The US and Israel carried out strikes across Iran, and Tehran has retaliated by striking US/Israeli assets across the region. Could this turn into the regional war analysts have been warning about?
Military strategists have long warned that war should be waged only if those waging it know what they want to achieve. Herein lies a problem: Washington's war aims in Iran are incoherent.
Tehran isn't likely to easily fold if/when Trump attacks. This means that the longer a military confrontation drags out, the more untenable Washington's position becomes.
Trump will be wondering if a military confrontation with Iran would help or hurt his dwindling popularity at home, making his decision to strike one of the riskiest bets of his presidency
The United States is bolstering its military presence across the Middle East ahead of scheduled nuclear talks with Iran in Geneva, while simultaneously preparing strike options if diplomacy collapses…
His meeting with Trump on 11 February, moved up a full week from its original date and just after talks began between Iran and the US, isn't a routine consultation between allies—it's an intervention
Beyond Israel's immediate security aims lies a much larger struggle over Lebanon's future—one that will unfold over years, in multiple stages, and cannot be reduced to a simple question of force.
Football star Lamine Yamal's hoisting of Palestine's flag, and the Eurovision audience's booing of Israel's contestant, show how Israel has lost its PR edge
Cairo hopes to gain the trust of partners through its regular payments to energy firms, so that they will be more inclined to invest in gas exploration activities
The tech CEO's manifesto, where he champions US military dominance and the use of AI weapons, has been described by some as the 'ramblings of a supervillain'