New Delhi has approved a $2 billion credit guarantee initiative for sectors, including aviation, impacted by the ongoing conflict
India has rolled out a credit guarantee initiative to support businesses affected by the Middle East conflict.
The federal government announced the $2 billion capital allocation plan, the Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) 5.0, on Tuesday. The ECLGS facility was first introduced in May 2020 to support b
New Delhi has approved a $2 billion credit guarantee initiative for sectors, including aviation, impacted by the ongoing conflict
India has rolled out a credit guarantee initiative to support businesses affected by the Middle East conflict.
The federal government announced the $2 billion capital allocation plan, the Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) 5.0, on Tuesday. The ECLGS facility was first introduced in May 2020 to support businesses impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic.
The plan is expected to enable additional credit flow of $3.5 billion. The borrowing cap for passenger airline companies has been set at $160 million.
“The scheme has been brought to address the stress in MSME and airline sectors due to the West Asia conflict,” Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said.
The Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) 5.0 approved by the Cabinet reflects our commitment to supporting India’s businesses, especially the MSME sector in challenging global times. By enabling additional credit flow with strong guarantee coverage, this initiative will…
The initiative will be applicable for loans sanctioned under the plan until March 31 next year.
The loans for the airline sector, battling high jet fuel prices and stress, will have a seven-year tenor, including a two-year moratorium. For businesses, the loans will be for five years, including a one-year moratorium.
The aim is to help maintain operations and supply chains, in addition to protecting jobs amid the crisis spurred by the Middle East conflict.
The guarantees will be routed through the National Credit Guarantee Trustee Company Ltd.
Most businesses have been hit by supply disruptions arising from the Middle East conflict, triggered by the strikes launched by the US and Israel on Iran in February. India, the world’s third-largest oil importer, also faces risks of higher inflation and slower growth.
In April, Indian airline companies sought government help to cushion surging jet fuel prices due to the conflict in the Middle East, which accounts for nearly 55% of crude oil imports.
More than 15,400 flights operated by Indian carriers were canceled from February 28 to April 24.
An industry body that represents the top carriers, including Air India, IndiGo, and SpiceJet, has urged “urgent support” from the government on ATF pricing to continue airline operations.
Rating agency Moody’s has cut India’s GDP projection for the 2026-27 fiscal year to 6% from 6.8%, citing subdued private consumption, softer industrial activity, and higher input costs.
The MV Hondius is expected to sail to the Canary Islands after Spain agreed to receive the vessel on humanitarian grounds
A cruise ship hit by a suspected hantavirus outbreak that has killed three people will head to Spain’s Canary Islands after authorities granted permission for it to dock, the Spanish government has confirmed.
In a statement on Tuesday, Madrid said the move followed a request from the World Health Organization (WHO), in coordin
The MV Hondius is expected to sail to the Canary Islands after Spain agreed to receive the vessel on humanitarian grounds
A cruise ship hit by a suspected hantavirus outbreak that has killed three people will head to Spain’s Canary Islands after authorities granted permission for it to dock, the Spanish government has confirmed.
In a statement on Tuesday, Madrid said the move followed a request from the World Health Organization (WHO), in coordination with the EU, and was made in line with international law and humanitarian principles. Spain said Cape Verde, where the vessel is currently located, cannot carry out the operation and that the Canary Islands is the nearest location with the required capacity.
The Dutch-flagged vessel, the MV Hondius, has been anchored off Cape Verde after several people fell ill during a voyage that began in Ushuaia, Argentina, in March and included stops in Antarctica, the Falkland Islands, and other locations.
Around 147 passengers and crew from 23 countries are on board, according to health authorities.
“Since 1 April when the boat set sail, of the 147 passengers and crew, seven people have become ill, among whom three have died, one is critically ill and three are reporting mild symptoms,” the WHO said.
The UN health body said the outbreak poses a low risk to the global population, citing current information on how hantavirus spreads.
A British passenger who was evacuated earlier remains in intensive care in Johannesburg, South Africa.
Two crew members, one British and one Dutch, are being prepared for urgent medical evacuation via Cape Verde to the Netherlands, Oceanwide Expeditions, the company operating the vessel, said on Tuesday. Another person linked to a passenger who died on May 2 is also expected to be evacuated.
Cape Verde’s Health Ministry said medical teams had boarded the ship and that patients would be evacuated by air ambulance before the vessel resumes its journey. Passengers have been told to remain in their cabins while disinfection and other public health measures are carried out.
The ship is expected to arrive in the next three to four days, with the port still to be determined, the Spanish government has said.
Hantavirus infections are usually linked to exposure to the urine, feces, or saliva of infected rodents.
The WHO said rare human-to-human transmission may have occurred among close contacts aboard the ship, while testing continues to identify the strain involved.
The importance of Russia and China will grow after the Iran war, Talmiz Ahmad told RT India’s In Conversation with Salman Khurshid
The West is crumbling into barbarism, signaling the end of the old order, former envoy Talmiz Ahmad told RT India’s In Conversation with Salman Khurshid.
The US has lost credibility and the Western alliance is in disarray, Ahmad, the former Indian ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the UAE, said.
He added that Ch
The importance of Russia and China will grow after the Iran war, Talmiz Ahmad told RT India’s In Conversation with Salman Khurshid
The West is crumbling into barbarism, signaling the end of the old order, former envoy Talmiz Ahmad told RT India’s In Conversation with Salman Khurshid.
The US has lost credibility and the Western alliance is in disarray, Ahmad, the former Indian ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the UAE, said.
He added that China and Russia will be seen as playing a larger political and diplomatic role in global affairs after the Iran war is over, noting that Russia and China are “strong supporters” of Iran.
As India receives 70-80% of its oil from the Gulf region, the disruption in shipping is a concern for the country, which should be more actively involved in Middle East affairs. “We do not have the luxury of sitting at home in fortress India. We have to be engaged with this region crucially. We cannot afford a regional conflagration,” Ahmad explained.
He also suggested that the Russia-India-China (RIC) troika should be at the heart of Indian diplomacy and foreign policy. A trilateral entity in which Moscow is close to both Beijing and New Delhi ensures balance in ties, he said, and if there are issues that agitate India and China, Russia’s presence will have a positive impact.
“Both BRICS and the SCO should [receive India’s] undivided attention. The Quad is now history, and sorry to say, even the G20 is… history,” Ahmad said, adding that “RIC is at the heart of BRICS.”
Watch the full episode of In Conversation with Salman Khurshid below.
Moscow has repeatedly warned the West that arms deliveries to Kiev only prolong the conflict and escalate tensions
The administration of US President Donald Trump has approved the potential sale of precision-guided bomb kits worth $373.6 million to Ukraine, following congressional pressure over stalled arms deliveries.
The move was announced by the State Department on Tuesday, greenlighting a possible Foreign Military Sale of 1,532 JDAM-Extended
Moscow has repeatedly warned the West that arms deliveries to Kiev only prolong the conflict and escalate tensions
The administration of US President Donald Trump has approved the potential sale of precision-guided bomb kits worth $373.6 million to Ukraine, following congressional pressure over stalled arms deliveries.
The move was announced by the State Department on Tuesday, greenlighting a possible Foreign Military Sale of 1,532 JDAM-Extended Range (JDAM-ER) tail kits and related support equipment to Kiev. The equipment could be used to convert heavy bombs into GPS-guided munitions that can hit targets dozens of kilometers away. Boeing, headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, is listed as the primary contractor.
The deal does not guarantee that the weapons will be delivered, while the figures represent the maximum quantity and value of the purchase, with details subject to further negotiations and congressional review.
“The proposed sale will improve Ukraine’s capability to meet current and future threats by providing it with additional means to conduct self-defense missions and enhance regional security,” the State Department said, adding that the package “will not alter the basic military balance in the region.”
Ukraine has used JDAM-ER systems since 2023, adapting them to Soviet-era aircraft while preparing for integration with Western equipment, including F-16 fighter jets. However, the system’s reliance on GPS guidance has exposed vulnerabilities as Russian forces have increasingly used electronic warfare to jam signals, degrading the overall effectiveness of precision-guided munitions, according to Military.com.
The sale approval comes after former Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell – now the chair of the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee – last week accused the Pentagon of freezing $400 million in congressionally approved Ukraine assistance. Following the criticism, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth later confirmed that the $400 million had been released.
Since his inauguration, Trump has been opposed to unconditional military support for Ukraine, but has not objected to selling arms. Rather than direct US funding, Washington has routed arms through the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) – a NATO mechanism under which European nations and Canada finance purchases of US-produced weapons for Ukraine in regular packages.
Moscow has consistently denounced Western arms deliveries to Ukraine, saying they only prolong the conflict without changing its outcome. It has also warned that shipments make NATO a direct participant in the hostilities.
The Middle East conflict makes clear that great‑power politics now matter as much as OPEC quotas and output
When Brent crude briefly crossed $120 a barrel last week amid renewed Hormuz tensions and the UAE’s exit from OPEC, market reactions suggested something beyond just another cyclical oil shock. Markets are recognizing the erosion of the framework that governed global crude flows for decades.
The UAE’s move has triggered familiar debates over
The Middle East conflict makes clear that great‑power politics now matter as much as OPEC quotas and output
When Brent crude briefly crossed $120 a barrel last week amid renewed Hormuz tensions and the UAE’s exit from OPEC, market reactions suggested something beyond just another cyclical oil shock. Markets are recognizing the erosion of the framework that governed global crude flows for decades.
The UAE’s move has triggered familiar debates over quotas, spare capacity, and Gulf rivalries. But focusing on cartel mechanics overlooks a deeper shift. OPEC’s fracture reveals the premise that producers could manage supply while others guaranteed stable sea lanes was always conditional. That era has ended.
For much of its history, OPEC operated within a relatively predictable system. Oil moved through a handful of critical chokepoints, the Strait of Hormuz foremost among them, and the cartel adjusted production to influence prices. Markets now price geopolitical risk alongside supply and demand. They are factoring in war-risk insurance, sanctions-driven rerouting, and the possibility that key transit routes may face prolonged disruption.
This broader context helps explain the strategic logic behind the UAE’s decision. Abu Dhabi has invested heavily in expanding production capacity toward 5 million barrels per day (mbpd) by 2027 from the current 4.85 mbpd, even as OPEC+ agreements constrained actual output significantly below that threshold.
Continuing to build upstream infrastructure while remaining bound by collective quota discipline presented a growing commercial and strategic contradiction. The exit reflects a broader recalibration. Producers such as the UAE, the fourth largest in OPEC+, now appear more focused on production flexibility and Asian market access than on maintaining older quota structures.
There is also a parallel demand-side shift shaping producer calculations. Major Asian importers, particularly India, are actively seeking more flexible supplier relationships that operate outside traditional cartel structures. Indian officials have already signaled interest in negotiating long-term oil trade agreements with the UAE now that Abu Dhabi is no longer constrained by OPEC production quotas.
The benefits are straightforward. Proximity means lower freight costs, bilateral deals allow flexible pricing, and direct arrangements avoid possible constraints associated with cartel.
For the UAE, this represents more than a break with OPEC. It signals repositioning toward an energy landscape where securing long term Asian demand through flexible export arrangements may matter more than maintaining the appearance of collective discipline.
OPEC attempts coordinated cuts to support prices while the routes moving that oil grow increasingly unreliable. Production quotas mean nothing if tankers cannot move freely.
From OPEC quotas to naval blockades
The older OPEC framework was built for an era when oversupply and price crashes were the main worry. The threats oil markets are facing now are entirely different. Geopolitics has changed how oil moves. The Strait of Hormuz, which carried roughly 20 million barrels per day before Iran effectively closed it in March, represents what the International Energy Agency has called the largest oil supply disruption in history.
Past crises operated on an assumption that disruptions would be brief and oil flows would return to normal. That assumption no longer holds. Risk perception itself now reshapes freight costs, delivery schedules, and market behavior. A full blockade isn’t necessary for markets to react. This is why Brent hit $120. The price reflected doubt about transit routes, not just supply.
Within this context, divergence inside OPEC+ makes more sense. The UAE’s exit exposes a widening gap between collective discipline and national strategy. Saudi Arabia still anchors the group, often taking deeper cuts to prop up prices. But not every producer operates on the same timeline. For Abu Dhabi, securing future market share in Asia matters more than defending a coordination system designed for different circumstances.
Iran reads the situation through a different lens. Tehran has long viewed energy security as a contest over access, pressure, and control of routes. Rising militarization and sanctions have already turned the oil trade into a geopolitical struggle. The UAE’s departure confirms that producers are going their own way in a fragmented system.
OPEC isn’t collapsing. It retains influence, largely through Saudi Arabia’s spare capacity. But the assumptions that held it together – predictable shipping, aligned incentives, centralized management – are eroding.
The rise of parallel energy networks
Russian crude has been redirected toward Asian markets following Western sanctions. This has reshaped tanker routes and altered margins and payment mechanisms. Sanctions did not crunch the supply from those producers they were aimed at, but rather accelerated the diversification of trade channels.
The US now seeks to play a dual role: security provider in key maritime regions and major supplier of shale oil and LNG. Growth in non‑OPEC production is steadily eroding the dominance of older, more centralized energy structures.
For Asian importers, this shift has been enabling and destabilizing in equal measure. Flexible LNG cargoes diversified crude sourcing, and new trading routes have reduced dependence on any single supplier. But they have also tied energy security more tightly to geopolitics, logistics, and financial infrastructure.
For Asian importers, this shift has been both enabling and destabilizing. While they have been able to diversify crude sourcing, their energy security is increasingly tied to geopolitics, logistics and financial infrastructure.
Market participants recognize this transition. Industry observers note the system may absorb shocks like the UAE’s exit without immediate disruption. But that calm reflects adaptation, not the old stability. Recent analysis shows how overlapping supply and security networks are now shaped as much by political alignment as by market efficiency. The global oil system no longer revolves around a single center; it is fragmenting into multiple interconnected but distinct circuits.
Asia’s rise and the new competition for energy relevance
Demand is shifting decisively eastward. India is expected to add 1 mbpd by 2030, the largest increase of any country globally, and account for nearly half of all incremental global oil demand through 2035. This shift is reshaping producer strategies. Gulf exporters are no longer just defending price levels. They’re competing for long-term relevance in Asian markets where Gulf-Asia trade reached $516 billion in 2024, double the $256 billion Gulf-West trade volume.
The exit reflects this calculation. Rather than abandoning global markets, Abu Dhabi is repositioning toward flexibility, bilateral arrangements, and direct access to Asia’s growth centers.
For Asian economies, the implications are more complex. Diversification across the Gulf, Russia, the US, and Africa improves bargaining power but embeds them in a more fragmented and politically sensitive system. Energy security now means more than securing supply it requires safer shipping routes, insurance frameworks, refining systems, and strategic reserves. When any of these elements fail, the economic fallout extends far beyond energy costs alone.
Policy responses are evolving accordingly. Strategic reserves, refinery expansion, growing renewable capacity and nuclear energy generation are increasingly viewed as parts of a broader resilience framework. Maritime security has gained prominence, with Hormuz identified as a key strategic focus.
India has deepened US engagement on LNG and technology, maintained Gulf ties, and continued Russian crude imports despite narrowing discounts. The goal is not alignment with any single bloc but flexibility in a fragmented market. It’s no longer who controls production, but who can ensure oil and the infrastructure moving it function reliably in an increasingly uncertain world.
Western governments see all gestures of goodwill as signs of weakness, the former Russian president has said
Only the “animal fear” of unacceptable losses will prevent Germany and the wider “United Europe” from launching another attack against Russia, the head of the Russian Security Council and former president, Dmitry Medvedev, wrote in an article ahead of the 81st anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany.
Moscow has condemned what it described
Western governments see all gestures of goodwill as signs of weakness, the former Russian president has said
Only the “animal fear” of unacceptable losses will prevent Germany and the wider “United Europe” from launching another attack against Russia, the head of the Russian Security Council and former president, Dmitry Medvedev, wrote in an article ahead of the 81st anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany.
Moscow has condemned what it described as reckless militarization by the EU, accusing Western governments of seeking to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia while trying to turn it into a “model external enemy” to divert attention away from domestic problems.
“It is no secret that an attempt is being made to impose on us the doctrine of ‘peace through strength’. Our response then can only be ‘the security of Russia through the animal fear of Europe,’” Medvedev wrote.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz openly vowed to turn the German military into the “strongest conventional army in Europe” in a speech just days after the world marked the 80th anniversary of the fall of the Third Reich last May.
Last month, the German Defense Ministry unveiled a plan to reach this goal and field 460,000 combat-ready personnel by 2039, the 100th anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s invasion of Poland. German and other EU officials repeatedly cited 2029 as the first stage deadline to be “war-ready” for a potential conflict with Russia.
“Talks, good intentions, goodwill, and unilateral steps to build trust must not be our tools to prevent a massacre. The sole guarantee lies in forcing Germany and the ‘united Europe’ backing it to grasp the inescapable certainty of incurring unacceptable losses if they ever set in motion ‘Operation Barbarossa 2.0,’” Medvedev said in the article soon to be published on RT.
The Western powers turned the post-war process into a farce, the former Russian president has said
The process of ridding German society and Europe of Nazi ideology was never completed, the head of the Russian Security Council and former president, Dmitry Medvedev, wrote in an article ahead of the 81st anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany.
Moscow has long accused the West of pursuing historical revanchism and seeking to erase the memory of Wo
The Western powers turned the post-war process into a farce, the former Russian president has said
The process of ridding German society and Europe of Nazi ideology was never completed, the head of the Russian Security Council and former president, Dmitry Medvedev, wrote in an article ahead of the 81st anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany.
Moscow has long accused the West of pursuing historical revanchism and seeking to erase the memory of World War II and rewrite the Soviet victory over Nazism.
Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) said last year that German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in particular harbors a “maniacal drive for revenge” against Russia based on Nazi-era grievances.
“The Federal Republic of Germany has seen no real denazification. Archival materials of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Russia, including a reference on the political situation in West Germany from 1952, convincingly show that instead of its implementation, ‘the Western powers followed the path of justifying Nazi war criminals,’” Medvedev wrote.
Some Western countries still do not accept the results of World War II and the rulings of the Nuremberg Tribunal, thinking that the Soviet victory was an “accident or a mistake” that needs to be rectified, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said last month.
Medvedev argued that the West kept the bearers of Nazi ideology alive for their descendants to continue wreaking havoc.
“The entire process, carried out with much ado, turned into an empty farce, with the exception of the liquidation of notorious pro-fascist organizations and the purification of public spaces.
“The Anglo-Saxons, trying to preserve the former leaders of Hitler’s military economy and major Nazis they needed, campaigned under the slogan ‘hang the small ones – acquit the big ones,’” Medvedev said in the article, soon to be published on RT.
Years of quiet adaptation are giving way to a more explicit and structured confrontation
On May 2, the Ministry of Commerce of China issued an injunction to block US restrictions against five independent Chinese oil refineries that have been sanctioned for importing Iranian oil and utilizing so-called ‘shadow fleets’.
Here’s why Beijing made this decision and why it could be historically significant.
Think slow, act fast
China has been inching t
Years of quiet adaptation are giving way to a more explicit and structured confrontation
On May 2, the Ministry of Commerce of China issued an injunction to block US restrictions against five independent Chinese oil refineries that have been sanctioned for importing Iranian oil and utilizing so-called ‘shadow fleets’.
Here’s why Beijing made this decision and why it could be historically significant.
Think slow, act fast
China has been inching towards this decision for the past year. The Shouguang Luqing refinery in Shandong province was the first to be added to the sanctions list on March 20, 2025. By October, the US had imposed restrictions on three other ‘teapot’ refineries.
Finally, on April 24, 2026, Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refinery Co., Ltd., fell under sanctions. With a capacity of 400,000 barrels per day, the facility in Dalian exceeds the combined capacity of the four previous refineries. This seems to have been the tipping point, prompting the Chinese government to shift from verbal threats to decisive action.
The legal groundwork has been in place for some time: a local law against foreign sanctions was passed in 2021, but remained largely symbolic due to the absence of implementing regulations. The delay made sense: the law was adopted during US President Donald Trump’s first term. After the thaw in US-China relations under [former US President Joe] Biden, it was put on hold. Ultimately, the directive to activate this law was only signed by Chinese Premier Li Qiang in March 2025.
Finally, on April 14, 2026, China implemented the Regulations on Countering Improper Extraterritorial Jurisdiction by Foreign States. These regulations contain 20 articles, including provisions that allow the Chinese government to add individuals and organizations involved in discriminatory measures against China to its sanctions list. Those included in the list could be expelled from China or denied entry; their assets could be frozen, and they may be banned from doing business with any individuals or organizations in China.
The situation with Iran
Evidently, China has taken the first practical step regarding the five refineries. As mentioned earlier, this move was tied to the US sanctions against the major refinery in Dalian. The sanctions themselves are the result of America’s conflict with Iran – or more accurately, the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
To recap, Iran allows only those ships that coordinate their routes with the Iranian authorities (i.e., pay for passage) to enter the strait, while the US attempts to prevent any vessels from leaving the Persian Gulf.
As a result, traffic through the strait has plummeted by 20-30 times compared to pre-war levels; however, Iran has seen the smallest decrease relative to other countries. This is primarily because Iranian ‘shadow fleet’ tankers do not need to seek approval from their own authorities, and they are more willing to take risks, navigating past US naval warships – typically along the Iranian coast and in Pakistani territorial waters. In contrast, legitimate ships refrain from such maneuvers, as they cannot risk losing insurance coverage.
As of April 22, at least 34 Iranian tankers have successfully navigated around the US maritime blockade since it began, averaging about 3-4 vessels per day. These figures are comparable to pre-war levels, and nearly all the oil from these tankers is headed for China. Consequently, we observe a direct attempt by Washington to influence Chinese buyers of Iranian oil, trying to pressure them into backing away.
Chinese authorities have made many comments regarding secondary US sanctions, but most of these statements have either been declarative (asserting that they won’t let third countries dictate their trade relationships) or made behind closed doors.
This approach aligns with traditional Chinese policy: avoiding direct confrontation, steering clear of disputes, seeking loopholes, and achieving objectives through subtle means. Moscow has felt the impact of this strategy firsthand: since 2022, China has engaged in trade with Russia rather discreetly. Everyone knew that China was purchasing Russian oil, but new US sanctions affected the flow of those shipments.
The same applied to Iran: when there was an oversupply of oil, China had the luxury of being selective. The market was determined by buyers; sanctioned oil was bought only as a last resort and at a large discount. Tankers could be anchored for months waiting for better conditions, and so on.
However, faced with a severe oil shortage, China was forced to enter into a more direct conflict with the US. The United States is unlikely to retaliate effectively, and China’s decision will likely lead to the establishment of a transparent alternative trading and payment infrastructure.
All the major decisions have long been made in this regard (for example, the creation and implementation of CIPS, China’s equivalent to SWIFT), but like the sanctions law, the alternative payment infrastructure has remained largely dormant for years.
***
For the past four years, Russia has been calling on its partners to take action: finding an alternative to the dollar, departing from American control over international trade, and replacing semi-clandestine payment schemes with a solid, transparent, and reliable system. And for the past four years, Russia’s trading partners shrugged off these calls, implying, ‘You want it? You go do it. We don’t want problems with the US.’ Iran found itself in a similar position, but unlike Russia, it relied on China as its de facto sole buyer.
Now, ironically, it’s Trump who is forcing China to change this approach. In doing so, he risks shooting himself in the foot, since his actions may provoke a new, tougher, and more decisive Chinese policy. Beijing has all the political, economic, and financial tools at its disposal to make this happen.
The US president has abruptly put ‘Project Freedom’ on hold after just two days
US President Donald Trump has temporarily paused a military operation to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz, but said the blockade of Iranian ports will “remain in full force and effect” until a final agreement with Tehran is reached.
Trump’s ‘Project Freedom’ was launched to guide tankers and other commercial vessels through the key energy chokepoint, which ac
The US president has abruptly put ‘Project Freedom’ on hold after just two days
US President Donald Trump has temporarily paused a military operation to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz, but said the blockade of Iranian ports will “remain in full force and effect” until a final agreement with Tehran is reached.
Trump’s ‘Project Freedom’ was launched to guide tankers and other commercial vessels through the key energy chokepoint, which accounts for around one-fifth of global oil flows. Announcing the mission on Sunday, Trump described it as a humanitarian effort rather than an offensive operation.
“Based on the request of Pakistan and other countries,” as well as “great progress” in talks with Iranian representatives, Washington and Tehran have “mutually agreed” to put the ship-movement operation on hold “for a short period,” Trump abruptly announced on Truth Social two days later.
Just hours earlier, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told journalists that the original operation (Epic Fury) is over, adding: “We’re now on to this Project Freedom.”
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth also appeared to be caught off guard by the announcement. Earlier on Tuesday, he boasted at a press conference that “hundreds more ships from nations around the world are lining up to transit,” after US forces “embarrassed” Iran with the success of Project Freedom.
The now-aborted operation is the latest flashpoint between Washington and Tehran. Iran warned that any foreign military entering the strait would be targeted, insisting that safe passage through the waterway must be coordinated with Iranian forces.
US Central Command claimed on Monday that US forces destroyed several small Iranian boats that tried to interfere with the mission. Tehran rejected the claims, while Iranian media reported that Iranian forces had fired warning shots near US naval vessels.
“Project Freedom is Project Deadlock,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in a post on X, warning the US to “be wary of being dragged back into a quagmire by ill-wishers.”
The Strait of Hormuz has been at the center of the crisis since the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran in late February. The US and Iran reached a fragile ceasefire in early April, but tensions have continued over maritime access, with Tehran calling Washington’s naval blockade an “act of war” and a violation of the truce.
Trump said the temporary pause in escorts is intended to give negotiators time to see whether a “complete and final agreement” could be finalized.
Continued silence could pose serious risks of escalation in the conflict with Iran, a group of 30 congressmen has said
A group of 30 Democrats in the US House of Representatives have demanded that the administration of President Donald Trump disclose information about Israel’s nuclear arsenal and relevant policies. The lack of transparency threatens the entire Middle East, the lawmakers argue.
Israel has neither confirmed nor denied that it posse
Continued silence could pose serious risks of escalation in the conflict with Iran, a group of 30 congressmen has said
A group of 30 Democrats in the US House of Representatives have demanded that the administration of President Donald Trump disclose information about Israel’s nuclear arsenal and relevant policies. The lack of transparency threatens the entire Middle East, the lawmakers argue.
Israel has neither confirmed nor denied that it possesses nuclear weapons, nor has it publicly presented a doctrine outlining the potential use of them or its red lines. The US, which has been aware of the Israeli nuclear program at least since the early 1960s, has remained silent on the issue.
Washington is fighting “side by side with a country whose potential nuclear weapons program the United States government officially refuses to acknowledge,” congressmen led by Democratic Representative Joaquin Castro said in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
“The risks of miscalculation, escalation, and nuclear use in this environment are not theoretical,” the letter stated.
The group has demanded that the US hold Israel to the same standard of transparency as other countries, adding that a “coherent nonproliferation policy for the Middle East,” including Iran’s nuclear program and Saudi nuclear ambitions, would otherwise be impossible.
The peninsula came under a massive attack on Tuesday evening, according to Sergey Aksyonov
Five civilians have been killed in a Ukrainian drone strike on the northern Crimean city of Dzhankoy, Governor Sergey Aksyonov has said.
Shortly before reporting the fatalities, Aksyonov warned that Crimea was under attack by Ukrainian drones. He said air defenses and mobile fire teams were engaging the incoming threats and had intercepted at least 12 UAVs.
The peninsula came under a massive attack on Tuesday evening, according to Sergey Aksyonov
Five civilians have been killed in a Ukrainian drone strike on the northern Crimean city of Dzhankoy, Governor Sergey Aksyonov has said.
Shortly before reporting the fatalities, Aksyonov warned that Crimea was under attack by Ukrainian drones. He said air defenses and mobile fire teams were engaging the incoming threats and had intercepted at least 12 UAVs.
“Unfortunately, as a result of an enemy UAV strike on Dzhankoy, there are casualties among the civilian population – five people have died,” Aksyonov wrote. He expressed condolences to the victims’ families and said the authorities would provide them with all necessary assistance.
The governor said emergency and other relevant services were working at the scene, adding that he was personally monitoring the situation. He urged residents to remain calm and rely only on official information.
The strike came after Russia’s Defense Ministry said air defenses had downed 289 Ukrainian drones over Russian territory and the Azov Sea the night before. According to the ministry, the raid targeted 19 regions in western and southern Russia. Regional officials reported damage and injuries in several areas.
Ukrainian drone raids on Russian territory have intensified in recent months, with Kiev increasingly deploying large numbers of fixed-wing UAVs against infrastructure, industrial facilities, and residential areas. Moscow has described the strikes as desperate “terrorist attacks” to compensate for the setbacks Kiev has suffered on the battlefield.
The attack comes days before Russia’s planned two-day ceasefire on May 8-9 to mark Victory Day, which commemorates the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. Moscow has said it will pause the fighting during the holiday and urged Kiev to do the same, warning that any attempt to disrupt the celebrations, including attacks against Moscow, would be met with a major retaliatory strike on Kiev.
The top diplomats discussed international affairs and upcoming contacts, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held a “constructive” phone call with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Foreign Ministry in Moscow has said.
The top diplomats compared notes on “the current state of international affairs and Russia-US relations” and discussed the schedule of upcoming bilateral contacts, the ministry said in a
The top diplomats discussed international affairs and upcoming contacts, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held a “constructive” phone call with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Foreign Ministry in Moscow has said.
The top diplomats compared notes on “the current state of international affairs and Russia-US relations” and discussed the schedule of upcoming bilateral contacts, the ministry said in a statement.
The conversation was “constructive and businesslike,” it added.
The US State Department has not yet commented.
The Lavrov-Rubio call – their first in more than six months – came less than a week after Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke with his US counterpart, Donald Trump. The two discussed the ceasefire in the Iran war, potential escalation in the region, as well as the Ukraine conflict, according to the Kremlin.
The call was part of broader renewed contacts initiated by Trump since his return to office last year, after years of frozen relations during the Joe Biden presidency. Trump also launched a diplomatic push to settle the Ukraine conflict.
However, three rounds of Washington-mediated direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev brought no breakthroughs, and talks appear to have stalled amid the ongoing US-Israeli war against Iran.
Login
