Got a Ukraine war question? Send it to Michael Clarke here
06:05:48
Send in your Ukraine war questions
It's Wednesday, which means our security and defence analyst Professor Michael Clarke is back to answer your questions on the Ukraine war in his weekly Q&A.
Hundreds of you have already sent in your questions after a very significant few days on the battlefield in the three-year conflict.
Ukraine has pulled off three daring attacks - on two bridges and Russia's bomber fleet over the weekend and on the key Kerch Bridge linking Russia to Crimea yesterday - and the world is waiting to see how Vladimir Putin responds.
Watch: Ukraine strikes Russian bombers
Watch: Kerch Bridge explosion
And there are reports Moscow is launching a summer offensive as peace talks make little sign of progress.
Teams from Kyiv and Moscow met for a second round of direct talks in Istanbul on Monday, agreeing only to another prisoner swap and exchanging terms for a full ceasefire, which still appears a long way off.
And all the while, the usually vocal Donald Trump has remained quiet.
So what does it all mean? Michael is here at midday to help make sense of it.
Submit your questions to join in - and you'll be able to watch the Q&A live on this page.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
How effective was the US attack on Iran's nuclear sites? A visual guide
Donald Trump was quick to claim that US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities had 'completely and totally obliterated' them. Still, it remains unclear how much physical damage has been done or what the longer-term impact might be on Iran's nuclear programme. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) confirmed that attacks took place on its Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz sites, but insisted that its nuclear programme would not be stopped. Both Iran and the UN nuclear watchdog said there were no immediate signs of radioactive contamination around the three locations after the strikes. The Iranian Red Crescent also reported no deaths in the US strikes on the nuclear sites, appearing to confirm Iranian claims they had been evacuated in advance. In the immediate aftermath, US military officials suggested the three sites had suffered 'severe damage' after an operation that had been weeks in planning, suggesting that it was fully coordinated in advance with Israel. The Pentagon said a battle damage assessment was still being conducted. Long regarded as the most difficult military target among Iran's nuclear sites, the uranium enrichment facilities at Fordow – the primary target of the operation – are buried beneath the Zagros mountains. Reports have suggested that the site was constructed beneath between 45 and 90 metres of bedrock, largely limestone and dolomite. Some experts have suggested that the layering of the sedimentary rocks, including faults, would also make it more difficult to strike the centrifuge array, providing a kind of geological cushioning against a blast wave. The attack – codenamed Operation Midnight Hammer – was carried out by seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers flying from the US, after a deception flight by other B-2s into the Pacific. Tomahawk missiles were also fired from US ships in waters south of Iran. The site was hit by a dozen 13,600kg massive ordnance penetrators – known as bunker busters – at around 2.10am Iranian time. It was the massive weapon's first operational use. The number used suggests some lack of confidence that a smaller strike could penetrate to the target. The result would to a large extent depend on the kind of concrete inside the facility, with estimates of the bunker busters' penetration based largely on reinforced concrete resistant to 5,000psi. Iran is believed to have used more resistant concrete. While video from the site showed evidence of a fire in the immediate aftermath, satellite images published on Sunday were inconclusive. The Open Source Centre in London highlighted what appeared to be at least two locations where the weapons appeared to have penetrated. While the main support building at the site appeared to be undamaged, the topography of a prominent area of ridgelines and small wadis appeared to have altered and been flattened out, with some evidence of rock scarring exposing damaged bedrock near an area that could show fresh cratering. While analysts had previously suggested that a strike could hit the main entrance tunnel to the site, the main effort appears to have been in a different location. There was speculation that the main aim of the strikes may have been to bury access to Fordow. Isfahan's nuclear technology centre was struck by cruise missiles as opposed to bunker busters. Video posted on social media showed a distant detonation from the site on Saturday night. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in addition to four hit by Israeli strikes, six other buildings had now been attacked, including a fuel rod production facility. The IAEA said facilities targeted at Isfahan either contained no nuclear material or small quantities of natural or low-enriched uranium. Natanz had previously been damaged by the first Israeli strikes of the conflict, with assessments then suggesting they had hit the power plant supplying the main centrifuge hall. Uranium had been enriched to up to 60%, short of weapons-grade material. It appears that Natanz's underground enrichment hall was targeted, but it is unclear how much damage was inflicted. In response to the US strikes, Iran launched ballistic missiles at Israel on Sunday, triggering countrywide air raid sirens and injuring 16 people. Iran has claimed that it evacuated the sites several days ago, and satellite imagery from several days ago suggests there was unusual truck traffic at Fordow. That appears to confirm the movement of some material from the site, possibly including the uranium stockpile – or parts of it – which remains unaccounted for. Hassan Abedini, the deputy political head of Iran's state broadcaster, said Iran had evacuated the three sites – Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow – some time ago. 'The enriched uranium reserves had been transferred from the nuclear centres and there are no materials left there that, if targeted, would cause radiation and be harmful to our compatriots,' he said. Three days before the US attacks, 16 cargo trucks were seen near the Fordow entrance tunnel. The head of the AEOI, Mohammad Eslami, claimed this month that Iran had another enrichment site 'in a secure and invulnerable location' where centrifuges could be. Analysts have long argued that while it is possible to disrupt the physical function of a nuclear facility and limit the scope of a programme through, for example, the Israeli assassination of scientists, the breadth of technical knowledge acquired during the decades-long programme is impossible to destroy. Ultimately, the question is whether the US-Israeli attacks are seen as sufficient for Iran to capitulate, or whether they instead encourage the regime to accelerate its efforts to produce a viable nuclear weapon.
BBC News
21 minutes ago
- BBC News
Retaliate now, later or never: How Iran could respond to the US strikes
Iran has responded furiously to the overnight US airstrikes on three of its nuclear sites, vowing what it calls "everlasting consequences".But beyond the words, there will be feverish discussions taking place at the highest level inside Iran's security and intelligence they escalate the conflict through retaliation against US interests, or, as US President Donald Trump has called on them to do, negotiate, which in practice means giving up all nuclear enrichment inside Iran? This internal debate will be taking place at a time when many senior Iranian commanders will be looking over their shoulders, wondering if they are about to be the next target of an Israeli precision airstrike or whether someone in the room has already betrayed them to Mossad, Israel's overseas spy speaking, there are three different strategic courses of action now open to Iran. None of them are risk free and uppermost in the minds of those taking the decisions will be the survival of the Islamic Republic regime. Retaliate hard and soon Many will be baying for blood. Iran has been humiliated, first by Israel, now by what it has often in the past called 'the Great Satan', its term for the US. Iran's ongoing exchange of fire with Israel continues into its tenth day but retaliating against the US brings a whole new level of risk, not just for Iran but for the whole region. Iran is believed to retain about half of its original stock of around 3,000 missiles, having used up and lost the remainder in exchanges of fire with latest on US strikes on IranWhat we know about US strikes on IranIran has a target list of around 20 US bases to choose from in the broader Middle East. One of the nearest and most obvious is the sprawling headquarters of the powerful US Navy's Fifth Fleet at Mina Salman in Bahrain. But Iran may be reluctant to strike at a neighbouring Gulf Arab state. More likely perhaps, would be to use its proxies in Iraq and Syria to attack any one of the relatively isolated US bases at At-Tanf, Ain Al-Asad or Erbil. Iran has form here. When Donald Trump ordered the assassination of Iran's Quds Force leader, Qassim Suleimani, in 2020 Iran responded by targeting US military personnel in Iraq but avoided killing any by giving prior notice. It may not do so this time. Iran could also launch 'swarm attacks' on US Navy warships using drones and fast torpedo boats, something that the Revolutionary Guards Corps Navy has practiced exhaustively over the years. The aim, if it went down this route, would be to overwhelm US naval defences through sheer numbers. It could also ask its allies in Yemen, the Houthis, to resume their attacks on Western shipping passing between the Indian Ocean and the Red secretive nuclear site that only a US bomb could hitThere are also economic targets Iran could strike, but this would antagonise its Gulf Arab neighbours who have recently reached an uneasy modus vivendi with the Islamic Republic. The biggest and most damaging target here would be choking off the vital Strait of Hormuz, through which over 20 per cent of the world's oil supplies pass daily. Iran could do this by sowing sea mines, creating a lethal hazard for both naval and commercial there is cyber. Iran, along with North Korea, Russia and China, has a sophisticated offensive cyber capability. Inserting destructive malware into US networks or businesses is doubtless one option under consideration. Retaliate later This would mean waiting until the current tension has subsided and launching a surprise attack at a time of Iran's choosing, when US bases were no longer on maximum alert. Such an attack could also target US diplomatic, consular or trade missions, or extend to the assassination of individuals. The risk here for Iran, of course, is that it would likely invoke renewed US attacks just as ordinary Iranians are returning to normal life. Don't retaliate This would take enormous restraint on Iran's part but it would spare it from further US attacks. It could even choose the diplomatic route and rejoin negotiations with the US, although Iran's Foreign Minister points out that Iran never left those negotiations, that it was, in his words, Israel and the US that blew them up. But restarting the US-Iran negotiations in Muscat, Rome or wherever, would only be worth doing if Iran was prepared to accept the red line that both the US and Israel are insisting on. Namely that for Iran to keep its civil nuclear programme, it must send all uranium outside the country for nothing after taking such a battering also makes the Iranian regime look weak, especially after all its warnings of dire repercussions if the US did attack. In the end it may decide that the risk of weakening its grip on its population outweighs the cost of any further US attacks.
BBC News
30 minutes ago
- BBC News
'Paralysed and constantly caught by surprise': Voices from Iran after US strikes
"My days and nights are the same. I feel paralysed. I just stare at the ceiling all day and all night.""I keep wondering what will happen next, and we are constantly caught by surprise."Shahla - whose name we have changed for her protection - is among the Iranians who have contacted BBC Persian to express their fear and anger after the US bombed three of their country's key nuclear sites President Donald Trump said the Isfahan, Natanz and Fordo facilities were "obliterated" and told Iran's leaders that they now had a choice of "peace or tragedy".But Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the US had crossed "a big red line" and warned that it would have "everlasting consequences".The strikes happened just over a week after Israel launched a large-scale air campaign against Iran, saying it aimed to remove what it called the existential threats of the country's nuclear and ballistic missile health ministry says at least 430 people have been killed so far, although one human rights group has put the death toll at double has responded by launching missiles at Israeli cities, killing 24 people and injuring 1,270, according to Israeli authorities. Follow live updatesWhat we know about the US strikesHow will Iran respond?Watch: What happens now?Watch: Trump calls strikes a 'spectacular military success' in address "I'm extremely angry and upset about what's happened. I don't think I've ever felt this level of sorrow and rage over anything in my life," Mehri - also not her real name - told BBC Persian in an audio message following the US strikes. "But in a way, it also gives me a strange sense of clarity - it reminds me that I'm connected to something beyond myself.""This war - Iran's war - is essentially a conflict between three individuals. Three leaders, from three countries, driven by their own ideologies," she added, apparently referring to Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."I get furious when I hear them mention names like Isfahan or suddenly declare: 'We've taken control of Iran's skies.' These are not just words to me - they're sacred."Homayoun, a man from the north-western region of Maku, was defiant in the face of Trump's warning that Iran would face more attacks if it did not agree to peace."Yes, we're going through tough times - but we'll stand by our country to the very end. And if needed, we'll give our lives for our homeland, for our honour," he said. "We won't let America and its lackeys make any wrong moves in our country."Trump warned Iran on Saturday that any retaliation against the US "will be met with force far greater than what was witnessed tonight".At a news conference in Turkey on Sunday, Araghchi declared that Iran reserved "all options to defend its security, interests and people". He also said the US bore "full responsibility for the consequences of its actions".Before Israel launched its air campaign, Iran had threatened to attack US bases in the Middle East if it participated in any strikes on its nuclear programme. Another Iranian man told BBC Persian that he hoped this was "the peak of the war's escalation - and from here, things will start to de-escalate"."Iran is rational enough to know that any response targeting the US would be complete suicide," he said."My child will be born in a few days, and I hope their birth coincides with the birth of a new Iran - one that adopts a fresh approach toward both the international system and its domestic affairs.""And I hope they grow up knowing that surveillance cameras and security forces should be focused on real threats, not on enforcing the hijab," he added, referring to Iran's strict laws requiring women to wear headscarves which led to mass anti-government protests and a deadly crackdown in - not his real name - said: "I'm not happy about what happened, but the Islamic Republic's past approach was not bearable. I hope a good future awaits Iran."
