Iran

Israel Says Iranian Naval Commander Alireza Tangsiri Killed in Air Strike

Israel has announced that it has killed a senior Iranian military figure, Alireza Tangsiri, who headed the naval arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

According to Israel’s Defence Minister, Israel Katz, the operation took place on Wednesday night. He described it as “in a precise … operation” and said it also targeted other “senior officers of the naval command” in Iran.

Katz further stated, “The man who was directly responsible for the terrorist operation of mining and blocking the Strait of Hormuz to shipping was blown up and eliminated.”

Despite the claim, there has been no official confirmation from Iranian authorities as of the time of filing this report.

A journalist with Al Jazeera, Tohid Asadi, who is reporting from Tehran, said uncertainty still surrounds the development. He noted, “But if it’s true, it’s going to be another major blow for a country that has already experienced a lot of military commanders being killed.”

The latest claim comes amid the ongoing conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran, which began on February 28. Since then, Israel has repeatedly announced the killing of several top Iranian officials.

Among those previously reported killed are Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, and security figure Ali Larijani.

Other casualties linked to Israeli attacks include the head of the Basij paramilitary force, Gholamreza Soleimani, as well as Iran’s Intelligence Minister, Esmail Khatib.

In addition to targeting individuals, Israeli forces have in recent days intensified strikes on Iran’s naval capabilities. Reports indicate that several naval vessels were hit last week in the Caspian Sea. These included ships equipped with missile systems, support vessels, and patrol craft.

The situation continues to evolve, with tensions rising across the region as both sides maintain military pressure.

Iran Rejects U.S. Ceasefire Proposal, Sets Conditions For Ending War

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Iran has turned down a ceasefire proposal from the United States, stressing that the ongoing conflict will only end based on its own terms and after certain conditions are satisfied.

In a statement released through the Consulate General of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Mumbai, the country outlined its position on the war. It said any ceasefire must come with clear commitments. These include an end to hostilities, payment of war damages, and recognition of its authority over the Strait of Hormuz.

A senior political-security official, cited in the statement, made it clear that Tehran would not accept any timeline imposed by the United States.

“Iran will end the war at a time of its own choosing and only if the conditions it has set are fulfilled. It will not allow Trump to determine the timing of the war’s end,” the official said.

The statement also disclosed that the United States had reached out through diplomatic channels with proposals for talks. However, Iran rejected the move and described it as misleading. It claimed the approach contradicts what it called a U.S. setback on the battlefield.

“Iran has evaluated these proposals… and considers them a deception aimed at escalating tensions,” the source added.

Tehran accused Washington of using negotiations in the past as a cover for military action. It insisted that any future agreement must include a “complete end to aggression and acts of assassination,” along with guarantees to prevent a repeat of the conflict. It also called for compensation for damages caused by the war.

In addition, Iran demanded a ceasefire that would apply across the region, including all allied groups. It also reaffirmed its “natural and legal right” to sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, a key global oil route.

“Iran has informed all mediators acting in good faith that a ceasefire will only take place once its conditions are accepted; until then, no negotiations will be conducted,” the statement said.

This development is expected to heighten tensions between Tehran and Washington. It follows earlier remarks by former U.S. President Donald Trump, who suggested that discussions were ongoing and that Iran was open to reaching an agreement.

Iranian officials have repeatedly denied such claims. Military spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaqari had earlier dismissed the U.S. position and stated that no direct negotiations were taking place.

Despite increasing calls from the international community for calm, both sides have maintained firm positions. Missile exchanges and airstrikes have continued across several fronts, prolonging the conflict.

Iran Accuses Trump of Manipulating Oil Prices After US Pauses Strikes on Energy Infrastructure

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Iran’s foreign ministry has dismissed US President Donald Trump’s claim of “productive” talks to end hostilities, suggesting the remarks aim to calm energy markets and gain time for military planning.

On Monday, Trump announced that Washington and Tehran had held “VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE” conversations over the past two days about a “COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESOLUTION OF HOSTILITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST”. He added that he had instructed the US Department of War to postpone all strikes on Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a five-day period. This announcement came just hours before the deadline of his ultimatum demanding that Iran reopen the Strait of Hormuz, warning that failure to comply would result in Tehran being “obliterated.”

Iran’s foreign ministry rejected the notion of direct negotiations with the US. It stated that while regional countries had initiated efforts to reduce tensions, “all requests should be directed towards the US as we did not initiate the war.”

Citing an unnamed source, Iran’s Fars news agency reported that Trump delayed military action after learning that Iran would respond by targeting all power plants in the region. The source also indicated that Tehran could lay mines across the Persian Gulf if the US proceeded with attacks on the country’s coast or islands.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has intensified pressure on Trump. The vital waterway is a major conduit for oil, and its disruption has caused energy prices to surge since hostilities escalated in late February.

In London, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer welcomed Trump’s announcement to delay strikes. His official spokesman said: “Any reports of productive talks are welcome. We have always said that a swift resolution to the war is in global interests and the Strait of Hormuz specifically needs to be reopened.”

The spokesman added that the UK was in contact with the US about the situation and had discussed safeguarding international shipping. “It has been something the prime minister has talked about since the beginning of this conflict, that we want to work with the US and international partners to develop a viable plan to safeguard international shipping and see an end to this crisis,” he said.

Financial markets responded to Trump’s announcement with modest optimism. Analysts warn, however, that prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz will continue to drive energy prices upward, potentially prompting multiple interest rate increases in the UK. Rising costs are expected to affect transport, fuel, and production, increasing inflationary pressures.

Meanwhile, Israel’s military confirmed fresh strikes on “Iranian terror regime targets” in Tehran, and Iranian sources stressed that the country would continue to respond and defend its territory. According to Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency, “the Strait of Hormuz will not return to pre-war conditions and energy markets will remain unsettled,” and no direct negotiations with the US are underway.

Trump’s announcement of a temporary pause came as he described ongoing discussions with Iran as “very good and productive,” aimed at achieving a “complete and total resolution of our hostilities in the Middle East.”

“Based on the tenor and tone of these in depth, detailed, and constructive conversations, witch [sic] will continue throughout the week, I have instructed the Department of War to postpone any and all military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a five day period, subject to the success of the ongoing meetings and discussions,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“Thank you for your attention to this matter! President Donald J. Trump”

U.S. Embassy Tells Americans To Vacate ‘Israel’ Via Land Routes, Organizes Buses To Jordan

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The United States Embassy in Jerusalem has advised its citizens in ‘Israel’ to consider leaving the country through land borders due to ongoing travel difficulties and limited immediate options.

In a message posted on its official Instagram page, the embassy explained that overland routes currently offer the quickest way out. It pointed to border crossings into neighboring countries such as Egypt and Jordan as the most viable options for departure.

According to the advisory, commercial flights are still operating from airports in Egypt, including Sharm el-Sheikh and Cairo, as well as from Jordan’s capital, Amman.

To support those seeking to leave, the U.S. Department of State has begun arranging bus transportation for American citizens. The service is scheduled to start on March 23 and will move passengers from ‘Israel’ to Queen Alia International Airport in Amman.

As part of the “departure by land” plan, assisted transport will be available through the northern crossing known as the Jordan River/Sheikh Hussein border point. The embassy said this option is intended for citizens who require help exiting the country.

Americans interested in using the service must first complete an online registration form. After that, they will receive information on departure schedules and designated meeting locations. Current arrangements cover departures from both Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

Officials stressed that travelers will still need to handle their onward journeys themselves, including securing flights from Amman.

The embassy added that it will continue to provide updates to U.S. citizens in ‘Israel’ as the situation develops.

Examining the Sanity of Saner Climes

By Amir Abdulazeez

Several decades into the global modern era, Africans, Asians and Latin Americans continue to be held hostage by their colonially indoctrinated inferior mindsets engineered by the blackmail and mythology of Western moral supremacy. This error is not in observing Western virtues, many of which are real. The error is in the uncritical veneration that renders their vices invisible and their judgements unchallengeable. It is evident from the events of the last three decades alone that the so-called saner climes of Europe and North America are the primary architects of global chaos and instability of nations, all in the name of injecting sanity into ‘less sane’ societies.

The ongoing US-Israel war on Iran, launched in the midst of Ramadan, is a typical doctrine of the saner climes, exhibited in its most naked form. Iran’s Foreign Minister had said three days before the war was declared that a nuclear agreement was ‘within reach’ after a third round of indirect talks in Geneva. 

The IAEA itself confirmed there was no evidence of a structured Iranian nuclear weapons programme at the time of the attack. Yet, the surprise assault assassinated Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, killed his family members and damaged schools, hospitals and even UNESCO-recognised cultural heritage sites. This is a typical catalogue of barbaric war crimes for which the West has condemned others across generations. 

The Donald Trump administration, whose seemingly rude, dishonest and arrogant officials, has offered a menu of rationalisations and a handful of conflicting justifications for the war. However, when Amnesty International confirmed that the United States was responsible for a strike that killed at least 160 primary school girls, the US officials chose arrogance through denials instead of remorse. 

In fact, the Head of the Federal Communications Commission simultaneously intimidated his own press, threatening the withdrawal of broadcast licenses of American news outlets whose war coverage he deemed unfavourable. Another trademark saner-climes mythology, muzzled in a way only a few non-saner climes can imagine. 

Meanwhile, in all these, it is the ‘lunatic’ Iran that is supposed to apologise and do nothing while it is attacked. The Iranian Regime, branded as autocratic on the premise that it compels women to cover their hair in public, is being lectured by leaders of societies whose women go out naked in the name of civilisation and whose governments topple, kill and abduct Heads of state of other countries for recklessly greedy reasons. 

Now imagine if the erratically behaving Donald Trump were the leader of any African Country, the West would have since declared him incoherent and unstable to deal with or labelled his citizens stupid for voting for him. Worse still, imagine if the Epstein scandal happened in Asia or Latin America. All these contradictions reveal with crystal clarity that Western principles are instruments of convenience. 

To understand the foundations of all these, let us revisit some history. Britain’s Industrial Revolution was fertilised by the profits of the transatlantic slave trade and the systematic plunder of India, a country whose share of global GDP fell from about 25% at the onset of colonial rule to barely 4% at independence. 

France financed much of its republican grandeur on the forced labour of West Africa and the Caribbean. Belgium’s King Leopold II transformed the Congo into a private abattoir, severing the hands of Africans who failed to meet rubber quotas, leaving behind a traumatised country that still bleeds today. 

To speak of the sanity of those climes without acknowledging that they were partly built from organised insanity inflicted elsewhere is to ignore the background to what we are witnessing today.

In the last fifty years alone, the so-called saner climes have unleashed a level of violence and destabilisation that would shame any regime they have ever deemed fit to condemn. The United States, the self-acclaimed sentinel of the free world, has engineered irrational regime changes in Chile (1973), Iran (1953 and subsequently), Guatemala (1954), Nicaragua, Panama, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, among others. The 1973 CIA-backed coup against a democratically elected socialist president of Chile, Salvador Allende, installed Augusto Pinochet, under whose reign thousands were tortured, disappeared, or executed. Henry Kissinger, the American architect of that atrocity, received the Nobel Peace Prize from his fellow saner clime comrades. 

The French Government, through its notorious Françafrique policy, maintained a neocolonial empire across West and Central Africa long after the 1960s, propping up murderous dictators and conducting military interventions to protect economic interests, with a consistency that made a mockery of every democratic principle France professed to uphold.

The invasion of Iraq in 2003 by Western Governments is perhaps the most consequential act of manufactured catastrophe of the modern era. The war resulted in the deaths of an estimated 200,000 to one million Iraqi civilians, the obliteration of the country’s infrastructure, the rise of ISIS from the ashes of a disbanded Iraqi army and the triggering of a refugee crisis that continues to destabilise the Middle East. No one was held accountable. George W. Bush and Tony Blair are living happy lives in their saner countries. The International Criminal Court, which has indicted multiple African heads of state on much lesser crimes with considerable alacrity, found no jurisdiction to examine any of them. Meanwhile, the people of Iraq, Syria and Libya who were dismantled in the name of liberation still live in the ruins and pains of what the saner climes call democracy.

While the West was busy bombing the Middle East, Africa, the so-called backward continent, was largely attending to its own affairs of conflict resolution with a remarkable degree of maturity. The African Union mediated crises in Burundi, the Gambia and Lesotho without firing a single bullet. ECOWAS brokered peace agreements in Sierra Leone and Liberia and deployed peacekeeping forces with genuine multilateral mandates, without the casual trigger-happiness of Western powers. 

Western attitude towards violence is shamelessly selective. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the Saner Clime’s response was swift, comprehensive and morally unambiguous: sanctions, weapons, diplomatic isolation and a media chorus of civilizational solidarity. This response was appropriate anyway. But the problem is its stark contrast with the Western posture toward other invasions. When Saudi Arabia launched its war on Yemen in 2015, the United States and the United Kingdom did not merely decline to intervene; they allegedly supplied the bombs, refuelled the warplanes and provided intelligence for strikes that killed thousands of Yemeni civilians and engineered one of the worst humanitarian crises on earth. 

Many argue that the actions of Western governments do not accurately reflect what their citizens stand for. This is debatable, especially when one examines certain incidents. During the Obama presidency, Edward Snowden revealed that the US National Security Agency was conducting mass, warrantless surveillance of American citizens and foreign governments, including the personal telephone of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in flagrant violation of constitutional protections and international diplomatic norms. The response was not accountability but exile for Snowden and a classification of his revelations as treason. 

The United States has the largest prison population on earth, both in absolute numbers and per capita, administered under a system in which Black Americans are incarcerated at five times the rate of their white counterparts, in conditions that the United Nations has described as cruel. Since 1968, gun violence has claimed more American lives than all of America’s foreign wars combined. One might be inclined to believe that these controversies are ones ordinary Western citizens may not approve of.

Climate change is another damning indictment of Western moral authority in the twenty-first century. The Industrial activities enriching Europe and North America still depend on burning carbon at a scale the planet has never experienced. The United States, historically the world’s largest cumulative emitter of greenhouse gases, withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement under Donald Trump. 

Australia, another clime reputed to be considerably saner than most, has built its prosperity on coal exports and resisted meaningful emissions reduction. Some Pacific Island nations face sea submersions within this century as a consequence of decisions made in saner capitals. When these nations’ leaders speak at the United Nations with tears in their voices, the saner climes offer symbolic but empty sympathy before later returning to preserving their industrial prerogatives. 

The Western Media’s tactical twisting of narratives regarding other climes is another issue. For example, CNN may not run primetime documentaries on the Swiss banking system’s complicity in laundering the proceeds of African kleptocracy, but will rather concentrate on the primary kleptocrats. The BBC does not lead with investigations into the role of British arms dealers in sustaining African conflicts. The New York Times does not dedicate its front page to the tax avoidance schemes through which Western corporations drain billions of dollars annually from African economies (more than the continent receives in foreign aid).

In addition to all this, there is something more worrisome. The bulk of support received by these saner climes comes from their victims in the third world. In Nigeria, for instance, the blind sympathy for religious affiliations drives people to support the brazen oppression and cruel injustices perpetrated by the West. Our solidarity should be among ourselves, not with those who see and treat us as worthless humans and more like animals because of their superior moral hypocrisy. 

Additionally, our bootlicking governments, which are considered close to valueless in the International arena or even insane just like us, must stop intimidating their own citizens who decide to speak up against Western double standards. Let’s remember, the phrase “saner climes” is a moral verdict and a devastating condemnation of everywhere else except Europe and North America. Africans and all peoples of the marginalised world are owed the intellectual inheritance of critical discernment.

The world does not need more or fewer saner climes; it needs a more honest accounting of what sanity actually requires. It requires consistency: the same rules applied to the powerful and the powerless alike. It requires humility: the acknowledgement that no civilisation holds a monopoly on wisdom. 

And it requires accountability: not the selective justice of indicting the weak and glorifying the mighty, but the universal application of standards that do not bend before a Security Council veto or the impulse of a self-serving superpower. Until that accounting arrives, the presumption of Western moral authority deserves not deference, but fearless interrogation; the kind that the so-called saner climes have always claimed to celebrate and so rarely been prepared to receive.

Switzerland Suspends Arms Exports To US Over Iran War

Switzerland has halted the approval of licences for weapons exports to the United States due to the ongoing conflict involving Iran, citing its policy of neutrality.

The Swiss government announced the decision on Friday. It said the measure would remain in place for the duration of the war.

“The export of war materiel to countries involved ⁠in the international armed conflict with Iran cannot be authorised for the duration of the conflict,” the government said.

“Exports of war materiel to the USA ‌cannot currently be authorised,” it added.

The development comes as the US-Israel war on Iran approaches its third week. The conflict has worsened the humanitarian situation across the Middle East and pushed global energy prices higher.

Swiss authorities have also shut their airspace to US military flights connected to the war. Last weekend, officials rejected two requests from the US for overflight linked to Iran operations, although three others were approved.

Switzerland’s neutrality law guides decisions on arms transfers. A federal act adopted in 1996 requires export licences for military equipment. The law is based on respect for human rights and the country’s neutral stance.

Since the war began on February 28, Switzerland said it has not issued any new export licences to the United States.

The government noted that it has not granted definitive licences for arms exports to Israel for several years. The same position applies to Iran.

Existing licences issued to the US will now undergo periodic review by a panel of experts. The group will assess whether further action is needed under neutrality rules.

Officials also confirmed that exports of dual-use goods and certain military items will face regular checks.

“A restrictive approach is already in place with regard to Israel,” the government said.

Data from Swiss authorities show that the United States was the second-largest buyer of Swiss arms last year. The total value of exports stood at $119 million.

Switzerland has taken similar steps in the past. It blocked the transfer of Swiss-made weapons to Ukraine after Russia’s invasion in 2022. It also imposed restrictions on flights and arms exports during the US-led Iraq war in 2003, although those measures were later lifted.

Switzerland Suspends Arms Exports To US Over Iran War

Switzerland has halted the approval of licences for weapons exports to the United States due to the ongoing conflict involving Iran, citing its policy of neutrality.

The Swiss government announced the decision on Friday. It said the measure would remain in place for the duration of the war.

“The export of war materiel to countries involved ⁠in the international armed conflict with Iran cannot be authorised for the duration of the conflict,” the government said.

“Exports of war materiel to the USA ‌cannot currently be authorised,” it added.

The development comes as the US-Israel war on Iran approaches its third week. The conflict has worsened the humanitarian situation across the Middle East and pushed global energy prices higher.

Swiss authorities have also shut their airspace to US military flights connected to the war. Last weekend, officials rejected two requests from the US for overflight linked to Iran operations, although three others were approved.

Switzerland’s neutrality law guides decisions on arms transfers. A federal act adopted in 1996 requires export licences for military equipment. The law is based on respect for human rights and the country’s neutral stance.

Since the war began on February 28, Switzerland said it has not issued any new export licences to the United States.

The government noted that it has not granted definitive licences for arms exports to Israel for several years. The same position applies to Iran.

Existing licences issued to the US will now undergo periodic review by a panel of experts. The group will assess whether further action is needed under neutrality rules.

Officials also confirmed that exports of dual-use goods and certain military items will face regular checks.

“A restrictive approach is already in place with regard to Israel,” the government said.

Data from Swiss authorities show that the United States was the second-largest buyer of Swiss arms last year. The total value of exports stood at $119 million.

Switzerland has taken similar steps in the past. It blocked the transfer of Swiss-made weapons to Ukraine after Russia’s invasion in 2022. It also imposed restrictions on flights and arms exports during the US-led Iraq war in 2003, although those measures were later lifted.

Iran Declares Global Threat, Says Parks, Tourist Sites Unsafe For US, Israeli Officials

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Iran has issued a strong warning to officials of the United States and Israel, stating that they are no longer safe anywhere in the world after recent attacks linked to both countries.

The warning came from a senior Iranian military spokesperson, Abolfazl Shekarchi, who said the risks faced by their adversaries may extend beyond traditional battle zones.

In a statement aired on Iranian state television, Shekarchi said, “From now on, based on the information we have about you, even parks, recreational areas and tourist destinations anywhere in the world will no longer be safe for you.”

The statement signals a sharp rise in tensions, as Tehran suggests it could widen the scope of its response to what it views as hostile actions.

The development follows a series of reported strikes connected to the United States and Israel. Iranian authorities have since pledged a firm response, which has added to fears of further escalation.

Observers say the latest remarks reflect growing concern over a possible expansion of the conflict, as threats continue to intensify between the sides.

The situation has also been fueled by reports of Israeli operations that led to the killing of senior Iranian officials, which has further deepened hostilities.

Meanwhile, the crisis appears to be drawing in more regional actors. The leader of Yemen’s Houthi Movement, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, has announced support for Iran in the ongoing confrontation with the United States and Israel.

In a televised address monitored on Friday, Al-Houthi accused Washington of supporting Israel’s military actions in the region. He warned that any US involvement against Iran would be seen as a direct threat to Yemen and the broader “Islamic nation.

“Because he considers it the biggest obstacle in the way of accomplishing his plan,” Al-Houthi said.

He added, “Therefore, any attack or US aggression supporting the Israeli enemy against Iran within the framework of the goal itself, is a throw to empower the Israeli enemy from controlling the entire region. And this is what cannot be silenced.”

The comments mark a notable escalation from the Iran-aligned group, which has previously targeted shipping routes in the Red Sea and launched attacks linked to Israeli interests. Analysts warn that the growing rhetoric and alliances could push the region closer to a wider conflict.

Drones Reportedly Spotted Over U.S. Military Base Housing Top Officials In Washington

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Fresh security concerns have surfaced in Washington after unidentified drones were seen flying over a sensitive United States military installation.

The Washington Post reported that the drones were detected above Fort McNair, a facility where Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth are accommodated. The report cited three individuals who were briefed on the development.

Officials have not determined where the drones came ⁠from, the report said, citing two of the people familiar with the matter, leaving questions over their origin unanswered.

The situation has led to internal discussions within government circles about whether Rubio and Hegseth should be relocated from the base due to safety worries. Despite those concerns, both officials are still at the facility. A senior administration official confirmed this, according to the report.

The newspaper also noted that the U.S. military has increased its surveillance of potential threats. This comes amid heightened alert levels linked to the ongoing conflict involving the United States and Israel against Iran.

Reuters reported it could not independently verify the development at the time.

Meanwhile, both the Pentagon and the U.S. State Department have not issued official statements on the matter. When approached by the Washington Post, Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell declined to provide details.

“The department cannot comment on the secretary’s (Hegseth’s) movements for security ⁠reasons, and reporting on such movements is grossly irresponsible,” he told the Post.

US Intel Chief Says Iran Posed No Nuclear Threat At Time Of Strikes

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The United States Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has stated that Iran did not present an active nuclear threat at the time American forces carried out strikes on the country.

Her position challenges a key reason advanced by former President Donald Trump for the military action. Mr Trump had cited what he described as an imminent danger from Iran.

In written testimony submitted to the Senate intelligence committee, Ms Gabbard said Iran had not taken steps to rebuild its nuclear programme after it was damaged in a joint US-Israeli operation in June 2025.

“As a result of Operation Midnight Hammer, Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was obliterated. There have been no efforts since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability,” Ms Gabbard said in the testimony to the Senate intelligence committee.

However, she did not include this conclusion in her oral presentation to lawmakers. When questioned by a Democratic senator, she explained that time constraints prevented her from presenting the full contents of her written submission. She did not dispute the findings.

Mr Trump has repeatedly defended the strikes, insisting they were necessary due to an “imminent threat” from Iran. After the operation in June 2025, he said US forces had “obliterated” Iranian nuclear facilities. He later claimed the country was only weeks away from producing a nuclear weapon.

Many analysts have disagreed with that assessment. Their views also contrast with ongoing diplomatic efforts aimed at restoring a nuclear agreement with Tehran.

During her remarks to senators, Ms Gabbard acknowledged that recent attacks had significantly weakened Iran. She referenced major developments, including the killing of former supreme leader Ali Khamenei. Despite this, she maintained that the country’s government structures were still functioning.

Earlier in her political career as a congresswoman, Ms Gabbard had opposed military action against Iran.

Meanwhile, Joe Kent, a senior aide to Ms Gabbard, resigned earlier this week. He argued there was no “imminent threat” from Iran. Mr Kent, who previously served as a counterterrorism director, alleged that he and other officials were not given the opportunity to present their concerns to Mr Trump.

Mr Trump dismissed the criticism. He said he had always considered Mr Kent “weak on security” and added that individuals who did not see Iran as a threat had no place in his administration.

Reports on Thursday indicated that the FBI has opened an investigation into Mr Kent over claims that he disclosed classified information.

In an interview with commentator Tucker Carlson, Mr Kent said key officials were excluded from the decision-making process that led to the strikes.

“A good deal of key decision makers were not allowed to come and express their opinion to the president,” he told Mr Carlson.

“There wasn’t a robust debate,” he said in the interview.

He also supported Ms Gabbard’s earlier assessment on Iran’s nuclear capability.

“No. They weren’t three weeks ago when this started, and they weren’t in June either,” he said, referring to claims that Iran was close to building nuclear weapons.

Mr Kent further alleged that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other officials lobbied Mr Trump directly, often relying on information that had not been verified by US intelligence.

“When we would hear what they were saying, it didn’t reflect intelligence channels,” Mr Kent said.

He also recounted a conversation with conservative activist Charlie Kirk before his death, stating: “He looked me in the eye and said, ‘Joe, stop us from getting into a war with Iran’.”

Mr Kent went on to suggest, without providing evidence, that Israel may have been involved in Mr Kirk’s death. His remarks, along with claims about an “Israeli lobby” influencing US policy, have attracted criticism from several groups who described the statements as anti-Semitic.