Top World News

Over the past week, Donald Trump has cycled through claiming the United States needs no assistance from allies in its Iran conflict, then requesting their support, and finally expressing rage at their refusal—a pattern that reflects an escalating personal crisis as the war continues and public approval declines.Greg Sargent of The New Republic identifies this behavior as evidence of Trump's central "political weakness": his inability to control himself, which has trapped him in a corner regarding Iran with no path forward that serves his political interests.The Strait of Hormuz closure sits at the core of Trump's predicament, providing Iran with significant strategic advantage.The underlying dynamic reveals Trump's calculation: he recognizes that reopening the strait presents serious challenges and that escalating military action carries substantial political risks for both him and the GOP heading into midterms. His strategy involves enlisting allies to share both the political burden and potential blame for either failure to reopen the strait or any military setbacks.This approach lacks merit. Reopening the strait is genuinely difficult. The geographic reality presents a legitimate obstacle because its geography privileges Iran by enabling small vessels to inflict disproportionate damage and casualties. According to Tom Nichols, advisers informed Trump of all this in advance, but he assumed our strength would overwhelm such boring complexities, and he never developed a plan B.Trump's antagonism toward allies compounds the problem. He has spent the past year weakening alliances across the board, issuing repeated threats to invade territories like Greenland and imposing tariffs on allied nations seemingly motivated primarily by nationalist aggression.Trump faces a difficult position. He will bear responsibility for the global consequences of the strait closure—including rising prices on gas and other products affecting American consumers. However, military action to reopen it could generate its own political costs. This dilemma stems from geographic realities that strengthen Iran's capacity to cause significant damage despite its diminished military capabilities. Yet as Bill Kristol details, no one around Trump appears able to coax him to reason through these fundamentals.Voters are unlikely to hold NATO allies responsible for America's weakening commitment to the alliance or for declining to rescue the nation from a crisis of Trump's making. Instead, public blame will rest with Trump. This reality explains his intense frustration—he understands he will be held accountable for this failure, and he recognizes no clear path to resolution.

At least 400 killed in Pakistan’s strike on drug rehab centre, Taliban say, with families searching unmarked mass gravesSohrab Faqiri spent Eid, the Muslim festival to mark the end of the fasting month of Ramadan, looking for the grave of his brother, killed in a massive Pakistan airstrike on Kabul this week.Pakistan’s bombardment campaign, on what it says is terrorist and military infrastructure in neighbouring Afghanistan, appeared to have gone catastrophically wrong. A rehabilitation centre for drug addicts was hit on Monday night, according to the United Nations and the Afghan authorities. The UN’s preliminary death toll is 143 people, while the Taliban administration puts the figure at more than 400 dead. Continue reading...

President Donald Trump got a harsh reminder on Friday as gas prices soared amid the ongoing Iran war. CNBC anchor Brian Sullivan suggested that as the economy takes a hit amid the conflict in the Middle East, people are still not likely to cut back on things such as subscriptions for Spotify and Netflix. "I find it hard to believe that people are going to cancel their Spotify account at 19 bucks a month or Netflix at 22 bucks a month because of the war in Iran and slightly higher gas prices, which, while painful, I don't think they're enough to change people's behavior over a couple of dollars here and there," Sullivan said. Tom Lee, entrepreneur and financial analyst, described how the economic downturn wasn't just temporary. "Absolutely not," Lee said. "I mean, people do need to realize that volatility is here to stay simply because the options markets have gotten too big to ignore. They are the story. And so they have a there's a lot of mechanical volatility that gets created that has nothing to do with fundamentals."

President Donald Trump's administration is considering relenting on a key demand from Senate Democrats in exchange for funding for the Department of Homeland Security.On Friday, NBC News correspondent Julie Tsirkin reported that border czar Tom Homan was expected to meet with Democrats later in the day to discuss the ongoing partial government shutdown. Negotiations have focused on reforms of two agencies: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).The White House was open to "compromising on other asks from Democrats," Tsirkin was told after speaking with Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD).According to the report, "agents unmasking is being discussed, with restrictions."Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) had also agreed to use judicial warrants for home entries if he were made Homeland Security secretary.The negotiations come after immigration enforcement officials killed two U.S. citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, in Minnesota.

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) refused to acknowledge that there was not an "imminent" nuclear threat before President Donald Trump struck Iran by insisting that the word was too "subjective" to debate.During a Thursday interview on CNN, host Boris Sanchez noted that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard had deflected a question about an imminent Iranian nuclear threat by arguing that only the president could define what "imminent" means."I'd say it's a persistent threat," Crenshaw dodged. "I mean, everyone's really getting hung up on the word imminent. And let's be clear about the word imminent. It's a subjective word.""Everyone's getting hung up on this, and I'm not sure why," he complained. "I don't view this conflict with Iran as just a rash decision by the president. I view it as something that was much more inevitable."Sanchez pointed out why Crenshaw, as a member of Congress, should be concerned with the definition of "imminent.""I guess, Congressman, part of the concern is that the president is only supposed to act unilaterally without input from Congress if there's going to be an imminent strike on Americans," the CNN host observed. "In other words, if there is an immediate danger to American lives, that's different than saying that Iran has a persistent threat or eventually may have the capacity to harm Americans on the mainland, no?""I don't think it's different at all," Crenshaw disagreed. "I think you phrased the same thing in two different ways.""What is imminent is the idea that you might have another North Korea," he added. "You're at a point in history where you either decide that you're not going to have another North Korea or you are. And right now, the only way to prevent that, the second North Korea, a madman with a bomb, is to use conventional means."U.S. law defines "imminent threat" as "the imminence of any natural, technological, or other occurrence which, in determination of a Federal Agency Head, because of its size or intent, seriously degrades or threatens the national security of the United States such that an emergency action would be impeded if the Federal Agency were to concurrently meet its historic preservation responsibilities under section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended."

UK’s bilateral aid to African countries, which funds areas such as schools and clinics, to be cut by almost £900m by 2028-29Some of the world’s poorest countries will lose out on UK aid that funds programmes such as schools and clinics, due to budget cuts set out by the foreign secretary.The UK’s bilateral aid to African countries will be reduced by almost £900m by 2028-29 – a 56% cut – as part of more than £6bn in cuts which are funding an increase in defence spending. Continue reading...

Right-wing author Brandon Weichert warned MAGA influencer Steve Bannon that President Donald Trump's war in Iran was "not going well."During a Thursday interview on the War Room podcast, Bannon insisted that the U.S. had to "win" the war, even though the goals were unclear."Regardless of how we got in here, and we can debate that, and I'm sure that even in the next couple days are coming up, we are where we are, we have to win, right?" Bannon told Weichert. "The President of the United States gave a very clear order out to the public, to the country, to everybody, that Iranian infrastructure, oil infrastructure was not to be hit. These gas fields were hit deliberately.""Now we're in the Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz, Red Sea, all of it. And it's rattling, whether you like it or not, whether you support President Trump or not," he continued. "It's rattling the world's economy and President Trump's economic plan.""Clearly, there is a severe breakdown in communication not only between the U.S. and its purported allies in the region, but also between — within the administration itself," Weichert agreed. "And I would encourage everybody in the administration, get on the same page now. Because this is not — this is not going well. The American people do not understand what's going on.""Furthermore, whatever the Pentagon and Centcom and the intel community is saying publicly, behind the scenes, the Iranians are still popping these missiles off," he added. "And you asked about Israel. And I would just say that I don't think we have any idea who is running Israel right now. I have seen no confirmation as to whether or not Netanyahu is still alive or in command.""I have seen no confirmation that anyone has succeeded him. I've been hearing rumors from people.""Hang on!" Bannon interrupted, annoyed with rumors of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's demise. "That can't be the internet slop that says he's an AI figure or anything like that. It's got to be more definitive.""It's a mess in Israel right now," Weichert said."Besides internet slop, why do you say that?" Bannon demanded. "Well, because the entire Israeli system seems to be in confusion," the author insisted. "There is clearly a problem right now. And then also you have these intelligence failures going on in Lebanon with Mossad, where they're blowing up targets that are clearly not military.""I think they're operating off of bad intelligence because Mossad's capabilities have been degraded."Before signing off, Weichert made it clear that he stood with Joe Kent, a former Trump intelligence official who resigned over the war in Iran."This show and me personally have been the biggest backer of Joe Kent," Bannon remarked.

Distributor says authorities warned screening Tunisian film-maker Kaouther Ben Hania’s docudrama could harm India–Israel relationsThe Indian release of The Voice of Hind Rajab, the Oscar-nominated Tunisian film about the death of a five-year-old girl during the Israel-Gaza war, has been blocked by the country’s ratings body, according to the film’s Indian distributor.In a report by Variety, Manoj Nandwana of Mumbai-based Jai Viratra Entertainment said that he was told that if the film was released, it would “break up” India-Israel relations. Continue reading...