India: Calls to boycott US goods

From McDonald's and Coca-Cola to Amazon and Apple, US-based multinationals are facing calls for a boycott in India as business executives and Prime Minister Narendra Modi's supporters stoke anti-American sentiment to protest against US tariffs, reports Reuters.

India, the world's most populous nation, is a key market for American brands that have rapidly expanded to target a growing base of affluent consumers, many of whom remain infatuated with international labels seen as symbols of moving up in life.

India, for example, is the biggest market by users for Meta's WhatsApp and Domino's has more restaurants than any other brand in the country. Beverages like Pepsi and Coca-Cola often dominate store shelves, and people still queue up when a new Apple store opens or a Starbucks cafe doles out discounts.

Although there was no immediate indication of sales being hit, there's a growing chorus both on social media and offline to buy local and ditch American products after Donald Trump imposed a 50% tariff on goods from India, rattling exporters and damaging ties between New Delhi and Washington.

Manish Chowdhary, co-founder of India's Wow Skin Science, took to LinkedIn with a video message urging support for farmers and startups to make "Made in India" a "global obsession," and to learn from South Korea whose food and beauty products are famous worldwide.

"We have lined up for products from thousands of miles away. We have proudly spent on brands that we don't own, while our own makers fight for attention in their own country," he said.

Rahm Shastry, CEO of India's DriveU, which provides a car driver on call service, wrote on LinkedIn: "India should have its own home-grown Twitter/ Google/ YouTube/ WhatsApp/ FB -- like China has."

To be fair, Indian retail companies give foreign brands like Starbucks stiff competition in the domestic market, but going global has been a challenge.

Indian IT services firms, however, have become deeply entrenched in the global economy, with the likes of TCS and Infosys providing software solutions to clients world over.

On Sunday, Modi made a "special appeal" for becoming self-reliant, telling a gathering in Bengaluru that Indian technology companies made products for the world but "now is the time for us to give more priority to India's needs."

 

 

 

 

 

Trump threats to India may prove hoax calls

The crude oil market's rather sanguine reaction to the US threats to India over its continued purchases of Russian oil is effectively a bet that very little will actually happen, reports Reuters.

President Donald Trump cited India's imports of Russian crude when imposing an additional 25% tariff on imports from India on August 06, which is due to take effect on August 28.

If the new tariff rate does come into place, it will take the rate for some Indian goods to as much as 50%, a level high enough to effectively end US imports from India, which totalled nearly US$87 billion in 2024.

As with everything related to Trump, it pays to be cautious given his track record of backflips and pivots.

It's also not exactly clear what Trump is ultimately seeking, although it does seem that in the short term he wants to increase his leverage with Russian President Vladimir Putin ahead of their planned meeting in Alaska this week, and he's using India to achieve this.

Whether Trump follows through on his additional tariffs on India remains uncertain, although the chances of a peace deal in Ukraine seem remote, which means the best path for India to avoid the tariffs would be to acquiesce and stop buying Russian oil.

But this is an outcome that simply isn't being reflected in current crude oil prices.

Global benchmark Brent futures have weakened since Trump's announcement of higher tariffs on India, dropping as low as US$65.81 a barrel in early Asian trade on Monday, the lowest level in two months.

This is a price that entirely discounts any threat to global supplies, and assumes that India will either continue buying Russian crude at current volumes, or be able to easily source suitable replacements without tightening the global market.

The track record of the crude oil market is somewhat remarkable in that it quickly adapts to new geopolitical realities and any price spikes tend to be short-lived.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 sent crude prices hurtling toward US$150 a barrel as European and other Western countries pulled back from buying Russian crude.

But what Trump is proposing now is somewhat different. It appears he wants to cut Russian barrels out of the market in order to put financial pressure on Moscow to cut a deal over Ukraine.

There are effectively only two major buyers for Russian crude, India and China.

China, the world's biggest crude importer, has more leverage with Trump given US and Western reliance on its refined critical and other minerals, and therefore is less able to be coerced into ending its imports of Russian oil.

India is in a less strong position, especially private refiners like Reliance Industries which will want to keep business relationships and access to Western economies.

India imported about 1.8 million barrels per day of Russian crude in the first half of the year, or about 37% of its total, according to data compiled by commodity analysts Kpler.

About 90% of its Russian imports came from Russia's European ports and was mainly Urals grade.

This is a medium sour crude and it would raise challenges for Indian refiners if they sought to replace all their Urals imports with similar grades from other suppliers.

There are some Middle Eastern grades of similar quality, such as Saudi Arabia's Arab Light and Iraq's Basrah Light, but it would likely boost prices if India were to seek more of these crudes.

If Chinese refiners were able to take the bulk of Russian crude given up by India, it may allow for a re-shuffling of flows, but that would not appear to be what Trump wants.

Trump and his advisers may believe there is enough spare crude production capacity in the United States and elsewhere to handle the loss of up to 2 million bpd of Russian supplies.

But testing that theory may well lead to higher prices, especially for certain types of medium crudes which would be in short supply.

It's simplistic to say that higher US output can supply India's refiners, as this would mean those refiners would have to be willing to accept a different mix of refined products, including producing less diesel, as US light crudes tend to make more products such as gasoline.

For now the crude oil market is assuming that the Trump/ India/ Russia situation will end as another TACO, the acronym for Trump Always Chickens Out.

But the reality is likely to be slightly messier, as some Indian refiners pull back from importing from Russia, some Chinese refiners may buy more and once again the oil market goes on a geopolitical merry-go-round.

  

Pleasing Trump may annoy Saudi Arabia

Energy diversification is smart, but foreign policy tact is essential.

Importing US crude oil may please US President Donald Trump, but it could also annoy Saudi Arabia, especially given the special relationship between Pakistan and the Kingdom, which includes:

Long standing energy ties
Saudi Arabia is Pakistan’s largest crude oil supplier, often providing oil on deferred payment (US$3 billion oil credit facility renewed multiple times).

Financial assistance
Saudi Arabia has provided billions in loans, deposits, and grants to support Pakistan’s economy, particularly during IMF negotiations.

Strategic alignment
The Saudi-Pakistan relationship is not just economic but also political and military, including defense cooperation and labor remittances.

Though, to begin with import of crude oil from United will be small, the move could strain ties between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Geopolitical optics
Importing US crude might be seen as Pakistan pivoting westward, especially if framed as part of a larger US trade deal.

Loss of market share

Even a 10% reduction in demand from a long-time buyer like Pakistan might raise commercial and symbolic concerns.

Trust and alignment issues

If the decision isn't communicated diplomatically, Riyadh may perceive it as ungrateful, especially if deferred payment oil continues.

Not necessarily a rupture

Scale is limited
Pakistan is not replacing Saudi oil. The pilot phase is just 10% of imports. It's a diversification move, not a shift in allegiance.

Economic logic
The US crude provides lighter grades and higher gasoline yield, improving domestic refining output. If positioned as a technical decision, it’s easier to justify.

Diplomatic communication
Pakistan can explain this as part of energy diversification—a common practice by many countries—and reaffirm its strategic ties with Riyadh.

Pakistan should do:

Step	Why it matters
Engage Saudi leadership in advance	Avoid surprises and reassure that US crude is a supplement, not a replacement
Reaffirm oil diplomacy	Continue or even expand the deferred payment arrangement with Saudi Arabia
Highlight refining needs	Explain that lighter crude grades improve fuel mix, not reduce strategic ties
Balance optics	Avoid appearing to pivot entirely toward US or using this purely as a bargaining chip in US trade diplomacy

 

Bottom Line

Importing US crude could cause diplomatic unease in Saudi Arabia—especially if it's perceived as Pakistan drifting from its long-standing partner. But the impact can be minimized through: 1) Transparent diplomacy, 2) Economic rationale, and 3) Strategic reassurance

 

Significance of Iranian President's visit to Pakistan

The world knows that Iran was the first country to recognize Pakistan’s independence in 1947 and open its embassy in Karachi, which was then the capital of Pakistan. Likewise, Pakistanis were the first to officially recognize the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979.

The people of both countries share cultural, linguistic, historical, and religious ties, and have supported each other in both bitter and sweet moments throughout history. The cultural commonalities between the two nations are such that citizens of either country do not feel estranged or alien when traveling to the neighboring country.

In Tehran, prominent places such as Mohammad Ali Jinnah Highway and Pakistan Street exist. Likewise, in major Pakistani cities, including Karachi, street signs bearing names like Iran Avenue and streets named after Iranian poets like Ferdowsi, Saadi, Hafez, Khayyam, and others can be found.

Islamabad, the capital of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, hosted Dr. Pezeshkian, President of Iran, and his accompanying delegation from August 02 to 03, 2025. This was, in fact, Pezeshkian’s first official visit to Pakistan since winning Iran’s 14th presidential election.

It is worth noting that in April 2024, the martyred Ayatollah Raisi also made a three-day visit to Pakistan, including the cities of Lahore, Karachi, and Islamabad, where he was warmly welcomed by the people and officials of that country. Following the helicopter crash and martyrdom of Ayatollah Raisi and his companions, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif of Pakistan, along with other officials, traveled to Tehran to pay their respects and attend the memorial ceremony.

In May of this year, Shehbaz Sharif once again visited Tehran to express his gratitude for Iran’s stance regarding the India-Pakistan war. Therefore, Dr. Pezeshkian’s recent visit was in response to Shehbaz Sharif’s invitation and, essentially, a reciprocation of his visit to Tehran.

Dr. Pezeshkian began his official visit in Lahore, the capital of Punjab province, by paying respects at the mausoleum of Allama Iqbal, the Pakistani philosopher and poet. It is said that over 8,000 verses of Iqbal’s poetry comprising 70% of his total works are written in Persian.

During the continuation of the visit in Islamabad, the Iranian delegation met with the Prime Minister, President, Foreign Minister, Army Chief, Speakers of the Senate and National Assembly, and Pakistani business community, seeking to implement the "Neighbor First" policy in practice. 

The current volume of annual trade between the two countries is about US$3 billion, yet many economic and commercial potentials remain untapped. During this recent visit, 12 cooperation agreements were signed in areas such as transportation, science and technology, tourism, and free trade, which, if implemented, could significantly boost bilateral relations.

One indicator of strong political relations is the frequent travel of officials between countries. In less than two years, top officials from Iran and Pakistan have visited each other’s countries four times, not including the meetings held on the sidelines of key regional and international summits. These frequent meetings highlight the close bond and significance of the relationship particularly now, when there is a growing need to expand cooperation.

Over the past few decades, Iran-Pakistan relations have enjoyed relative stability, and mutual visits and exchanges between officials have been a regular occurrence. What gives special importance to the recent presidential visit to Pakistan is the unique political situation and the developments that have taken place in recent months in South and West Asia and even globally.

The four-day war between India and Pakistan in May 2025, as two nuclear powers, created a highly sensitive situation in the region. Although brief, the consequences of this conflict continue to affect both countries and the broader region and world.

Additionally, the ongoing war and genocide in Gaza have significantly influenced global politics. In this context, the stances of Islamic countries such as Iran and Pakistan are of great importance. Tehran and Islamabad have consistently adopted shared, firm positions and have emphasized full support for the Palestinian cause. The 12-day imposed war by Israel on Iran drastically altered the geopolitics of the region and the Islamic world.

Pakistan’s positions as one of the largest and most influential Muslim nations and a nuclear power have been crucial, and the Iranian public and officials have always appreciated Pakistan’s brave and brotherly stance.

Islamabad's officials have expressed their appreciation, in various ways, for Iran’s goodwill and initiative in offering to mediate between the two countries, and for the highly important visit of Iran’s Foreign Minister Dr. Araghchi to Pakistan and India to reduce the tensions.

A key factor linking Iran and Pakistan’s foreign policies is the sensitivity of public opinion in both nations toward the Palestinian issue and their mutual opposition to Zionist occupation and crimes in Gaza. This shared stance is rooted in the principled policies laid down by the founding leaders of both nations, Imam Khomeini and Muhammad Ali Jinnah and continues today. Currently, there is deep concern over the joint illegal actions of the Zionist regime and the United States against Iran’s nuclear facilities, and the potential for similar scenarios to be repeated elsewhere.

The condemnation of the Zionist regime’s aggressive attack on Iran by Pakistan’s permanent representative at the UN Security Council, as a non-permanent member and rotating president, was well-received. Pakistan’s support for dialogue and negotiation and its affirmation of Iran’s right to nuclear knowledge were also reflected in the joint press conference held by Shehbaz Sharif and Dr. Pezeshkian.

Iranian and Pakistani officials have come to a shared understanding that the 900 plus km border between the two nations should transition from being a security border to an economic one. The two sides have created joint mechanisms to improve coordination in the fight against terrorism. There exists an ocean of untapped potential in both countries, which requires serious political will to activate. The travel of hundreds of thousands of Pakistani pilgrims as part of religious tourism is one such opportunity.

Currently, two land borders at Rimdan and Mirjaveh are operational, facilitating travel for tourists and traders. Strengthening infrastructure is essential for increasing travel between the two peoples. People-to-people ties and citizen interactions can play a critical role in raising awareness of each other’s capabilities. 

Meeting mutual needs given that the two economies complement each other should be a top priority for private sectors and businesspeople in both nations. Much of what Iran imports from other countries is easily accessible in Pakistan, and Pakistan exports goods that Iranians also import from various sources.

Pakistan can meet many of its needs through Iranian producers and benefit from the proximity and low logistics costs. There is an urgent need to upgrade the joint Iran-Pakistan Chamber of Commerce to play a more significant role.

An Iranian proverb says, “A good neighbor is better than a distant relative.” Pakistan is both a good neighbor and a good relative and we Iranians are grateful for this valued neighbor.

Courtesy: Tehran Times

 

More countries likely to recognize Palestine

According to The Jerusalem Post, many people in Israel are convinced that over the past week, Hamas has won a “hunger narrative”. Countries like France and Britain are talking about recognizing the state of Palestine at the UN General Assembly in September.

Israel says Hamas are liars, they fake evidence, ride in ambulances, and hide in schools, and much of the world is fooled, and some UN agency workers are complicit.

The single image that may have shifted global perception most in recent weeks was of a supposedly starving Gaza boy, later revealed to have had a severe pre-existing condition. Millions saw the image; thousands saw the correction. Yes, it’s journalistic malpractice, and yes, it’s quite unfair.

Yet none of that changes the underlying reality. There is no winning the semantic argument over whether what’s happening in Gaza constitutes hunger, malnutrition, starvation, or famine. What’s beyond debate is that people are suffering – from lack of access to food, but also medicine, shelter, and a functioning infrastructure. Gaza, much of which is literally destroyed, is not self-sufficient.

Meanwhile, Israel is using its own narrative that is certainly no less dishonest. Many Israelis argue that no one should be required to send aid to their enemy. However, this war is nearly unprecedented, an enemy territory, fully sealed off, governed by a terrorist group that feeds off the suffering of its own population.

In addition, when Israeli ministers – including Itamar Ben-Gvir just last weekend – openly call for all aid to be halted, it becomes impossible to deny that collective punishment has been normalized. That call alone will be widely seen as a war crime under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Gaza is blockaded from every direction by both Israel and Egypt. Civilians can’t leave — not to Israel, not to Egypt. In Gaza, millions of innocents are trapped.

Meanwhile, Israel has been moving much of the population around, more or less like cattle, for 21 months. They’ve been herded here, told to concentrate there. There’s talk of a so-called “humanitarian city” that would be a tent camp for a million people. People speak seriously of getting the Gazans to all leave.

Yet no country has agreed to take them, and nobody serious will view people leaving a bombed-out ruin as having done so willingly. All of this will be viewed as massive ethnic cleansing. Meanwhile, the idea of Israeli settlements in Gaza is being floated again – another war crime, normalized in real time.

How many Israelis would have supported, after October 07, a war that drags on for two years, kills tens of thousands of innocent people and hundreds of IDF soldiers, and does not prioritize the return of the hostages?

How many are really prepared for the coming legal complications for everyday Israeli citizens as they travel?

Yet this madness has been normalized, not because the public truly supports it, but because of the nonstop propaganda drumbeat inside the country. Outside, Israel still has friends – because its case against Hamas is excellent – but only a few who agree with the war policy, and that includes Jews and Zionists who are in no way fooled by Hamas.

Inside Israel, the normalization of madness has been built on three main pillars.

First, the narrative that there are “no innocents in Gaza.” It’s probably true that most people in Gaza hate Israel. The idea that it makes them combatants – and that this extends to little children (something I’ve tried to argue against on TV panels with seemingly sane people who claimed it) – is grotesque. No one outside of Israel buys it, and it is exactly the kind of discourse that has driven the charges of genocide. Israel’s supporters are mostly reduced to claiming this is a fringe view; very sadly, it is not.

Second, the Israeli media rarely shows the full horror of what’s happening in Gaza. Editors know what their audience wants. Many Israelis lack patience for scenes of Palestinian suffering, in part because the “no innocents” narrative has taken root, in part because they have accepted that war is terrible, and in part due to their own trauma. So even if most people know what’s happening on some level, they don’t feel it.

Third, there’s the deeply embedded belief that this is all Hamas’s fault. Hamas started the war, and Hamas could end it by surrendering. But Hamas is a terrorist group that doesn’t care about people, and Israel is a sovereign state that thinks it’s a light unto the nations. Israel was supposed to be the adult in the room. It needed to find a better way – or at the very least to make this one quick and decisive.

Instead, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has engineered a long war. Every off-ramp has been rejected. “Day after” planning has been blocked. The Palestinian Authority – the only plausible alternative to Hamas – has been relentlessly undermined and demonized (even as it continues, daily, its security coordination with the IDF in the West Bank).

The extremists who dominate the coalition don’t want an alternative. They want to occupy Gaza, resettle it, and push out its population.

Netanyahu has also insisted that accountability for October 7 must wait until the war ends. The strategy has been to gaslight, obfuscate, and confuse with propaganda and moral gray zones, to a tragic extent, it has worked. That’s why the streets are not full of people demanding an end.

The foreign media has had no unimpeded access to Gaza since the start of the war – only a small number of tightly controlled “embeds”. As a result, international outlets are forced to rely on reports from Palestinian journalists, and then Israel complains that those reports are biased.

Israel fears that letting foreign journalists in would put them at risk and that if any were killed, Israel would be blamed.

Upcoming visit of Iranian President to Pakistan

Iran-Pakistan relationship are unique — one defined not simply by geography, but by centuries of shared civilizational experience, religious affinity, cultural kinship and converging strategic interests. The two sovereign nations can gain from an enduring partnership — and even more to contribute to the future of the region.

The upcoming state visit of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian to Pakistan reflects this growing momentum. It builds upon a history of high-level engagement that includes the late President Ebrahim Raisi’s landmark visit to Islamabad and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s reciprocal visit to Tehran.

These exchanges, along with sustained diplomatic consultation between senior officials of both the countries, represent a deepening alignment that extends well beyond ceremonial diplomacy. These reflect a conscious, strategic choice to elevate the bilateral relationship into one of regional consequence.

Iran and Pakistan share a 900-kilometre border that is more than a line dividing two states; it is a bridge that has connected peoples and civilizations for centuries. Through this frontier flowed not only trade, but ideas, languages, poetry and faiths that continue to animate our societies today.

From the celebration of Nowruz to shared Sufi traditions, the depth of cultural and spiritual interconnection has forged an enduring sense of familiarity and trust that forms the bedrock of political cooperation.

As two proud Muslim nations, Iran and Pakistan are anchored in the principles of Islam -- justice, compassion and solidarity. These values are not only sources of internal cohesion; they serve as guiding lights for international engagement. The two countries stand together in support of causes such as the Palestinian struggle, to speak out against injustice and to promote peace through cooperation and mutual respect.

Their economic complementarities offer enormous potential. Pakistan’s agricultural dynamism and Iran’s abundant energy resources, coupled with shared interest in connectivity, provide a natural basis for integration.

In addition to sectoral synergies, both nations share a long-term interest in fostering an open, equitable, and interdependent regional economy. By aligning visions, Iran and Pakistan can build a sustainable economic partnership grounded in mutual resilience, technological progress and inclusive growth. Such cooperation can play a transformative role in lifting communities, creating employment and promoting a model of development that benefits the wider region.

At a time transnational threats continue to endanger their security, Iran and Pakistan remain vigilant against terrorist networks operating in border regions. Coordination in counterterrorism is not an option; it is an imperative.

Beyond local threats, both countries face broader strategic concerns arising from aggressive postures in the region. The Israeli regime’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, its occupation of Syria and Lebanon, and its recent unprovoked attacks on Iranian territory underscore the urgency of a collective response to belligerent forces that thrive on instability and domination. Responsible states cannot afford silence. It is time to strengthen coordination, deepen security cooperation and articulate a clear and united stance in international forums.

Iran deeply appreciates the principled position taken by the Government of Pakistan in unequivocally condemning the June 2025 Israeli and American military aggression against Iranian territory. At a time Western powers chose to stand on the wrong side of history, Pakistan stood firmly for international law, regional stability and solidarity with its neighbour.

Equally moving was the heartfelt support expressed by the people of Pakistan, whose spontaneous outpourings of compassion resonated deeply across Iranian society. The Iranian people watched with gratitude as their Pakistani brothers and sisters raised their voices in their support. This display of empathy and unity will never be forgotten. It reaffirmed the profound depth of our bond and the strength of the values we share.

Iran and Pakistan also enjoy a record of close cooperation across multilateral institutions. At the UN, the two have consistently worked together to defend the rights of the Palestinian people and advance sustainable development goals.

Within the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, we advocate for addressing the pressing challenges of the Muslim Ummah. As active members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Economic Cooperation Organization, and the D-8, pursue shared objectives in connectivity, economic integration, and regional peace.

Coordinated diplomacy amplifies their voice on the global stage and helps steer international discourse towards justice, equity, and multilateralism. This collaboration is not limited to crisis management. It also reflects a broader strategic convergence.

Both Iran and Pakistan uphold principles of sovereignty, non-interference, and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Both are committed to a regional order in which Muslim nations shape their own destinies and cooperate toward collective prosperity.

Their partnership holds promise in trilateral and broader regional settings as well. With Afghanistan as their mutual neighbour, the two share an interest in stabilizing the country and ensuring that peace and development replace conflict and extremism. By integrating their economic strategies and leveraging geostrategic positions, Iran and Pakistan can help transform the region into a hub of cooperation rather than competition.

The creation of functional trade and transit corridors, grounded in mutual benefit, brings tangible dividends to our peoples and reaffirms our leadership in crafting a forward-looking regional architecture.

The path ahead calls for unity, clarity of purpose, and a willingness to transform shared aspirations into lasting institutions and practical achievements. Enhancing diplomatic dialogue, expanding economic ties, fostering educational and cultural exchanges and institutionalizing cooperation on security and development will give real depth and resilience to our relationship.

President Pezeshkian’s visit provides an opportunity not only to reaffirm commitments but to reimagine possibilities. In doing so, the two may draw inspiration from Allama Iqbal — Pakistan’s national poet and a profound admirer of Persian thought — who reminded us that the soul of nations is shaped not in fleeting political cycles, but in enduring moral and spiritual visions. His words resonate still: “Nations are born in the hearts of poets; they prosper and die in the hands of politicians.”

Iran-Pakistan friendship is not merely a relic of the past; it is a strategic investment in the future. In unity, they find strength. In cooperation, they find purpose. And in mutual respect, they find the foundation for lasting peace and shared progress.

 

US used about a quarter of its high-end missile interceptors in Israel-Iran war

According to CNN, the United States blew through about a quarter of its supply of high-end THAAD missile interceptors during Israel’s 12-day war with Iran in June 2025, thwarting attacks at a rate that vastly outpaces production.

US forces countered Tehran’s barrage of ballistic missiles by firing more than 100 THAADs (short for Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) – and possibly as many as 150 – a significant portion of America’s stockpile of the advanced air defense system, the sources said. The US has seven THAAD systems, and used two of them in Israel in the conflict.

Using so many THAAD interceptors in such a short period exposed a gap in the US missile defense network and depleted a costly asset at a moment when American public support for Israeli defense has reached historic lows.

Former US defense officials and missile experts told CNN that the rapid drawdown has also raised concerns about America’s global security posture and ability to regenerate supplies at speed.

Last year, the US produced only 11 new THAAD interceptors and is expected to receive just 12 more this fiscal year.

In response to questions regarding the US’s THAAD stockpile and the expenditure of interceptors during the 12-day conflict, Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson said the US military is the strongest it has even been and has everything it needs to conduct any mission anywhere, anytime, all around the world. If you need further proof, look no further than Operation Midnight Hammer and the total obliteration of Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

CNN reported that an early intelligence assessment determined the US’ strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities last month did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months.

The US administration dismissed the assessment, and the CIA later said it had evidence Iran’s nuclear program was severely damaged.

Despite the heavy use of THAADs during the 12-day war to help fend off Tehran’s assault last month, dozens of Iranian missiles still struck Israel.

THAAD is a mobile system that can engage and destroy short, medium, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles both inside and outside of the Earth’s atmosphere during their final phase of flight. Each battery is operated by 95 American soldiers, armed with six launchers, and 48 interceptors. The interceptors are manufactured by Lockheed Martin and cost roughly US$12.7 million, according to the 2025 Missile Defense Agency budget.

Iran-Saudi Cordial Ties Upset US and Israel

Growing amicable relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia have played a significant role in promoting peace and security in West Asia over the past years. Such cordial ties have come into even sharper focus following Israel’s aggression against Iran last month.

On June 13, Israel launched unprovoked strikes on Iranian territory, targeting high-ranking military commanders, nuclear scientists, and civilians alike. The United States later joined the Israeli war effort, launching attacks on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities—actions widely viewed as violations of the United Nations Charter and the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In a swift and powerful response, Iranian Armed Forces launched retaliatory strikes on strategic Israeli targets in cities such as Tel Aviv and Haifa, and struck the al-Udeid air base in Qatar—the largest American military installation in West Asia.

By June 24, Iran’s coordinated operations had effectively brought Israeli and American aggression to a halt.

The scale and precision of Iran’s missile power shocked Israel and its Western allies, particularly the United States. 

 “Although Israel has its own sophisticated, multilayered defense, which includes systems like Arrow, David’s Sling and Iron Dome, the country was running low on its own interceptors and was husbanding resources by the time the conflict ended.

Had Iran fired a few more large volleys of missiles, Israel could have exhausted its supply of top-tier Arrow 3 munitions,” The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday, citing American officials familiar with the 12-day war. 

The Journal also revealed that despite deploying two advanced THAAD missile-defense systems to Israel in the wake of the conflict, the US efforts proved insufficient to fully stop Iran’s missile barrages. 

“Operating alongside Israeli systems, THAAD operators burned through munitions at a furious clip, firing more than 150 missiles to shoot down the waves of Iranian ballistic missiles,” the paper reported.

The intensity of the Iranian attacks created such a high demand for interceptors that, according to the Journal, the Pentagon considered diverting THAAD interceptors already purchased by Saudi Arabia to Israel. “Saudi Arabia refused US request to send interceptors to Israel”

Meanwhile, according to Middle East Eye, which cited two American officials, the US asked Saudi Arabia to turn over THAAD interceptors to help Israel, but Riyadh rejected the request.  “Saudi Arabia's refusal to help Israel will sting officials in Washington,” MEE added. 

Saudi Arabia’s “no” to the US demand underscores the deepening ties with Iran. 

On July 8, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) held talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Jeddah. In the meeting, the Saudi crown prince condemned any military aggression against Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. He welcomed the improving climate of cooperation between the two Islamic powers.

Araghchi, in turn, “thanked Saudi Arabia for its responsible stance in condemning the Israeli aggression against Iran.”

He put emphasis on Iran’s commitment to building stronger ties with its neighbors, including Saudi Arabia based on principles of good neighborliness and mutual interest.

Araghchi also held talks with Saudi Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman and Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan, reaffirming the countries’ commitment to closer strategic cooperation.

China’s mediation drives Iran-Saudi unity for regional stability

The renewed diplomatic warmth is rooted in a 2023 agreement brokered by China, which saw Iran and Saudi Arabia formally restore ties after years of estrangement. Since then, China's constructive mediation has played a key role in bringing Tehran and Riyadh closer together.

As the dust settles on the most intense Israel-Iran war in recent memory, the strengthening bond between Iran and Saudi Arabia emerges as a powerful force for stability in West Asia. Their growing diplomatic, political, and economic cooperation is not only reshaping the region's strategic landscape—but also offering a compelling alternative to the cycles of escalation driven by Israeli aggression.

Once geopolitical rivals, Tehran and Riyadh now appear poised to lead a new era—one rooted in sovereignty, mutual respect, and collective security. Their united front sends a clear message: regional peace is best preserved not through foreign intervention or militarism, but through regional unity and shared interests.

In a time of increasing volatility, Iran and Saudi Arabia are demonstrating that Islamic nations can rise above division and become pillars of stability—capable of defending their people, upholding international law, and resisting those who threaten the peace of the region. The path they have chosen may well define the future of West Asia.

 

 

 

 

United States obstructing Gaza ceasefire

The Hamas resistance movement has strongly condemned recent statements by the US administration about the ceasefire negotiations, accusing it of shielding the Israeli occupation regime. 

President Trump stated on Friday, “Hamas didn’t really want to make a deal. I think they want to die and it’s very, very bad. And, it got to a point where you have to finish the job. (Hamas) pulled out (of the negotiations).”

Hamas reiterated its commitment to negotiations and its serious desire to reach a comprehensive agreement on ending the Israeli war on Gaza.

The resistance movement expressed surprise at the remarks by US President Donald Trump, as well as earlier comments by US envoy Steve Witkoff. 

The movement stated that these remarks contradict the assessments of mediators and do not reflect the reality of the negotiation process, which it said had made real progress. 

It emphasized that mediating parties, especially Qatar and Egypt, have expressed their appreciation for Hamas’s serious and constructive stance.

In a press statement, Hamas official Izzat al-Rishq criticized the United States for disregarding “the real obstacle to any agreements.”

He also accused the Netanyahu government of creating roadblocks, engaging in delays, and breaching prior commitments.

Al-Rishq stressed that Hamas has, from the start of the negotiations, acted with national responsibility and great flexibility. 

He said the movement has been keen to reach a comprehensive agreement that would end the genocidal war and alleviate the suffering of Gaza’s population.

Al-Rishq also said Hamas’s latest response came after extensive national consultations with Palestinian factions, mediators, and friendly countries. 

The official added that Hamas had engaged constructively and flexibly with all comments and suggestions raised, including those within Witkoff’s own proposal.

In its response, Hamas emphasized the need for clear and enforceable terms, particularly regarding humanitarian issues. 

It called for an unimpeded flow of aid, distributed through the United Nations and its approved agencies, without interference from the Israeli occupation regime.

According to al-Rishq, Hamas also insisted on reducing the size of buffer zones where Israeli occupation forces would remain for 60 days and not allowing most displaced people to return to their homes.

Hamas also dismissed accusations by the US administration that the aid intended for Gaza is stolen. These claims were baseless and recently disproven by a Reuters report citing a USAID investigation, which found no evidence linking Hamas to the misappropriation of US assistance, it asserted.

Furthermore, Hamas called on the US administration to stop providing political and military cover for the Israeli regime, which continues to carry out a campaign of extermination and starvation against more than two million Palestinians in Gaza under the watch of the international community.

Hamas urged Washington to pressure the Israeli regime to engage seriously in a political process that ends the genocide, leads to a fair prisoner exchange deal, and alleviates the suffering of Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons.

 

Ousting of female leaders to have chilling effect at Pentagon

The unexplained removal of the first female head of the US Naval Academy last week is the latest in a string of top military women who have either been fired or re-delegated to largely invisible roles under the Trump administration, reports The Hill.

The ousting of Vice Adm. Yvette Davids from her post as the first female superintendent of the academy in Annapolis, makes her one of at least five senior female service members who have been moved out of their roles since January.

That trend, coupled with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s well-documented antipathy toward women in combat roles prior to becoming Pentagon chief, could have a chilling effect on women enlisting in the armed forces, experts say.

“It’s hard not to come to the conclusion that it’s going to weaken our military force by undermining the role of women who have become, I believe, an intrinsic part of our military capability,” said Leon Panetta, a former defense secretary in the Obama administration.

Panetta, who in 2013 announced that all combat roles would soon be open to women — a shift that eventually came in 2015 — told The Hill that the Trump administration’s removal of female leaders from the ranks, often without explanation, will have impacts on morale for female service members. 

“Just to remove commanders from their positions without cause sends a clear signal that this is not about merit, it’s not about performance, and it is about the fact that they’re women. It’s the only conclusion you can come to,” he said.

Davids was not outright fired, instead moved to deputy chief of naval operations, a senior position but largely out of the public eye. But the shift was only after she had led the academy for 18 months rather than the typical three- or four-year tenure of the school’s superintendent.

Nora Bensahel, a professor of civil-military relations at Johns Hopkins University, said the fact that she was removed from the Naval Academy ”really sends a message from the Pentagon that they do not think that a woman is qualified to be in charge of educating and training the next generation of fighters.”

 

 

 

 

Netanyahu and Trump to abandon Gaza ceasefire negotiations with Hamas

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump appeared on Friday to abandon Gaza ceasefire negotiations with Hamas, both saying it had become clear that the Palestinian militants did not want a deal, reports Reuters.

Netanyahu said Israel was now mulling "alternative" options to achieve its goals of bringing its hostages home from Gaza and ending Hamas rule in the enclave, where starvation is spreading and most of the population is homeless amid widespread ruin.

Trump said he believed Hamas leaders would now be "hunted down", telling reporters, "Hamas really didn't want to make a deal. I think they want to die. And it's very bad. And it got to be to a point where you're going to have to finish the job."

The remarks appeared to leave little to no room, at least in the short term, to resume negotiations for a break in the fighting, at a time when international concern is mounting over worsening hunger in war-shattered Gaza.

French President Emmanuel Macron, responding to the deteriorating humanitarian situation, announced that Paris would become the first major Western power to recognize an independent Palestinian state.

Britain and Germany said they were not yet ready to do so but later joined France in calling for an immediate ceasefire. British Prime Minister Keith Starmer said his government would recognize a Palestinian state only as part of a negotiated peace deal.

Trump dismissed Macron's move. "What he says doesn't matter," he said. "He's a very good guy. I like him, but that statement doesn't carry weight."

Israel and the United States withdrew their delegations on Thursday from the ceasefire talks in Qatar, hours after Hamas submitted its response to a truce proposal.

Sources initially said on Thursday that the Israeli withdrawal was only for consultations and did not necessarily mean the talks had reached a crisis. But Netanyahu's remarks suggested Israel's position had hardened overnight.

US envoy Steve Witkoff said Hamas was to blame for the impasse, and Netanyahu said Witkoff had got it right.

Senior Hamas official Basem Naim said on Facebook that the talks had been constructive, and criticized Witkoff's remarks as aimed at exerting pressure on Israel's behalf.

"What we have presented - with full awareness and understanding of the complexity of the situation - we believe could lead to a deal if the enemy had the will to reach one," he said.

Mediators Qatar and Egypt said there had been some progress in the latest round of talks. They said suspensions were a normal part of the process and they were committed to continuing to try to reach a ceasefire in partnership with the US.

The proposed ceasefire would suspend fighting for 60 days, allow more aid into Gaza, and free some of the 50 remaining hostages held by militants in return for Palestinian prisoners jailed in Israel.

It has been held up by disagreement over how far Israel should withdraw its troops and the future beyond the 60 days if no permanent agreement is reached.

Itamar Ben-Gvir, the far-right national security minister in Netanyahu's coalition, welcomed Netanyahu's step, calling for a total halt of aid to Gaza and complete conquest of the enclave, adding in a post on X, "Total annihilation of Hamas, encourage emigration, (Jewish) settlement."

Trump has turned US into a rogue and pariah state

The United States under the leadership of Donald Trump is almost at odds with all countries except Israel. The Trump administration is also defying established international institutions, such as UNESCO and the International Criminal Court.

Trump’s repeated and reckless remarks that Canada should be the 51st state of the United States and that his country may take over Greenland by force if necessary, his proposal to own the Gaza Strip, his reversal of any decision or step to rein in on the climate change, and his illusion that all countries are taking advantage of the US have made Trump to look outlandish.

His tactless withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), has now turned into a global security headache as his administration and Israel launched military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities in June.

The strikes, which are an act of aggression and illegal under international law, could have led to environmental catastrophes, even though some experts still don’t rule out the possibility of nuclear disasters.

Speaking at a forum at the Institute for Political and International Studies in Tehran about 18 years ago, Germany’s Joseph Joschka said the world would descend into chaos without the United States. However, the United States itself is now pushing the world toward anarchy and lawlessness.

In his term as president, he started defying international rules and regulations. He recognized Jerusalem (al-Quds) as Israel’s capital, moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to the city, and recognized the Syrian Golan Heights as Israel’s territory, pulled out of the JCPOA, the Paris climate agreement, and the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty.

His recognition of occupied Jerusalem as Israel’s capital took place while the international community was and is still working, of course with a lesser hope, on establishing a Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital.

In his first term, it was thought that Trump was inexperienced and was living in his dreams because he had not served in top managerial posts such as a mayor, governor, or served in Senate before being catapulted to the powerful post of president. Yet, he began his second presidency after a four-year hiatus with more thoughtless remarks and actions.

On the first day of his presidency in the second term, Trump signed an executive order to again withdraw the US from the Paris climate agreement that the country had joined in during the Joe Biden presidency. In his announcement, Trump stated that “as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the Paris agreement.”

His remarks that Canada should join the US were first taken as a joke. However, after repetition it become clear that he was serious in his statements. In his newest remarks, Trump told Fox News, "Frankly, Canada should be the 51st state, okay? It really should, because Canada relies entirely on the United States. We don't rely on Canada."

His threat of annexing Greenland, that caused transatlantic division, caused shivers in the bones of Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen prompting her to visit Berlin, Paris, and Brussels in late January with a focus on fostering "European unity". In Brussels, she met with former NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.

The Trump administration also introduced sanctions on the UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur Francesca Albanese for Palestine as an outspoken critic of Israel's military offensive in Gaza. Intolerant of Albanese’s criticism of companies such as arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin for selling weapons, and tech firms Alphabet, IBM, Microsoft and Amazon for providing technology which allows Israel to track and target Palestinians, provoked the US to resort to the repetitive old policy of accusing the UN official of being ant-Semitic.

On July 21, in his latest rash decision, Trump pulled the US out of the UN culture and education agency UNESCO, repeating a move he had already ordered during his first term, which had also been reversed under Biden.  Trump justified the decision by claiming that the UN body is anti-Semitic.

All these moves are portraying the United States as a bully, rogue and pariah state that will make countries, even American friends, to rethink the quality of their relations with Washington.

 

Preparing organizers to oppose Trump policies

According to media reports, progressive advocacy organization Indivisible is launching an ambitious new campaign aimed at training more than one million organizers to oppose the policies of US President Donald Trump and his administration.

Over the next several weeks, Indivisible will be hosting online organizing sessions as part of its One Million Rising initiative, which it describes as "a national effort to train one million people in the strategic logic and practice of non-cooperation, as well as the basics of community organizing and campaign design."

Indivisible this year has already organized high-profile nationwide protests this year including the "Hands Off" and "No Kings" events that were attended by millions of Americans.

However, it says that its aim with One Million Rising is to go beyond big one-day mobilizations to create more sustained local campaigns throughout the United States that would fight the Trump agenda on a daily basis.

In its message promoting the event, Indivisible emphasizes, "It'll take all of us" to mobilize against the Trump administration and added that this effort "is how we build people power that can't be ignored."

Indivisible held its first One Million Rising session last Wednesday and a recording of the session is available to watch on YouTube.

The next session will be held on Wednesday, July 30 and will focus on "how you can lead a discussion with others and get them on board with taking action in your community" and will also help attendees organize their first "community resistance gathering" in the span of two weeks or less.

The third and final session, scheduled for Wednesday, August 13, will have attendees "on boarded to basic campaign design" where they will "learn how to implement it locally as well as get plugged into our next national campaign work."

Gloria J. Browne-Marshall, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, recently told publication Axios that Indivisible's new campaign shows that it's entering a second stage in its approach to organizing.

"That outrage is still there, but now it's going to be funneled and channeled into strategies and tactics on how we actually make change in the government," she explained.

"As more and more protests happen, local, state, and federal elected officials will feel uncomfortable maintaining the stance they have."

 

House approves US$832 billion defense funding

According to The Hill, House approved legislation early Friday allocating roughly US$832 billion in funding for defense programs for fiscal 2026. The passage came just weeks after Republicans approved a separate US$150 billion plan to advance President Trump’s defense priorities.

The GOP-led chamber approved the bill 221-209, mostly along party lines; five Democrats voted in favor of the bill, and three Republicans opposed it.

The measure marks only the second appropriations bill Republicans have been able to pass for 2026, after GOP appropriators said the effort to pass Trump’s tax and spending cuts megabill dominated the party’s focus over the past few months.

The bill passed Friday would boost funding for active, reserve and National Guard military personnel by US$6.6 billion above current levels, to a total of US$189 billion. It also allows for an increase of 3.8% in basic pay for military personnel, to take effect in January.

It calls for US$174 billion for procurement, up US$6.5 billion from current levels, and would provide US$283 billion for operation and maintenance, a roughly US$7 billion decrease below 2025 levels.

The bill also includes about US$148 billion for research, development, test and evaluation, as well as boosts for Defense Department health programs and overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic aid programs.

The bill comes after Republicans greenlit additional defense dollars as part of Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” earlier this month. 

That plan called for US$25 billion to fund Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense system, with billions more aimed at items such as shipbuilding and the maritime industrial base, munitions and nuclear deterrence. 

Democrats have risen in sharp opposition to the overall defense appropriations plan, which also seeks to codify Trump’s actions targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts, advance prohibitions for funding for abortion-related travel, and block funds for gender-affirming surgeries.

Trump issues ultimatum to Putin

According to The Hill, US President Donald Trump is seeking to pressure Russia's leader to the negotiating table through a combination of arming Ukraine and threatening 100 percent tariffs on countries that trade with Russia. 

Trump made the announcement during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office Monday morning. 

It marks a potential turning point for a president who had wanted to pull US support from Ukraine and has repeatedly demonstrated favorable treatment to Putin despite Moscow’s invasion of its neighbor.

“We’re very, very unhappy with Russia, and we’re going to be doing very severe tariffs if we don’t have a deal in about 50 days,” Trump said, after teasing a major announcement. 

Trump and Rutte also officially announced a weapons deal in which NATO countries would foot the bill for US arms shipments to Ukraine, though details on the provisions remain vague. 

“It’s everything. It’s Patriots. It’s all of them. It’s a full complement with the batteries,” Trump said, adding that the batteries could arrive in Ukraine within days.

Ukraine is desperate for increased air defenses as Putin has ramped up aerial attacks on its cities in recent months.

Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky met with Trump's envoy retired Lt.  Gen. Keith Kellogg earlier in the day and said he spoke with Trump and Rutte later on.

"Agreed to call more often and coordinate our steps further. Thank you, Mr. President! Thank you America!" Zelensky wrote on Facebook. 

There's no sign that Trump is seeking to send offensive weapons that would allow Ukraine to strike further into Russia, which Ukraine hawks say may be necessary to move Putin off his maximalist war demands.

Former NATO chief and retired Navy Adm. James Stavridis told CNN on Monday he would like to see Ukraine given harpoon missiles, surface-to-surface weapons and F-16 aircraft. 

"I think that is what could move Putin to the negotiating table, which is what we want on our side,” he said. 

US to send Ukraine weapons through NATO

US President Trump has announced that a deal was struck with NATO to send weapons to Ukraine, with the military alliance bearing the brunt of the cost, reports The Hill. 

“We’re sending weapons to NATO, and NATO is paying for those weapons, 100 percent,” he said in a phone interview with NBC News. “So, what we’re doing is, the weapons that are going out are going to NATO, and then NATO is going to be giving those weapons to Ukraine, and NATO is paying for those weapons.”

The president added that the deal was struck in June at the NATO summit in The Hague.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US is talking to multiple countries in Europe, including Spain and Germany that have Patriot batteries — a key element in the defense system used to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles — about sending them over to Kyiv. 

“Well, the Spaniards have them. They’re really far from Ukraine and they have one. The Germans have, others have them — I’m not singling them out, but I’m just telling you those are two that I know,” Rubio told reporters while in Malaysia after his meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. “There are other Patriot batteries, and there are other opportunities.”

The conversation comes as the president intensified his criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent days, saying the two leaders have made “no progress” on brokering a potential ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. Trump also said he does not think Putin is looking to halt the war in Eastern Europe, which has been ongoing since its invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The Trump administration restarted sending some defense weapons to Ukraine on Monday, days after the Defense Department ordered a pause on delivering some air defense missiles and munitions, citing concerns of US stockpiles being depleted.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said he spoke with Trump on Thursday and has pushed allies within the alliance to send weapons to Ukraine. 

 

 

Gaza ceasefire tests Trump-Netanyahu bond

US President Donald Trump's push for a ceasefire in Gaza is testing his bond with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. That relationship was on full display this week during the Israeli leader’s third visit to Washington this year, reports The Hill.

Even when Trump and Netanyahu have diverged in private, they have usually remained publicly in lockstep — apart from Trump dropping a bomb last month during the shaky start of the Israel-Iran ceasefire.

As Trump turns his attention to ending the fighting in Gaza, Netanyahu risks drawing the president’s ire once again. 

“The president gets frustrated because he wants this victory of having brought peace,” said Elliott Abrams, US special representative for Iran during Trump’s first term. 

“I think when it comes to Gaza, he recognizes that the problem is Hamas. So, it’s frustrating to him that he can’t get the hostages out and get a ceasefire, but he’s not blaming Netanyahu.”

Trump and his top envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, say a deal is close. 

“There’s nothing definite about war, Gaza and all the other places, there’s a very good chance of a settlement, an agreement this week, maybe next week if not,” Trump told reporters on Wednesday when asked about the progress of his talks with Netanyahu. 

Witkoff said Tuesday the two sides were now in “proximity talks,” having whittled their disagreements down to one point.

A Palestinian source told the BBC that talks in Doha have stalled over disagreements on the delivery of humanitarian aid and Israeli military withdrawal.  

It’s not clear whether Trump will respect Netanyahu’s red lines — getting Hamas out of Gaza and Israel retaining freedom of military operation — or push the Israeli leader to accept a deal that would infuriate his right-wing allies and risk toppling his governing coalition.

Trump has repeatedly broken with Netanyahu’s desires in the Middle East, as demonstrated by his dropping sanctions on Syria’s new government and engaging in direct talks with Iran. Yet this week the president was notably deferential to his Israeli counterpart on questions about the future of Gaza. 

“Trump is the only US president who in his first 6 months has both sidelined Israel and made it central to his successes and policies,” Aaron David Miller, a veteran Middle East negotiator and senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote Monday on the social platform X.

“The Trump-Netanyahu bromance will last until it doesn’t.” 

 

 

Historic agreement signed between US and Israel

In a milestone moment for US-Israel relations, the two nations signed a historic Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Tuesday, formalizing a powerful new alliance in the fields of artificial intelligence and energy infrastructure. The agreement was signed at Blair House in Washington, with high-level participation from both governments.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US Secretaries Doug Burgum (Interior) and Chris Wright (Energy) joined US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee and Israel’s Ambassador to Washington Yechiel Leiter for the landmark signing. Also leading the effort was Israel’s Energy Secretary Eli Cohen, whose vision helped shape the strategic framework.

The MoU aims to accelerate joint research and policy development in applying AI technologies to fortify national energy grids and drive energy innovation across both countries. Israel’s Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Prime Minister’s Office, and several US federal agencies including the Department of Energy and the White House National Energy Dominance Council are key parties to the agreement.

“The future belongs to those who innovate,” Netanyahu declared. “America and Israel are the prime innovation nations on the planet. AI is the thrust of innovation now… This day will be remembered. Not every signing ceremony is as significant as this. This is very significant.”

This agreement follows weeks of deepened US-Israel cooperation in the wake of Israel’s successful 12-day air campaign against Iran’s nuclear sites. As Secretary Burgum emphasized, “The planning, the execution, the world has never seen anything like it truly eliminating one of the existential threats that was facing the entire world.”

He continued, “This step takes us into the future… Defense would not be working without AI, and Israel’s incredible startup community and technological leadership make it the perfect partner.”

Secretary Wright echoed this sentiment “Israel has been a great American ally for a long time, and our partnership has never been tighter, never been stronger than it is today.”

The MoU sets the stage for concrete collaboration in key strategic sectors and reinforces Israel’s status as a premier global innovation hub. From securing critical infrastructure to driving forward breakthroughs in clean energy and machine learning, this partnership opens new frontiers for both nations.

As Netanyahu noted, “It will make both of us greater again.” This is not just diplomacy it’s shared destiny.

 

Iran threat to Britain, significant and rising

Iran poses a significant and wide-ranging threat to Britain and, while not in the same league as Russia or China, it is one which is rising and for which the British government is not fully prepared, British lawmakers said in a report released on Thursday, reports Reuters.

Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) said the Iranian risk varied from physical attacks on and potential assassinations of dissidents and Jewish targets, to espionage, offensive cyber capabilities and its attempt to develop nuclear weapons."

Iran is there across the full spectrum of all the kinds of threats we have to be concerned with," the committee chair, Kevan Jones, said in a statement.

Although the evidence given to the committee concluded in August 2023, the lawmakers said their recommendations about action the government should take remained relevant and it is the latest message from the British authorities on the danger they say Tehran poses.

Last year, the head of Britain's domestic spy agency MI5 said since January 2022, his service and British police had responded to 20 Iran-backed plots to kidnap or kill British nationals or individuals based in the United Kingdom regarded by Tehran as a threat.

In March, Britain said it would require the Iranian state to register everything it does to exert political influence in Britain, subjecting Tehran to an elevated tier of scrutiny in light of what it said was increasingly aggressive activity.

British security services say Tehran uses criminal proxies to carry out its work in Britain, and the ISC said the threat to individuals was comparable to that posed by Russia.

In December, two Romanians were charged after a journalist working for a Persian language media organization in London was stabbed in the leg, while just last month three Iranian men appeared in court charged with assisting Iran's foreign intelligence service and plotting violence against journalists.

The ISC said the British government should fully examine whether it would be practicable to proscribe the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), an action for which some lawmakers have long called.