Israel-Iran conflict escalates with strikes, arrests, and blackout
JERUSALEM: Israel and Iran exchanged fire again on Friday, a week into the war between the longtime enemies.
Here are the latest developments:
Iran meetings
European top diplomats are meeting with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva on Friday to discuss Iran's nuclear programme.
'I've received several phone calls reassuring me that the Zionist regime would not target' Araghchi en route to Geneva, his adviser Mohammad Reza Ranjbaran said on X.
Foreign ministers from France, Germany, Britain and the EU are urging de-escalation, with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy saying the next two weeks are 'a window... to achieve a diplomatic solution'.
Separately, the UN Security Council is also due to convene on Friday for a second session on the conflict, at Iran's request with support from Russia, China and Pakistan, a diplomat told AFP on Wednesday.
Overnight strikes
Israel's military said Friday it struck dozens of targets in Tehran overnight, including what it called a centre for the 'research and development of Iran's nuclear weapons project.'
In an upscale neighbourhood of Tehran, some residents were looking out at the night sky from their rooftops, with red blasts lighting up the darkness, AFP journalists saw.
In another area, an Iranian cried out through a loudspeaker, with music blasting in the background: 'Death to Israel, death to America!'
Iran's Revolutionary Guards said more than 100 'combat and suicide' drones were launched at Israel on Thursday.
Trump waiting to decide
US President Donald Trump said Thursday he will decide whether to join Israel's strikes on Iran within the next two weeks as there is still a 'substantial' chance of negotiations to end the conflict.
The Wall Street Journal reported Trump told aides he approved attack plans but is holding off to see if Iran will give up its nuclear programme.
Tehran ally Moscow said any US military action 'would be an extremely dangerous step', while pro-Iran groups in Iraq threatened retaliatory attacks.
Dozens of US military aircraft were no longer visible at a US base in Qatar on Thursday, satellite images showed -- a possible move to shield them from potential Iranian strikes.
Iran's new intelligence chief
Iran appointed a new chief of intelligence at its Revolutionary Guards on Thursday, the official IRNA news agency said, after his predecessor was killed in an Israeli strike last week.
Major General Mohammad Pakpour, the commander of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, appointed Brigadier General Majid Khadami as the new head of its intelligence division, IRNA said.
He replaces Mohammed Kazemi, who was killed on Sunday alongside two other Revolutionary Guards officers -- Hassan Mohaghegh and Mohsen Bagheri -- in an Israeli strike.
Ali Shamkhani, adviser to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was in stable condition, state TV reported on Friday, after he was seriously injured last week.
Death toll
The body of a woman was recovered on Thursday from a building struck by an Iranian missile four days earlier, taking the overall death toll in Israel to 25 since the war began, according to Israeli authorities.
Iran said Sunday that Israeli strikes had killed at least 224 people, including military commanders, nuclear scientists and civilians. Authorities have not issued an updated toll since.
Arrests and blackout
Iranian police announced the arrest on Thursday of 24 people accused of spying for Israel.
Authorities in both Israel and Iran have announced arrests for espionage and other charges since the war began on Friday.
Norway-based NGO Iran Human Rights said at least 223 people have been arrested nationwide on charges related to collaboration with Israel, cautioning that the actual figure was likely higher.
Iran imposed a 'nationwide internet shutdown' on Thursday -- the most extensive blackout since widespread anti-government protests in 2019 -- internet watchdog NetBlocks said.
The shutdown 'impacts the public's ability to stay connected at a time when communications are vital', NetBlocks wrote on X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
an hour ago
- New Straits Times
UK MPs vote in favour of assisted dying law in historic step
LONDON: Britain took a historic step towards allowing euthanasia on Friday when MPs backed contentious legislation that would introduce assisted dying for terminally ill people. Lawmakers in the lower House of Commons voted 314 in favour to 291 to send the proposal to the upper House of Lords for further scrutiny following four hours of emotional debate. The outcome sparked celebrations among supporters gathered outside parliament who say legalised euthanasia will give people with an incurable illness dignity and choice at the end of their lives. But opponents attending a neighbouring counter-protest said they feared vulnerable people could be coerced into dying and urged lawmakers to focus on improving palliative care instead. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults who have been given less than six months to live. They would have to be able to administer the life-ending substance themselves, and any patient's wish to die would have to be signed off by two doctors and a panel of experts. A change in the law would see Britain emulate several other countries in Europe and elsewhere that allow some form of assisted dying, including Belgium and the Netherlands. Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who proposed the legislation, told Friday's so-called third reading debate that a law change would "offer a compassionate and safe choice" for terminally ill people. She said maintaining the status quo would mean more "heartbreaking stories" of "pain and trauma, suicide attempts, PTSD, lonely trips to Switzerland, (and) police investigations." But Vicky Foxcroft, also of Labour, said the proposal did not include adequate safeguards for disabled people. "We have to protect those people who are susceptible to coercion, who already feel like society doesn't value them, who often feel like a burden to the state, society and their family," she pleaded. Outside parliament, protesters waved placards with slogans including "Let us choose" and "Don't make doctors killers." David Walker, 82, said he supported changing the law because he saw his wife of 60 years suffer for three years at the end of her life. "That's why I'm here, because I can't help her anymore, but I can help other people who are going through the same thing, because if you have no quality of life, you have nothing," he told AFP. But Elizabeth Burden, a 52-year-old doctor, said she feared the legislation would open a "slippery slope" where those eligible for assisted dying expands. "Once we allow this, everything will slip down because dementia patients, all patients... are vulnerable," she told AFP. MPs backed the proposed legislation by 330 to 275 votes at an initial vote in parliament last November. Since then, the bill has undergone several changes, including applying a ban on adverts for assisted dying and allowing all health workers to opt out of helping someone end their life. MPs in the 650-seat parliament also added a safeguard which would prevent a person being eligible "solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking," ruling out people with anorexia. Britain's medical community and Prime Minister Keir Starmer's top ministerial team are split on the proposed law change. His health and justice secretaries publicly oppose it. But in a YouGov poll of 2,003 adults, surveyed last month and published Thursday, 73 per cent of respondents backed an assisted dying law. MPs had backed an earlier version of the proposed legislation by 330 to 275 votes at an initial vote in parliament last November, before parliament introduced the changes. The House of Lords now needs to approve the legislation before the end of the current parliamentary year, likely in the autumn, or the bill will fail. If it passes and receives royal assent, it would still be four years before an assisted dying service was implemented. A government impact assessment published this month estimated that approximately 160 to 640 assisted deaths could take place in the first year, rising to a possible 4,500 in a decade. Assisted suicide currently carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Separate legislation is going through the devolved Scottish parliament. At the end of March, the Isle of Man became the first British territory to pass an assisted dying bill.
Malaysiakini
an hour ago
- Malaysiakini
What the Iran-Israel escalation really revealed
LETTER | From the outside, the latest Iran–Israel escalation looked like a tightly controlled spectacle, one more episode in the long tradition of geopolitical theatre. Symbolic strikes. Calibrated optics. Narratives exchanged more than missiles. However, something disrupted the performance. Someone, somewhere inside Iran, broke the script. All signs point to the conflict being originally designed as a limited, performative escalation, meant to simulate confrontation while avoiding real strategic consequences. Israel's opening salvo was telling: a high-visibility strike on Iran's state broadcaster (Irib), carried out during a live news segment but without catastrophic loss of life. A communication centre, yes, but also a deeply symbolic, civilian-facing target. Iran's initial response also bore the hallmarks of restraint. The state narrative emphasised successful interception, dismissed damage as minimal, and sought to contain the emotional temperature. There was no immediate mobilisation. No red-line rhetoric. No retaliatory frenzy. On both sides, a choreography of ambiguity seemed to be in play. One cannot help but recall the February 2025 skirmish between India and Pakistan - another flashpoint marked by cries of 'nuclear escalation', which briefly dominated headlines, diverted attention from Ukraine, then dissolved quietly. Iran retaliates The Israel - Iran episode seemed to follow a similar script: controlled, symbolic, narratively contained. But this time, something went off-script. Instead of a symbolic missile volley and a return to messaging, Iran escalated. Precisely. Deliberately. Repeatedly. Multiple waves of drones and missiles penetrated Israel's multi-layered defence system. Strategic infrastructure was hit. Regional allies, like the Houthis, entered the fray. The US ambassador in Tel Aviv reportedly had to seek shelter five times in a single night - a detail that says less about the danger than it does about the surprise. If the strikes were meant to be symbolic, someone forgot to send the memo. The missiles kept coming. Iranian officials later clarified: they were using only older missile stockpiles. In other words, this wasn't even their real answer. It was a demonstration of capacity, not desperation. If the original script called for symbolic retaliation, this wasn't it. This shift suggests something profound: that the escalation was not fully controlled from the top, or at least not uniformly. Within Iran's complex power structure, factions exist that vary in loyalty, alignment, and ideology. Some lean toward diplomatic preservation. Others are fiercely nationalistic. Still others are, quietly, compromised. It is entirely plausible that the original limited response was shaped by internal actors influenced, directly or structurally, by foreign interlocutors. Agreements may have been made. Visibility exchanged for restraint. Missile arcs are calculated for narrative rather than damage. But it seems that within Iran's strategic apparatus, a patriot faction intercepted the script. Whether it was the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), a missile command directorate, or a leadership cell with a longer memory and shorter patience that chose to halt the performance. To let Israel strike symbolic targets unchallenged would have been to accept ritual humiliation. Instead, they answered with precision, message, and method. Real deterrence, not managed optics, became the reply. No appetite for nukes For decades, Iranian leaders has been assassinated, sanctioned, bombed, and blamed, often with little or no international recourse. Its alleged nuclear weaponisation programme has been banned internally by fatwa, repeatedly affirmed in official United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) submissions and embedded in domestic law. In a revealing turn, a senior Iranian official recently called for the fatwa to be revoked only to be swiftly overruled by the top command. Although largely ignored in the West, the episode is telling. You do not attempt to revoke what does not exist. Still, Israel, backed by Western powers, continues to invoke the so-called Iranian nuclear threat as a pretext for assassinations, sabotage, and strikes. Scientists have been assassinated, nuclear infrastructure bombed, and broader infrastructure damaged through cyberattacks, and the West calls it self-defence. Obviously, when such aggression is met only with narrative containment, credibility dies. Internally and externally. Iran's patriotic factions may have concluded that survival now requires reimposing real fear into deterrence - not just words, but capabilities demonstrated under fire. And that is exactly what they did. The escalation has now created a paradox. Those who designed the conflict to be seen but not felt - whether in Tel Aviv, Washington, or even segments of Tehran - now find themselves cornered by consequences they never intended. Israel's might challenged Israel, long buffered by US-backed impunity, has now absorbed real strategic damage. Its famed Iron Dome has revealed critical gaps. Key infrastructure has been shaken. Even its domestic media, typically used to project victimhood to international audiences, has gone curiously quiet. Meanwhile, the Western narrative, still stuck in Cold War templates, tries to reassert control: nuclear threat, rogue state, axis of evil. But the public is growing resistant. Especially when Iran has shown, again and again, a legal, religious, and strategic rejection of nuclear arms, while operating with more restraint than its adversaries. Much like with Ukraine, the US administration has tried to walk both sides of the line, claiming non-involvement while orchestrating logistics. Refuelling Israeli jets, sharing satellite intel, and shooting down Iranian drones. But just as in Kyiv, control is slipping. Behind the scenes, indirect talks between the US and Iran have already collapsed - not over uranium levels or inspection terms, but over a deeper structural fault line. Tehran rightfully demanded that any talks be on equal grounds and that any agreement remain binding across US administrations. But Washington, fractured by partisanship and strategic inconsistency, simply cannot guarantee continuity. The collapse revealed a deeper asymmetry: Iran acts with institutional memory and policy coherence, while the US lurches between administrations and abandons commitments. This wasn't a technical failure. It was systemic. And Iran refuses to anchor its future to a partner built on shifting ground. US President Donald Trump, now in open conflict with the military-industrial establishment, has attempted to disentangle the US from these open-ended entanglements. But he is boxed in. The war machine continues with or without presidential blessing. And Israel is its most entrenched proxy. US President Donald Trump Ironically, Israel's collapse may have been triggered not by its enemies but by the very system that built it (refer to 'Zionism at the Edge: The Terminal Overreach of a Fading Project'). What this moment reveals is not just a rift between Iran and Israel but a schism within narrative power itself. M'sia asserting its stand Malaysia has positioned itself not on the battlefield but in the domain of narrative sovereignty. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has voiced strong support for Iran, not through military alignment, but through moral and political solidarity. In truth, Iran does not need boots on the ground. It has already demonstrated its military precision. What it needs now are narrative allies - states like Malaysia that are willing to challenge Western propaganda and defend the principles of lawful multipolarity. In today's conflict, the real front line is discursive, not kinetic and Malaysia is holding it. A war that was meant to be managed became real because someone inside refused to betray their country's dignity for another photo op. In doing so, they exposed: the weakness of Israeli defences, the limits of US orchestration, the fragility of Western narrative monopoly. And perhaps most importantly, they reminded the world that true deterrence is not choreographed. It is earned in silence, in precision, and in refusal to be cast in someone else's script. Dr Rais Hussin is the Founder of EMIR Research, a think tank focused on strategic policy recommendations based on rigorous research. The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
Malay Mail
2 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Africa pioneers low-cost, non-dollar payment systems, defying Trump's de-dollarisation threats
PAPSS payment system allows trade settlement in local currencies Experts says move aims of lowering trade costs South Africa using G20 presidency to advance local payments US President Trump warns against de-dollarisation efforts NAIROBI, June 20 — Africa's push for local currency payments systems — once little more than an aspiration — is finally making concrete gains, bringing the promise of less costly trade to a continent long hobbled by resource-sapping dollar transactions. But efforts to move away from the dollar face strong opposition and the threat of retaliation from US President Donald Trump, who is determined to preserve it as the dominant currency for global trade. The move by Africa to create payments systems that do not rely on the greenback mirrors a push by China to develop financial systems independent of Western institutions. Countries like Russia, which face economic sanctions, are also keen for an alternative to the dollar. But while that movement has gained a sense of urgency due to shifting trade patterns and geopolitical realignments following President Trump's return to the White House, African advocates for payment alternatives are making their case based on costs. 'Our goal, contrary to what people might think, is not de-dollarisation,' said Mike Ogbalu, chief executive of the Pan-African Payments and Settlements System, which allows parties to transact directly in local currencies, bypassing the dollar. 'If you look at African economies, you'll find that they struggle with availability for third-party global currencies to settle transactions,' he said. Africa's commercial banks typically rely on overseas counterparts, through so-called correspondent banking relationships, to facilitate settlements of international payments. That includes payments between African neighbours. That adds significantly to transaction costs that, along with other factors like poor transport infrastructure, have made trade in Africa 50 per cent more expensive than the global average, according to the UN Trade and Development agency. It is also among the reasons so much of Africa's trade — 84 per cent, according to a report by Mauritius-based MCB Group — is with external partners rather than between African nations. 'The existing financial network that is largely dollar-based has essentially become less effective for Africa, and costlier,' said Daniel McDowell, a professor at Syracuse University in New York specialising in international finance. A man counts Nigerian naira notes in a market place as people struggle with the economic hardship and cashflow problems ahead of Nigeria's Presidential elections, in Yola, Nigeria, February 22, 2023. — Reuters pic Homegrown systems According to data compiled by PAPSS, under the existing system of correspondent banks, a US$200 million (RM851 million) trade between two parties in different African countries is estimated to cost 10 per cent to 30 per cent of the value of the deal. The shift to homegrown payments systems could cut the cost of that transaction to just 1 per cent. Systems like PAPSS allow a business in one country, Zambia for example, to pay for goods from another like Kenya, with both buyer and seller receiving payment in their respective currencies rather than converting them into dollars to complete the transaction. Using currencies like the Nigerian naira, Ghanaian cedi or South Africa's rand for intra-Africa trade payments could save the continent US$5 billion a year in hard currency, Ogbalu told Reuters. Launched in January 2022 with just 10 participating commercial banks, PAPSS is today operational in 15 countries including Zambia, Malawi, Kenya and Tunisia, and now has 150 commercial banks in its network. 'We have also seen very significant growth in our transactions,' Ogbalu said, without providing usage data. The International Finance Corporation, the World Bank's private sector lending arm, has, meanwhile, started issuing loans to African businesses in local currencies. It views the switch as imperative for their growth, relieving them from the currency risks of borrowing in dollars, said Ethiopis Tafara, IFC's vice-president for Africa. 'If they are not generating hard currency, a hard-currency loan imposes a burden that makes it difficult for them to succeed,' he said. Africa's push for local currency payments systems is finally making concrete gains, bringing the promise of less costly trade to a continent long hobbled by resource-sapping dollar transactions. — Picture By Choo Choy May Geopolitics and the Trump factor Africa's campaign to boost regional payments systems has found a platform at the Group of 20 major economies, with South Africa leading the charge as holder of the G20's rotating presidency. It held at least one session on boosting regional payments systems when South Africa hosted a meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors. And South Africa wants it to follow up the talk with concrete actions. The next meeting of G20 finance officials is scheduled for mid-July. 'Some of the most expensive corridors for cross-border payments are actually found on the African continent,' Lesetja Kganyago, South Africa's central bank governor, told Reuters during a G20 meeting in Cape Town in February. 'For us to function as a continent, it's important that we start trading and settling in our own currencies.' Talk of moving away from the dollar — either for trade or as a reserve currency — has drawn aggressive reactions from President Trump, however. After Brics — a grouping of nations including Russia, China, India and Brazil along with Africans like South Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia — weighed reducing dollar dependence and creating a common currency, Trump responded with threats of 100 per cent tariffs. 'There is no chance that Brics will replace the US Dollar in International Trade, or anywhere else, and any Country that tries should say hello to Tariffs, and goodbye to America!,' he wrote on Truth Social in January. In the months since, Trump has demonstrated his willingness to use tariffs to pressure and punish allies and foes alike, a strategy that has upended global trade and geopolitics. No matter its intentions in moving to more local currency transactions, Syracuse University's McDowell said Africa will struggle to distance itself from more politically motivated de-dollarisation efforts, like those led by China and Russia. 'The perception is likely to be that this is about geopolitics,' he said. — Reuters
