Read the daily news to learn English

Trump vague on Iran’s ‘unconditional surrender’ as he refuses to rule out US troop deployment

Donald Trump on Saturday offered only a vague description of what he meant by his demand for an unconditional surrender by Iran’s current regime, while leaving open the possibility of deploying American troops on the ground but ruling out asking Kurdish forces to mount an invasion. “I said unconditional. It’s where they cry uncle or when they can’t fight any long longer and there’s nobody around to cry uncle — that could happen too,” Trump said when pressed by the Guardian aboard Air Force One. The lack of specifics in Trump’s response made it difficult to ascertain his political endgame for the conflict, an issue that has dogged the White House as it faces scrutiny about what the president wants from Iran and how he would play a role in selecting its next leader. Trump has been more consistent with his military objectives and has said for days he could send US troops. Still, he caveated using ground troops to secure the enriched uranium, believed to be stored at Iran’s nuclear sites the US bombed last year, as a possibility for later in the conflict. “We haven’t talked about it,” Trump said. “At some point maybe we will. It would be a great thing. Right now we’re just decimating them. We haven’t gone after it but something we could do later on. We wouldn’t do it now.” It also appeared that Trump had made a final decision on not using the Kurds to mount an invasion, acknowledging that it would complicate a fraught situation despite the idea buzzing around Washington after news outlets reported they had been armed by the CIA. “I don’t want the Kurds going in,” Trump said. “They’re willing to go in, but I’ve told them I don’t want them going in. The war’s complicated enough without getting the Kurds involved.” The president’s extended remarks came hours after he traveled to Dover air force base in Delaware to attend, with JD Vance and defense secretary Pete Hegseth, the so-called dignified transfer of six US service members killed in the opening days of his war against Iran. The dignified transfer took place under a hazy gray sky that enveloped the entirety of the base and the C17 Globemaster transport aircraft that carried the deceased, a scene only punctuated by Trump’s bright white baseball cap emblazoned with the gold letters “USA”. Trump saluted each of the six flag-draped transfer cases as he watched two teams carry them into waiting vans. Afterward, he told reporters the moment had not made him think twice about continuing with the Iran war. “No, we’re winning the war by a lot. We decimated their whole evil empire. It will continue I’m sure for a little while but I’m very proud of the people,” Trump said. Later, he added deaths were “a part of war”. The conflict has only expanded since Trump gave the green light for the US to join Israel in conducting airstrikes against Iran one week ago, including a series of strikes that killed its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had been meeting with other top leaders at a compound in Tehran. In the initial days of the war, Trump suggested in interviews that the campaign would last roughly four weeks. But the administration has since shifted its position, and some officials have warned it could last for months. Trump was non-committal on how long he expected the war to continue on Saturday, saying he didn’t know. “Whatever it takes,” Trump answered to reporters, even as he later described the war as a “short excursion”. He also blamed Iran for strikes that destroyed a girl’s elementary school in the south of the country that killed at least 175 people, many of them children. A Pentagon investigation is ongoing but forensic analysis by the New York Times, CNN and the Associated Press gave it a high likelihood it was a precision strike by the US that occurred at the same time as attacks on an adjacent naval base operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. “No, in my opinion, based on what I’ve seen, that was done by Iran,” Trump said. After the defense secretary declined to back the president, saying only that the matter was under investigation, Trump repeated his claim. “It was done by Iran. They’re very inaccurate as you know with their munitions. They have no accuracy whatsoever. It was done by Iran,” he insisted.

UK faces growing calls from locals to remove Cyprus military bases

Britain is facing growing calls to withdraw its military bases from Cyprus as locals step up protests against facilities seen as a threat to their security after an unprecedented drone attack on RAF Akrotiri. Anger over the installations spilled on to the streets of Nicosia, the capital, as protesters chanting “out with the bases of death” marched to the colonial-era presidential palace on Saturday amid fears of the Mediterranean nation being dragged into the wider Iran conflict. “They are a danger to our security and should never have been here in the first place,” said Mathaios Stavrinides, decrying the existence of bases that were established as part of a negotiated independence deal for the island. “We want them closed.” The mounting opposition came as the country’s foreign minister, Constantinos Kombos, told the Guardian the Iranian-made drone that hit the airbase had been launched from Lebanon, home to the Iranian proxy group Hezbollah and units of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Less than 12 hours after the explosive-packed device crashed into the facility late Sunday, two other combat drones were also intercepted at a distance off the island. They, too, were deployed from Lebanon, 150 miles east of the island. “Right now it’s a fact that we have to be looking towards the Lebanese front,” said the minister, confirming the drones’ provenance for the first time. “We cannot exclude anything from the broader direction of the north-east. We have to be very careful … we have to make sure that the systems in place are covering all possibilities of threat.” Cypriot officials, who take pride in the neutrality and humanitarian role of an island nation that is also the EU’s closest state to the Middle East, are adamant it is the British bases, not the republic, that have been singled out for attack since the onset of the US-led offensive against Iran. Nicosia, they say, had repeatedly raised the red flag about the threat posed to the facilities in talks with London beginning last year. The warnings went unheeded. RAF Akrotiri is the UK’s main forward-mounting post for overseas operations in the Middle East and widely seen as by far the most important slice of territory retained by Britain in 1960, when it held on to 3 % of the island’s landmass in exchange for independence. “We’ve consistently communicated that the bases could be a target if things move in a specific direction regionally,” Kombos said. “This is a concern we shared consistently … but the outcome of those conversations is clear in terms of what transpired on Sunday night.” It was evident, he said, “not everything that could be done was done to the level of expectations that we have, that people living and working in the bases, Cypriots, also have, and I’m sure the British government has as well … but, right now, I want to focus on how the cooperation improves”. The speedy deployment of warships and air assets from several European states – military support that had arrived at the request of Cyprus – would help bolster defence of the installations, he said. The UK has also resupplied air defence systems, sending in Royal Navy Wildcat helicopters capable of taking out aerial threats, in addition to “extra fast” F-35 fighter jets flown in last month. But for many the deployment is seen as too little, too late. The destroyer HMS Dragon, which is being repaired and refitted in Portsmouth, is not expected off the shores of Cyprus until the week after next. “We don’t just want to stockpile assets. We want assets that are useful,” Kombos said. Defence plans were being applied with a whole-of-Cyprus approach and not only focused on military facilities in UK sovereign territory. Although the protective cordon thrown around the island is itself unprecedented, Kombos said his government would continue to press for Nato membership, long obstructed by opposition from Turkey. “In the meantime, we are trying to make sure that we have the capacity to be able to link up to the Nato systems and structures as far as possible for someone who is not a member of the alliance.” With the Cypriot government dealing with the worst security crisis since 1974, when an attempt at union with Greece prompted Turkey to invade, the president, Nikos Christodoulides, has insisted the country has no intention of becoming involved in any military operation, and also said “nothing is ruled out” when asked about the future of the British facilities. Late on Friday, the Cypriot defence minister, Vasilis Palmas, revealed that the Shahed-like drone had succeeded in going undetected and penetrating RAF Akrotiri because it was flying “at an altitude of 1,000 metres and at a speed of 90 to 100 miles [per hour]”, too low and too fast to be easily picked up by radar. Anger over the bases has been fuelled not only by lingering resentment over installations seen as remnants of the colonial empire but also the change in narrative over what exactly happened at RAF Akrotiri. Stavrinides, holding a giant banner proclaiming “Cyprus is not your launch pad”, said: “At first we are told it hit a runway, then there’s pictures of a hangar being destroyed, a hangar we then find out is used by American military assets, specifically U-2 spy planes stationed there. “It’s lie after lie. Anything they tell us we have to take with an ocean of salt, and that’s why these protests will continue.”

Trump joins families of six slain US service members at Dover air force base

Donald Trump on Saturday joined the families of six US soldiers killed in the war in the Middle East during a dignified transfer ritual at Dover air force base. A “dignified transfer” is when the remains of US service members killed in action are returned to the US. The soldiers were killed in a drone strike in Kuwait earlier this week, as the US and Israel continue its regime-change war in Iran. The transfer is considered one of the most somber duties of any commander-in-chief. During Saturday’s event, the president wore a Trump-branded “USA” golf cap. Cellphones were not allowed during the entirety of the dignified transfer. In addition to the president, some members of his cabinet were present, including JD Vance, the vice-president; Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary; Pam Bondi, the attorney general; and others. Trump, speaking at a summit of Latin American leaders in Miami on Saturday before his trip to Dover air force base, said the fallen service members were heroes “coming home in a different manner than they thought they’d be coming home”. He said it was “a very sad situation” and pledged to keep American war deaths “to a minimum”. Those killed in action were Sgt first class Nicole Amor, 39, of White Bear Lake, Minnesota; Capt Cody Khork, 35, of Winter Haven, Florida; Chief warrant officer 3 Robert Marzan, 54, of Sacramento, California; Maj Jeffrey O’Brien, 45, of Indianola, Iowa; Sgt first class Noah Tietjens, 42, of Bellevue, Nebraska; and Sgt Declan Coady, 20, of West Des Moines, lowa, who was posthumously promoted from specialist. The families of the six army reserve members were present during the transfer. The six soldiers were killed by a drone strike at a command center in Kuwait. They were all from the 103rd sustainment command based in Des Moines, Iowa, which provides food, fuel, water, ammunition, transport equipment and supplies, the Associated Press reported. They died just one day after the US and Israel launched its military campaign against Iran. During the ritual, transfer cases draped with the American flag and holding the remains of the fallen soldiers are carried from the military aircraft that transported them to an awaiting vehicle to take them to the mortuary facility at the base. Amor’s husband, Joey Amor, said earlier this week that she had been scheduled to return home to him and their two children within days, the Associated Press reports. “You don’t go to Kuwait thinking something’s going to happen, and for her to be one of the first – it hurts,” Joey Amor said. O’Brien had served in the Army reserve for nearly 15 years, according to his LinkedIn account, and his aunt said in a post on Facebook that O’Brien “was the sweetest blue-eyed, blonde farm kid you’d ever know. He is so missed already.” Marzan’s sister described him in a Facebook post as a “strong leader” and loving husband, father and brother. “My baby brother, you are loved and I will hold onto all our memories and cherish them always in my heart,” Elizabeth Marzan wrote. Coady was among the youngest people in his class, trained to troubleshoot military computer systems, but he impressed his instructors, his father, Andrew Coady, told the Associated Press. “He trained hard, he worked hard, his physical fitness was important to him. He loved being a soldier,” Coady said. “He was also one of the most kindest people you would ever meet, and he would do anything and everything for anyone.” Khork’s family described him as “the life of the party” who was known for his “infectious spirit” and “generous heart” and who had wanted to serve in the military since childhood. “That commitment helped shape the course of his life and reflected the deep sense of duty that was always at the core of who he was,” according to a statement from his mother, Donna Burhans, his father, James Khork, and his stepmother, Stacey Khork. Tietjens, who came from a military family, previously served alongside his father in Kuwait. When he returned home in February 2010, he reunited with his overjoyed wife in a local church’s gym. Tietjens’s cousin Kaylyn Golike asked for prayers, especially for Tietjens’s 12-year-old son, wife and parents, as they navigate “unimaginable loss”. Trump most recently traveled to Dover in December for another dignified transfer for two Iowa national guard members and a US civilian interpreter. The three were killed in an ambush attack in the Syrian desert. During Trump’s first term, he attended dignified transfers several times, including for a Navy Seal killed during a raid in Yemen, for two army officers whose helicopter crashed in Afghanistan and for two army soldiers killed in Afghanistan when a person wearing an Afghan army uniform opened fire. Hugo Lowell contributed reporting

Which human remains are held in UK museums – and where?

How many human remains are held by UK museums? An investigation by the Guardian found 241 UK museums, universities and local authorities hold more than 263,228 items of human remains. Due to the complex way some institutions catalogue their collections, and gaps in their records, the actual figure is likely much higher. These remains include skeletons, body parts and preserved bodies, such as Egyptian mummies, as well as bones and bone fragments, hair, teeth, nails and remains incorporated into cultural artefacts. Only 100 institutions provided an exact or estimated number of individuals in their collections, totalling about 79,334 people. The University of Cambridge did not disclose a number, explaining this was difficult because “many remains are commingled and fragmented”. But a 2003 report stated that its Duckworth Laboratory held the remains of approximately 18,000 individuals. That would bring the recorded total to about 97,334. A Cambridge University spokesperson said: “The vice-chancellor has written to the families and descendants to acknowledge their profound grief and the enduring uncertainty they have expressed.” They added that the vice-chancellor had assured the descendants that the Duckworth Collection does not hold the remains of any of the first Chimurenga heroes from Zimbabwe. Responses to freedom of information (FoI) requests, analysed by Dr Rebekah Hodgkinson, a researcher of colonial legacies in British history and heritage, and Dan Hicks, professor of contemporary archaeology at the University of Oxford, also show that about 5,700 items of remains are not recorded in a database. Some institutions only disclosed having several boxes of human remains of unknown provenance. The FoI figures do not include human remains held in private collections, such as the royal collection, or by individuals. Which museums hold the most human remains? The Natural History Museum (NHM) in London appears to have the largest collection, representing an estimated 27,500 individuals. The museum said it has 27,864 catalogue records of human remains, which may each represent more than one individual. Furthermore, one individual may be represented by a single tooth, a small number of bones or up to thousands of bone fragments. The University of Cambridge holds about 20,110 items in its Duckworth Laboratory, of which about 9,399 originated from outside the UK. The university said there are 1,070 catalogue entries referring to human remains in the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, of which an unspecified number were transferred to the Duckworth collections. The Fitzwilliam Museum holds “a small number of human remains”, of which 14 records are on its public catalogue. The University of Bristol estimated that it holds “well over” 20,000 items, representing about 2,000 individuals. The University of Winchester holds 30,488 items, but this represents only 150 skeletons excavated in the UK. The National Museums and Galleries of Wales hold 7,391 items, but did not disclose how many individuals this represents. How many human remains originated in the UK? The Guardian found 166,124 items of human remains are recorded as originating from the UK, representing 63% of the known total. Of these, 122,747 are recorded as coming from UK archaeological excavations, which is less than half (47%) of all the human remains held. The University of Winchester holds a quarter of the items of remains from UK excavations. There are also high numbers of UK excavated remains held by Armagh city, Banbridge and Craigavon borough council in Northern Ireland (6,400 items, representing only 10 individuals), and the University of Sheffield (3,972). How many overseas remains are held in the UK? The FoI responses show there are 37,996 items of human remains recorded as originating from overseas, while the continent of origin of another 16,236 items is unknown. Ninety-seven institutions hold 28,914 items of remains recorded as originating from Africa, Asia, North and South America and Oceania. Seventy-five institutions hold 11,856 items of remains recorded as originating from Africa. Of these, 6,223 (52%) are held in the University of Cambridge’s Duckworth Laboratory. Fifty-three institutions hold 9,550 items of remains originating from Asia, with the largest collection in the National History Museum. Thirty-nine institutions collectively hold 3,252 items of remains from Oceania, with the largest recorded collection in the British Museum. Thirty-three institutions hold 2,276 items of remains from North America, with more than half (1,398) held by the National History Museum. Twenty-nine institutions hold a total of 1,980 items of remains from South America, with most held by the National History Museum (1,141). How did overseas human remains come to the UK? The 2003 report of the government working group on human remains said they were acquired in “a very wide range of circumstances”. Some remains were bought from or exchanged with museums abroad. Others, such as tsantsas (shrunken heads), were taken from, and traded by, Indigenous peoples. The report also noted that many items of remains were acquired unethically by collectors, including as a result of “duress, deceit, unlawful removal and, very occasionally, murder”. Some bodies were taken from graves or from battlefields and hospitals, it added. The working group said colonised peoples, such as Australian Aborigines and Native American peoples, were “often unable to prevent the removal of human remains because of the dynamics of power in colonial situations”. Can UK museums return human remains? Section 47 of the Human Tissue Act allows nine national museums, including the British Museum, the National History Museum, the V&A and the Science Museum, to remove human remains from their collections if they are reasonably believed to belong to a person who died less than 1,000 years before the section came into force. However limitations do apply and some national museums are prevented by law from deaccessioning items in their collections unless, broadly, they are duplicates or unfit for retention, eg due to damage. These restrictions do not apply to local authorities and universities.

Iran rejects Trump’s demand for unconditional surrender as a ‘dream’

The president of Iran has rejected Donald Trump’s call for the country’s unconditional surrender as a “dream”, while issuing a rare apology for Iranian attacks that hit neighbouring states, even as missiles and drones continued to strike Gulf countries. In a prerecorded address broadcast on state television on Saturday, Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, said the country would never capitulate, responding to remarks by the US president, who said on Friday that only Iran’s total submission could bring the war to an end. Iran’s enemies, Pezeshkian said, “must take their dream of the Iranian people’s unconditional surrender to their graves”, in remarks that further escalate the eighth day of conflict, which has choked global oil supplies and cut world air travel. During his speech, Pezeshkian also issued an apology to neighbouring states for Iran’s recent “actions”, in an apparent attempt to ease regional anger after Iranian strikes hit civilian targets in Gulf Arab countries. Tehran has responded to attacks on its territory by targeting Israel, but also Gulf Arab states that host US military installations, while Israel has also launched intense strikes on Lebanon, where the Iran-backed armed group Hezbollah is based. Over the past week, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have all reported drone and missile attacks. Pezeshkian said Iran’s temporary leadership council had approved suspending attacks on nearby countries unless an assault on Iran originated from those states. “I personally apologise to neighbouring countries that were affected by Iran’s actions,” he said. It remains unclear whether Pezeshkian’s remarks signal a broader decision by Tehran to scale back its campaign, or what prompted the apparent shift, with reports suggesting some strikes were still being directed at Gulf states on Saturday morning. On Saturday, video published on social media and obtained by the BBC shows an apparent drone strike on the property of Dubai international airport. The UAE said it intercepted 15 ballistic missiles and 119 drones on Saturday. Pezeshkian’s remarks were swiftly followed by a warning from Trump, who said Tehran faced the prospect of “complete destruction” if it did not capitulate, adding that Iran’s apology to neighbouring states was the result of mounting US military pressure. On his Truth Social platform, Trump replied that if Iran did not surrender, “it will be hit very hard!” adding that the country was “under serious consideration for complete destruction and certain death”. Trump also said that Iran had apologised and surrendered to its Middle East neighbours, “because of the relentless U.S. and Israeli attack”. Israeli and US officials said strikes had destroyed about 60% of Iran’s missile launchers and large stockpiles, while roughly 80% of its air defence systems had been neutralised, allowing Israel to claim aerial superiority over Iran. Western officials were trying to decipher President Pezeshkian’s apology and the authority behind it, but urged caution in reading it as a sign Tehran was seeking an off-ramp. “We do not know what is driving the Iranian president’s remarks,” one official said. “It is one data point, no more.” Officials say Iran’s capabilities appear degraded and recent attacks have declined, citing US Centcom briefings. Tehran’s regional offer seems conditional, but it remains unclear whether attacks hinge on the use of US bases – or their mere presence. Later, Mehdi Tabatabaei, deputy for communications in Pezeshkian’s office, said the president’s message was “clear”. “If countries in the region do not cooperate in a US attack on Iran, we will not attack them,” he said, adding that Iran would not submit to coercion and that its armed forces would respond decisively to any aggression launched from US bases in the region. Pezeshkian later wrote on X that Iran had not attacked neighbours but targeted US bases in the region, adding that Tehran’s commitment to regional ties did not negate its right to self-defence. Pezeshkian’s speech came as Israel said it had launched a fresh wave of strikes on Iran, sending 80 fighter jets in a pre-dawn blitz that set one of Tehran’s main airports on fire. Israeli officials said the targets included a military academy, an underground command centre and a missile storage facility. Photos showed flames and thick plumes of smoke rising from Mehrabad international airport, one of the two airports serving the Iranian capital, Tehran. Iran also retaliated on Saturday. Air raid sirens sounded over Jerusalem, while explosions were reported in Gulf cities including Dubai and Manama. Saudi Arabia said it intercepted a ballistic missile aimed at an airbase hosting US personnel near its capital, Riyadh. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) said they struck a Marshall Islands-flagged tanker in the strait of Hormuz, the strategic shipping chokepoint that Tehran has effectively closed. Now entering its second week, the war was triggered by joint airstrikes by Israel and the US that killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei. Hardline clerics have called for the swift selection of a new supreme leader withing 24 hours to help guide Iran. Mojtaba Khamenei, the late supreme leader’s son, wields significant influence and ties to the IRGC, but dynastic succession is frowned upon in revolutionary Iran. The conflict has rapidly widened, spilling into Lebanon and reaching as far as the eastern Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean. Iran’s health ministry said at least 926 civilians had been killed and about 6,000 injured. Israel has also intensified airstrikes in Lebanon, repeatedly targeting the southern suburbs of Beirut. Lebanon’s health ministry said at least 339 people had been killed. The Norwegian Refugee Council said about 300,000 people had fled their homes. Meanwhile, as Israel fights war on multiple fronts, violence continues to surge in the occupied West Bank, where a 27-year-old Palestinian was shot dead near Masafer Yatta after settlers reportedly opened fire.

Revealed: the Ukrainian facility where UK engineers help fix vital weapons

In an unmarked and undisclosed location in western Ukraine, British and Ukrainian engineers work side by side to fix damaged military hardware, crawling under the chassis of artillery systems and pulling apart the insides of British-donated howitzers. Until now, the existence of this facility, along with three other similar sites inside Ukraine, has been kept quiet, buried in neutral language to avoid drawing too much attention to the sites, given the sensitivities of all military-linked work inside Ukraine. However, the Guardian was invited to view the location earlier this week – the first time media have been granted access – during a visit to Ukraine by the UK defence minister Luke Pollard. The facility was an example of Britain doing things that “no other nation has been willing or able to do”, said Pollard. While there are no British military personnel on site, there are British engineers, contracted by the Ministry of Defence, working in-country. For safety reasons, other countries have often preferred to repair kit outside Ukraine, leading to longer journeys and delays with getting it back to the front. The facility visited by the Guardian has repair bays for up to 30 vehicles, and is able to fix a number of weapons systems, including British-made AS-90 self-propelled howitzers. The AS-90 was initially planned to be withdrawn from service in the British army in the 2030s, but the decision was made to donate the entire stock of the system to Ukraine over the past few years. “There are some things that in military times we don’t talk about, but when it comes to industrial partnerships, and the legitimate question of ‘You’ve donated all those AS-90s, what’s happened to them?’… we want to start telling the story,” said Pollard. He acknowledged that there was risk involved in having the facility inside Ukraine, but said it was a “risk worth taking and managing” in the interest of support for Kyiv. “Any operation or support provided inside Ukraine is clearly going to have a greater risk than if its provided in Poland or anywhere within the Nato article 5 protected area, but it’s precisely this type of support that Ukraine needs to stay in the fight,” he said. Engineers and technicians from two British companies, BAE Systems and AMS, work alongside Ukrainian colleagues to repair the kit. Many of the Ukrainians hired by the companies were employed previously by Ukrainian military enterprises that have since been damaged or destroyed, and they are now being trained to work with British and other foreign-donated equipment. Much of the equipment the Ukrainian armed forces are using is now obsolete, meaning a new supply chain for spare parts had to be set up. BAE was involved in the original manufacture of the AS-90 and had access to the technical drawings, but for other systems more creative approaches were required. For the Tunguska, a Soviet-era anti-aircraft platform that is also fixed at the facility, and for Soviet T-72 tanks used by Ukraine, engineers visited the Bovington tank museum in Dorset to look over versions of the vehicles on display there and work out how they could manufacture spare parts in the UK. Swedish Archer artillery systems are also fixed at the facility, under a cooperation agreement in which the Swedish government pays but the British and Ukrainian engineers do the work. In future, the hope is that the project can expand, to more sites and with more countries involved. “We want one structured, organised approach, where any nation giving equipment has a structure they can plug into,” said Pollard. Facilities such as this give some insight into how western support to Ukraine might look after a potential peace deal. A so-called “coalition of the willing” has come together, of nations prepared to offer Ukraine support to prevent Russia from attacking again, in the event that Donald Trump’s efforts to bring about a deal between Moscow and Kyiv prove successful. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has expressed a desire for any postwar settlement to include a provision that western troops be stationed in Ukraine, and last September the Finnish president, Alexander Stubb, told the Guardian that a coalition of the willing would involve “real security guarantees” that would compel western nations to fight Russia if Moscow violated the ceasefire. However, the past few years have shown that no western country is ready to go to war in Ukraine, and that calculus is unlikely to change. “We know that our only real security guarantee is going to be a strong Ukrainian army,” said one Ukrainian security source. Last month, the UK defence secretary, John Healey, said he hoped to deploy British troops to Ukraine in the aftermath of a peace deal, but it is not expected that these troops would engage with Russian forces. “UK forces are not the deterrent, a stronger Ukraine is the deterrent,” said Pollard, hence the focus on the regeneration of Ukrainian hardware as well as on training for Ukrainian troops. Currently, Ukrainian units used their hardware “to the point of destruction”, he said, and the task after a ceasefire would be to speedily restore all the equipment at the front, something that is not possible when they are in use during daily operations. “For the UK, one of the key roles in the coalition of the willing is to regenerate Ukrainian armed forces, and to do that we need to have the infrastructure ready to go on day one of the peace,” he said.

Offer from Iran’s president to not attack neighbours provokes internal backlash

The surprise offer by the president of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, to not attack countries in the neighbourhood so long as their airspace and US bases within their territories are not used to attack Iran has provoked a storm inside the country as the military appeared to contradict him, if not outright overrule him. There were also calls for a new supreme leader to be installed as quickly as possible, as a means of marginalising the president. Attacks on facilities in Bahrain and elsewhere have continued, and there were unconfirmed reports that Bahrain had become the first Gulf country to fire back at Iran. Abbas Araghchi, the Iranian foreign minister, seemed focused on the likelihood of escalation, rather then de-escalation. “The US had committed a blatant and desperate crime by attacking a freshwater desalination plant on Qeshm Island. Water supply in 30 villages has been impacted. Attacking Iran’s infrastructure is a dangerous move with grave consequences. The US set this precedent, not Iran.” There are as many as 400 water desalination plants across the Gulf, and if they come to be viewed as legitimate targets, a drinking water crisis of unimaginable proportions could face the region within days. The backlash over Pezeshkian’s offer was made worse by him including an apology to the region on behalf of himself and the nation in his pre-recorded address on state TV. He also implied that after the US attack on its top command, rudderless armed forces may have been forced to make targeting decisions on their own. He suggested they had fired at will. Pezeshkian’s position was not helped by president Trump characterising his offer as a surrender, describing it as the first time Iran had been forced to admit defeat to its regional rivals in a thousand years. Pezeshkian had specifically said those seeking Iran’s surrender would take that wish to their grave. But Pezeshkian, not always the clearest communicator and not always empowered to make decisions, insisted his offer was the result of a collective decision by the temporary tripartite group of men running the country after the assassination of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Others said it arose out of detailed talks with the Gulf states in recent days. The internal dispute also shows how power has been diffused in wartime and established lines of authority are in flux, a development that is prompting some clerics and hardline newspapers to call for the election as quickly as possible for a replacement supreme leader. Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, for instance, said a choice is “essential in light of the ongoing political confusion”. It is possible the announcement will come this weekend. The apparent delay in the 88-strong Assembly of Experts electing a new leader may be the result of deadlock, or it may be to give moderate political forces within the country a chance to gain the upper hand over war strategy. It has been noticeable that at least three high-profile political prisoners have been released since Khamenei’s killing. Trump has said he must approve the future leadership of Iran. Inside Iran, Pezeshkian’s remarks were met by a range of interpretations and questions, including whether all US bases remained justifiable targets, or only if they were being used to attack Iran. The Gulf states’ anger about the attacks has been growing since they claimed they had clearly communicated to Iran that the US bases and their airspace would not be used in the American attack. Moreover, Iran had not just attacked US facilities. States such as Qatar have complained that oil refineries, hotels and airports have also been hit. There were few immediate official responses in the Gulf to Pezeshkian’s remarks. Gulf Cooperation Council foreign ministers are due to meet on Sunday. A western diplomat described the president’s address as “one data point”, adding it was not clear if a decline in Iranian attacks was a policy choice or a product of military necessity In the face of the criticism about what precisely had been agreed, Mehdi Tabatabaei, the president’ s deputy director of communications, insisted that Pezeshkian’s message was “clear”. He said: “If the countries of the region do not cooperate in the American attack, we will not attack them. The Islamic Republic of Iran will never yield to force, and our powerful armed forces will give a decisive response to any aggression from US bases in the region.” In the five minute address, Pezeshkian said: “No more missiles will be fired at these countries unless an attack on Iran originates from those countries.” He urged the Gulf states not to become “toys in the hands of imperialism”. But the armed forces clearly showed their disapproval of the president, which could yet lead to splits between the military and some politicians. In a statement, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said: “Following the orders of the Honorable President of the Republic, the Armed Forces declare for the umpteenth time that they respect the interests and national sovereignty of neighboring countries and have not yet attacked them. “However, in the continuation of previous offensive actions, all military bases and interests of the criminal America and the fake Zionist regime on land, sea and space in the region will be subjected to crushing and fierce blows by the powerful armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” The foreign ministry also did not reiterate the president’s offer, instead saying its “defensive operations were against targets and facilities that are the origin and source of aggressive actions against the nation or serve such targets”. Alaeddin Boroujerdi, a member of the parliament’s national security and foreign policy commission stated: “Before the start of the ‘Ramadan war’, we clearly announced to each and every country in the region that if America takes military action against Iran, we will definitely target American bases; these bases are considered American territory and not the territory of the countries in the region; this policy has not changed in any way and will continue with determination.” The president’s words “should not be misused or questioned”, they continued, but added: “If the radars of these bases are active and guide the planes that are conducting operations against Iran, we will target those bases.” Ali Asghar Nakhaeirad, a Mashhad MP, warned: “The Arab countries that have provided bases to the enemy and allowed them to be used to attack our country are … at least accomplices in the martyrdom of our beloved leader, 167 elementary schoolchildren, and nearly 2,000 of our compatriots. In all legal systems in the world, accomplices are punished, not apologised to. “Your apology to the partners or accomplices in the martyrdom of our leader, dearer than our lives, is not wise. The alternative, he said, was to raze the palaces of the emirs to the ground.” During a television appearance, Hamidreza Moghaddamfar, media adviser to the IRGC, seemed to be more supportive of the president’s line, saying the restraint is conditional on no action being “taken against Iran from those bases in the countries of the region; this was the main message”. He clarified: “So far, the countries in the region themselves have not been our targets, and they know this. The aim of our attacks has been solely the interests and positions of the United States in the region, which include military bases, airbases, missile systems and ships, which are our targets.” Moghaddamfar said: “The countries of the region have been repeatedly raising the issue from the beginning that they are being harmed. We have also apologised to them from the very beginning.” He suggested discussions had led to a new understanding with the Gulf states that the US bases would not be used to attack Iran. Mashallah Shamsolvaezin, a member of the government information council, insisted the president’s apology had been viewed very positively. “On the one hand, it shows his personal humility, and on the other hand, it shows the flexibility of Iran’s foreign policy towards neighbouring countries.”