A fresh diplomatic dispute has emerged between the United States and Israel after US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy to Syria Tom Barrack accused Israel of carrying out a military strike in Syria without providing advance warning to Washington. Barrack described the attack as an “unnecessary escalation” and suggested that the strike on the Abu Duhur military base in northern Syria may have been intended to provoke Turkey.

The comments, reported by Al Jazeera, have added another layer of tension to an already complicated situation involving Israel, Turkey, Syria and the United States. Barrack said the Israeli operation could have risked triggering a confrontation with Turkey, which maintains significant influence and military interests in Syria. He warned that such actions could further destabilise the region at a time when Washington is attempting to promote dialogue and prevent a wider conflict.

US envoy raises concern

Barrack said Israel did not provide the expected warning before carrying out the strike this week. According to his assessment, the operation against the Abu Duhur military base could have been aimed at “baiting the Turks” and creating conditions for a possible confrontation.

The remarks are particularly significant because Turkey has expanded its involvement in Syria and has repeatedly expressed concern over Israeli military operations in the country. Ankara has described some of Israel’s recent actions as reckless and has opposed moves that could further complicate Syria’s security situation.

Israel disputes US claim

Israel has rejected Barrack’s account. Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israel had shared intelligence information with authorised US officials before the strike.

Katz strongly criticised the US envoy’s comments, arguing that they contained inaccuracies and did not reflect the position of President Donald Trump’s administration. The Israeli government has also maintained that its military operations in Syria are linked to its security concerns and regional threats.

The disagreement highlights differences within an otherwise close US-Israel relationship over how military activity in Syria should be handled, particularly when Turkish forces and interests are involved.

Turkey’s role in Syria

Turkey has become an important regional player in Syria, particularly since the fall of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024. Ankara has maintained close political and security links with Syria and continues to monitor developments along its southern border.

Israel, meanwhile, has stepped up military operations in Syria and has expanded its military presence in parts of the country’s south. The situation has increased the possibility of an indirect confrontation between Israel and Turkey, despite efforts by Washington to keep tensions under control.

Golan Heights remains disputed

The latest dispute also comes against the backdrop of the long-running controversy over the Golan Heights. Israel captured the territory from Syria during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War and later annexed it. The annexation is not recognised under international law.

Barrack has previously described the Golan Heights as occupied territory, making him a notable figure within the Trump administration on the issue. His position has also brought him into disagreement with Israel’s established stance on the territory.

US pushes for de-escalation

The United States has been attempting to facilitate dialogue between Syria and Israel and prevent further military escalation. Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa has repeatedly said Damascus does not want a direct conflict with Israel.

However, continuing Israeli strikes, Turkey’s growing role in Syria and competing security interests are making the diplomatic situation increasingly difficult to manage. Barrack’s latest remarks could further expose the differences among the countries involved over how Syria’s fragile security environment should be handled.

The immediate focus will now be on whether Washington can contain the disagreement and prevent further Israeli-Turkish tensions from spilling into a broader regional confrontation.

A senior Russian military officer has warned that Israel could ultimately “cease to exist as a state” as the conflict in West Asia continues to escalate, while accusing Israel of seeking to widen the confrontation and draw the United States and NATO deeper into the region. Lieutenant General Apti Alaudinov, deputy chief of the Russian Armed Forces’ Main Military-Political Department and commander of the Akhmat special forces unit, made the remarks in an interview with Russia’s state-run TASS news agency. His comments are political and military assessments, not an indication that the disappearance of Israel as a state is an established or imminent outcome. 

Alaudinov said the war in the Middle East would continue to escalate and argued that Israel’s objective was to expand the conflict by bringing both Washington and the wider NATO bloc into the confrontation. He claimed that such an approach could eventually work against Israel itself. “Ultimately, they will overestimate their strength and cease to exist as a state,” he said, according to TASS. The statement comes amid continuing tensions involving Israel, Iran and the United States, with the wider conflict creating uncertainty over the possibility of further military escalation across the region. 

The remarks also come as diplomatic efforts involving the United States and Iran remain uncertain. According to reporting cited by ANI, US President Donald Trump has asked his negotiating team to wait until Tehran is ready to reach a deal, although an American official said there was no disagreement inside the administration over the broader approach to negotiations. Trump has also maintained that a naval blockade in the region remains in force while saying the Strait of Hormuz is open and operating. These developments have added another layer to an already complicated situation involving military operations, energy routes and diplomatic efforts.

Alaudinov is a senior figure in Russia’s military structure and commands the Akhmat special forces unit, making his comments notable, although they do not necessarily represent an official Kremlin position. His assessment reflects Moscow’s broader criticism of what it sees as attempts to widen the conflict and involve additional Western powers. Russia has maintained close attention on developments involving Iran and Israel, particularly because any prolonged confrontation could affect regional security, energy markets and relations between Moscow and Western countries.

The situation remains fluid, with military activity and diplomatic signals continuing to change. The Russian general’s warning is therefore best understood as a strongly worded assessment of the possible consequences of further escalation rather than a prediction with a fixed timeline. Whether the conflict expands further will depend on decisions taken by Israel, Iran, the United States and other regional and international actors. For now, Alaudinov’s remarks add to the increasingly sharp rhetoric surrounding the West Asia conflict and underline concerns that a wider confrontation could have consequences well beyond the immediate battlefield.

 Israel and Honduras have signed a new defence cooperation agreement aimed at strengthening military and security ties between the two countries, as Jerusalem continues to expand its network of strategic partnerships and defence-industry relationships.

Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz and Honduran Defence Minister Enrique Rodriguez Burchard signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) during a ceremony on Sunday, according to Israel’s Ministry of Defence.

The agreement is intended to deepen cooperation between the two countries’ defence establishments and expand coordination on shared security concerns.

Defence Ministers Sign MoU

Senior officials from both countries attended the signing ceremony, including Israel Ministry of Defence Director General Maj Gen Amir Baram, the Senior Deputy Head of the Policy and Political-Military Bureau and Israel’s defence attaché to Honduras.

The agreement comes as Israel seeks to strengthen defence relationships with countries outside its traditional strategic partnerships.

The Israeli Defence Ministry said the MoU would contribute to deeper defence cooperation between Israel and Honduras.

Security Talks Held in Israel

During the Honduran delegation’s visit, Honduras’ defence minister, internal security minister and chief of the Joint Staff of the Honduran Armed Forces held wide-ranging discussions with Israeli defence officials.

The talks focused on shared strategic and security challenges, as well as opportunities to expand cooperation between the two countries.

According to the Israeli Defence Ministry, Honduran officials were also briefed on lessons learned from Israel’s military conflicts in recent years.

The delegation received additional information about the ministry’s current activities and aspects of Israel’s defence and defence-industrial establishment.

Israel Expands Defence Partnerships

The new agreement is part of a broader effort by Israel’s Ministry of Defence to expand international defence partnerships.

The ministry has been seeking to strengthen strategic relationships with friendly governments while increasing cooperation between Israeli defence companies and overseas markets.

Israel has developed a major defence industry covering areas including air defence, surveillance, unmanned systems, cyber capabilities and military technology.

For Jerusalem, international defence partnerships can provide both strategic cooperation and opportunities for Israeli defence companies to expand their presence in foreign markets.

Honduras Seen as Key Partner

Israel has described Honduras as an important partner in Central America and highlighted the country’s support for Israel in international forums.

The two countries have maintained diplomatic relations for decades, although their relationship has also experienced changes in recent years.

Honduras was among the countries that voted against a 2017 UN General Assembly resolution condemning the United States’ decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

In 2021, Honduras moved its embassy to Jerusalem, joining the United States, Guatemala and Kosovo in taking the step.

Diplomatic Ties Faced Recent Strain

Despite the close relationship, Honduras temporarily recalled its ambassador from Israel following the October 7 Hamas attack and the subsequent war in Gaza.

The country appointed a new envoy in early August, who was received by Israeli President Isaac Herzog.

The renewed diplomatic engagement has now been accompanied by a new defence agreement, potentially giving the bilateral relationship a stronger security dimension.

What the Agreement Could Mean

The exact operational details of the MoU have not been publicly disclosed. It is therefore unclear how quickly the agreement will translate into specific military programmes, equipment deals or joint activities.

However, the agreement provides a framework for closer engagement between the two defence establishments.

For Honduras, closer cooperation with Israel could provide access to Israeli military expertise and defence technologies. For Israel, strengthening ties with Honduras could help expand its strategic presence in Central America and create additional opportunities for its defence industry.

The agreement also reflects Israel’s wider effort to maintain and develop international partnerships at a time when its security relationships are under increased international scrutiny.

The next stage will depend on how the two governments translate the memorandum into concrete defence cooperation, training, technology and security initiatives.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sparked a fresh controversy after describing the United Kingdom as the “Islamic Republic of Britain” and claiming that it could become the “first Islamic republic” to possess nuclear weapons. His remarks came amid already strained relations between Israel and Britain over the Gaza war and London’s increasingly critical position on Israel’s military campaign.

Netanyahu made the comments during a podcast-style interview for Israel’s Army Radio, where he was discussing Britain’s changing political landscape and its relationship with Israel. The remarks were reported by The Guardian and have since triggered debate over the Israeli leader’s characterization of British society and politics.

Netanyahu’s ‘Islamic Republic’ Remark

While discussing Britain and referring to the legacy of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, Netanyahu contrasted the country's past relationship with Israel with what he described as its present political environment.

He referred to modern Britain as the “Islamic republic of Britain” and later said that someone had described it as the “first Islamic republic with nuclear weapons.”

The statement appears to draw on a far-right narrative that portrays Britain as being increasingly influenced by its Muslim population. Muslims, however, remain a minority in the United Kingdom, which is not an Islamic republic.

Reference to Pakistan

Netanyahu’s comments also appeared to reference Pakistan, whose official name is the Islamic Republic of Pakistanand which has possessed nuclear weapons since the 1990s.

By describing Britain in similar terms, Netanyahu appeared to suggest a hypothetical future in which Britain could become an Islamic republic while retaining its nuclear capabilities.

The remarks have attracted attention because they came from the Israeli prime minister at a time when relations with one of Britain’s historically important Western allies are already under pressure.

UK-Israel Relations Under Strain

Relations between London and Jerusalem have deteriorated over Israel’s military operations in Gaza, Britain's position on Palestinian statehood and its criticism of Israeli policies in the region.

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham has adopted a more critical approach towards the Israeli government. Before becoming prime minister, Burnham had acknowledged that Labour had not handled its initial response to the Gaza conflict correctly and said the party needed to take a different approach.

In July, Burnham said Britain would do more to put pressure on the Israeli government. He also indicated that London could consider additional sanctions against individuals and organisations and restrictions related to goods produced in Israeli settlements.

These developments have contributed to growing diplomatic tensions between the two countries.

Remarks Echo JD Vance

Netanyahu’s latest comments also resemble remarks made by US Vice-President JD Vance during the 2024 US presidential campaign.

Vance had previously warned that Britain could become the first “truly Islamist country” to obtain nuclear weapons. Netanyahu’s description of Britain appears to follow a similar line of argument about the country’s changing demographics and politics.

Such comments have repeatedly faced criticism from British political figures and Muslim community representatives, who argue that they contribute to Islamophobic narratives.

Criticism Within Israel

The remarks have also drawn criticism inside Israel.

Avi Dabush, a candidate from Israel’s opposition Democrats party, accused Netanyahu of attacking an important Western ally at a time when Israel is already facing increasing international isolation.

Critics have argued that Netanyahu’s comments could further complicate Israel’s diplomatic position, particularly as the country seeks continued political and strategic support from Western governments.

No Official Response Yet

According to The Guardian, Netanyahu’s office did not immediately respond to questions about whether the description of Britain represented the official position of the Israeli government.

The UK's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office also had not immediately issued a response to the remarks.

Netanyahu’s comments are likely to add another layer of tension to an already difficult relationship between Britain and Israel, especially as London continues to reassess its position on the Gaza conflict and its broader Middle East policy.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is reportedly preparing to remove nuclear material from a secret Syrian site under an agreement brokered by the administration of US President Donald Trump, according to a report by Axios. The material is believed to be remnants of Syria's former nuclear programme under Bashar al-Assad and has raised concerns over the possibility of radioactive material being used in a so-called dirty bomb.

The reported agreement involves the United States, Syria, Israel and the UN nuclear watchdog and is aimed at addressing concerns surrounding nuclear-related material left behind at an undisclosed facility known as “Site 99.”

Nuclear Material at Secret Site

According to the report, the material at Site 99 includes yellowcake, a uranium-bearing powder produced during the processing of uranium ore. Yellowcake itself is not a nuclear weapon, but it can be further processed and enriched for nuclear purposes.

The presence of such material at an inactive Syrian facility has been a longstanding security concern, particularly because of the history of Syria's covert nuclear activities.

The IAEA is expected to oversee the removal of the material as part of the reported arrangement. The move could reduce concerns over the material falling into the hands of groups capable of using radioactive substances for malicious purposes.

Syria's Former Nuclear Programme

Syria's nuclear ambitions came under international scrutiny after Israel destroyed the Al-Kibar nuclear reactor in 2007. The facility, located in eastern Syria, was widely assessed to have been part of a covert nuclear programme.

The Israeli strike severely damaged Syria's suspected nuclear infrastructure. However, according to the reports cited in the development, nuclear-related material remained at other locations.

The discovery and continued presence of such material became an issue of concern following the collapse of the Assad government and the political transition in Syria.

Risk of a Dirty Bomb

One of the concerns surrounding the material is its potential use in a dirty bomb. Unlike a conventional nuclear weapon, a dirty bomb combines conventional explosives with radioactive material. Its primary danger comes from spreading radioactive contamination rather than producing a nuclear explosion.

Experts have long warned that unsecured radioactive material can pose a serious security and public-safety risk, particularly in conflict zones where state institutions and security arrangements may be disrupted.

The reported US-brokered agreement therefore represents an attempt to secure and ultimately remove material that could otherwise remain a potential source of concern.

IAEA Access to Syrian Sites

After Ahmed al-Sharaa's government came to power, the IAEA reportedly reached an understanding with the new Syrian authorities that allowed its inspectors to visit the Al-Kibar reactor and other locations associated with the country's former nuclear programme.

The access has provided the agency with an opportunity to assess sites that were previously difficult to inspect.

Site 99 is reportedly among the locations that attracted particular attention because of the presence of yellowcake. The proposed removal of the material would mark a significant step in efforts to address the unresolved nuclear legacy of the Assad era.

US Role in the Agreement

The United States reportedly played a central role in bringing Syria, Israel and the IAEA together for the arrangement. Negotiations continued for several months amid broader regional tensions.

According to the report, Israel had considered taking military action against the site because of concerns over the nuclear material and uncertainty surrounding Syria's handling of it.

The US-brokered arrangement could therefore help prevent another military escalation while allowing the IAEA to address the material through an international monitoring mechanism.

Syria's Changing Regional Position

The development comes as Syria's new leadership seeks to rebuild relations with Western countries after years of civil war and international isolation.

President Ahmed al-Sharaa has sought greater international engagement as his government attempts to stabilise the country and improve its diplomatic standing. At the same time, Israel continues to closely monitor developments in Syria, particularly because of the country's evolving relationships with regional powers.

If implemented, the reported agreement would remove a sensitive remnant of Syria's former nuclear programme while strengthening international oversight of nuclear-related material in the country.

The IAEA's involvement is expected to remain central to ensuring that the material is safely handled and removed, reducing the risk of proliferation or misuse.

 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has thanked Prime Minister Narendra Modi following a phone conversation between the two leaders, during which they discussed the evolving situation in West Asia and reviewed the progress of the India-Israel Special Strategic Partnership.

The conversation took place as tensions continue across West Asia, with the prolonged conflict raising concerns over regional security, energy supplies and international trade routes.

Netanyahu Thanks PM Modi

Netanyahu shared PM Modi's post on X and thanked the Indian Prime Minister for the conversation.

"Thank you, my friend, Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi. Together we continue to strengthen the bond between Israel and India," Netanyahu wrote.

Earlier, PM Modi had shared details of the phone call, saying that he and Netanyahu discussed recent developments in West Asia and reviewed cooperation between the two countries.

PM Modi said the India-Israel Special Strategic Partnership continues to strengthen across various areas. The two leaders also exchanged views on the current situation in West Asia.

Focus on Bilateral Partnership

According to the Prime Minister's Office, Modi and Netanyahu reviewed the sustained progress of the India-Israel Special Strategic Partnership.

The two leaders reaffirmed their commitment to further strengthening bilateral cooperation across various sectors for the mutual benefit of both countries.

India and Israel have developed close cooperation in areas including defence, technology, agriculture, innovation, trade and security.

The leaders also agreed to remain in contact as developments in West Asia continue to unfold.

West Asia Tensions Continue

The conversation comes against the backdrop of continuing tensions across West Asia. The prolonged conflict has created concerns not only for regional security but also for global energy markets and trade routes.

The Strait of Hormuz remains particularly important because of its role in international energy shipments. Any prolonged disruption or instability around the waterway could affect crude oil supplies, prices and wider global markets.

India Maintains Diplomatic Engagement

India has been closely monitoring developments in West Asia while maintaining diplomatic engagement with countries across the region.

New Delhi's approach has focused on regional stability, the safety of Indian nationals, energy security and maintaining relations with key strategic partners.

The latest conversation between Modi and Netanyahu underlines the continued communication between the leaderships of India and Israel.

While the two leaders did not announce any major new agreement following the call, they reiterated the importance of strengthening bilateral ties and staying in touch over developments in West Asia.

The conversation also comes as India continues to balance its strategic partnerships with its broader diplomatic and economic interests in a region facing prolonged instability.

US President Donald Trump has expressed confidence that the ongoing conflict involving the United States and Iran could end "pretty soon," even as military tensions continue across the Middle East and global markets remain on edge.

Speaking to reporters in Washington, Trump dismissed reports suggesting the US was facing ammunition shortages, asserting that the country possesses an "unlimited supply" of weapons and remains fully prepared for any escalation.

"We are in very good shape. We have literally massive amounts of ammunition," Trump said.

Trump Optimistic About Conflict

The US President said he believes the conflict cannot continue indefinitely, arguing that Iran "can't go much longer" under the current circumstances.

His remarks come amid continued military exchanges and heightened regional instability involving Iran, Israel and Iran-backed armed groups across West Asia.

Despite his optimistic outlook, there has been no official announcement regarding ceasefire negotiations or a formal diplomatic breakthrough.

Iran Accuses US of Economic Pressure

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian accused the United States of maintaining "maximum pressure" through sanctions and economic restrictions.

He claimed that recent attacks had severely affected Iran's energy infrastructure, resulting in the loss of nearly 230 million cubic metres of natural gas production per day.

Pezeshkian, however, maintained that coordinated governance and regional cooperation had helped Iran manage the crisis despite continued military pressure.

Violence Continues Across the Region

The broader regional conflict showed little sign of easing.

In occupied Jerusalem, Hamas condemned Israeli military operations targeting towns and refugee camps, including the Qalandiya refugee camp, accusing Israel of escalating violence against Palestinians.

Meanwhile, Israel confirmed that two Israeli soldiers were killed in an explosion in southern Lebanon, marking the first Israeli military fatalities since a ceasefire with Hezbollah came into effect.

Israeli authorities said operations in southern Lebanon have continued despite the fragile truce.

Saudi Arabia, France Discuss Regional Security

Regional diplomatic activity also intensified as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and French President Emmanuel Macron held discussions on Middle East security and freedom of navigation in the Red Sea.

According to Saudi state media, the leaders reviewed regional stability and ongoing efforts to protect maritime routes following attacks linked to Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi movement.

Oil Prices Rise on Strait of Hormuz Concerns

Global oil markets reacted to the continued uncertainty, with Brent crude rising to around $83.48 per barrel after reports of Iranian military activity targeting what Tehran described as "hostile targets" near the Strait of Hormuz.

The strategic waterway remains one of the world's most important energy shipping routes, and any disruption has the potential to impact global crude supplies.

Reports also suggested Iran is exploring diplomatic efforts through Oman to ease maritime tensions in the region.

Conflict Continues to Shape Global Outlook

Although President Trump has indicated that the conflict could conclude in the near future, military operations, diplomatic engagements and energy market volatility continue to reflect the fragile security situation across West Asia.

Analysts say developments in the coming days—including any progress in negotiations or further escalation on the ground—will be closely watched by governments and financial markets worldwide.

 A bipartisan proposal in the US Congress is seeking to redefine the United States' long-standing security relationship with Israel by replacing billions of dollars in annual military aid with a broader framework of defence, intelligence and technology cooperation.

The proposal comes at a time when public support for Israel has weakened, particularly among younger Americans, amid continued debate over the country's military operations in Gaza.

Aid Model May Be Replaced

According to reports, lawmakers are considering legislation that would gradually move away from the current system of providing at least $3.8 billion in annual US military assistance to Israel.

Instead, the proposal envisions legally mandated collaboration in areas such as defence technology, intelligence-sharing, weapons development, defence manufacturing, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, missile defence and autonomous military systems.

Supporters argue that such an arrangement would create a more balanced partnership by allowing both countries to benefit directly from joint research, innovation and industrial cooperation rather than relying primarily on financial assistance.

New Pentagon Office Proposed

As part of the legislation, Congress is proposing the establishment of a dedicated office within the US Department of Defense to oversee strategic cooperation between Washington and Tel Aviv.

The office would coordinate joint development, testing and deployment of advanced military technologies while expanding defence-industrial collaboration.

The proposed legislation would also require the US President and the Director of National Intelligence to strengthen intelligence-sharing mechanisms with Israel.

Support from Trump and Netanyahu

The proposal has received backing from US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The bill has already cleared the House of Representatives and is currently awaiting consideration in the Senate.

If approved, it would mark one of the most significant structural changes in US-Israel defence relations in decades.

Public Opinion Becoming More Critical

The congressional initiative comes despite growing public scepticism about US support for Israel.

Recent opinion surveys indicate that younger Americans have become increasingly critical of Israel following the conflict in Gaza that began in 2023.

According to a Pew Research Center survey, a majority of Americans aged 18 to 29 now hold an unfavourable opinion of Israel.

Another national survey reportedly found that a significant proportion of younger Republican voters also oppose continued military and economic assistance to Israel, reflecting a broader shift across sections of the American electorate.

Critics Warn of Risks

While supporters describe the proposal as a strategic evolution of the bilateral relationship, critics argue that it could further integrate Israel into the US defence and intelligence framework without sufficient safeguards.

They contend that Washington and Tel Aviv already maintain one of the world's closest military and intelligence partnerships, and expanding institutional cooperation could complicate future policy decisions.

Analysts also note that the proposal arrives amid continuing political debate in the United States over military aid, Middle East policy and the humanitarian impact of the Gaza conflict.

The Senate's decision on the legislation is expected to determine whether the proposed shift from direct financial assistance to long-term strategic collaboration becomes the next phase of the US-Israel security partnership.

Tehran/Washington/Tel Aviv: Tensions in the Middle East have escalated once again after Iran issued a strong warning to Gulf countries, stating that any fresh military strike by the United States on its energy infrastructure would trigger a wider regional response. Tehran has warned that oil facilities, refineries, electricity grids and other strategic installations across the Gulf region could become potential targets if another attack takes place.

According to international media reports, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has reached out to the leadership of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Türkiye and Pakistan, urging them to use diplomatic channels to prevent further military action by Washington. Iran has reportedly conveyed that while it continues to prefer a negotiated settlement, it is prepared to respond with greater force if attacked again.

The latest warning comes at a time when diplomatic efforts are continuing behind the scenes to prevent another round of conflict in the region. Sources indicate that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has also spoken with US President Donald Trump, urging restraint and encouraging continued dialogue instead of military escalation.

Iran has maintained that diplomacy remains its preferred option but insists that any future strike on its territory or critical infrastructure will invite a broader retaliation that could affect the entire Gulf region. The statement has heightened concerns over the security of major energy installations, as the Gulf remains one of the world's most important oil-producing regions.

Another key development has emerged around the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's busiest maritime trade routes for crude oil exports. Iranian officials have said they have reached an initial understanding with Oman on a proposed framework aimed at regulating shipping routes through the strategically important waterway. Both countries are expected to make a joint announcement once the details of the arrangement are finalised.

Despite progress in discussions with Oman, Iran has clarified that the agreement should not be interpreted as a complete resolution of tensions in the Strait of Hormuz. Officials in Tehran argue that continued military pressure from the United States could still threaten maritime security in the region.

President Donald Trump has meanwhile suggested that negotiations with Iran have made significant progress. Speaking at separate public events, Trump claimed that a clearer picture regarding a possible understanding over the Strait of Hormuz could emerge within the next 48 hours. He also expressed hope that diplomatic engagement would ultimately prevent another military confrontation.

During a public address, Trump said he would prefer reaching an agreement rather than resorting to military action, adding that avoiding further loss of life remains a priority. He also claimed that communication between Washington and Tehran had continued through diplomatic channels, although Iranian officials have not publicly confirmed such contacts.

Reports have also highlighted the military implications of the recent conflict. According to a CNN report, the United States is believed to have used nearly 80 percent of its THAAD missile defence interceptors and around half of its Patriot missile interceptors during the confrontation with Iran. While American officials have not officially commented on the figures, the report has drawn attention to the scale of defensive operations carried out during the conflict.

In neighbouring Lebanon, the humanitarian situation has shown signs of improvement. According to the United Nations, more than 821,000 displaced people have returned to their homes following a decline in cross-border hostilities. However, over 360,000 people are still reported to be displaced, indicating that humanitarian challenges remain significant despite the reduction in violence.

The possibility of a new agreement concerning the Strait of Hormuz is being closely watched by global markets, as nearly a fifth of the world's oil supplies pass through the narrow maritime corridor. Any disruption to shipping routes could have a direct impact on international energy prices and global supply chains.

While diplomatic efforts continue, uncertainty remains over whether ongoing negotiations can prevent another escalation. With military preparedness continuing on both sides and regional powers actively engaged in back-channel diplomacy, the coming days are expected to play a crucial role in determining whether tensions move towards de-escalation or another phase of confrontation.

Israel Rejects US Proposal

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly rejected US President Donald Trump's proposal calling for Hamas' disarmament and a phased Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, marking the sharpest public disagreement between the two leaders over the ongoing Gaza conflict.

In a video statement shared on Facebook, Netanyahu said Israel had not accepted the draft proposal presented by the United States, insisting that it did not reflect Israel's position.

"We did not agree to it. It was not our draft," Netanyahu said, adding that Israel had submitted its own comments and amendments to the proposal.

No Withdrawal From Gaza

Netanyahu also made it clear that Israel has no plans to withdraw from Gaza at this stage.

According to the Israeli prime minister, the US administration believes Hamas can be persuaded to disarm and demilitarise the Gaza Strip through negotiations. While Israel is reviewing the proposal, Netanyahu stressed that his government has not endorsed the framework presented by Washington.

His remarks represent the first public confirmation that Israel has formally objected to key elements of the American initiative.

Trump's Peace Proposal

The proposal is part of President Trump's broader Board of Peace initiative aimed at ending the Gaza conflict.

Last week, Trump announced what he described as an in-principle understanding under which Hamas would gradually surrender its weapons in exchange for a phased Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza.

The US president said the arrangement would pave the way for Gaza to be administered by a new Palestinian authority working alongside the Board of Peace, while ensuring Israel's long-term security by preventing the territory from being used for future attacks.

Growing Rift Between Allies

Netanyahu's rejection highlights an emerging policy divide between Washington and Jerusalem over the future of Gaza.

According to US officials, the proposed disarmament-and-withdrawal framework is an extension of Trump's earlier 20-point Gaza peace plan, which Israel had previously accepted in principle.

A senior US official warned last week that President Trump would be "very disappointed" if Israel blocked the latest proposal, arguing that rejecting the framework would undermine commitments already made by the Israeli government.

The disagreement is widely seen as the most significant diplomatic rupture between Trump and Netanyahu since the current conflict began.

Board of Peace Efforts Continue

Following Trump's announcement, Board of Peace Director General Nikolay Mladenov held talks with Netanyahu, urging Israel to suspend military operations in Gaza for two weeks to facilitate negotiations with Hamas.

The Board of Peace later clarified that Israel would only be required to complete its withdrawal after Hamas had fully disarmed.

It also stated that Hamas would be expected to surrender all categories of weapons, including heavy arms, tunnel infrastructure and light firearms, before any final withdrawal took place.

Despite those assurances, Netanyahu's latest remarks indicate that Israel remains unconvinced by the proposed sequence of events and is unwilling to commit to a withdrawal under the current framework.

Negotiations Face Fresh Uncertainty

The public disagreement has cast fresh uncertainty over diplomatic efforts to end the Gaza conflict.

While the United States continues to push for a negotiated settlement combining Hamas' disarmament with a phased Israeli withdrawal, Israel's leadership maintains that its security concerns remain paramount.

With both sides holding differing interpretations of the proposed agreement, negotiations are expected to continue in the coming days as international mediators seek to bridge the divide.

In a dramatic shift in US policy, President Donald Trump has called off planned military strikes on Iran, announcing that negotiations with Tehran are set to resume after what he described as progress toward a deal involving the Strait of Hormuz. The reversal came just days after Trump threatened to hit Iran "very hard," marking a significant change in Washington's approach to the escalating West Asia crisis.

From Military Threats to Diplomacy

The latest turn in events follows weeks of heightened tensions between the United States and Iran. During a meeting at Camp David last week, Trump expressed frustration over stalled diplomatic efforts, accusing Tehran of repeatedly violating commitments and warning that the US would launch severe military action if Iran continued its aggression.

Reports in American media suggested that US strikes targeting Iranian power infrastructure were under consideration and could take place over the weekend. However, those plans were shelved before any operation was launched.

Trump Announces Pause in Military Action

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said the United States had been asked by Iran and several Middle Eastern countries to delay military action because the "parameters of a deal" had been agreed upon.

According to Trump, the proposed understanding includes:

• Immediate reopening of the Strait of Hormuz for international shipping.

• Progress toward addressing concerns over Iran's nuclear programme.

• A return to diplomatic negotiations beginning this week.

Trump added that the decision to cancel the strikes was conditional and warned that the US military remained fully prepared to respond if talks failed.

"The United States is locked and loaded and ready to go," Trump said, stressing that military action remains an option if diplomacy collapses.

Iran Rejects Trump's Claim

Iran quickly dismissed Trump's assertion that Tehran had requested a delay in US military action.

Iranian state media denied that any such request had been made, maintaining that the Islamic Republic had not sought American restraint. While rejecting Trump's version of events, Iranian officials confirmed that diplomatic contacts could continue regarding regional security and maritime issues.

The conflicting narratives have added uncertainty over the actual nature of the reported breakthrough.

Gulf Nations Played a Key Role

Multiple US media reports indicate that Gulf countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, were instrumental in encouraging de-escalation.

According to reports:

• Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman reportedly warned Trump that strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure could trigger retaliation against oil facilities across the Gulf.

• Regional leaders expressed concern that a wider conflict could threaten global energy supplies and disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

• Diplomatic efforts intensified over the weekend to prevent another large-scale military confrontation.

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world's most critical maritime trade routes, carrying a significant share of global crude oil exports.

Why the Sudden U-Turn?

Analysts believe several factors may have influenced Trump's decision:

• Growing pressure from Gulf allies worried about regional instability.

• Concerns over disruptions to global energy markets.

• The possibility of renewed negotiations on Iran's nuclear programme.

• The risk of a wider military conflict involving multiple regional powers.

While Trump has portrayed the move as a diplomatic success, critics argue it represents another instance of aggressive rhetoric followed by strategic retreat.

What Happens Next?

Negotiations between the United States and Iran are expected to resume, with discussions likely to focus on:

• Freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

• Regional security.

• Iran's nuclear activities.

• Preventing further military escalation.

Despite the renewed diplomatic push, officials from both sides continue to exchange strong public warnings, suggesting that tensions remain high and the situation could change rapidly if talks fail.

US President Donald Trump has announced that he has cancelled a planned military strike on Iran, saying the decision is conditional on the possibility of reaching a rapid agreement that includes the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The announcement came amid heightened tensions in West Asia, where Iran has warned that any military action by the United States or Israel would trigger a "decisive and proportionate" response.

Trump Signals Preference for Diplomacy

In a statement posted on social media, Trump said the planned attack had been called off after what he described as an agreement on the "parameters" of a possible deal.

He indicated that Washington would pursue negotiations, provided progress could be made quickly, particularly on restoring unrestricted navigation through the strategically important Strait of Hormuz.

The decision follows several days of escalating rhetoric, during which Trump had warned Iran of severe military action.

Iran Warns Against Any Aggression

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated Tehran's position that any military aggression by the United States or Israel would receive a firm response.

During separate telephone conversations with the foreign ministers of Türkiye, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, Araghchi said Iran was prepared to respond proportionately to any attack against its territory.

Iranian officials have also maintained that any assault launched from US military bases in the region would invite retaliation against those facilities.

US Embassies Issue Advisory

Amid continuing regional tensions, US embassies across the Middle East have advised American citizens to remain prepared for possible security deterioration and unforeseen escalation.

The advisory was issued a day after President Trump warned Iran that Washington was prepared to act forcefully if necessary.

Shipping Through Hormuz Declines Sharply

The geopolitical uncertainty has significantly affected maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's busiest energy shipping routes.

According to shipping intelligence firm Kpler, vessel traffic through the strait declined by nearly 77% in a single day, reflecting growing concerns over regional security and commercial shipping.

Fighting Continues in Gaza

Despite diplomatic developments surrounding Iran, fighting continued in the Gaza Strip.

According to reports cited in the live updates, Israeli military operations killed several Palestinians across Gaza, while airstrikes reportedly damaged infrastructure, including a medical warehouse in Deir el-Balah.

Israeli authorities also announced the killing of two Hamas commanders in separate operations, while Palestinian officials reported civilian casualties, including children.

Saudi Arabia Reportedly Urged De-escalation

Media reports said Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman spoke with President Trump before the decision to cancel the planned strike.

According to the reports, Saudi Arabia expressed concern that attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure could trigger retaliatory strikes against Gulf energy facilities and further destabilise the region.

The developments have raised cautious optimism about the possibility of renewed diplomatic engagement, although tensions between the United States, Iran and Israel remain high, and no formal agreement has yet been announced.