Top World News
St. Vincent did not give US authorization for deadly boat strikes, prime minister says
The prime minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines says his government did not give the U.S. authorization for a recent strike on an alleged drug boat in local waters
South Sudan risks return to full-blown civil war as violence escalates
At least 169 killed in raid near Sudan border as clashes between government and opposition forces intensifySouth Sudan is reeling from an escalating conflict between the government-aligned army and opposition forces and allied groups that observers say risks returning the country to a full-blown civil war.Violent confrontations in the world’s youngest country between the military, which is loyal to President Salva Kiir, and insurgents believed to be allied to the suspended vice-president, Riek Machar, have increased in recent weeks. Continue reading...
Macron orders France's nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to the Mediterranean
French President Emmanuel Macron has France’s nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to move from the Baltic Sea to the Mediterranean to protect allied assets during the ongoing war in the Middle East
Iran peace talks a 'smokescreen' as decision to strike had already been made: analysis
Peace talks between the United States and Iran may have been a smokescreen as a decision to strike had already been made, an analyst has claimed. Bill Press, the former California Democratic Party chair, believes Donald Trump's administration already knew a strike on Iran would be made while also hosting peace talks with representatives. In a column for The Hill, Press claimed a decision could have been made as early as before Trump delivered his State of the Union address. Press wrote, "Iran didn’t walk away from making a new deal. The U.S. did — and it started bombing the next morning. In fact, there is reason to believe that the entire Geneva operation was only a smokescreen, designed to fool Iran’s leaders into thinking the U.S. was negotiating in good faith. "Clearly, the decision to bomb Iran had already been made before the State of the Union, while the Trump administration was still pretending to be seriously interested in diplomacy." Press went on to suggest that the deal the US and Iran had discussed before the bombing was nearing a reasonable conclusion. "Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman urged Trump to take advantage of the opportunity to kill Khamenei," he wrote. "Trump agreed to do their dirty work."It is also not true, as Trump claims, that Iran 'walked away from the table' without agreeing to abandon plans to build a nuclear bomb. In fact, as late as last Friday, negotiations between Iran and the U.S., moderated by Oman, were still underway in Geneva — with public assurances of progress being made."Trump issued a statement on the Iran war earlier today (March 3), with the president claiming a war with the Middle Eastern country could last much longer than anticipated. He wrote, "The United States Munitions Stockpiles have, at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better - As was stated to me today, we have a virtually unlimited supply of these weapons. Wars can be fought 'forever,' and very successfully, using just these supplies (which are better than other countries finest arms!)."At the highest end, we have a good supply, but are not where we want to be. Much additional high-grade weaponry is stored for us in outlying countries."Sleepy Joe Biden spent all of his time, and our Country’s money, GIVING everything to P.T. Barnum (Zelenskyy!) of Ukraine - Hundreds of Billions of Dollars worth - And, while he gave so much of the super high-end away (FREE!), he didn’t bother to replace it. Fortunately, I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so."The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP."
'I was stunned': Ex-CIA senior official left 'speechless' by Marco Rubio's 'stupid' move
A former senior intelligence service official said on Tuesday that Marco Rubio's latest comments about the Iran war left him and other observers "speechless."Rubio raised eyebrows with his comment on the Iran war, which largely pointed to Israel as the chief reason for the US involvement.CNN's Alayna Treene reported this:"Rubio speaking to reporters now says the 'imminent threat' the administration has referred to to justify US strikes on Iran was that they knew Israel was going to attack Tehran, and believed such an attack would prompt Iran to strike US bases and assets in the region."Pod Save The World's Ben Rhodes shared Treene's reporting and replied, "America doesn't have to go to war just because Israel was going to go to war."National security expert Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz also chimed in, adding, "If there is a strategic risk greater than Iran itself for Israel, it is the perception that Israel pushed the United States into a discretionary and open-ended war. In the current American political environment, perception matters as much as operational reality.""Israel’s standing among younger Americans, within significant parts of the Democratic Party, and even among segments of the Republican coalition, is already under strain," he added in response to comments by Rubio.That led to ex-CIA senior official Marc Polymeropoulos to speak out. He said, "Rubio in his statement and the admin’s decision to toss this war all on Israel may have catastrophic effects on future American support for Israel."The expert further added:"I texted an Israeli friend right after Rubio’s presser and said just that-it’s a step away from essentially blaming Israel (which he did) to saying ‘blame the Jews.’ I was stunned at the abject stupidity of this tact from the admin and it left me speechless. All the anti semitic crazies feel validated now."Rubio in his statement and the admin’s decision to toss this war all on Israel may hav catastrophic effects on future American support for Israel. Below analysis is spot on. I texted an Israeli friend right after Rubio’s presser and said just that-it’s a step away from… https://t.co/ul7WsAzYp4— Marc Polymeropoulos (@Mpolymer) March 3, 2026
‘Imperialist undertones’: global south condemns US-Israeli war with Iran
China calls it unacceptable to ‘kill leader of sovereign state’, while South Africa questions ‘pre-emptive’ justificationMiddle East crisis – live updatesThe US-Israeli war on Iran has been condemned as illegal across much of the global south, with China saying it was unacceptable to “blatantly kill the leader of a sovereign state”.Many countries objected that negotiations between the US and Iran over its nuclear programme and missile capability were not given a chance to succeed before Washington and Israel began bombing, and analysts often saw the war in terms of a colonial-style exercise of might. Continue reading...
Rubio under fire over 'insane' 'imminent threat' remark on Iran: 'Dishonest as hell'
Secretary of State Marco Rubio's claims that the U.S. was under an "imminent threat" prompting American military strikes in Iran came into question Monday. Rubio told reporters the Iranian military was growing its nuclear weapons program and planning to launch attacks against America, its assets in the Middle East, and its allies in the region — namely Israel. In the days since, Rubio said Iran has attacked civilian areas in the Middle East in retaliatory strikes since the attacks started Saturday."There absolutely was an imminent threat," Rubio told reporters Monday afternoon in Washington, D.C.People were critical of Rubio and the Trump administration amid the conflicting information around the military actions."So now the 'imminent threat' was that Iran would hit back after being attacked by Israel? That’s why the US launched this devastating war and plunged the region into chaos — instead of pressuring its closest ally not to attack in the first place.Impressive logic: start a war to stop the retaliation you expect from starting a war. That’s a very creative definition of 'imminent threat,'" Ghida Fakhry, producer and host of TRTWorld, wrote on X. "The whole thing is dishonest as hell but if you take them at their word: 1) the imminent threat was created by Israel's attack on Iran 2) they say Israel made that attack using U.S. intelligence 3) Trump said he authorized the attack They admit to creating their own pretext!" Aaron Fritschner, Rep. Don Beyer's (R-VA) deputy chief of staff, wrote on X."Netanyahu got what he wanted but what about the American people? What about the service members who died? What about the nearly 200 schoolchildren killed? There's a reason why past presidents didn’t go to war with Iran: they refused to risk American lives to open Pandora’s Box," Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) wrote on X."There was no imminent threat to the United States by the Iranians. There was a threat to Israel. If we equate a threat to Israel as the equivalent of an imminent threat to the US, then we are in uncharted territory," Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) said in an interview with reporters, which was shared by journalist Aaron Rupar on X."This is the most insane and absurd definition of an ‘imminent threat’ I have ever heard in my life. Our ally and proxy, Israel, that we arm and fund, was about to illegally attack Iran so we joined in the attack because that illegal attack would have led to an attack on us," journalist and editor-in-chief of Zeteo Mehdi Hasan wrote on X.
Here are Trump's endgame options in his attack on Iran
Now that President Donald Trump has launched an illegal, unprovoked war of choice on Iran, the next question inevitably becomes: how does this end? Or, what are some off-ramps Trump can take to end it before the situation turns out of control?There are three broad scenarios; the first and most likely is that Trump continues this until he gets some sort of regime implosion and then declares victory, while also washing his hands of whatever follows.This has been very clear in internal conversations: no one wants to take responsibility for the aftermath. This is essentially the difference between regime change and regime collapse.That’s why they didn’t want to do an Iraq War-style regime change where you are actively trying to install a new government. If you do that, its track record becomes your track record.Indeed, if the US manages to kill a lot of the different leaders of the current system, there could be some sort of an implosion. Trump could declare victory even though you would likely have in that case severe instability, or potentially civil war.Another scenario is that the Iranians continue to strike back and outlast Trump. The Iranian onslaught would start to become too costly for the United States with casualty rates increasing (possibly even on the American side), inflation worsens, and global markets become destabilized.And then the pressure on Trump internationally, from the American public, and from his own base would start to become so strong that he would have to look for an exit.At that point, he may actually take the deal that was on the table: a deal that is better than what Barack Obama managed to secure, and that Trump nevertheless rejected. He may take that and suddenly declare it a victory, saying: “Thanks to my bombing campaign, we achieved this.”There is also a third scenario, that is the least likely, in which after a couple of rounds of attacks, both sides may feel they can go back to the negotiating table.They might even go back to the same agreement that was on the table during the most recent talks. And both sides could frame that as a win. Trump can claim he bombed Iran and was very successful. The Iranians can claim they struck back and were very successful. And then they come to some sort of agreement.However that would be difficult because there’s now absolutely no trust between the US and Iran.But even if they did come to some form of agreement, it would be extremely difficult to implement, it would likely not endure, and it wouldn’t be anything more than essentially a ceasefire with a pretense of having a deal beyond that.Meanwhile, Israel’s interest is in pushing the narrative that the negotiations were a ruse from the outset, and that this attack was already planned — because that narrative destroys America’s credibility as a diplomatic force, as a negotiator.And the more you push the narrative that diplomacy was a lie from the outset, the more easily you can avoid any future negotiations.I’m not convinced it really was a ruse from the beginning. There were elements in the US government who were sincere about the diplomatic path, but ultimately Trump fell for the type of pressure that he has proven himself to be far too susceptible to.None of that makes what happened forgivable. It doesn’t make it legal. It doesn’t make it strategic. But we do have to recognize this: nothing would serve Israeli interests more than to completely destroy America’s credibility as a negotiating partner.Trita Parsi is Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute and an expert on US-Iranian relations, Iranian foreign politics, and the geopolitics of the Middle East. He is author of "Losing an Enemy — Obama, Iran and the Triumph of Diplomacy"; "A Single Roll of the Dice — Obama's Diplomacy with Iran"; and "Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States." This article was adapted from Trita Parsi’s remarks during an appearance on Breaking Points
National security expert slaps down Rubio's 'implausible rationale' on Iran bombing
A historian and national security specialist was skeptical Monday of Secretary of State Marco Rubio's first public comments defending the Trump administration's decision to launch strikes against Iran. CNN national security analyst Peter Bergen expressed doubt about Rubio's argument of an "imminent threat" and what could happen next in the war with Iran, which has left six American service members dead. "Casey, I'm extremely skeptical," Bergen told CNN anchor Kasie Hunt. "I mean, the Israelis and the United States are very closely allied. And their operations, as we've seen just now, are very closely integrated," Bergen added. "And Netanyahu has been in D.C., repeatedly. We've been moving massive amounts of military assets into the region since January, so I just find that kind of an implausible rationale."
Afghanistan says it thwarted Pakistan airstrikes on Bagram airbase
Sporadic clashes reported in several provinces in Afghanistan as both sides give conflicting death tollsAfghanistan has said it had thwarted Pakistan’s attempted airstrikes on Bagram airbase, the former US military base north of Kabul, as cross-border fighting between the two countries stretched into a fourth day.Months of clashes have flared up again since Thursday, when Afghanistan launched attacks along the frontier and Pakistani forces hit back on the border and from the skies. Pakistan has declared it is in “open war” with Afghanistan. Continue reading...
‘Adventurism has had its day’: speedboat shootout leaves Miami’s exiled Cubans bewildered
Few clues as to how 10 heavily armed men intercepted on stolen speedboat came together from across Florida or what they hoped to achieve Foot traffic was slow outside the Bay of Pigs Museum on Calle Ocho in Miami’s Little Havana neighbourhood. A few tourists in T-shirts and shorts bypassed the gallery dedicated to one of the most fateful days in Cuba’s history and headed instead to nearby Máximo Gómez Park to take photographs of Cuban exiles playing dominoes.This is the street at the heart of the Cuban expat community of more than 1 million people where tens of thousands partied through the night in November 2016 to celebrate the death of Fidel Castro, and where they gathered in sorrow almost exactly 30 years ago to mourn four Cuban-Americans shot down by the communist country’s air force as they conducted a mission for the humanitarian exile group Brothers to the Rescue. Continue reading...
US backs Pakistan’s ‘right to defend itself’ against Taliban after strikes on Afghanistan
Taliban offer to resolve dispute via dialogue after Pakistan bombed cities in Afghanistan in latest escalation with its neighbourWashington endorsed Pakistan’s “right to defend itself” after it bombed major cities across Afghanistan amid heightened tensions between the two hostile neighbours.The Taliban government in Kabul stressed it was ready to negotiate on Friday as violence intensified between the two countries. Continue reading...
