Middle East
- By Kian Sharifi
Who Was Hassan Nasrallah, The Assassinated Leader Of Hezbollah?
Hassan Nasrallah was the longtime leader of Hezbollah, the Iran-backed armed group and political party that controls much of southern Lebanon. Hezbollah confirmed on September 28 that Nasrallah was killed in massive Israeli strikes on the Lebanese, capital, Beirut the day before.
In his more than 30 years in charge of Hezbollah, Nasrallah transformed the Shi'ite militia into a major political force in Lebanon and a powerful adversary of neighboring Israel.
In that time, the 64-year-old cleric became one of the most powerful and polarizing figures in the Middle East.
To many members of Lebanon's Shi'ite community, a historically marginalized group, he was a hero. But others considered him a warmonger who dragged the country into regional conflicts.
Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organization by the United States, although the European Union has only blacklisted its armed wing.
Nasrallah was born in 1960 to a poor family in the southern suburbs of Beirut. After studying at a Shi'ite seminary in Iraq, Nasrallah joined the Amal movement, a militia that sought to elevate the status of Lebanon's Shi'ite community.
Following Israel's invasion of southern Lebanon in 1982 -- during Lebanon's devastating civil war -- Nasrallah joined the newly formed Hezbollah.
A charismatic cleric and skilled orator, Nasrallah quickly rose through Hezbollah's ranks. When Israel assassinated Hezbollah chief Abbas al-Musawi in 1992, Nasrallah was picked as his successor at the age of 32.
Nasrallah forged a close relationship with Shi'a-majority Iran, Hezbollah's key backer. With significant financial and political assistance from Tehran, Nasrallah built Hezbollah into a powerful political and military entity in Lebanon and a major player in the region.
Hezbollah's fight against Israel won Nasrallah support inside and outside Lebanon. In 2000, following persistent Hezbollah attacks, Israel withdrew its forces from southern Lebanon after an 18-year occupation.
In 2006, Hezbollah's kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers triggered a devastating 34-day war with Israel. Despite the destruction and loss of life caused, the war boosted the standing of Hezbollah in Lebanon and the region.
Under Nasrallah's leadership, Hezbollah came to the aid of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad during that country's civil war, trained Iran-backed militias in Iraq and Yemen, and assisted Hamas, the U.S.- and EU-designated Palestinian terrorist group.
Hezbollah has also been accused of orchestrating the deadly 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in the Argentinian capital, Buenos Aires.
The cleric was rarely seen in public in the past two decades, with most of his supporters witnessing his once black beard turning gray only on television screens. Wearing a black turban, Nasrallah often delivered long speeches via video link from secret locations due to security concerns.
Since the outbreak of the Gaza war in October 2023, Hezbollah and Israel have exchanged constant cross-border attacks. Hezbollah has said that it is acting in solidarity with Palestinians.
Nasrallah's organization suffered major setbacks in recent months. Israel assassinated key members of Hezbollah's leadership, neutralized a significant part of its military arsenal, and disrupted its communications.
In his most recent speech on September 19, following suspected Israeli attacks targeting electronic devices used by members of Hezbollah, Nasrallah warned Israel that "retribution will come."
More News
As Iran Talks Stall, Markets Bet On Diplomacy, Experts Say
WASHINGTON -- The latest exchange between Washington and Tehran over a proposed path toward de-escalation has raised new questions about what comes next in the growing crisis around the Strait of Hormuz.
US President Donald Trump described Iran's latest response to a US-backed proposal as "totally unacceptable," even as both sides continue to signal interest in negotiations over sanctions relief, nuclear restrictions, and the future of shipping through the strategic waterway.
Analysts in Washington say the standoff is increasingly testing assumptions that diplomacy can move quickly enough to prevent wider economic fallout from the conflict.
So far, financial markets have remained relatively calm despite some choppy moments.
But experts say the relative market stability reflects expectations that negotiations will eventually produce some form of agreement.
"There's pressure on both sides to make some sort of deal," Mark Cancian said during a discussion hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) on May 11.
Cancian, a retired US Marine Corps colonel and senior adviser at CSIS who served more than three decades in the military, including during Operation Desert Storm, and Iraq, said the military situation has settled into "a stalemate."
Tehran has attempted to restrict movement through the strait, the waterway for one-fifth of the world's oil and gas, while the United States has maintained pressure from outside the waterway.
Although clashes have remained largely confined to the strait, neither side appears positioned for a decisive breakthrough.
According to Cancian, both Washington and Tehran appear to be exploring possible compromises involving Iran's enriched uranium stockpile, future enrichment activity, and phased sanctions relief.
He noted that the United States seems willing to forgo inspectors on the ground in exchange for physical constraints on enriched uranium.
In the meantime, Cancian said the longer the confrontation continues, the greater the military and economic pressure will become for both sides.
Asia Watching Closely
Although global markets have remained relatively stable, analysts said the economic impact could become more pronounced if disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz continue.
While some cargo traffic does get through, the crisis has already contributed to higher fuel prices -- up roughly 40 percent -- and growing supply concerns in parts of Asia and Europe.
The crisis is being followed particularly closely in East Asia, where several economies remain heavily dependent on Middle Eastern energy imports -- 70 percent for South Korea and 95 percent for Japan.
Victor Cha, who serves as president of the geopolitics and foreign policy department at CSIS and a professor at Georgetown University, said Japan and South Korea are already looking for ways to diversify energy supplies and reduce long-term dependence on Gulf shipping routes, eyeing investments in Central Asia and Africa.
"Both of them, as a result of this, no matter what happens, are going to want to lower their dependence on crude coming out of the strait," Cha said.
He further noted that this shift creates a "geostrategic imperative" for Korea and Japan to improve relationships with Russia, as alternative routes from Central Asia would likely transit the Russian Black Sea coast.
Additionally, both the Japanese yen and South Korean won have hit multi-year lows against the dollar, further straining their economies.
The Iran issue is also expected to loom over Trump's upcoming summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping on May 14-15.
Beijing has remained Iran's primary oil customer, taking roughly 90 percent of its exports last year. US officials may press Beijing to use this leverage to encourage Iranian concessions.
Still, analysts say the immediate issue remains whether diplomacy can move faster than the economic pressures and munitions depletions now building across global markets and military theaters.
- By Kian Sharifi
Could Iran Start Charging Global Tech Firms For Undersea Cables In The Strait Of Hormuz?
Iran has insisted for weeks that it has the right to charge international ships to transit the Strait of Hormuz, a key global shipping route off the coast of the Islamic republic.
Now, two news agencies affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) have issued proposals urging Tehran to go further by imposing fees on the global tech firms that operate undersea fiberoptic cables running through the narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the open sea.
The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which Tehran has effectively closed since the United States and Israel launched a bombing campaign on February 28, remains a key sticking point in ending the war. Tehran has claimed sovereignty over the strategic waterway, which is rejected by the international community.
Experts say the proposals calling for Iran to demand payment for undersea cables under the strait are more of a threat than a viable plan.
"The risk of adversarial subsea cable cuts has always been there, but an open threat from a nation-state like Iran adds urgency," Isik Mater, director of research at the London-based Internet monitoring group NetBlocks, told RFE/RL.
Undersea cables are mostly owned and operated by international tech companies like Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Amazon. The cables carry SWIFT transactions, cloud traffic, and general Internet data between Asia, Europe, and the Persian Gulf.
If the submarine cables running through Hormuz were severed, the impact on ordinary people across Asia, the Middle East, and Europe would be immediate and wide-ranging.
Streaming services would buffer or fail entirely. Messaging apps would slow or go dark. Video calls would drop. Online banking and card payments could be disrupted. Cloud-dependent services -- from e-mail to workplace tools -- would degrade.
Internet providers could reroute traffic through surviving cables or satellites, but capacity is limited, meaning slower speeds for everyone even where connectivity survives. Repairs typically take weeks, sometimes months.
What's The Pitch?
The Tasnim and Fars news agencies argued that Iran should both monetize and assert sovereignty over the web of undersea cables that crisscross the strait.
The legal foundation for the proposals draws on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which Iran has signed but never ratified.
Citing Article 34, Tasnim argued that transit passage rights granted to shipping do not eclipse Iran's sovereign rights over the seabed. At the strait's narrowest point, the territorial sea claims of Iran and Oman overlap entirely, meaning the cables physically sit in Iranian-claimed territory.
Building cables there without authorization, Tasnim claimed, amounts to "occupying Iranian soil underwater" and requires both licensing and fees.
The revenue model is borrowed loosely from Egypt, which Tasnim claims earns hundreds of millions of dollars annually from undersea cables that run through the Suez Canal.
Tasnim and Fars also argued that Iran should compel tech giants to formally operate under Iranian law and partner with Iranian technology companies. Fars described the goal explicitly as turning Iran's control over the Strait of Hormuz into a "digital power lever," with Iranian firms controlling the maintenance and repairs of the cables.
Does It Hold Up?
Experts say the legal arguments provided by the Iranian news agencies have significant weaknesses.
While coastal states do retain sovereignty over their territorial seabed, Tasnim ignores UNCLOS Article 79, which explicitly protects the right for global Internet providers to build and maintain undersea cables.
Mater of NetBlocks said the Egypt comparison has "limited weight" because Cairo "licenses transit and landing points on its own territory, and these agreements have been entered willingly."
"By contrast Iran's position is more tenuous, and though it has control of its territorial waters it doesn't own a significant stretch of the routes," she added.
Mater said the proposals' "biggest red flag" is the call for international tech firms to be forced to formally operate under Iranian law and partner with Iranian technology companies.
Under Iranian law, "communications are typically controlled and monitored, before even considering sanctions and geopolitical barriers," she said.
"This makes Iran's demand come off as more of a 'protection' fee, similar to what they've been doing with tankers, distant from any kind of conventional transit licensing agreement we usually see in the industry," Mater said.
Before a US sea blockade of the Strait of Hormuz was imposed in mid-April, Iran was charging commercial ships up to $2 million to transit the strait, although few vessels were making the passage. Maritime traffic in the strait has come to a standstill since the American barricade.
Iran has a history of imposing severe restrictions on Internet usage. The authorities have enforced an Internet blackout since February 28 and refused to restore access since a cease-fire came into effect on April 8.
"Iranian authorities haven't hesitated to cut off their own citizens' connectivity and may well seek to sever external links if demands are unmet," said Mater. "Although international cables aren't under Iran's direct control, sabotage via ships' anchors or diving teams would be within their capabilities in the strait."
Former Senior US Diplomat Gordon Gray: Iran Talks Likely To Continue Despite Trump's Latest Rejection
WASHINGTON -- Former senior US diplomat Gordon Gray, who served as deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs under President George W. Bush, says indirect negotiations between Washington and Tehran are likely to continue despite what he described as significant pain and pressure on both sides.
The latest exchange comes after Tehran reportedly sent a proposal via Pakistan seeking an end to military operations across the region, sanctions relief, and guarantees for maritime security, including the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
President Donald Trump responded on May 10 by rejecting the Iranian position, while signaling continued frustration with the slow pace of diplomacy.
RFE/RL spoke with Gray, who also served as US ambassador to Tunisia and deputy chief of mission in Egypt and now is a professor of Gulf and Arabian Peninsula affairs at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University, about the latest state of Iran peace talks.
RFE/RL: Iran has now responded to the US proposal. Does this feel like a breakthrough moment?
Gordon Gray: I don't believe it is as much a breakthrough as it is a continuation of the process that began in Islamabad when [US] Vice President [JD] Vance met with the speaker of the Iranian parliament. Even though those talks did not result in a breakthrough, as many had hoped they would, what is important was that the two sides kept speaking indirectly through Pakistani mediators, but also, perhaps more recently, through the Qataris as well.
I note that the Qatari prime minister was in Miami two days ago, where he reportedly met with Mr. [Steve] Witkoff and Mr. [Jared] Kushner.
RFE/RL: Trump said earlier that a deal was very possible. What is the real obstacle today -- Washington’s demands or Tehran’s red lines?
Gray: They're both. It's like any negotiation: Both sides have demands, both sides have red lines. In this case, both sides are suffering from the actions of the others, and that gives them motivation to seek some sort of agreement.
RFE/RL: Based on reports from Tehran and mediators that Iran is seeking sanctions relief as a precondition for deeper nuclear negotiations, does this leave the White House facing a choice between compromise or further escalation?
Gray: I don't know that I would put it that way. I think Washington's decision will be based on what the Iranian response is to the US proposal and whether it meets at least minimal US demands.
I don't expect that the Iranian response will completely address all of the issues. The reports I've seen -- and they're very initial since the Iranians just handed over their response -- suggest there may be a short-term cease-fire and reopening of the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for time to allow the other issues to be successfully negotiated.
If those reports are accurate, I wouldn't call that a compromise if Washington decides to accept it. I'd call it part of the negotiation process.
RFE/RL: Do you think Tehran is negotiating because it wants relief, or because the pressure campaign is working?
Gray: I wouldn't say the pressure campaign is working so much as it is creating an incentive for Iran to seek a diplomatic solution. Of course, it wants relief, but it wanted relief from sanctions before February 28, as well.
RFE/RL: Iran's economy has been hit hard by sanctions and isolation. How much strain is the regime really under right now?
Gray: It's under tremendous strain. Infrastructure has been destroyed. Inflation is high. The Iranian currency is virtually worthless. There's tremendous economic mismanagement and tremendous corruption.
Because of the Internet blackout, for example, a lot of unemployment is going up because many businesses are laying off workers. So the regime is under tremendous strain.
But that being said, it's also responded with tremendous brutality when people rose up to protest in January. It's not a democracy, and it has shown that it's willing to use brutal repression to stay in power.
RFE/RL: Some analysts suggest that even if an agreement is reached, the Strait of Hormuz could remain a potential flashpoint for renewed tensions. Do you agree with that assessment?
Gray: It certainly has the potential to be because Iran has shown it has the ability to act in an asymmetric way to close off the Strait of Hormuz.
The issue is not simply the free flow of energy through the strait. It's also the confidence of insurers, shipping companies, and those making medium- and long-term contracts to buy oil. Iran does not have to do much to shake that confidence.
RFE/RL: The proposed framework would reportedly halt uranium enrichment for at least 12 years. Would that fundamentally change the nuclear threat?
Gray: It depends how you assess the nuclear threat to begin with.
Trump has given conflicting statements on whether he wants Iran to turn over the uranium enriched to 60 percent. Sometimes he says it has to be turned over; other times he says it's buried, so it doesn't matter. The US position on that is unclear.
RFE/RL: How significant are the reported concessions involving underground enrichment and long-term restrictions?
Gray: I'd have to see the details. There are too many reports right now, and the devil is in the details. I'd also want to see what impartial nuclear experts conclude after reviewing any agreement carefully.
RFE/RL: Despite the military pressure, have Iran’s core nuclear red lines changed?
Gray: I don't think so. I think they are going to insist on what they perceive to be their right as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to enrich uranium.
This is not simply the position of the Islamic republic. It was also the position of the shah of Iran, who began the Iranian nuclear program.
RFE/RL: If Trump rejects Iran's conditions, are we looking at diplomacy breaking down or a much wider war?
Gray: No, I don't see diplomacy breaking down. I think there will be a continuation of discussions.
That doesn't mean there won't be military strikes by one side or the other, but at the end of the day both sides have an incentive to get out of the situation they're in because the other side has created sufficient pain and therefore sufficient incentive for some kind of resolution.
RFE/RL: Gulf nations initially appeared united against Iran. What is your assessment of the current state of the regional alliance?
Gray: The regional alignment against Iran is probably stronger than it has been before because Iran made a strategic miscalculation in striking Gulf Arab economic and civilian infrastructure.
That being said, there are reports of a Saudi-Emirati rift, but that rift predated February 28.
RFE/RL: And in terms of the endgame with Iran, do regional allies remain united?
Gray: They all have similar objectives. They want a cessation of Iranian attacks against their countries, and they want the Strait of Hormuz open again so they can export energy and import goods they need, including foodstuffs.
RFE/RL: From the perspective of ordinary Iranians, what would be the best possible outcome right now?
Gray: There would be two best outcomes.
One would be a cessation of military strikes against their country because civilians have lost their lives and infrastructure has been severely damaged. We can all hope for that outcome.
The second would be a transition to democratic governance. But unfortunately, I don't expect that for a very long time.
RFE/RL: Given the current circumstances, how long could it realistically take to bridge the remaining differences and sign an agreement?
Gray: Diplomacy takes time. You can look at other arms-control negotiations outside the Middle East as well.
The United States and the Soviet Union did not reach the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty in 30 or 60 days. These negotiations are complicated. So, it's going to take a long time because there are a lot of complicated issues.
In the short term, I could see an agreement leading to a cessation of hostilities, a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and possibly sanctions relief or assets being unfrozen.
But if you're talking about resolving the nuclear issue, that is sufficiently complicated that reaching an agreement there is going to take quite a long time.
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
- By RFE/RL
US, Iran Clash Over Peace Proposal As Gulf Stalemate Continues
US President Donald Trump described the cease-fire with Iran as being on "life support," adding he is considering restarting naval escorts -- dubbed Operation Enduring Freedom -- through the Strait of Hormuz amid a continuing a deadlock over how to bring the conflict to an end.
Speaking to reporters at the White House on May 11, Trump said the cease-fire, agreed to on April 8, is now "unbelievably weak" and that he's looking to achieve "complete victory" in the war.
"I would say it's one of the weakest right now, it's on life support," he said. "I would say the cease-fire is on massive life support."
Trump's latest comments came after he angrily rejected Tehran's response to a US peace proposal in a social media post, calling it "totally unacceptable." He did not say what part of counterproposal he was opposed to.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei said in his weekly press conference on May 11 that Tehran's response included stopping the war, lifting the US blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, freeing Iran's assets, and "establishing security in the region and Lebanon."
Iranian state media said that accepting the US conditions would amount to the country's "surrender" to what it called "excessive demands."
Baqaei said "the only thing we demanded was Iran's legitimate rights."
Many reports have suggested the US plan was set out in a one-page memorandum that called for an end to fighting and the unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz but left other key issues -- including Iran's right to enrich uranium -- until later.
Trump said in a Fox News interview on May 11 that he was considering renewing Operation Enduring Freedom, though a final decision had yet to be made. The operation was launched on May 6 but stopped less than two days later.
"We're going to have a complete victory," he said, adding that Tehran thinks "I'll get tired of this. I'll get bored, or I'll have some pressure. But there's no pressure."
Trump has taken a dual line in public statements, stressing the possibility of a diplomatic solution to the war while alternatively threatening massive new air strikes on Iran's energy and power infrastructure.
In an interview with journalist Sharyl Attkisson broadcast on May 10, Trump said American military operations against Iran may not be over, suggesting the United States could still target additional sites if necessary.
Asked whether combat operations involving Iran had concluded, Trump responded: "No, I didn't say that. I said they were defeated, but that doesn't mean they're done. We could go in for another two weeks and hit every single target."
Trump added that US and Israeli strikes had already hit "probably 70 percent" of the intended targets since launching air strikes on Iran on February 28.
The campaign was halted on April 8 when a two-week cease-fire was agreed via mediation by Pakistan. The strikes have not resumed even though the deadline has passed.
"We have other targets that we could conceivably hit," Trump said. "But even if we don't, it will take years for them to rebuild."
He also addressed Iran's enriched uranium stockpiles, saying the United States was monitoring the sites closely.
"We have it under surveillance," he said, adding that US space-based monitoring capabilities were tracking activity around the facilities.
Iran has repeatedly rejected proposals that would require it to transfer its stockpile of enriched uranium to the United States.
Former senior US diplomat Gordon Gray, who served as deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs under President George W. Bush, told RFE/RL in an interview that indirect negotiations between Washington and Tehran are likely to continue despite what he described as significant pain and pressure on both sides.
"I don't see diplomacy breaking down. I think there will be a continuation of discussions," said Gray, who also served as US ambassador to Tunisia and deputy chief of mission in Egypt and now is a professor of Gulf and Arabian Peninsula affairs at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University.
"That doesn't mean there won't be military strikes by one side or the other, but at the end of the day both sides have an incentive to get out of the situation they're in because the other side has created sufficient pain and therefore sufficient incentive for some kind of resolution."
With reporting by RFE/RL's Radio Farda and Reuters
- By RFE/RL
Iran's Currency Falls To Record Low As War, US Blockade Rattle Economy
Iran's currency has fallen to a record low against the US dollar as the two-month-long conflict rattles the country's sanctions-hit economy.
Air strikes by the United States and Israel, launched at Iran on February 28, along with the American naval blockade on Iranian ports and vessels, have disrupted Tehran's vital oil exports, hampered domestic production, and fueled inflation.
Iran's national currency, the rial, dropped to a new low of 1.81 million to the US dollar on April 29 before rebounding the next day. The rial has seen its value fall by nearly 15 percent in recent days, according to Iranian media.
Iran and the United States agreed to a cease-fire on April 8, although Washington increased economic pressure by imposing a blockade on April 13, a move that has made it harder for Tehran to obtain hard currency through exports.
According to Iran's Central Bank, annual inflation, which was above 40 percent before the war, increased to 50 percent as of April 4.
Iranians say the prices of basic goods such as rice, eggs, and chicken have increased significantly since the conflict began.
Rising inflation was the catalyst for nationwide protests that broke out in January and posed one of the biggest threats to the Iran's clerical rulers since the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
The authorities responded to the demonstrations with unprecedented force, killing thousands of people, according to human rights groups.
Iran, too, has sought to impose significant economic pain on the United States and its allies. It responded to US-Israel air strikes by effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, a key artery for global oil and gas supplies, to international shipping.
The move has rattled international energy markets and upended the global economy.
On April 29, the price of Brent crude rose by almost 7 percent to over $126 a barrel, the highest since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
- By Ray Furlong and
- RFE/RL's Radio Farda
'Endgame' For Iran's Oil Sector? How US Blockade May Impact Tehran's Calculus
Weeks of US and Israeli air strikes, sanctions, and restrictions have hit Iran hard, but it could be geology that eventually pushes it into making concessions in its ongoing standoff with the United States.
As the US naval blockade of Iran approaches the end of its third week, data from shipping and industry monitors suggests that tankers have been unable to move Iranian crude through the Strait of Hormuz toward markets in Asia.
This means that Iranian oil storage capacity is rapidly filling, and the clock is ticking before Iran will need to cease production. That's the problem for Tehran, analysts say, as it tries to withstand US pressure to negotiate a peace agreement.
'Geological Impact'
"That creates more of a geological impact rather than anything else, to do with how oil is extracted," Stephen Innes, managing partner at SPI Asset Management, a foreign exchange and commodity advisory, told RFE/RL.
Once the valves get turned off, "oil tends to settle down at the bottom of the reservoir. And it's quite viscous and it's quite thick and it takes a lot of propulsion to bring that up," he said.
The result, he added, could even be "an endgame" for the sector.
"The whole process to build up pressure again and successfully get [oil] coming up the well again, could possibly take a year…. A lot of people think it's just the end of the production because it's just going to be too costly [to restart]," Innes said.
A research note issued by Goldman Sachs on April 23 stated that "the share of country production with relatively low reservoir pressure is estimated to be higher in Iran and Iraq than elsewhere in the Gulf."
The note, which was considering oil sectors in all Persian Gulf countries, said that recovery of oil production levels "may be only partial after a prolonged closure."
Mehdi Moslehi, a UK-based Iranian risk consultant who worked in the oil sector for a decade, agreed that the timescale of any extraction shutdown would be important.
"If production at a well is stopped for a short period, say between one week up to two or maximum three weeks, then it can be brought back into operation again," he told RFE/RL's Radio Farda.
"But if a well remains shut for a long period -- especially because the oil wells in southern Iran mostly have high sulfur content, and depending on how old the well is -- there will be serious problems. Reservoir pressure may drop."
A Race Against Time?
Of course, Iran may not need to shut down production. But data released this week suggested that it's now a race against time.
A recent report by Kpler, a commodities and shipping analytics company, said "no confirmed tanker has exited the US blockade zone" since Washington began enforcing the blockade on April 13.
"Several tankers passed through the Strait of Hormuz but failed to clear the US blockade, which sits further south between the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea," it said.
This is why Iran's oil stores are filling up. Kpler estimated Iran had about 12 days spare capacity. Some analysts have suggested a time window of 2-3 weeks.
"Before, we could say time was on the side of the Islamic republic. But now we can't really say that anymore," Kpler analyst Homayoun Falakshahi told Radio Farda. "The rules of the game have become somewhat balanced."
Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, preventing oil exports by other Gulf nations, is also exerting pressure. It has led to a spike in oil prices and sent supply shocks through the world economy, hitting not only oil but also gas and other vital commodities.
As this goes on, the global pain increases.
"Right now this is a game of endurance, of seeing which side gives in more in the short term…. Prices around $100–110, even up to $120 per barrel are still levels the global economy can tolerate. However, if the Strait of Hormuz is closed in the coming days or weeks, prices will probably rise further," Falakshahi said.
On April 29, Brent crude rose sharply to $115 per barrel following a report in The Wall Street Journal that US President Donald Trump had told aides to prepare for an "extended" blockade.
In the meantime, Iran is seeking other ways to ease storage pressures. There's talk of delivering oil by train to China, which is Iran's biggest customer by far. But this would be more expensive and in smaller volumes than by tanker and so have limited impact.
Iran's next step may be further escalation.
Many other Persian Gulf producers have been able to alleviate the storage pressures Iran is facing by using other routes, such as Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline to the Red Sea. Amid curtailed output this has helped keep the pumpjacks jerking and the trunk lines pressurized.
Iran could mobilize its Houthi proxy forces in Yemen to attack this route, by targeting shipping in the Bab al-Mandab Strait, through which roughly 10 percent of the world's seaborne oil passes.
But this would also entail risk for Tehran. In recent weeks, the United States has added to its massive military presence in the region and indicated the possibility of a return to hostilities.
"The feeling around the market is that something's going to get done on the deal front between now and the next three weeks," Innes said.
- By Kian Sharifi
Iran's Conservative Camp Split Over US Talks To End War
In the face of a devastating US-Israeli bombing campaign, Iran's rival political factions cast aside their differences to unite behind the country's decision-makers.
But since a cease-fire with the United States came into force on April 8, deep-rooted political differences in the Islamic republic have spilled out into the open.
The public rupture over Tehran's attempts to negotiate an end to the two-month-long war has pitted Iran's small but vocal faction of ultraconservatives against more moderate conservatives, a confrontation that has been laid bare in the halls of parliament and on the front pages of state-affiliated media.
But analysts warn the fracture is not ideological. The main differences, they say, are not even over whether to cut a deal with the United States, but when to pursue peace and what concessions to make.
The dispute crystalized in the days following the first round of talks between delegations led by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf and US Vice President JD Vance in Pakistan on April 11-12.
What had largely been friction behind closed doors erupted into an open media war when the Tasnim news agency -- linked to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) -- published an editorial on April 25 mocking ultraconservatives, comparing their expectations for the talks to a "magic beanstalk."
Ultraconservatives have said Iran should not make any concessions to the United States, including over its nuclear program, a nonstarter for Washington. They also insist any peace deal should extend to Iran's regional proxies and must ensure the lifting of all sanctions against Tehran.
In a separate piece, Tasnim accused Raja News, a website close to the ultraconservatives, of causing "discord" and playing into US President Donald Trump's hand by criticizing the Iranian negotiating team. Days earlier, Trump had said there was "tremendous infighting and confusion" within Iran's leadership.
Ali Afshari, an Iranian political analyst based in Washington who spoke to RFE/RL's Radio Farda, cautioned against reading too much into the public confrontation.
"I don't think we yet have evidence that this dispute represents a large structural fracture," he said.
The US-Israeli bombing campaign launched on February 28 has decapitated much of Iran's political and military leadership. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the longtime supreme leader, was assassinated and succeeded by his son, Mojtaba, who has yet to appear in public since his ascent to power.
The primary target of the ultraconservatives is Qalibaf, the country's top negotiator with the United States. Politicians linked to the Paydari Front, an influential ultraconservative faction aligned with former presidential candidate Saeed Jalili, accused the negotiating team of violating the red lines set by the new supreme leader.
Mahmoud Nabavian, a lawmaker affiliated with Paydari who accompanied the delegation to Pakistan, said talks were "pure damage" and discussing limits to Iran's nuclear program was a "strategic mistake."
Iran's parliament on April 27 voted on a statement expressing support for the negotiating team. Only seven of the 261 lawmakers, all prominent Paydari figures, refused to sign.
"Iran's oil is selling for double the pre-war price," Nabavian wrote on X the next day, calling on "cowards" to join the public whom he suggested did not back the talks. The war has rattled international energy markets and upended the global economy, and hard-liners appear hopeful this will ultimately force Washington to make concessions.
Afshari said the divide among ultraconservatives and more moderate conservatives is over the timing of peace talks.
The ultraconservatives want to continue the war and negotiate from a position of strength, he said. By contrast, Qalibaf and other more moderate conservatives want to end the war now and secure a deal while they still can.
"The disagreement exists at this level, but it doesn't go so far that anyone in the [ultraconservative] bloc is advocating for no deal at all," Afshari argued.
Political differences in Iran have been exacerbated by the absence of Mojtaba Khamenei, who is living in hiding and is reportedly gravely wounded. He has minimal contact with Iranian officials, according to reports.
"The lack of a decisive central authority due to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei's absence has likely allowed these disputes to escalate into the public domain rather than remain contained within regime channels," the Institute for the Study of War, a US-based think tank, wrote in a report on April 28.
Reza Jamali of RFE/RL's Radio Farda contributed to this report.
Iran, US Locked In Strategic 'Staring Contest' Over Hormuz, Says Former CENTCOM Official Joe Buccino
WASHINGTON -- The US Navy's blockade of Iranian ports, now in its third week, has stopped almost all of the country's maritime trade, including key oil exports. But it has also ratcheted up tensions between the two sides as they hold sporadic peace negotiations.
RFE/RL spoke with former US Central Command (CENTCOM) Communications Director and retired US Army Colonel Joe Buccino on April 27 to discuss the escalating situation and the strategic "staring contest" now defining the region.
Colonel Buccino also served as a spokesman for Secretary of Defense James Mattis during US President Donald Trump's first term and is the author of When Every Word Counts: How to Earn Trust, Command Attention, and Communicate Clearly in Any Situation.
RFE/RL: How would you describe the current US naval posture in the Strait of Hormuz, and what does the situation tell us about where this conflict stands right now?
Joe Buccino: It's a bit of a stalemate. Both sides feel like they have leverage, and I think both sides are right to feel that way. It seems the Trump administration does not feel time pressure; they don't feel a need to cave on any of their objectives at the moment. Iran probably feels the same way.
RFE/RL: We're seeing reduced traffic through the strait, with only limited vessel movement. There are also reports that Iran is allowing some ships through under specific conditions, even demanding payment in its own currency. How do you interpret that?
Buccino: Iran feels they have control of this critical body of water and that they can maintain it for the coming months. They will continue to use this as leverage over the Trump administration.
In Tehran's view, they are adding economic, psychological, and economic warfare pressure. They are claiming there are mines in the strait, although we don't really know if they remain, where they are, or what kind they are.
It is an interesting snapshot into how Iran intends to continue adjudicating this war.
RFE/RL: From a strategic standpoint, how central is the strait to Iran's leverage, and how does the United States factor that into its planning?
Buccino: When this conflict began in late February, the strait was open. Now it is effectively closed, and that shift matters globally.
Iran understands this creates economic pressure far beyond the region; oil markets, global trade, and energy security are all affected. At the same time, the US has deployed significant naval power, including three carrier strike groups -- more than at any point in the region since 2003. What you have now is essentially a staring contest: each side waiting to see who yields first.
RFE/RL: Is time working in favor of the United States or Iran?
Buccino: Both parties feel like time is on their side. Iran is looking at US domestic politics: the oil prices in the US and Europe, the polls, and the fact that we are five months away from the midterms. All of that goes into their calculus.
Meanwhile, Trump has been clearer than ever that he doesn't feel this pressure to move quickly. He feels he has the opportunity to deliver a "knockout blow" regarding Iran's nuclear capability. That has always been critical in his mind. Outwardly, at least, he isn't feeling the pressure of the clock.
RFE/RL: How are Iran's low-cost capabilities shaping US naval operations? What are commanders most focused on in protecting forces?
Buccino: The risks in the Strait of Hormuz often come from weapon systems that do not cost very much.
Think about drifting mines; these are WWI-style "dumb" mines. They aren't moored to anything; they just drift on the surface. We don't know where they are, and Iran doesn't either. They blend in with debris, wood, and fishing equipment.
Then you have the "three guys in a truck" scenario: coastal firing points shooting drones that cost only a few thousand dollars. They fly so low to the water that they are hard to pick up on radar. By the time you see them, they are on top of you.
Despite our cutting-edge assets, these are great risks. But we are publicly committed to holding this blockade until Iran opens the strait and agrees to discontinue its uranium enrichment.
RFE/RL: A recent US pilot rescue mission deep inside Iran drew significant attention. What lessons from such operations apply to the current situation?
Buccino: It demonstrates that we can move Special Forces and Marine assets into the actual territory of Iran to provide force protection.
If you think about an operation to remove enriched uranium from the country, that would require massive resources -- ground forces, overhead cover, and earth-moving equipment -- all under fire. That rescue operation proves we have the capacity to do this through the coordination of Central Command and Special Operations.
RFE/RL: Iran is also engaging internationally, including with China, Russia. How much does that relationship matter here?
Buccino: If any country has outside influence, it's probably China, though even that is limited. There is talk of China sending its newest air defense systems to Iran, which could identify an F-15, something Iran currently cannot do.
RFE/RL: Russian President Vladimir Putin met with the Iranian foreign minister on April 27, and reports indicate he "received a message" from the new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei. Does that signal anything important?
Buccino: There is a reason you haven't seen the ayatollah or even heard his voice lately. He is likely two miles underground, under concrete, communicating via slips of paper. It is hard to get information to him, and hard to get decisions out.
The Iranian leadership is fragmented between the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), the parliament, and the mullahs. There is a massive time lag because you have to wait for word back from Mojtaba Khamenei.
I was never under the illusion this would take a few weeks. The regime's priority is protecting the ayatollah, and that complicates any potential negotiations.
RFE/RL: If tensions escalate further, what indicators are you watching for?
Buccino: I'll be looking to see if we move on Kharg Island. To me, that is the natural progression.
We've already "softened" the island by destroying most of its air defense systems. We have the 82nd Airborne Division in theater ready to conduct an aerial assault to seize the oil. If you seize that oil, you hurt the regime's ability to pay and resupply the IRGC.
If the IRGC stops getting paid and runs out of ammunition, they might start putting down their weapons. That is where you deliver the knockout blow. We are a long way from that -- we are still hoping for a negotiated end to the uranium program -- but if we reach that goal, this will all have been worth it.
The interview has been edited for clarity and length.
US To Send Witkoff, Kushner To Pakistan For New Talks, But Iran Participation Uncertain
WASHINGTON -- The United States will send a delegation to Pakistan this weekend for a new round of talks with Iranian officials, the White House said, as Washington tests whether a fragile cease-fire can translate into diplomatic progress.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on April 24 that the delegation would include President Donald Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner, and would depart for Islamabad on April 25.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi arrived in Islamabad late on April 24, but there was no immediate confirmation from Tehran that he or other officials would meet with the US delegation.
The spokesman for Iran's Foreign Ministry said Iranian officials did not plan to meet with the US team, although it was unclear if the statement represented the view of the government.
"No meeting is planned to take place between Iran and the US. Iran's observations would be conveyed to Pakistan," spokesman Esmail Baqaei wrote on X.
However, The Washington Post quoted an unnamed US official as saying Witkoff and Kushner had received confirmation from Tehran that Araqchi would meet with them.
US and Iranian teams held peace talks in Islamabad on April 11-12, but they ended without an agreement and a second round that had been expected earlier this week did not materialize.
US Vice President JD Vance, who led the US delegation then, was not traveling with Witkoff and Kushner but would be on "standby" and "will be willing to dispatch to Pakistan if we feel it's a necessary use of his time," Leavitt said.
Trump, Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio "will be waiting here in the United States for updates," she said.
Leavitt said Washington had seen "some progress" from the Iranian side in recent days, adding that it was Tehran that requested the new meeting.
"Iranians want to talk," she said. "We're hopeful that it will be a productive conversation and move the ball forward toward a deal," she said.
Trump later told Reuters that the Iranians were "making an offer" aimed at satisfying U.S. demands and "we'll have to see" how it looks.
Trump has said that in any deal to end hte US-Israeli war with Iran, which began on February 28, Iran must give up its enriched uranium and allow free passage through the Strait of Hormuz, a cruicial oil and gas transit artery that Tehran has effectovely blocked through most of the conflict.
Asked who the United States was negotiating with, Trump said: "I don't want to say that, but we're dealing with the people that are in charge now," Reuters reported.
Tempered Expectations
Vance remaining in Washington unless negotiations reach a breakthrough stage is a decision analysts said reflects tempered expectations.
Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East analyst at the risk management company RANE, described the move as a sign Washington is “in a reactive diplomatic state.”
“They're waiting for the Iranians to make some sort of first move or gesture,” Bohl told RFE/RL. “Sending a lower-level delegation suggests they want to test whether momentum is real without overcommitting political capital.”
“This is more of a listening session than a negotiation,” Jason Brodsky, policy director at the nonprofit United Against Nuclear Iran, told RFE/RL. “If the two parties were close to inking a deal, then senior leadership on both sides would be in the room.”
Bohl said the United States is unlikely to soften its core demands, including significant Iranian nuclear concessions and unilateral steps to ease tensions before sanctions relief is considered.
For analysts, the White House's statement that Tehran initiated the expected talks raised questions about whether Iran is seeking a genuine diplomatic off-ramp or simply buying time.
Bohl argued that while Iran faces long-term economic pressure, its short-term strategy favors delay.
“There is urgency economically, but not in the immediate sense,” he said. “Iran can afford to drag out talks as long as it avoids renewed military escalation.”
Brodsky offered a slightly different view, pointing to the strain of US pressure following weeks of air strikes on Iran, which ended with a cease-fire that took effect on April 8 and that Trump extended before it was due to expire on April 22.
“The noose is tightening with the US naval blockade,” he said. “That sharpens the choices facing Iran’s leadership.”
The US has maintained that its blockade of Iranian ports remains fully in place, with Trump calling it “100 percent effective.” Iran says the blockade is a violation of the cease-fire and demanded it be lifted.
Lebanon And Beyond
The diplomatic push comes amid a fragile calm in the region, including a cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon, home of Iran-backed Hezbollah -- but Lebanon's Health Ministry said six people were killd in Israeli strikes on southern Lebanon on April 24.
Bohl said that de-escalation on that front is critical to sustaining talks.
“It’s one of the few ways the US can build trust,” he said, noting deep Iranian skepticism about US intentions given continued American military deployments in the region.
At the same time, divisions remain between Washington and Israel over how to handle Hezbollah -- a militant group and political party that controls much of southern Lebanon. It is considered a terrorist organization by the United States, while the European Union has only blacklisted its armed wing.which Tehran backs.
“The Israelis want to press their advantage,” Bohl said. “The US is more willing to preserve the cease-fire to keep diplomacy alive.”
Brodsky predicted Hezbollah will remain a destabilizing force regardless of the talks.
“As long as the current regime is in power in Iran, Hezbollah will continue to be a problem,” he said.
Araqchi is to travel to Oman and Russia following his visit to Pakistan. Bohl described the regional outreach as a mix of damage control and strategic hedging.
“They’re shoring up support,” he said. “Oman is about repairing regional relationships, while Russia is critical for economic and military backing if the confrontation drags on.”
Brodsky said the visits would likely focus on practical concerns, including the Strait of Hormuz and securing political support from Moscow.
Russian, Chinese Lifelines Keeping Tehran's Military Reconstruction Alive, Experts Warn
WASHINGTON -- With tensions high and the prospects for a deal to end the US-Israeli war with Iran uncertain, analysts say a "two-way street" of support from Russia and China is a crucial element of Tehran's ability to weather the effects of weeks of air attacks and keep its military machine running after severe losses.
At a forum hosted by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy on April 23, experts described deepening partnerships that have helped Iran replenish its military, improve targeting, and blunt Western operations during the conflict.
"A decisive factor in the future of this contest will be Iran's ability to resupply and reconstitute its own military capabilities," said Grant Rumley, the institute's senior fellow and director of its program on Great Power Competition and the Middle East.
"Tehran's backers are willing to provide some level of support to keep the regime in power," he added.
Rumley, a former Pentagon official who served in both the first Trump administration and the Biden administration as an adviser for Middle East policy, said the central question now is whether that external support will prove decisive as Iran seeks to rearm and reposition itself in preparation for what's next, whether it's peace or more warfare.
A 'Two-Way Street' With Moscow
While Iranian officials have long emphasized self-reliance, panelists said battlefield evidence points to a far more interconnected war effort, particularly with Russia.
Nicole Grajewski, an assistant professor at Sciences Po and a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the Russia-Iran relationship has evolved far beyond the simple purchase of hardware.
"The relationship is not only based on components.... It's also based on learning and sharing data between each other," said Grajewski, the author of a recent book on Russian-Iranian ties.
She noted that the "signatures" of Russian drone tactics, refined during the war in Ukraine, have surfaced in Iran's recent operations. "You see some of the signatures of Russian swarm elements...and Iran actually incorporating that in this recent war."
Beyond tactics, Grajewski highlighted the critical role of "offshore" intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) support -- support from abroad.
She noted that Russia has reportedly provided Iran with satellite imagery and "damage assessments," enabling Tehran to constantly improve its strikes against US and regional targets.
China's 'Low-Cost' Strategic Play
If Moscow provides the tactical blueprint, Beijing appears to be providing the industrial and technological backbone.
Hasan Alhasan, a senior fellow for Middle East Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), said Chinese assistance spans so-called dual-use components, such as rocket fuel ingredients, and sophisticated satellite data.
"There are multiple indications that China has been providing Iran with various forms of military support...that support may have had a tangible impact on Iranian military performance," Alhasan said.
He pointed to a Chinese company using AI to analyze satellite imagery of US assets at Prince Sultan Air Base in Riyadh just days before a "devastating" Iranian attack.
For Beijing, the conflict serves a dual purpose. "China does here see a low-cost opportunity to entangle the US militarily on the strategic level in Iran and then, tactically speaking, test some of its capabilities against the United States in a real conflict environment," Alhasan said.
Endurance and Geography
Matthew Tavares, a defense analyst and former Pentagon official with nearly two decades of experience in Russia strategy, said the revitalization of the Russian defense industrial base has directly benefited Iran.
"The Alabuga facility not only is producing equipment based on Iranian designs, but is improving on that equipment," Tavares said of a compound in Russia's Tatarstan region that includes a drone assembly plant, adding that he believes contractual arrangements likely allow for these systems to be sent back to Iran if the regime is attacked.
Tavares warned the conflict has shifted into a "factory versus factory" war and said Iran and its backers are producing inexpensive precision weapons systems that can "wear out" the "expensive, exquisite systems" favored by the United States and its Persian Gulf partners.
Despite the influx of external support, the experts cautioned that Tehran's own strategic posture remains the foundation of its survival.
Alhasan noted that Iran's ability to hold the Strait of Hormuz "hostage" and its high tolerance for "punishment" are indigenous strengths that external powers only augment.
"Iran's biggest assets during this war have been, on the one hand, its endurance...and then, on the other hand, its ability to leverage its systems and geography," Alhasan concluded.
Zelenskyy In Saudi Arabia For Defense Talks As Russia Continues To Pound Ukraine
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrived in Saudi Arabia for security talks, marking his second visit to the region since the start of the US-Israeli war with Iran, now under cease-fire, as Russia continued to pound Ukraine with deadly strikes.
"Today, we are advancing our agreements with Saudi Arabia in the areas of security, energy, and infrastructure. It is important that the strengthening is mutual," Zelenskyy wrote on X on April 24.
The Ukrainian president's visit comes almost a month after Kyiv and Riyadh signed a defense cooperation agreement, as waves of relentless retaliatory strikes from Iran targeted civilian and energy infrastructure across the Middle East.
Having previously secured a number of bilateral agreements with European countries -- such as joint drone construction with Germany -- since the first Shahed drones struck the Gulf, Kyiv has sought to bring its battle-proven technologies and military expertise to the region.
Shahed drone technology, which originated in Iran, has long become central to Russia's domestic drone production, as Tehran supplied Moscow with military equipment and know-how during the first years of its full-scale war against Ukraine.
Russia has since often launched around 100 Shahed-type drones at Ukraine at a time. In response, Kyiv has developed cost-effective interceptor drones, saying the technology allows it to cut off about 90 percent of incoming drones.
Both Tehran and Moscow have been publicly skeptical about how useful Kyiv's support to the Gulf countries would be, with Iranian envoy to Ukraine calling it "nothing more than a joke and a showy gesture."
Separately, US President Donald Trump said Zelenskyy was the last person he would ask for help in Washington's military efforts in Iran, despite reports that the United States had held talks with Ukraine on the matter.
Days prior to Zelenskyy's latest visit to the Saudi Arabia, Reuters cited five sources familiar with the matter, saying the United States had introduced Ukrainian drones at its key air base in Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile, on its own front lines, Ukraine has continued to suffer deadly Russian air attacks, which have occurred almost every day over the past week.
According to regional Governor Serhiy Lysak, a married couple, both 75 years old, were killed in the attack on the Ukraine's major southern port city of Odesa on April 24, adding 17 other people were injured.
A local Odesa resident told RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service that she was covered in blood after an explosion blew out a window and its frame in her apartment.
"The explosion blew a window and a frame right onto me…. Everything was falling. I was frightened," she said at the scene of the aftermath.
Separately, Moscow and Kyiv reported that 193 Russian and Ukrainian prisoners of war were swapped on April 24. Zelenskyy said those who returned to Ukraine included soldiers, border guards, and police who had been injured or faced criminal charges in Russia.
In his comment to RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service, the country's ombudsman, Dmytro Lubinets, said those returned home had been held in Russia's Chechnya region.
Lubinets added that most of them had not been confirmed as prisoners by the International Committee of the Red Cross, and that one of them had been considered missing.
With reporting by Reuters
- By Firuza Azizi and
- Sahar Lewal
Afghan Refugees In Qatar Wait For Relocation After US Transfer Deadline Passes
Hundreds of Afghan refugees remain in limbo at the As-Sayliyah camp in Qatar awaiting information about the countries they may be transferred to after a US State Department deadline to move them passed last month.
In interviews with RFE/RL's Radio Azadi, several of those waiting said they were told that the camp near the capital of Doha would close by March 31 and that they might be transferred to other countries.
In the meantime, the uncertainty of not knowing where they may be headed looms over them, making it impossible to know what their future holds or if they even may be returned to Afghanistan despite the perils they could face.
"The authorities here told us that As-Sayliyah camp will be closed on March 31, and according to the newly announced US policy, you may be transferred to another country," one Afghan refugee, who did not want their name to be published and has been living in the As-Sayliyah camp for the past 15 months, told Radio Azadi.
"People were waiting until March 31. Even after that, when asked, they said there was no news yet. People still ask, which are these second and third countries that we can go to? We are not told which countries they might send us to."
Fleeing After Cooperating With US Forces
According to some American officials and Afghans living in the camp, about 1,100 people are currently living at the As-Sayliyah camp. Many of the refugees at the camp are civilians who cooperated with US forces during 20 years war; more than half are women and children.
They had expected to end up in the United States after international forces left Afghanistan in August 2021. Evacuation flights got them out of the country as the Taliban regained control of the war-torn country.
Those hopes were dashed, however, after all immigration requests relating to Afghanistan were halted in November 2025 after an Afghan national shot two members of the National Guard, one of whom died a day after the shooting near the White House.
A spokesperson from the US State Department told RFE/RL that work continues on "voluntary resettlement options" for the refugees at the camp and that relocation to a third country "is a positive resolution that provides safety for these remaining people to start a new life outside of Afghanistan while upholding the safety and security of the American people."
The spokesperson did not specify any third countries that could be included in the program, but The New York Times reported on April 21 that the Trump administration is in talks to send many of them to the Democratic Republic of Congo. The report cited an aid worker briefed on the plan.
Some media outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, say Washington has held talks with two African and one Asian countries about taking in Afghan refugees living in the camp, which Qatar has reportedly asked to be closed.
US Democrat lawmakers Gregory W. Meeks, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Sydney Kamlager-Dove, ranking member of the Subcommittee on South and Central Asia, issued a statement condemning the situation saying the administration "has failed to uphold America’s word to these Afghan allies."
They added that "we made a promise to protect them after the Taliban’s takeover. Abandoning that commitment not only betrays our allies, it sends a dangerous message to future partners that U.S. promises cannot be trusted."
Another Afghan refugee, who did not want their name to be published, said they have been waiting in the As-Sayliyah camp in Qatar for the past 18 months.
"They told us in this camp that they would transfer us to a third country by March 31, but we have not been transferred yet, and they have not promised anything, and they have not said anything," the person said.
"We spoke to the officials, including the head of this camp, and they say that whenever there is an order, news, or instruction from Washington, we will share it with you. They say, for now, we are waiting and we will see what happens."
Rwanda Option
Meanwhile, a number of Afghan refugees who were previously living in an Abu Dhabi camp say that 27 people were transferred to Rwanda in August last year.
They say that they were promised that they would be transferred from there to another country, but that since their arrival, no action has been taken.
"It has been about eight months since we were transferred from Abu Dhabi to Rwanda. They offered us five countries to transfer us to within three months. These countries were the US, Canada, Australia, and France," one of the Afghan asylum seekers told Radio Azadi.
"They said that if there was a problem, they would send us to Brazil for a while and then to other countries, but so far they have kept us here. When we ask them, they say that they cannot do anything," the asylum seeker, who asked not to be named for fear of reprisal, added.
The State Department spokesperson told RFE/RL that while Afghan nationals at the Qatar camp do not have a "viable pathway" to the United States, voluntary repatriation remains an option, with Washington offering a stipend to those who take the option.
The Taliban government says it is committed to implementing a general amnesty but reports from the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and other agencies show that a number of soldiers and people who cooperated with the Americans during the republican government have faced imprisonment, torture, and even death threats -- something the Taliban has denied.
"The answer has been the same for four years. Bring them here [to the United States]. They're vetted. They earned it on the ground, in uniform, next to our people," said Shawn VanDiver, the head of AfghanEvac, a group dedicated to help coordinate relocation and resettlement efforts of Afghans impacted by the US mission in Afghanistan.
The US government has said that no one will be forcibly returned, nor has it released how many people have accepted the offer to receive money and return to Afghanistan.
Camp As-Sayliyah was established after the Taliban retook power in 2021 to house Afghans who had cooperated with US forces and were awaiting transfer to the United States.
Some members of Congress have called the closure of the camp a "deep betrayal.”
The State Department has said that Afghan refugees were not properly vetted under the Biden administration, which AfghanEvac and other advocacy and rights groups dispute.
With reporting by Alex Raufoglu in Washington
Rachel Ehrenfeld: Why Targeting Iran's 'Shadow Economy' Hits The IRGC Where It Hurts
WASHINGTON -- With a cease-fire in the US-Israeli war on Iran due to expire on April 22, US actions at sea are drawing renewed attention to a central issue: how deeply Iran's military establishment is embedded in the country's economy.
The disabling on April 19 of the M/V Touska, a container ship reportedly linked to Iranian trade networks, highlighted the control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) over key industries, from banking and energy to shipping and telecommunications.
In an interview with RFE/RL, Rachel Ehrenfeld, director of the American Center for Democracy and the Economic Warfare Institute and author of multiple books on terrorism financing, said the IRGC's economic reach is not incidental but rather a crucial foundation of its power.
She argued that targeting infrastructure and commercial activity directly affects the regime's military capabilities.
RFE/RL: You've long argued that the IRGC's dominance over Iran's economy is central to its military power. How significant is the US seizure of the Touska in that context?
Rachel Ehrenfeld: It depends who owns the ship, which foundation. The IRGC has the biggest foundation in Iran. When Ayatollah [Ruhollah] Khomeini started in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution and took over Iran, he thought about how to make sure the economy would flourish and that it would be resilient and protected from outside sanctions, for example.
So what do you do? You create foundations, and different elements in the revolutionary forces of Iran were allocated different portions of the economy. As a charity organization overseeing charities, they named them different names, and the biggest is the IRGC.
He decreed that this would be the system.... [And former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei] in 2004 issued what was essentially a fatwa or directive through Iranian legislative bodies, and it was actually enshrined in law. This is the structure that allowed the IRGC to develop Iran's shadow economy. It is part of the economy, but it is not accountable. They do not pay taxes. In Iran, everybody has to pay taxes.
This helps them circumvent international sanctions, because you have a charitable organization sending money here or there. They are using all kinds of financial institutions and banking systems all over the world.
Within the big foundation -- they call them "bonyads" in Farsi -- they have subdivisions, and those parts are also involved. So now they control banking, real estate, telecommunications, transportation, mining, energy, defense, chemicals, petrochemicals -- you name it, they have possession of it.
I do not know if this [ship] belongs to the IRGC or not, but since their system is such, everybody should actually know.... To my surprise, the Americans -- the administration -- have really not explained how the economy is working there.
And that is to their detriment; they are getting a lot of criticism because, "Oh, you are going to destroy the infrastructure." Well, they own the infrastructure, most of it. There is private, civil commerce, and some civil economy, but it is not large, and it also can be taken away easily by the regime.
In the last couple of weeks, with the closing of the Internet by the regime, many people who had private businesses -- civil, civic businesses -- were using the Internet to do business. This was closed down. It cost billions. People cannot communicate and cannot do business.
So destroying most of the large infrastructure, including shipping, would be part of the forces -- armed forces, if you want -- even if they are not supposed to be armed merchant ships that are serving the purposes of the Iranian regime for war, not for peace.
RFE/RL: You described the IRGC as operating a "state within a state." Given recent leadership shifts, how much of Iran's economy does the IRGC control today, and is it even possible to separate civilian governance from military power?
Ehrenfeld: Well, sort of. The civilian, whatever civilian there is, is under the thumb of the IRGC. From the last data that I could actually surmise, they control something around two-thirds of the economy.
This goes back to what Khamenei, and before him Khomeini, called a "resistance economy." They wanted to create an economy that is resistant to the enemy.
People should know about it so they will stop criticizing when infrastructure is hit, because these are all serving the IRGC, which is the strongest force in Iran.
RFE/RL: Reports suggest a "military council" has sidelined the Pezeshkian administration. Does this indicate the IRGC has effectively consolidated control over the Iranian state?
Ehrenfeld: It looks like it did, because we heard one day that the straits (Strait of Hormuz) were open, and then immediately afterward, a couple of hours later, no -- they were closed. So this clearly indicates there is some power struggle going on.
But as far as I understand, the IRGC is really the group that is running the regime.
RFE/RL: By using disabling fire against a container ship, is Washington signaling that it now views the IRGC's commercial fleet as a legitimate military target?
Ehrenfeld: Of course it is, because you do not know what they are carrying. What they are carrying can be arms, can be ammunition, can be something that will solve their needs.
Even if it is something like dates from somewhere in the desert, the money from the sales will go to the pockets of the IRGC. Everything that is moving there now is able to move because the IRGC is allowing it or intending it to move.
RFE/RL: The Touska was reportedly carrying dual-use goods. In your research, how commonly does the IRGC conceal military-related materials within civilian shipments?
Ehrenfeld: They are notorious for dual use. And again, even if it was something that they can sell, or something that they can refurbish and use for something else, it is all about the value -- the financial value.
How much does it cost? They sell it, they make money, or it saves them money. So everything that comes and goes is benefiting them.
RFE/RL: You've argued that targeting infrastructure can be more effective than direct military confrontation. Are current US actions an example of that strategy being put into practice?
Ehrenfeld: If the United States -- and hopefully other countries, not only Western countries, but also Iran's neighbors -- implement the blockade properly and stick to the sanctions, Iran's economy will collapse, not before long.
RFE/RL: There are reports of a "selective blockade" near Larak Island. Does the IRGC's deep involvement in the economy shield it from such pressure or make it more vulnerable?
Ehrenfeld: They are also threatening commercial shipping in other places, like near Bab al-Mandab. They are trying really to disrupt international maritime shipping.
They have to be prevented from doing it. This kind of blackmail cannot be allowed.
RFE/RL: As we approach the April 22 cease-fire deadline, how do you assess the regime's economic endgame? Are there signs of strain?
Ehrenfeld: I do not know. The IRGC is running it, and this is a radical, ideological regime. Their goal is to cause as much chaos as possible, to kill as many "infidels" as possible, and to die for their beliefs so that the 12th Imam can come.
When you believe in such an ideology, which most people in the world do not understand, I do not know what will prevail. But the optimal thing that can happen is regime change.
RFE/RL: If the cease-fire lapses without progress, what do you expect next?
Ehrenfeld: I think that military power should bring this regime to its knees -- eliminate as many leaders as possible or force the regime to disappear.
I hope the people of Iran will go out to the streets and force change. There are many people who are dissatisfied. We have seen demonstrations, and we know that the IRGC and Basij have been killing demonstrators.
Many people do not want this. The leadership has been stealing billions, enriching themselves, and sending their families abroad while ordinary people suffer.
RFE/RL: What are the most likely next moves from Washington?
Ehrenfeld: Do you know anyone who knows what President Trump thinks? I have no idea. But I think he will find a way to do what he wants and what he promised.
RFE/RL: If talks fail, should IRGC-controlled infrastructure such as ports be primary targets?
Ehrenfeld: It is difficult to get rid of [the IRGC] because they are divided into cells throughout the country. It is not just about hitting headquarters.
But the infrastructure has to be hit very hard. And there should be a blockade, freezing Iranian money anywhere it can be found -- in foreign banks and financial institutions -- really starving them economically so they will have to change course.
RFE/RL: Finally, does this moment represent a broader shift in how economic warfare is being used against state actors like Iran?
Ehrenfeld: There will be many lessons learned from this war. Economic warfare has many stages and can help a great deal, especially since Iran's economy was already in a bad situation before the war.
If you want to win, you have to use the best strategies: economic and kinetic warfare together. Hopefully not for long, because both hurt innocent people as well.
And that is very unfortunate. But this regime has been in place for decades, and those trying to stop its expansion cannot simply be blamed for taking action now.
Prospects For New Round Of US-Iran Talks Clouded As Cease-Fire Nears Deadline
The prospects for a new round of face-to-face peace talks between the United States and Iran remained unclear amid confusion over the US negotiators' plans and uncertainty over whether Tehran would agree to take part.
US President Donald Trump told the New York Post on April 20 that a delegation led by Vice President JD Vance was due to arrive in Pakistan "tonight," but there was no immediate confirmation that Vance had left the United States.
"We're supposed to have the talks…. So I would assume at this point nobody's playing games," the Post quoted Trump as saying in a brief interview it said was held shortly after 9 a.m. Eastern time (3 p.m. CET).
"They're heading over now," Trump was quoted as saying. While he did not specify whether that meant the delegation was already in the air, he said, "They'll be there tonight, [Islamabad] time."
However, sources told RFE/RL on condition of anonymity that the plane Vance normally uses, Air Force Two, remained on the ground at Joint Base Andrews outside Washington a few hours later.
Reuters, citing two unnamed sources, reported that Vance had not yet departed, and several media reports cited sources as saying he would do so soon. The time in Islamabad is nine hours ahead of Washington.
Trump had said a day earlier that US negotiators would travel to Islamabad for talks and would arrive on April 20. But neither Iran nor mediator Pakistan confirmed at that time that talks were planned.
"We have no plans for the next round of negotiation, and no decision has been made in this regard," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei said several hours before Trump spoke to the Post.
Later, Reuters cited an unnamed senior Iranian official as saying Tehran was "positively reviewing" its participation in potential peace talks with the United States but that no final decision had been made.
Pakistan, which hosted and mediated an initial round of face-to-face talks in Islamabad on April 11-12, has been trying to organize another meeting. The first round ended with the United States and Iran blaming each other for the failure to reach an agreement.
The uncertainty over the talks comes as a two-week cease-fire between Iran and the United States is due to expire on April 22. The sides have accused each other of violating the fragile truce.
Even if the talks in Islamabad proceed, public statements indicate Tehran and Washington remain far apart on key issues, including Iran's nuclear program and its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz, which the Islamic republic has effectively closed since the US-Israeli bombing campaign began on February 28.
Cease-Fire 'Violations'
During his weekly press briefing, Baqaei said the United States was not serious about pursuing diplomacy, citing what it called "violations" of the truce.
He said a US attack on an Iranian cargo ship early on April 19, the ongoing US naval blockade on Iranian ports, and delays in implementing a truce in Lebanon were all "clear violations of the cease-fire."
Trump said US forces intercepted the Iranian-flagged ship as it tried to pass through a US maritime blockade and have "full custody" of it.
Iran's joint military command claimed the move violated the cease-fire and threatened to retaliate "soon" against the "armed piracy," according to state media.
Tehran has said it will not participate in talks if the US blockade of Iranian ports is in effect, while Trump has said it will not be lifted until a peace deal is signed.
Trump repeated that on April 20, writing that "we will not take [the blockade] off...until there is a 'DEAL.'" He also wrote that "things are going very well" in the war and that he is "under no pressure whatsoever" to reach a deal with Iran but that "it will all happen, relatively quickly!”
Iran also reiterated its criticism of the blockade. In a phone call with his Pakistani counterpart, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said Tehran "considered the provocative actions and continuous violations of the cease-fire by the United States, especially threats and aggression against Iranian commercial ships, and contradictory positions and threatening rhetoric against Iran, as a fundamental obstacle to the continuation of the diplomatic process," the Iranian Ministry said on X.
Araqchi said "Iran will take a decision on how to continue the path [after] considering all aspects of the matter," suggesting Tehran was mulling whether to take part in a new face-to-face talks.
Separately, Araqchi told Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov that what he called the "illegal behavior and contradictory positions" of the US were incompatible with diplomacy, Iranian state media reported.
Earlier in the week, there were hopes that the Strait of Hormuz, which usually accounts for around one-fifth of global oil trade, would open after more than a month of being closed as Tehran announced it was open to commercial shipping traffic.
However, Iranian forces fired upon at least three civilian ships, two of which reportedly were Indian and one French-flagged vessel, and announced the reclosing of the strait.
Lebanon Front
Iran also said delays in implementing a cease-fire in Lebanon, where Israel is waging war against Hezbollah, an ally of Tehran, was also a violation of the truce.
Hezbollah is a militant group and political party that controls much of southern Lebanon. It is considered a terrorist organization by the United States, while the European Union has only blacklisted its armed wing.
Israel and Lebanon agreed a separate 10-day cease-fire that went into effect on April 17. The truce included Hezbollah, which entered the war to defend Iran and has fired rockets at Israel.
The cease-fire ended weeks of heavy fighting between Hezbollah and Israel, which invaded southern Lebanon. It was agreed after the United States hosted talks between the Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors to Washington on April 14, the first direct talks between the neighboring countries in decades.
A senior US official told RFE/RL on condition of anonymity that the second round of ambassador-level talks between Israel and Lebanon will take place at the State Department on April 23.
Both sides have both accused each other of violating the truce, and Israeli forces continue to occupy much of the south with the aim of maintaining a buffer zone to shield northern Israel from Hezbollah attacks. Hezbollah has said it maintains the "right to resist" Israeli occupation.
Israel's military on April 20 warned Lebanese civilians against returning to southern Lebanon. But that has not stopped thousands of people displaced in the war from making their way back to their homes.
With reporting by RFE/RL Washington correspondent Alex Raufoglu, Reuters, and AFP
- By RFE/RL
Trump Says US-Iran Deal 'Very Close' After Tehran Declares Strait Of Hormuz Open
Iran said it has opened the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping traffic for the remainder of a 10-day cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon, and US President Donald Trump again said Washington and Tehran could reach a deal to end the war with Iran in the near future.
"We're very close. Looks like it's going to be very good for everybody. And we're very close to having a deal," Trump told the news agency AFP by telephone on April 17. The media outlet Axios quoted Trump as saying, "I think we'll get a deal in the next day or two."
The Strait of Hormuz, which leads to the Persian Gulf and was the conduit for 20 percent of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments before the war began on February 28, will be "completely open" for the duration of the Israel-Lebanon truce, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in a social media post.
The strait had been effectively closed to traffic amid Tehran's strikes at targets around the Middle East, sending oil prices skyrocketing and shaking the global economy. Oil prices dropped sharply and stock prices rose on world markets following the announcement.
The US-brokered 10-day cease-fire Israel-Lebanon took effect on April 16 and can be extended by mutual agreement. Iran has repeatedly said that an end to Israeli attacks on Lebanon, where Israel has been targeting Iran-backed Hezbollah sites since March 2, was a requirement for its own peace negotiations with the United States.
A militant group and political party that controls much of southern Lebanon, Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organization by the United States, while the European Union has blacklisted its only armed wing. A two-week cease-fire agreed by Iran and the United States on April 7 does not include Lebanon.
Shortly after Araqchi's post about the strait, Trump posted a message of gratitude on his Truth Social platform.
"IRAN HAS JUST ANNOUNCED THAT THE STRAIT OF IRAN IS FULLY OPEN AND READY FOR FULL PASSAGE," he wrote in a reference to Hormuz. "THANK YOU!"
"Iran has agreed to never close the Strait of Hormuz again. It will no longer be used as a weapon against the World!" Trump wrote in a subsequent post.
In yet another Truth Social message, Trump said a US blockade on Iranian ports would "remain in full force...until such time as our transaction with Iran is 100% complete." The United States imposed the blockade, aimed at preventing ships from entering or leaving Iranian ports, on April 13.
Iran, however, didn't sound happy about that. Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei said Tehran would take "necessary reciprocal measures" if the blockade continued.
Trump said he expects a resolution of the conflict with Iran will come "very quickly," asserting that "most of the points are already negotiated."
It was part of a string of upbeat comments from Trump on the prospects for a deal to end the war, which is halted by the cease-fire that expires on April 22.
"I think the deal will go very quickly. We're getting along very well with Iran," the Reuters news agency quoted Trump as saying in a phone interview on April 17. He said more talks will be needed to reach a deal and that these would take place "probably over the weekend."
"The Iranians want to meet. They want to make a deal. I think a meeting will probably take place over the weekend. I think we will get a deal in the next day or two," Axios quoted Trump as saying by phone.
In a post on X, the Axios reporter who spoke to Trump cited unnamed senior US officials and "sources knowledgeable on the matter" as saying the United States and Iran have made progress in negotiations on a three-page memorandum of understanding to end the war.
In the brief call with AFP, Trump asserted there were "no sticking points at all" left with Tehran.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, however, a senior Iranian official told Reuters that serious negotiations were required to overcome differences.
Iran hopes a preliminary agreement can be reached in the coming days with Pakistan continuing to mediate and with the possibility of extending the cease-fire to "create space for more talks on lifting sanctions on Iran and securing compensation for war damages," Reuters quoted the official as saying.
A day earlier, Trump said he believed the United States was "very close to making a deal with Iran."
Trump has given few details about a prospective deal with Iran, and Tehran has said even less, but on April 17 the US president repeated his suggestion that Tehran has agreed to give up its stocks of enriched uranium -- which, enriched to a certain level, can be used in nuclear weapons.
"The U.S.A. will get all Nuclear 'Dust'.... No money will exchange hands in any way, shape, or form," Trump said in another post. US news outlet Axios has reported that Washington was considering a $20 billion cash-for-uranium deal.
Reuters cited Trump as saying Washington would work with Iran to recover the enriched uranium and would then bring it to the United States. "We're going to get it together. We're going to go in with Iran, at a nice leisurely pace, and go down and start excavating with big machinery.... We'll bring it back to the United States," he said.
He referred to "nuclear dust" and said it would be retrieved "very soon," Reuters reported, adding: "Trump's mention of 'nuclear dust' is a reference to what he believes remains after the United States and Israel bombed Iran's nuclear installations" in June 2025.
But the news agency quoted the senior Iranian official as saying that "no agreement has been reached on the details of the nuclear issues."
Separately, Trump took an unusually tough tone with Israel, saying that the longtime US ally "will not be bombing Lebanon any longer. They are PROHIBITED from doing so by the U.S.A. Enough is enough!!!"
In a message issued after Iran's announcement that the Strait of Hormuz was open but before Trump's post, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he had agreed to the "temporary cease-fire in Lebanon" at Trump's request but that Israeli forces remained stationed in southern Lebanon to defend against "the near threat."
"There are things we plan to do regarding the remaining rocket threat and the drone threat, which I will not detail here," Netanyahu said. He said Israel still aims to dismantle Hezbollah and that this "requires sustained effort, patience, and endurance, and it requires wise navigation of the diplomatic field."