Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Former US President Donald Trump has stated that Iranian leaders are eager for a deal, but are hesitant due to fear of US retaliation. Trump's comments come amid ongoing tensions between the US and Iran. The Iranian government has been seeking a new agreement, but fears of potential US sanctions and military action have complicated negotiations.The situation remains complex, with Iranian leaders walking a tightrope between economic needs and geopolitical risks. Trump's remarks highlight the deep-seated concerns and mistrust that continue to characterize US-Iran relations.

Oil prices have climbed higher amid fading hopes of deescalation in the Iran war following Tehran’s denial that talks with the United States are under way.Futures for Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose nearly 2 percent on Thursday to top $104 per barrel after Tehran dismissed reports of direct negotiations with US President Donald Trump’s administration.The rise comes after oil prices eased on Wednesday following reports that Trump had shared a 15-point plan for ending the war with Iran.Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in an interview with state media aired on Wednesday that Tehran was not engaged in direct talks with Washington and has “no intention of negotiating for now”.White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt warned on Wednesday that Iran would be “hit harder” than ever before if Tehran did not accept military defeat.Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a conduit for one-fifth of global oil supplies, and its attacks on energy facilities across the Middle East have prompted a surge in energy prices worldwide.Oil prices are up more than 40 percent compared with before the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran on February 28, prompting numerous countries to implement fuel rationing and other energy conservation measures.Market-watchers say prices are likely to rise further until shipping is free to traverse the strait, despite efforts by countries to bolster supply by tapping emergency stockpiles in coordination with the International Energy Agency.While Tehran has repeatedly claimed that the strait is open to ships that are not aligned with its enemies, daily transits have all but collapsed since the start of the conflict.Four vessels were tracked transiting the waterway via their automatic identification systems on Tuesday, down from an average of 120 daily transits before the conflict, according to maritime intelligence firm Windward.

US President Donald Trump has extended his deadline for Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz by 10 days to April 6, 2026. The decision comes as talks between the US and Iran are described as 'going very well'.In a social media post, Trump stated: 'As per Iranian Government request, please let this statement serve to represent that I am pausing the period of Energy Plant destruction by 10 Days to Monday, April 6, 2026, at 8 P.M., Eastern Time.'Trump also mentioned that despite 'erroneous statements to the contrary by the Fake News Media,' talks with Iran are ongoing and progressing well. He had previously urged Iranian leaders to negotiate an end to the near-month-long war or face further assassinations of senior officials.The conflict has resulted in significant escalation, with Israel conducting strikes on Iranian targets, including the killing of Alireza Tangsiri, the Revolutionary Guards' naval commander. Iran has retaliated with strikes across the Middle East, including in Tel Aviv, Modi'in, and Jerusalem.Trump has claimed victory in the war, stating, 'In a certain sense, we have already won.' He has also criticized NATO allies and described Iran as producing 'great negotiators' but 'lousy fighters.'The US and Israel have destroyed much of Iran's naval capabilities, but Tehran still possesses smaller boats capable of laying mines and launching anti-ship cruise missiles. These could render the Strait of Hormuz impassable to shipping.Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, accused the US of 'double standards,' citing the US support for Israel's actions in Gaza while condemning Iran's defense in the Strait of Hormuz.The conflict has resulted in a significant death toll, with over 1,900 people killed in Iran and nearly 1,100 in Lebanon. The situation remains volatile, with fears of further escalation and potential ground invasion.

Following Donald Trump's recent claims that the US is engaged in 'strong talks' to end the war with Iran, Qatar took the unusual step of publicly distancing itself from any alleged diplomatic negotiations. The Gulf state's government spokesperson Majed al-Ansari explicitly stated, 'Qatar was not involved in any mediation efforts,' adding pointedly, 'If they exist.'This represents a significant departure from Qatar's traditional role as a chief mediator in Middle East conflicts, having previously facilitated negotiations between Israel and Hamas, the US and the Taliban, and peace deals in Lebanon and Sudan.Over the past three weeks, Gulf states have found themselves on the frontlines of the conflict after their mediation efforts to prevent war were ultimately rejected by the US. The pattern of broken negotiations is particularly telling: the US attacked Iran twice during talks aimed at halting the Iranian nuclear program, which were championed by Oman. Discussions last June were halted as the US and Israel conducted strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, and revived talks in February were similarly undermined when Trump began bombing Tehran before the final round of meetings.Since the war began, Gulf states have been forced to spend billions defending against daily Iranian missile and drone attacks, with their economies and sovereignty suffering substantial damage. Analysts suggest their reluctance to engage with the alleged ceasefire efforts reflects both the heavy toll of continued warfare and lingering suspicion about whether Trump's peace initiatives are genuine or merely a pretext for further escalation.As Bilal Saab, senior managing director of advisory group Trends US and former Pentagon official in the first Trump administration, explained: 'They've been burned by their previous experience. They previously thought they played a useful mediating role – until they realised that it was all for naught. Not to mention that they have been directly implicated in the war and are still being attacked by the Iranians. So there's a lot of pent-up frustration and disappointment.'By Wednesday night, the Iranian regime had outright rejected Trump's 15-point plan to end the war, submitted to Tehran via Pakistani generals, as 'extremely unreasonable' and presented their own substantially different proposal.The concern among Gulf states is that any negotiations could become a front for military escalation or even the assassination of additional Iranian leaders. This anxiety is compounded by the simultaneous deployment of thousands of US troops to the region and the persistent fear of being used as pawns in the US and Israel's Middle East strategy.Professor Bader al-Saif of Kuwait University noted: 'Whenever the word negotiation was used by the Trump administration, we unfortunately ended up under the rubric of war.' He emphasized that while Gulf states are reluctant to engage with what they perceive as a potential Trumpian charade, they recognize the critical importance of shaping any realistic peace negotiations that could affect their future.The existential threat to Gulf economic ambitions is particularly concerning. The prospect of Trump ending the war with the current Iranian regime still in place—potentially more vengeful than before and acutely aware of the damage its missiles can inflict on multi-billion-dollar infrastructure—poses significant risks. Additionally, there remains no clear solution to Iran's effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, through which most of the region's oil and gas exports flow.Analysts suggest that beyond relying on US-led negotiations, Gulf states should pursue their own separate dialogue with Iran. As al-Saif stated: 'They shouldn't only count on the US to do the negotiation. They should go and strike a deal with Iran for themselves. This was not our war, and if we can shield ourselves from being impacted any further, we should do it to protect our own national interests.'

US markets witnessed a significant downturn on Thursday, marking their biggest slump since the onset of the US-Israel war with Iran. The Dow closed 450 points down, while the S&P 500 dipped 1.7%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq fell 2.3%, plunging into correction territory, which occurs when an index falls at least 10% below its most recent peak. The conflict has led to a surge in oil prices, reaching levels not seen since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. At the end of the day on Thursday, Brent crude oil, the global benchmark, was about $107 a barrel, while US crude hit $93 a barrel. Average US gas prices at the pump reached $3.98 a gallon, according to AAA. Despite the soaring prices, Donald Trump said that oil prices “have not gone up as much as I thought” during a cabinet meeting on Thursday. He predicted that prices would “come back down to where it was, and probably lower,” and that the impact on the stock market would reverse once the conflict ends. Markets have been growing weary of Trump's mixed signals on the US's stance in negotiations with Iran. Stocks dipped on Thursday morning after Trump posted a warning to Iranian negotiators that they “better get serious, before it’s too late.” However, later in the morning, Trump said that there were “very substantial talks” happening with Iran and that the country allowed 10 oil tankers to pass the blocked strait of Hormuz. The White House announced it will extend a pause on Iranian energy infrastructure strikes by 10 days, until 6 April. A new report estimates US inflation will average 4.2% this year, compared with an average of about 2.6% in 2025, according to the Organization for Economic and Cooperation and Development (OECD). The increase in inflation reverses what was expected to be strong growth for the global economy before the conflict began.

Israel stands as the sole nation where overwhelming public support exists for the conflict with Iran, despite the profound impact on daily life. At least 15 people have been killed and hundreds injured by Iranian missiles since the war began in February, with school closures and missile warnings becoming routine. Polling indicates that more than 90% of Jewish Israelis back the war, a figure that sharply contrasts with international sentiment.The global perspective reveals a dramatically different picture. Nearly a month into the fighting, polling shows that 60% of the US public opposes the war with Iran, and just one in four Americans backed the initial strikes. In the Gulf, Europe and Asia, the conflict is widely unpopular as severe economic consequences begin to manifest.According to Emma Graham-Harrison, The Guardian's chief Middle East correspondent based in Jerusalem, many Jewish Israelis view themselves as under siege in a hostile world since the October 2023 massacre. This perception has led many to conclude that an aggressive security policy is the only way to ensure safety, regardless of international reaction.There's a prevailing sentiment in Israel that short-term suffering will lead to long-term security, despite security experts questioning whether Israel has a clear strategy to convert tactical achievements into lasting security. Life in Jerusalem remains restricted, with many working from home and limitations on businesses from cafes to gyms.The public support for the war has not translated into improved political fortunes for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who currently lags in polls for the upcoming general elections. While there is majority support for Netanyahu's decision to launch the war and his handling of it, even among those who don't want to give him another term, his coalition faces challenges in securing enough seats to return him to power.Some Israeli supporters of the war worry that Netanyahu's push to attack Iran has jeopardized the country's crucial relationship with the United States. Historically, Israel's foreign policy has been based on bipartisan ties, but Netanyahu has effectively abandoned that approach to cultivate an extremely close relationship with Trump.Israel's isolation is becoming increasingly apparent as the conflict continues. Unlike historical precedents where Israel achieved security through negotiated agreements with Jordan and Egypt, the current approach emphasizes military power above diplomatic solutions. This isolation is reflected in the fact that Israel may be the only place in the world with broad support for this war, with populations in Lebanon and Iran experiencing the conflict as horrific.

Egil Johansen, the landlord of the Kenton pub in Hackney, east London, describes recent incidents involving children as "like the wild west." He has now banned children entirely after a three-year-old fell down a cellar hatch while parents sat elsewhere, a five-year-old crashed into staff carrying drinks, and six parents brought 10 hyperactive children after a birthday party while ignoring their behavior."In every case, the parents blame us when something goes wrong or get really angry when we ask them to control their children," says Johansen, who has run the pub for 17 years. "I'm legally obliged to keep children safe on my premises and if the parents let their children run riot, the only answer is to not allow them in at all."Johansen initially tried banning children only after 5pm, but this interim measure failed to address the underlying issues. Despite online criticism framing him as the "baddie," he expresses sadness about the situation: "I'm a publican; I'm a people-person. It gives me no joy to ban anyone, but it's just not safe: parents don't control their children and our other customers were beginning to go elsewhere. I had no choice."The Kenton's decision reflects a growing trend among UK pubs seeking to differentiate themselves from establishments that "resemble soft play centres without the ball pit." While some welcome this shift, others view it as unwelcoming to families, creating a culture war in the pub industry.Lee Jones, landlord of the Brewers Arms in West Malvern, Worcestershire, reversed a previous child ban: "We're dog-friendly, child-friendly, adult-friendly. We're just friendly – we don't distinguish. Pubs are for the community and I don't see bans in the spirit of what we're here for." Jones reports that when children become rowdy, staff can address the issue with parents, though this is rarely needed.Stephen Boyd, who runs the Alma in south London, took a different approach after attempting to attract young families. He found families with children consumed disproportionate time and resources with special requests for diluted drinks, heated beverages, and customized meals, while adult customers waited longer for their orders."You just need a couple screaming, banging on a table or running up and down, and it dictates the whole atmosphere of the pub," Boyd says. "Parents would take massive umbrage if staff asked them to stop their children doing something." After implementing a child ban, he describes the change as "a fucking revelation" with staff retention improving and takings doubling.Despite the positive results, Boyd faced significant backlash: "I got a lot of online hate. Mainly from people who had never been to the pub but felt I was doing something morally hateful."Tom Stainer, chief executive of the Campaign for Real Ale, acknowledges the debate is "very live" but emphasizes: "But you do have to look at the responsibility of the parents in these situations, not just at the pubs. They're the ones responsible for making sure that their children behave."Financial considerations also drive some decisions. Mandy Keefe, landlady of the Wheel Inn in Ashford, banned children partly for behavioral reasons but also financial ones: "If a third of my Sunday customers were children eating from a reduced-rate child's menu and not drinking any alcohol, that wouldn't be financially viable."Across the UK, pubs are making individual decisions based on their specific circumstances, but as Johansen's experience demonstrates, it only takes one serious incident to settle the question for good.

US President Donald Trump has reiterated claims that negotiations are underway with Iran, contradicting Tehran's assertion that such claims are 'fake news'. This development comes amid heightened tensions between the US and Iran.In a recent escalation of hostilities, at least 12 people were killed and 28 wounded in an airstrike targeting southern Tehran. The incident is part of a series of US and Israeli attacks on Iranian territory.The situation underscores the fragile state of US-Iran relations, with both sides engaging in a war of words and actions. Trump's claims of ongoing talks with Iran have not been substantiated, adding to the uncertainty and heightened tensions in the region.

The United States has recently presented a 15-point plan as part of its ongoing diplomatic efforts with Iran. This proposal is seen as a significant move in the complex and often tense relationship between the two nations. While specific details of the plan have not been disclosed, it is understood to cover a range of critical issues that have been points of contention between the US and Iran. These may include nuclear negotiations, economic sanctions, and regional security concerns. The proposal comes at a time when diplomatic efforts between the US and Iran have been intensifying, with both sides seeking to find common ground to address their differences. The Iran nuclear deal, from which the US withdrew in 2018, remains a central point of discussion, with the US pushing for stricter controls on Iran's nuclear program in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. The international community has been closely watching these developments, given the potential impact on global security and energy markets. A successful negotiation could lead to a more stable Middle East and lower oil prices, while a failure could exacerbate tensions and lead to further instability.