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
Staying friends with the Turks, Chinese, Russians, Americans, Europeans, Iranians and Saudis simultaneously is a big ask for Islamabad's diplomats, but somehow they are managing it
Despite the war's unpopularity, Trump seems determined to press on until he can claim a decisive victory, whether by diplomacy, force, or a combination of the two
French novelist Philippe Jaenada's novel 'The Unknown Woman of Quai de Javel' wins big, while the Prix Renaudot goes to François-Henri Désérable for his novel about an unlikely wine expert