USA

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States naval personnel and marines aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli have reached the Middle East, according to an announcement by the Central Command on Saturday.

The vessel serves as the flagship of the Tripoli Amphibious Ready Group/31st Marine Expeditionary Unit. It carries about 3,500 troops along with transport and fighter aircraft.

The deployment is expected to strengthen the U.S. military presence in the region. Washington is reportedly weighing the possibility of launching a ground operation around Iran’s key oil export hub and the Hormuz Strait.

Reports indicate that the U.S. is considering steps to secure Iran’s nuclear materials. Other options under review include a possible seizure of Kharg Island, an invasion of Larak Island near Hormuz, and control of Abu Musa and nearby islands. Additional strikes on nuclear and energy facilities are also being considered.

At the same time, Yemen’s Houthi forces have declared their involvement in the conflict. The group said it carried out its first operation using ballistic missiles against Israeli military targets.

“Our operations will continue until the declared goals are achieved,” a spokesperson vowed on Saturday. “We will continue until the aggression stops on all fronts.”

Meanwhile, Iran continued retaliatory actions against Gulf countries over the weekend. Two drones struck Oman’s Port of Salalah. The incident left one worker injured and damaged a crane.

Authorities in Kuwait reported that multiple drones hit the country’s international airport, affecting its radar systems. Emirates Global Aluminium also confirmed that Iranian strikes impacted its Al Taweelah facility in Abu Dhabi.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian criticized the situation. He said it was unfortunate that “the territories of some Muslim countries” are being used to attack Iran. He accused Israel of attempting to widen the conflict across the region.

The president also stated that Iran has been “attacked twice during negotiations,” adding that the “bombing infrastructure and assassinating Iranian figures show that the aggressors cannot be trusted.”

His remarks came after Israel launched fresh strikes on two nuclear-related facilities in Iran. The targets included a heavy-water production plant in Khondab and a yellowcake production site in Ardakan.

Russia also reacted to the developments on Saturday. Moscow accused Iran’s opponents of escalating the conflict “despite related risks, including a threat of large-scale radioactive contamination.”

The country called on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to address what it described as a “grave threat.” It added that the attacks breached international law and should attract strong condemnation from the global community.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has taken the unusual step of blocking the promotion of four Army officers to the rank of one-star general, a move that has drawn concern among senior military officials.

According to officials familiar with the development, two of the affected officers are Black, while the other two are women.

According to a report by The New York Times, the names were removed from a promotion list that includes about three dozen officers, most of whom are white men.

Sources said Hegseth had, for months, urged top Army leaders, including Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll, to drop the officers from the list. Driscoll reportedly declined on several occasions, citing the officers’ long-standing records of distinguished service.

The situation changed earlier this month when Hegseth acted on his own to strike the names from the list. It remains unclear whether he has the legal authority to make such a decision.

The list is now under review at the White House and is expected to be forwarded to the Senate for final approval. Officials noted that some Black and female officers are still included.

The decision has attracted rare attention at this level, as promotion lists for one-star generals do not usually face this degree of intervention from a defense secretary. The development has also highlighted divisions within the military leadership.

Hegseth has defended his broader stance on military reforms. He has argued that he is working to overhaul a system he believes was shaped by “foolish,” “reckless” and “woke” leaders from previous administrations.

However, critics have raised concerns that his actions, particularly toward minority and female officers, could undermine trust in a promotion process that is expected to remain neutral and based on merit.

By Anwar Usman

The United Nation Security Council will hold closed-door consultations on Friday to discuss strikes on Iran at Moscow’s request, Russian state media reported, as the Middle East war nears its second month.

Iran has come under near-daily bombardment since US-Israeli strikes on February 28 triggered the war, which has since widened to large parts of the region.

According to state news agency TASS, spokesman for Russia’s envoy to the United Nations, Evgeny Uspensky, said “The Russian Federation has requested closed-door consultations with the UN Security Council due to the ongoing strikes on civilian infrastructure in Iran, including educational and healthcare facilities.”

A strike on the first day of the war hit a school in the southern Iranian city of Minab, killing more than 160 children, according to authorities.

Reports from the US military investigation by The New York Times indicated that a US Tomahawk cruise missile had hit the school due to a targeting mistake.

The United States, which holds the Security Council presidency this month, scheduled the meeting for 10:00 am in New York (1400 GMT), according to TASS.

The US-Israeli military campaign has targeted Iranian leadership, missile sites and military infrastructure, prompting a large-scale Iranian retaliation across the Gulf and the effective closure of the crucial Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of global crude and liquefied natural gas passes during peacetime.

AFP reports that, the UN Human Rights Council will hold a separate meeting on Friday in Geneva focused on the deadly school strike.

By Zayyad I. Muhammad

Low-budget drones are reshaping the architecture of modern warfare in ways that were unimaginable just a decade ago. They allow combatants to engage targets with minimal human contact, reduced battlefield exposure, and significantly fewer casualties. Unlike traditional air power that requires expensive fighter jets, trained pilots, and sophisticated logistics, drones can be produced at low cost, deployed quickly, and operated remotely with high precision. This shift is lowering the barrier to entry for military capability and redefining how wars are fought.

More importantly, this transformation is changing the balance of power between strong and less-powerful nations. Previously, military dominance depended heavily on air superiority, armoured divisions, and naval strength, all of which were controlled by a handful of major powers. Today, relatively smaller or less-equipped countries can use swarms of low-cost drones to challenge technologically advanced militaries. This has made conflicts more prolonged, unpredictable, and difficult to decisively win. Even well-funded armies now face persistent threats from inexpensive systems that are hard to detect and cheap to replace.

The Ukraine-Russia war is a clear example of this shift. A country with fewer conventional military resources has been able to slow down and at times stall a larger, more powerful opponent by using drones for surveillance, artillery guidance, and direct strikes. Commercial-style drones modified for military use have destroyed tanks, disrupted supply lines, and targeted command positions. This has contributed to battlefield stalemates and reduced the effectiveness of traditional heavy military advantage.

Similarly, the United States-Israel-Iran war has demonstrated how drone technology is changing deterrence dynamics. Iran, with its Shahed drones, was able to withstand the US and Israel at the same time, including being able to attack other countries. Iran was able to attack military bases, infrastructure, or naval assets across the Gulf and Israel using its relatively cheap drones; these have altered strategic calculations of the entire war. Furthermore, this suggests that even nations without overwhelming conventional strength can project power and create credible resistance.

However, while low-cost drones provide tactical advantages, they also introduce serious risks. The biggest concern is that non-state actors, militias, insurgent groups, and even criminal organisations can now access and deploy drone technology. Unlike fighter jets or missiles, drones are easier to acquire, modify, and operate. This increases the likelihood of asymmetric attacks against states, critical infrastructure, and civilian targets. What was once the exclusive domain of national militaries is now accessible to smaller groups with limited funding.

In essence, low-cost drones have ‘democratised’ air power. They have changed the face of war, reshaped military strategy, and reduced the dominance of traditional superpowers. But at the same time, they have introduced a new era of insecurity where conflicts may become more frequent, more decentralised, and harder to control. The same technology that reduces casualties on one side also increases the risk of widespread, unpredictable confrontations, especially when used by non-state actors beyond conventional rules of engagement.

This trend is no longer limited to state actors alone. Multiple credible reports and security analysts confirm that Boko Haram and ISWAP (Islamic State West Africa Province) have increasingly deployed low-budget, commercially available (COTS) drones, often modified quadcopters, in attacks on Nigerian military positions in the Northeast. These drones are reportedly used for surveillance, reconnaissance, and in some cases, direct strikes against troop locations and defensive positions.

Beyond Nigeria, other non-state actors in different parts of the world have also been reported to use low-budget, commercially available drones, typically inexpensive quadcopters or FPV models, modified with improvised explosives, grenades, mortar rounds, or IEDs. These systems are deployed for intelligence gathering, target acquisition, and direct attacks. The accessibility of these platforms makes them attractive tools for irregular forces seeking to offset conventional military disadvantages.

 Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja via zaymohd@yahoo.com.

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”

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.

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.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States intelligence agencies have concluded that Iran has not resumed efforts to rebuild its nuclear enrichment programme following the destruction of key facilities in a joint US-Israeli strike in June 2025. The finding contrasts with President Donald Trump’s justification for his ongoing military campaign.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard disclosed the assessment in a written submission presented during an annual threat review before the Senate intelligence committee. However, she did not repeat the position while addressing lawmakers in person.

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

When questioned by a Democratic senator over the omission during the hearing, Gabbard explained that time constraints prevented her from reading the full statement. She did not dispute the conclusion.

President Trump has consistently defended the February 28 strike on Iran, which was carried out alongside Israel. He cited what he described as an “imminent threat.” After the 2025 bombing, Trump stated that Iran’s nuclear facilities had been completely destroyed. More recently, he has claimed that Tehran was close to producing a nuclear weapon. That position is not widely supported by analysts and comes amid ongoing negotiations over a possible nuclear agreement.

Meanwhile, a senior aide to Gabbard stepped down on Tuesday. The official said there was no “imminent threat” and argued that Trump had been misinformed by both Israel and sections of the media.

In her remarks to senators, Gabbard noted that Iran had suffered significant damage in recent weeks of attacks. The strikes included the killing of longtime supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Despite this, she said the country’s governing system remains in place.

The US intelligence community “assesses the regime in Iran to be intact but largely degraded due to attacks on its leadership and military capabilities,” Gabbard said.

She added that if the current leadership remains, it may attempt to rebuild over time.

“If a hostile regime survives, it will likely seek to begin a years-long effort to rebuild its military, missiles, and UAV forces,” Gabbard said.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The Director of the United States National Counterterrorism Center, Joseph Kent, has stepped down from his role, citing disagreement with Washington’s military involvement in Iran and questioning the factors behind the conflict.

Kent conveyed his decision in a letter to President Donald Trump. He said he reached the conclusion after careful thought and confirmed that his resignation takes immediate effect.

“After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today,” he wrote.

He stated that he could no longer support the administration’s current foreign policy, especially its decision to engage Iran militarily.

“I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby,” he stated.

Kent noted that his position reflects principles he believes once shaped U.S. foreign policy.

“I support the values and the foreign policies that you campaigned on in 2016, 2020, 2024, which you enacted in your first term,” Kent wrote.

“Until June of 2025, you understood that the wars in the Middle East were a trap that robbed America of the precious lives of our patriots and depleted the wealth and prosperity of our nation.”

He also accused “high-ranking Israeli officials and influential members of the American media” of driving what he described as a misinformation effort. According to him, the campaign “wholly undermined your America First platform and sowed pro-war sentiments” that encouraged action against Iran.

Kent argued that U.S. leadership received misleading information about the situation.

“This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, and that should you strike now, there was a clear path to a swift victory. This was a lie,” he said, while drawing a comparison with events that preceded the Iraq war.

He pointed to his own military background to stress the human cost of war.

“As a veteran who deployed to combat 11 times and as a Gold Star husband who lost my beloved wife Shannon in a war manufactured by Israel, I cannot support sending the next generation off to fight and die in a war that serves no benefit to the American people nor justifies the cost of American lives,” he said.

Kent urged the president to reconsider the current approach and warned about possible long-term consequences.

“I pray that you will reflect upon what we are doing in Iran, and who we are doing it for. The time for bold action is now. You can reverse course and chart a new path for our nation, or you can allow us to slip further toward decline and chaos. You hold the cards,” he said.

He ended his letter by expressing gratitude for the opportunity to serve. “It was an honor to serve in your administration and to serve our great nation.”

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Key European countries have turned down calls by United States President Donald Trump to support military efforts aimed at securing the Strait of Hormuz, as tensions rise during the ongoing US-Israel conflict with Iran.

The position was made clear during a meeting of European Union officials in Brussels on Monday, where leaders discussed the sharp increase in global oil prices linked to the conflict. Germany stated firmly that it would not take part in any military action in the region.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said more information was needed before any further steps could be considered. “We need more clarity here,” he told reporters. “We expect from the US and Israel to inform us, to include us into what they’re doing there and to tell us if these goals are achieved.”

He added that once the situation becomes clearer, attention should shift towards broader regional security arrangements. “Once we have a clear picture of that, we believe we need to move into the next phase, namely, defining a security architecture for this entire region, together with the neighbouring states,” he said.

Germany’s Defence Minister Boris Pistorius also ruled out military involvement. He said Berlin would instead support diplomatic efforts to maintain safe passage through the strategic waterway. “This is not our war. We have ⁠not started it,” he said, while questioning the expectation for European naval forces to succeed where the US Navy already operates. “What does … Trump expect a handful or two handfuls of European frigates to do in the Strait of Hormuz that the powerful ⁠US Navy cannot do?”

A spokesperson for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stressed that the conflict is unrelated to NATO operations. Stefan Kornelius said the alliance’s purpose is territorial defence and noted that “the mandate to deploy NATO is lacking”.

The United Kingdom echoed a similar stance. Prime Minister Keir Starmer stated that any involvement in the Strait of Hormuz would not fall under NATO. “Let me be clear: that won’t be, and it’s never been envisioned to be, a NATO mission,” he said. He also made it clear that Britain would avoid being pulled into a broader conflict, although discussions are ongoing with allies about possible support roles.

Several other European nations expressed doubts about the feasibility of a naval mission in the short term. Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetten said it would be “very difficult to launch a successful mission there in the short term”.

Countries such as Lithuania and Estonia indicated they were open to considering a US request, but insisted on clearer details about the objectives. Estonia’s Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna asked: “What will be the plan?” as he called for clarity on Washington’s “strategic goals”.

Greece and Italy also ruled out participation in military operations in the area, while Denmark suggested Europe should remain open to supporting safe navigation, even if it disagrees with the decision to go to war. Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said, “We must face the world as it is, not as we want it to be,” adding that any plan should aim at de-escalation.

Poland signalled willingness to review a formal request made through NATO channels. Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski said, “If there is a request via NATO, we will, of course, out of respect and sympathy for our American allies, consider it very carefully.”

Despite the resistance, President Trump has continued to press allies to join efforts to reopen the vital shipping route. Speaking at the White House, he criticised countries that have shown little enthusiasm. “Some are very enthusiastic about it, and some aren’t,” he said, adding that “the level of enthusiasm matters to me.”

He also expressed surprise at the United Kingdom’s hesitation and said Secretary of State Marco Rubio would soon announce countries willing to support the initiative.

Within the European Union, there appears to be little support for expanding existing missions to cover the Strait of Hormuz. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said there had been “no appetite” for such a move. “Nobody wants to go actively in this war,” she said.

The Strait of Hormuz remains a critical global shipping route, with about one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passing through it. The ongoing conflict has disrupted traffic and driven oil prices above $100 per barrel, raising concerns about the wider impact on the global economy.

European leaders are now under increasing pressure from Washington to act, but many remain cautious. While discussions continue on how to ensure safe passage through the strait, there is no clear agreement on military involvement.