Our enemies, Iran and the axis of evil, came to destroy us, and now they are simply fighting for their survival.”

Netanyahu was accompanied by Defence Minister Israel Katz, Israel Defence Forces Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir, and Northern Command head Major General Rafi Milo, according to reports.

The remarks come as the Lebanese presidency confirmed direct talks with Israel will begin on Tuesday at the US State Department in Washington, even as Israeli airstrikes continue despite a ceasefire agreed last week between the United States , Israel and Iran’s allies.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun is pressing for an immediate and stable ceasefire amid a worsening humanitarian situation, while Israel is expected to demand the full disarmament of Hezbollah and tighter border security.

Separately, US Vice President JD Vance held 21 hours of talks with Iran ian officials in Islamabad, which ended on Sunday without agreement. Vance said the outcome was “bad news for Iran, much more than it's bad news for the United States."

“We’ve made very clear what our red lines are,” he said, adding that the US wants a long-term commitment from Iran not to pursue a nuclear weapon. “We haven’t seen that yet.”

He said the US left the talks with a “final and best offer” still on the table and insisted the delegation had negotiated in good faith.

“I think that we were quite flexible. We were quite accommodating,” Vance said.

He added that President Donald Trump was kept informed throughout the talks and praised Pakistan for trying to help both sides reach an agreement.

The negotiations followed a conditional two-week ceasefire announced on Wednesday, tied to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

Miadfar said the heaviest casualties were recorded in Tehran, Khuzestan, Lorestan, Isfahan, Kermanshah and Ilam provinces. He described one of the worst incidents as taking place at a school in Minab, saying the number of victims there included large numbers of women and minors. He also said Iran’s emergency response system had been hit hard, with “118 people ” injured among responders, “26” killed, and dozens of bases and ambulances damaged, Viory reports.

His remarks came as diplomacy between Tehran and Washington remained deadlocked. U.S. and Iranian delegations ended talks in Islamabad without an agreement after marathon negotiations, casting fresh doubt over a fragile two-week ceasefire reached earlier this week.

That ceasefire, brokered with Pakistani mediation, was tied to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Although the truce initially eased fears of a wider regional war, the breakdown in talks has renewed uncertainty over both the ceasefire and shipping through the strait.

Khamenei’s statement came despite a fragile two-week ceasefire agreed this week between Washington and Tehran, with further talks expected in Islamabad under Pakistani mediation. The truce has been presented by both sides as a temporary opening for diplomacy , but its durability remains in doubt amid continued regional tensions.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh said the Strait of Hormuz remained open, but added that traffic was still subject to technical restrictions because of the recent war and measures imposed during the conflict. He said vessels seeking passage would need to coordinate with Iran’s military , underlining that navigation through the chokepoint remains tightly controlled.

The status of Hormuz remains central to the ceasefire, with U.S. President Donald Trump insisting that the waterway must be fully reopened. Shipping data and industry reports suggest traffic is still heavily restricted, with many vessels waiting to transit the route.

The pope also invited Catholics to join him for a prayer vigil for peace at St Peter’s Basilica on Saturday, April 11, saying the current moment required prayer as delicate diplomatic efforts continued. He has repeatedly urged world leaders to choose negotiation over war in recent weeks.

His remarks came after Washington and Tehran announced a provisional two-week ceasefire, brokered by Pakistan, under which Iran agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and both sides were expected to continue talks in Islamabad. President Donald Trump said he had suspended threatened attacks on Iran as part of the deal.

The truce has been welcomed internationally as a chance to step back from a wider regional war, though its durability remains uncertain amid fresh tensions involving Lebanon and shipping through Hormuz. Global markets initially rallied on the news , while diplomats cautioned that only sustained negotiations could turn the pause into a lasting settlement.

But can’t they really?

About the ICC

The ICC was created by the Rome Statute as a court of last resort. It prosecutes individuals, not states, and covers four core crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression. 

It is meant to step in only when national authorities are unwilling or unable genuinely to investigate and prosecute. Its jurisdiction is also limited. In general, the court can act when the alleged crimes were committed on the territory of a state party, by a national of a state party, or when the UN Security Council refers a situation to it. 

As of now, 125 countries are parties to the Rome Statute : 33 African States, 19 Asia-Pacific States, 20 countries from Eastern Europe, 28 Latin American and Caribbean States, and 25 Western European and other States.

Important to note: the United States and Israel are not parties to the statute. 

Most of ICC’s defendants are from the Global South

That legal architecture helps explain why the ICC’s public defendants list remains heavily weighted towards weaker or more internationally exposed states. 

ICC’s website currently lists 74 defendants. The roster is dominated by African situations, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo (6), Uganda (5), Sudan (7), the Central African Republic (12), Kenya (9), Libya (14), Côte d’Ivoire (3) and Mali (3). The remainder stretches across places such as Afghanistan (2), Georgia (3), Ukraine (6), the State of Palestine (3) and the Philippines (1). 

An overwhelming majority — 51 defendants — face war crimes allegations. These include Sudan’s Abd-Al-Rahman, who is suspected of 31 counts of war crimes and is in ICC custody, and Libya’s Khaled Mohamed Ali El Hishri, better known as “El Hishri.”

Warrants for Netanyahu, Putin

That is not to say the court has never tried to go after bigger fish.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is the subject of an ICC arrest warrant for the alleged war crimes of unlawfully deporting and transferring Ukrainian children. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant are also the subjects of ICC warrants after judges said there were reasonable grounds to believe they bore criminal responsibility for, among other acts, starvation as a method of warfare, murder, persecution and intentionally directing attacks against civilians in Gaza. 

Those cases show that the court can, at least on paper, move against leaders backed by strong states. But a warrant is not an arrest, and the court has no police force of its own. It depends on state cooperation.

Can they get Trump?

The Iran war illustrates the next barrier. There are already credible traces of conduct that international humanitarian law treats as potentially criminal. 

For instance, attacks on civilian installations can constitute war crimes if they fail the tests of military necessity, distinction and proportionality. Trump’s threats against bridges and power plants therefore fall squarely within such conduct.

In a joint letter published on April 2, more than 100 US-based international law experts expressed “serious concerns about violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including potential war crimes.”

They cited Trump’s threats to Iran’s energy infrastructure, as well as the February 28 strike on Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab, which resulted in the deaths of at least 175 people, many of them children.

“The strike likely violates international humanitarian law, and if evidence is found that those responsible were reckless, it could also be a war crime. The strike is among the deadliest single attacks by the U.S. military on civilians in recent decades,” the lawyers noted.

So can the ICC get Trump or Netanyahu? Netanyahu is already within the court’s reach because the judges have said the court has jurisdiction in the State of Palestine and have rejected Israel’s challenge. 

Trump is a different case. 

Washington has gone beyond non-membership and moved to punish the court itself. In a February 2025 order, the White House called the ICC’s actions against the US and Israel “illegitimate and baseless,” said neither country had accepted the court’s jurisdiction, and authorised sanctions, asset blocking and visa restrictions against ICC officials and those assisting them. 

In practice, that leaves the ICC confronting the same problem critics have long identified: it can name the powerful, but it is far better equipped to jail the weak.

"In the light of Easter, let us allow ourselves to be amazed by Christ! Let us allow our hearts to be transformed by his immense love for us! Let those who have weapons lay them down! Let those who have the power to unleash wars choose peace! Not a peace imposed by force, but through dialogue! Not with the desire to dominate others, but to encounter them!" he said.

Leo also warned against what he described as a growing desensitisation to violence, lamenting a world becoming indifferent to the deaths of thousands and the wider consequences of conflict.

"On this day of celebration, let us abandon every desire for conflict, domination, and power, and implore the Lord to grant his peace to a world ravaged by wars and marked by a hatred and indifference that make us feel powerless in the face of evil," the pontiff, who hails from Chicago in the United States , said.

Popes have long been viewed as a moral compass in times of crisis, and Leo’s Easter message appeared to continue that tradition — while also reflecting the unique position of the papacy as both a spiritual authority and a head of state.

Although the pontiff did not name specific leaders in his Easter address, his remarks come against the backdrop of escalating global tensions and ongoing conflicts .

Just days earlier, however, Leo had been more direct.

Speaking to journalists, he referenced remarks by Donald Trump, saying he hoped the US leader was seeking an “off-ramp” to reduce violence and halt the cycle of hatred, particularly in conflict zones such as the Middle East.

He also called on leaders to return to dialogue and reduce the level of violence , stressing that peace — especially during Easter — should prevail.

As conflicts persist across multiple regions, Leo’s call for restraint, dialogue and peace positions the Vatican once again at the centre of global appeals for an end to violence.

Sadrist Movement official Sabah al-Saadi said the demonstrations reflected Iraqis’ desire for peace, freedom and dignity, while rejecting aggression, colonialism and foreign domination in the region. Another protester, Sheikh Muhammad al-Atwani, denounced attacks on what he described as safe areas, including schools sheltering families and children, and reaffirmed opposition to occupation.

The protests followed a statement issued by al-Sadr earlier in the week urging Iraqis to take to the streets to condemn what he called “Zionist-American aggression” and to call for peace . Demonstrators said Iraq and the wider region wanted stability, but rejected what they described as U.S.-Israeli hegemony against Arab and Muslim peoples.

Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters later praised Iraq’s position, thanking in particular the Popular Mobilisation forces, resistance factions and the Shiite community for their support. It also said Iraq would be exempt from any Iranian transit restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Regional tensions have soared since the United States and Israel launched a joint military operation against Iran on February 28, amid diplomatic efforts over Tehran’s nuclear and missile programmes.

The rescue came after a U.S. F-15E was shot down over Iran, triggering a nearly two-day search for its second crew member. U.S. forces eventually extracted the wounded officer in a high-risk operation that U.S. media said involved special operations troops and a CIA deception effort to mislead Iranian forces.

The episode has unfolded against the backdrop of the widening U.S.-Iran war, which began after U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28.

Reuters, citing an Israeli security official, reported that Israeli intelligence helped the rescue mission and that Israel paused operations in the area to support it, underlining the close coordination between Washington and Tel Aviv as the conflict deepens.

Figures drawn from multiple media and defence sources indicate that more than 1,300 ballistic missiles and nearly 3,900 drones were deployed by Iran in roughly the first five weeks of the conflict, underscoring the scale of its initial offensive.

The bulk of Iran’s launches occurred in the opening phase of the conflict . In the first week alone, hundreds of missiles and over a thousand drones were reportedly fired, reflecting what analysts describe as a “shock-and-saturation” strategy aimed at overwhelming air defence systems.

Data compiled by Al Jazeera shows that in the first 24 hours, Iran fired 167 missiles and over 500 drones at targets in the region, including the United Arab Emirates.

This intensity was consistent with broader patterns observed in the early days of the conflict, when large salvos were used to expand the battlefield and test defensive systems across multiple countries.

However, the pace of launches dropped significantly in subsequent weeks.

Sustained U.S. and Israeli airstrikes targeting missile infrastructure and launch sites led to a dramatic reduction in Iran’s firing rate , in some cases by up to 90% compared with the early days of the war.

By mid-conflict, Iran was launching roughly 20 to 30 missiles per day on average, alongside continued drone attacks, according to defence analysts tracking the war.

Despite the reduction, attacks continued across the region, with Gulf states reporting interceptions of missiles and drones targeting energy infrastructure and military bases.

One of the most notable trends has been the scale of drone warfare. Drones accounted for the majority of Iran’s launches during the first five weeks, reflecting their lower cost and ability to evade defences when used in large numbers.

Even as launch rates declined, Western intelligence assessments suggest Iran retained a significant portion of its arsenal and operational capacity.

Recent reporting indicates that only part of Iran’s missile and drone inventory has been destroyed, with mobile launch systems and underground storage allowing continued attacks despite heavy bombardment.

“We are in touch with Iran and other countries there to see how best we can get unimpeded transit and safe transit for our ships, which are carrying products including LPG, LNG and other products. Through this conversation that we have had over the last several days, we have had six Indian ships which have been able to safely cross Hormuz and we continue to be in touch with relevant parties on this matter,” Viory quotes.

He said New Delhi would continue engaging with relevant parties to safeguard the movement of Indian vessels through the strategic waterway.

The comments came hours after reports that the bridge, a major artery linking Tehran and Karaj, was hit in two waves of US airstrikes. Iranian state media said the second strike occurred while emergency teams were already responding to the first, Viory reports.

Iranian officials said the strikes killed eight people and wounded 95, while US officials cited in international media described the bridge as a key route they claimed was being used to move military supplies.

Scaled-down ‘Visita Iglesia’

The impact of higher fuel prices is most visible in Visita Iglesia, a Maundy Thursday tradition where devotees visit seven or more churches to pray the 14 Stations of the Cross

This year, some Catholics are compressing the ritual — opting to visit just one church and complete all 14 stations within its premises, rather than travelling across multiple locations.

Others are limiting their routes to nearby parishes, abandoning longer trips that previously stretched to provinces such as Pampanga, Ilocos or Tagaytay.

The shift reflects the sharp rise in fuel prices, with gasoline costs nearly doubling in some cases, prompting households to cut back not only on travel but also on electricity and other daily expenses.

Urban centres such as Quezon City and Manila have seen steady foot traffic in major churches, suggesting that while mobility has been curtailed, participation in the tradition remains intact — albeit in a more localised form.

‘Jesus’ prays for the Middle East

In Pampanga, one of the country’s most extreme expressions of Holy Week devotion has taken on a contemporary geopolitical dimension.

In San Pedro Cutud, San Fernando, a long-time devotee known as the “Christ of Pampanga” marked his final crucifixion after 37 years — dedicating the act to prayers for peace in the Middle East.

The ritual, in which participants are nailed to wooden crosses, drew about 8,000 spectators at the main site and more than 15,000 across five locations this year, according to organisers.

The annual reenactment, already physically demanding, unfolded under intense heat, with some attendees fainting during the ceremonies, though no major incidents were reported.

The retiring devotee, aged 65 and managing health issues including asthma, required oxygen support after the performance — underscoring both the personal toll and enduring appeal of the tradition, which continues to draw both local and foreign visitors.

Travel demand still up 50%

Despite mounting cost pressures, data suggest that Filipinos are still travelling in large numbers during Holy Week — though with notable adjustments.

Outbound travel demand rose by 50% year-on-year for the April 1 to 12 period, while domestic bookings increased by 25%, according to travel platform Trip.com.

However, travellers are increasingly favouring destinations closer to home, particularly within Asia. Hong Kong, Tokyo and Singapore topped outbound preferences, followed by Bangkok and Taipei, with longer-haul trips to Europe and the United States seeing reduced demand as airfares climbed sharply.

Holy Week remains one of the Philippines’ busiest travel periods, with bookings made earlier — averaging 74 days in advance — as travellers seek to manage rising costs.

"They were the bully of the Middle East, but they're the bully no longer. This is a true investment in your children and your grandchildren's future. The whole world is watching, and they can't believe the power, strength, and brilliance," he said.

Iran—by this very name, character, and identity—is one of the oldest continuous civilizations in human history . Despite its historical and geographical advantages at various times, Iran has never, in its modern history, chosen the path of aggression, expansion, colonialism, or domination. Even after enduring occupation, invasion, and sustained pressure from global powers—and despite possessing military superiority over many of its neighbors—Iran has never initiated a war. Yet it has resolutely and bravely repelled those who have attacked it.

The Iranian people harbor no enmity toward other nations, including the people of America, Europe, or neighboring countries. Even in the face of repeated foreign interventions and pressures throughout their proud history, Iranians have consistently drawn a clear distinction between governments and the peoples they govern. This is a deeply rooted principle in Iranian culture and collective consciousness—not a temporary political stance.

For this reason, portraying Iran as a threat is neither consistent with historical reality nor with present-day observable facts. Such a perception is the product of political and economic whims of the powerful—the need to manufacture an enemy in order to justify pressure, maintain military dominance, sustain the arms industry, and control strategic markets. In such an environment, if a threat does not exist, it is invented.

Within this same framework, the United States has concentrated the largest number of its forces, bases, and military capabilities around Iran—a country that, at least since the founding of the United States, has never initiated a war. Recent American aggressions launched from these very bases have demonstrated how threatening such a military presence truly is. Naturally, no country confronted with such conditions would forgo strengthening its defensive capabilities. What Iran has done—and continues to do—is a measured response grounded in legitimate self-defense, and by no means an initiation of war or aggression.

Relations between Iran and the United States were not originally hostile, and early interactions between the Iranian and American people were not marred with hostility or tension. The turning point, however, was the 1953 coup d’état—an illegal American intervention aimed at preventing the nationalization of Iran’s own resources. That coup disrupted Iran’s democratic process, reinstated dictatorship, and sowed deep distrust among Iranians toward U.S. policies.

This distrust deepened further with America’s support for the Shah’s regime, its backing of Saddam Hussein during the imposed war of the 1980s, the imposition of the longest and most comprehensive sanctions in modern history, and ultimately, unprovoked military aggression—twice, in the midst of negotiations—against Iran.

Yet all these pressures have failed to weaken Iran. On the contrary, the country has grown stronger in many areas: literacy rates have tripled—from roughly 30% before the Islamic Revolution to over 90% today; higher education has expanded dramatically; significant advances have been achieved in modern technology; healthcare services have improved; and infrastructure has developed at a pace and scale incomparable to the past. These are measurable, observable realities that stand independent of fabricated narratives.

At the same time, the destructive and inhumane impact of sanctions, war, and aggression on the lives of the resilient Iranian people must not be underestimated. The continuation of military aggression and recent bombings profoundly affect people’s lives, attitudes, and perspectives. This reflects a fundamental human truth: when war inflicts irreparable harm on lives, homes, cities, and futures, people will not remain indifferent toward those responsible.

This raises a fundamental question: Exactly which of the American people’s interests are truly being served by this war? Was there any objective threat from Iran to justify such behavior? Does the massacre of innocent children , the destruction of cancer-treatment pharmaceutical facilities, or boasting about bombing a country “back to the stone ages” serve any purpose other than further damaging the United States’ global standing?

Iran pursued negotiations, reached an agreement, and fulfilled all its commitments. The decision to withdraw from that agreement, escalate toward confrontation, and launch two acts of aggression in the midst of negotiations were destructive choices made by the U.S. government—choices that served the delusions of a foreign aggressor.

Attacking Iran’s vital infrastructure—including energy and industrial facilities—directly targets the Iranian people. Beyond constituting a war crime, such actions carry consequences that extend far beyond Iran’s borders. They generate instability, increase human and economic costs, and perpetuate cycles of tension, planting seeds of resentment that will endure for years. This is not a demonstration of strength; it is a sign of strategic bewilderment and an inability to achieve a sustainable solution.

Is it not also the case that America has entered this aggression as a proxy for Israel , influenced and manipulated by that regime? Is it not true that Israel, by manufacturing an Iranian threat, seeks to divert global attention away from its crimes toward the Palestinians? Is it not evident that Israel now aims to fight Iran to the last American soldier and the last American taxpayer dollar—shifting the burden of its delusions onto Iran, the region, and the United States itself in pursuit of illegitimate interests?

Is “America First” truly among the priorities of the U.S. government today?

I invite you to look beyond the machinery of misinformation—an integral part of this aggression—and instead speak with those who have visited Iran. Observe the many accomplished Iranian immigrants—educated in Iran—who now teach and conduct research at the world ’s most prestigious universities, or contribute to the most advanced technology firms in the West. Do these realities align with the distortions you are being told about Iran and its people?

Today, the world stands at a crossroads. Continuing along the path of confrontation is more costly and futile than ever before. The choice between confrontation and engagement is both real and consequential; its outcome will shape the future for generations to come. Throughout its millennia of proud history, Iran has outlasted many aggressors. All that remains of them are tarnished names in history, while Iran endures—resilient, dignified, and proud.

Trump’s claim has not been confirmed by Iranian officials.

His remarks come as the conflict — now in its second month — intensifies pressure on one of the world ’s most critical oil transit routes. The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway linking the Persian Gulf to global markets, handles a significant share of global oil shipments.

Washington has accused Tehran of effectively blockading the strait, disrupting energy flows and driving volatility in oil prices.

The US president also struck a combative tone, warning that military action would continue in the absence of concessions. “Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion,” he said.

Earlier, Trump suggested that successive waves of US-Israeli strikes had already reshaped Iran’s leadership, claiming without evidence that a “new regime” had emerged following the deaths of senior officials.

Tehran has not acknowledged any ceasefire request or direct negotiations with Washington.

He added that the Pope’s call for “the laying down of arms and the renunciation of violence” had “resonated profoundly,” describing it as consistent with the teachings of major world religions.

“Whether we look to Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism or any of the world's great spiritual traditions, the message is fundamentally the same: love, compassion, tolerance, and self-discipline,” the Dalai Lama said. “Violence finds no true home in any of these teachings.”

The statement comes as conflicts in the Middle East and between Russia and Ukraine continue, with limited signs of near-term diplomatic resolution.

“History has shown us time and again that violence only begets more violence and is never a lasting foundation for peace,” he said.

The Dalai Lama called for efforts to resolve conflicts through non-violent means, saying: “An enduring resolution to conflict, including the ones we see in the Middle East or between Russia and Ukraine, must be rooted in dialogue, diplomacy and mutual respect.”

He added that such efforts should be “approached with the understanding that, at the deepest level, we are all brothers and sisters.”

Pope Leo XIV — the first American pontiff — said in his Palm Sunday homily at St. Peter’s Square that “Jesus does not listen to prayers of those who wage war, adding that the Lord “always rejects violence.”

In his message, the Dalai Lama said a prayer for an end to ongoing conflicts : 

“I urge for and pray that the violence and conflicts may soon come to an end.”

Will you be done within a week, asked a reporter?

"No", Trump said. But "soon".

The press conference Donald Trump gave in the White House didn't exactly clear things up on when the conflict in the Middle East might wind down, from an American perspective at least. But it did give a lot of clues as to Trump's thinking.

A necessary condition, he said, would be a situation: "Where they're not going to be starting the following day to develop a nuclear weapon." But last year, he had already "obliterated" Iran's nuclear capabilities. That was the successful outcome of 2025's operation Midnight Hammer.

He was asked about his promise to help the Iranian people .

"I'd like to," he replied. "If they can behave. But they've been very menacing. You know, they're great people. They have an amazing population . It's amazing. Smart, brilliant, energetic. They have a great population. I'd love to help them, but they have to be in a system that allows them to be helped. And right now, they're in a system that only allows failure."

The early calls for regime change seem to have been dropped as the Iranian government shows no sign of loosening its grip on power. Trump indicated that he wanted an arrangement like the one he enjoys with Venezuela, whose new leader is cooperating closely with the US. But he also held back from pledging to replace Iran’s new Supreme Leader, who represents complete continuity from his predecessor and father Ali Khamenei.

Israel's views on the matter seem to differ. They have promised to kill Iran's new leader and overthrow the government , and Benjamin Netanyahu has said his country is not done.

The most uncomfortable moment in the Miami press conference came when the US president was pressed on his claim that Iran had been responsible for hitting a primary school and killing more than 170 of its own citizens, many of them children. Video analysis shows a missile identified as a US-made Tomahawk striking an adjacent military base.

Trump claimed, unfeasibly, that Iran might have obtained one of the US's most prized missiles, together with the skills and systems required to fire it, but finished up promising to accept the results of a US report into the incident.

Overall, the message to the world is that Trump is feeling the impact from surging oil prices and is ready to end the conflict if it starts seriously hurting popularity at home. His message to Tehran, which had been "unconditional surrender or death", now appears to be: hold tight, calm things down and we can get back to business as usual.

World Reframed episode 33 

World Reframed is produced in London by Global South World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

Afghan Taliban officials said renewed clashes on Wednesday came after a temporary Eid ceasefire expired, killing at least two civilians in eastern Afghanistan, while each side accused the other of starting the exchange.

That has not stopped Islamabad from making a conspicuously public play for a role in the Middle East crisis.

Since the US-Israel war on Iran began on Feb. 28, Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership have been engaging what one of the source reports described as “regional and friendly countries” while repeatedly calling for de-escalation. 

Foreign Office spokesman Tahir Andrabi said earlier this week that Pakistan remained committed to resolving the conflict “through diplomatic means and engagements,” even as he urged the media to avoid speculation.

In a post on X, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif formally offered Islamabad as a venue for talks between Iranian and US officials, saying Pakistan stood “ready and honoured” to host “meaningful and conclusive talks” if both sides agreed. 

Sharif tagged President Donald Trump, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US special envoy Steve Witkoff. The idea of Islamabad hosting talks had in fact come from Washington, reporters revealed. Trump later shared Sharif’s post on Truth Social.

A messenger to Tehran

Pakistan’s role has not been limited to offering conference rooms.

Washington had sent a peace proposal to Tehran through Pakistan, with Reuters and the New York Times naming Islamabad as the messenger. A senior Iranian official told Reuters that either Turkey or Pakistan was being considered as a possible venue if talks advanced. 

Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, added to the speculation when he said he thought talks could take place in Islamabad over the weekend, though he stressed nothing had been settled.

Pakistani officials then moved from hint to confirmation, though not all the way to clarity. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar said on X on Thursday that “indirect US-Iran talks” were taking place through messages relayed by Pakistan. He added that the United States had shared 15 points that Iran was considering. 

But he stopped short of saying Pakistan would definitely host any face-to-face meeting. Andrabi did the same in his weekly briefing, insisting this was a “process,” not an “event,” and saying any concrete developments would be announced later. He also rejected suggestions that security concerns were holding up Islamabad as a venue, saying Pakistan was “very safe and secure.”

Walking a tightrope

Islamabad has also sought to show that it has access to both sides. Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, spoke with Trump on March 23, while Sharif spoke the next day with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. 

In the Senate, Dar said he had conveyed Tehran’s position to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and backed Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy, while also making clear that Pakistan “would not allow itself to be dragged into a broader regional conflict.”

About 35,000 Pakistanis were in Iran and that 792 had already been evacuated by land through the Taftan-Zahedan crossing.

Still, Pakistan’s emergence as a mediator remains real but provisional. The White House has warned against treating reported talks as official, and Araghchi has said exchanges through mediators do not amount to negotiations with Washington. 

For now, Pakistan is trying to end one war — even as it fights another at home.

Prabowo pointed to Pakistan’s response to similar pressures, including pay cuts for officials, remote working arrangements and delays to non-essential spending, as a model for Indonesia.

The proposal has since drawn support from several parties within the governing coalition. The Golkar Party, which holds a significant share of cabinet posts, said it was prepared to comply.

“If the country requires it, Golkar is ready for its members serving in the cabinet and the legislature to have their salaries cut,” secretary-general Muhammad Sarmuji said, describing the move as a signal of the government ’s “willingness to adapt.”

The National Mandate Party (PAN) also backed the plan. Deputy chair Eddy Soeparno said the party would “stand at the forefront” of efforts to ensure public acceptance if the policy is implemented.

Even the opposition Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) has not objected, though it stressed that any cuts should begin at the highest levels of government. Lawmaker Andreas Hugo Pareira said savings “should start with the top, from the President and Vice President down.”

Several cabinet members have echoed that stance. Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai said he would accept a pay cut “even if I don’t receive a salary… for the greater good,” while Finance Minister Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa confirmed the government was reviewing the proposal’s details.

The executive order frames the US-Israel-Iran conflict as an external shock that could quickly spill into inflation in an economy that imports most of its fuel. To blunt that impact, the government said it will roll out targeted fuel support for key sectors, tighten enforcement against hoarding and profiteering, and accelerate approvals for projects meant to stabilise supply and electricity generation, The Straits Times reports.

Meanwhile, Jeepney drivers have staged transport strikes over rising diesel costs, arguing that higher fuel prices are cutting into already slim earnings. In the aviation sector, budget carrier Cebu Pacific has suspended several international routes until October, citing operational adjustments due to the rise in fuel costs and regional uncertainty.

Marcos also warned that tougher measures could follow if conditions deteriorate further, including possible restrictions on flights.

The emergency steps can remain in force for up to one year unless lifted earlier.