Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Iraq is facing a balancing act as the US-Israeli war on Iran exposes deep divisions within the country. The conflict has highlighted the divisions between those who view the attacks on Iran as a means to end Tehran's longstanding influence over Iraqi politics and those who are loyal to the Islamic republic. The war has struck Iraq during a precarious power vacuum, following the stepping aside of caretaker leader Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, whose coalition won the largest share of seats in November's parliamentary elections. This power vacuum has exacerbated tensions, with factions from the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, an umbrella body of Iran-backed armed groups, vowing to drag the US into a long war of attrition. The group has claimed responsibility for numerous drone and missile attacks on targets in Iraq and neighboring countries, including the US base in Erbil and the city's international airport. In response, unclaimed airstrikes attributed to US and Israeli forces have hit positions across the country, killing several commanders and fighters. Iraqi leaders are attempting to maintain a balancing act, denouncing the killing of Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei while rejecting attempts by Tehran to draw Iraq into the conflict. However, this balancing act is complicated by the fact that pro-Iran groups are also members of the Popular Mobilisation Units (PMU), a sprawling institution that operates with its own agenda. The conflict has significant implications for Iraq's stability and economy, with a looming financial disaster hanging over the country due to the crisis over the strait of Hormuz and the loss of oil revenue. The US pressure and threat of sanctions have forced some members of the pro-Iran Shia alliance in Iraq's parliament to distance themselves from more militant factions. The killing of Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, has also had a profound impact on the Iraqi resistance factions, which have struggled to respond effectively to the recent war. The insider close to the pro-Iran factions noted that the killing of Nasrallah has affected the Iraqi resistance factions more than the killing of Khamenei, as Nasrallah had a direct appeal to many commanders.

In a primetime address to the nation, Donald Trump claimed that the US war in Iran is 'nearing completion' and that the US has accomplished 'all of America's military objectives.' However, the conflict continues to escalate, with thousands of deaths in Iran and across the Middle East, and oil prices soaring due to the closure of the strategic strait of Hormuz.Trump argued that Iran's navy and air force have been decimated, leaving the country weak and 'no longer a threat' to the US and the world. He also claimed that the US has become energy independent and blamed Iran for a 'short-term' rise in gas prices. However, the economic pain caused by the conflict is evident, with the cost of gas surging past an average of $4 a gallon for the first time since 2022.The conflict has also caused significant human suffering, with estimates suggesting that at least 1,900 people have been killed and 20,000 injured in Iran since the war began. In Lebanon, more than 1,300 people have been killed, and in Israel, 19 people have been killed and 515 injured. Additionally, at least 13 American service members have been killed, with hundreds more troops wounded.Despite Trump's claims of progress, the war is grinding on, with thousands of US troops remaining positioned in the region, providing the option of a broader ground campaign after weeks of airstrikes targeting Iran. The US president has also faced criticism for his handling of the conflict, with mixed and contradictory signals about the US's objectives and lashing out at US allies for not joining the war effort.

The recent conflict between the United States and Iran has sparked concerns over military overextension and the US's strategic approach in the Middle East. The war, initiated by President Donald Trump, has been characterized as a 'boomer war,' with limited support among younger generations. According to the article, the conflict's popularity declines with each younger cohort, with only one in five adults under 30 supporting the war.The author, Stephen Wertheim, argues that the war is anachronistic and reflects an outdated approach to foreign policy. He notes that every president since Trump, most notably Trump himself, has repudiated regime-change wars in the Middle East. The conflict has also raised concerns about the US's military capabilities and its strategic priorities in the region.Wertheim suggests that the war may be a last-ditch effort by older generations to impose their will on the region. He notes that sympathy for Israel is declining among millennials and Gen Z, which may have factored into the decision to launch the war. The article also highlights the risks of escalation and the potential for further conflict in the region.The author concludes that the US must reevaluate its approach to the Middle East and avoid tying itself to the region's problems. He argues that Americans must act to make warmakers pay a steep political price to prevent future conflicts. Ultimately, the article suggests that the US-Iran conflict is a critical moment for the US to reassess its foreign policy priorities and avoid further entanglement in the region.

The US-Iran conflict, now in its fifth week, has escalated into a war of attrition with no clear strategy or end in sight. The US continues to hit Iranian targets while building up forces in the region, while Iran launches missile and drone attacks on Israel and neighboring Gulf states.The conflict has significant economic implications, with Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz causing oil prices to surge and disrupting global supply chains. The pain is likely to get worse, with shortages already felt across the world, from Asian factories to European diesel markets.The war should never have been started, with the threat not imminent, objectives unclear, and justification falling apart under scrutiny. Responsibility rests with Donald Trump and Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu. The delusion that force can impose a more compliant regime in Tehran has predictably given rise to a conflict that sustains itself.The only plausible exit is negotiation without preconditions. However, Mr. Trump mixes threats of escalation and claims that negotiations are progressing, with little evidence of a meaningful diplomatic track. The conflict cannot be separated from Gaza, where Mr. Netanyahu is gambling that war with Iran will restore his standing.If US ground forces are committed, the dynamic shifts, and American casualties will harden resolve among those who backed the intervention, making withdrawal politically harder. World powers can shift the incentives away from a US ground war by working together to insulate themselves from economic pain and coordinate diplomatic messaging.

Pakistan's capital, Islamabad, has become a hub for diplomatic activity as key regional powers converge to address the escalating conflict between the US and Iran. Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, and Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud have arrived for talks with Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar. The meetings aim to bring an end to the US-Israeli war on Iran, which has entered its 30th day and caused a global energy crisis. The conflict has led to a significant increase in tensions in the Middle East, with 20 percent of the world's oil and gas supplies passing through the Strait of Hormuz, which has been choked by Iran. Pakistan is walking a diplomatic tightrope, with close defense ties to Saudi Arabia and cultural ties to Iran. The country is also home to the second-largest Shia population in the world after Iran. Analysts describe Pakistan's role as a 'very delicate balancing act' as it tries to bring the Americans and Iranians back to the negotiating table. The diplomatic push is driven by severe economic fears, with millions of Pakistani citizens potentially losing their jobs in the Gulf region if the conflict spreads. The stakes are existential for Islamabad, which risks a major crisis if energy supplies decline. Experts point out that the enormous economic costs borne by the Gulf countries have dropped drastically due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian drone and missile attacks have targeted energy and industrial facilities, forcing petroleum companies to declare force majeure on supply contracts. The Islamabad gathering serves as a foundational step for an 'Islamic alliance' designed to counter the Israeli project in the region, address geopolitical vacuums, and mitigate uncertainties surrounding future US involvement.

The ongoing US-Israel war against Iran has sent shockwaves through global markets, resulting in a substantial increase in everyday living costs for many Americans. Following the US-Israeli strikes on Iran, which prompted retaliatory attacks on US allies in the region and Iran's decision to close the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime passage, costs have surged across the US. In particular, gas prices have spiked sharply, with the national average rising by roughly 30% over the past month. Additionally, grocery bills, mortgage rates, and fertilizer costs have also climbed. As a result, many Americans are being forced to reassess their finances and cut back drastically on basic necessities such as food, clothing, and electricity. Individuals from various parts of the country, including Indianapolis, Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania, have shared their struggles with rising costs and how they are impacting their daily lives and long-term financial planning. For instance, an Indianapolis bank employee named Lore has had to reduce his commuting and is holding on to his old car for as long as possible to avoid the financial burden of a new one. A Massachusetts-based librarian's husband has had to take on extra work to keep up with rising expenses, often working 12 to 14 hour days. An elderly woman in New York described living a very frugal existence and struggling to make ends meet each month. The strain is also hitting small business owners, with a tattoo artist and father in Pennsylvania forced to shut down his private studio after three years due to decreased demand. Rising costs are also intensifying anxieties around healthcare, with a bread factory worker in Michigan expressing concerns about his health and the potential risks he faces simply getting to work.

The ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran has led to a war of words over whether negotiations are taking place to end the hostilities. US President Donald Trump asserts that 'productive' talks have occurred with a top Iranian figure, but Iranian officials, including Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, vehemently deny these claims.The conflicting narratives raise questions about the motivations behind each side's statements. An analysis of what each side stands to gain from negotiations and a potential end to the conflict may provide clarity. Trump's comments on negotiations may be aimed at calming stock markets and oil prices, which have fluctuated significantly due to the conflict.The timing of Trump's comments coincides with the end of the trading week and a five-day deadline he gave for a positive response from Iran. This has led some to speculate that the US may be using talk of negotiations as a strategy to buy time for more US troops to arrive in the Middle East, potentially for a ground invasion of Iranian territory.From Iran's perspective, the economic pain inflicted on the US and global economies serves as a deterrent against future attacks. Therefore, it is in Iran's interest to downplay any talk of negotiations to maintain pressure on the US.Trump faces a dilemma between extending the war and suffering economic and political costs or ending it and facing criticism for not completing what he termed a 'short-term excursion.' The Iranian state, on the other hand, appears to have less incentive to end the war without establishing an effective deterrent against future attacks.The conflict has already resulted in over 1,500 deaths in Iran, significant infrastructure damage, and strained relations with Gulf neighbors. Moderate voices in Iran may argue that some form of deterrence has been achieved, and it may be time to talk and secure concessions.

UK ministers have issued a stern warning that increasing North Sea drilling would leave the country vulnerable to the fluctuations of fossil fuel markets. This cautionary stance comes as the Conservatives and some Labour MPs are advocating for a reversal of the manifesto commitment to not issue new oil and gas licences.Energy Minister Michael Shanks emphasized that the UK is learning from past conflicts to avoid exposure to fossil fuels, which have previously led to households bearing the brunt of price hikes. The government's focus is on clean power to achieve energy sovereignty and national security.Chancellor Rachel Reeves is set to outline plans to protect people from higher energy bills caused by the US-Iran conflict. The plans include measures to clamp down on price gouging, especially by petrol retailers responding to the conflict.Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, stressed that dependence on fossil fuel markets makes the UK a price taker, not a price maker. He argued that new licences in the North Sea would not affect prices and that scrapping the windfall tax would only increase energy company profits.The Labour Party has raised concerns about the impact of increased drilling on the environment and the economy. Claire Coutinho, the shadow energy secretary, argued that turning away from domestic gas would be detrimental, especially during a gas supply crisis.The government spokesperson highlighted the importance of £120bn of public investment in building homegrown energy, including nuclear power projects, to protect working people's bills for generations to come.