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
In an interview with Al Majalla, Charles Michel explains how Trump didn't consult with allies before attacking Iran in a war that benefits Russia at Europe's expense
Millions working in the Gulf are worried about their livelihoods and the impact on their families, while their employers are worried that they will leave
Tehran says any negotiated settlement to the US-Iran war must include its Hezbollah allies, but this could take a long time—a luxury Lebanon may not have.
In Part 2 of a two-part interview, the newly appointed deputy defence minister outlines the mistakes made by the SDF and gives his outlook on Syria's future.