标签： Asia

A growing transatlantic crisis has erupted over the US-led war on Iran, with major European allies rejecting Washington’s demands to join the conflict and pushing forward independent diplomatic efforts to resolve the closure of the critical Strait of Hormuz. The rift has escalated to the highest levels, with US President Donald Trump openly lambasting European allies for their refusal to back the conflict, threatening to withdraw the United States from the 75-year-old NATO alliance, while the United Kingdom has moved forward with a landmark diplomatic summit excluding the US to de-escalate the crisis.

On Wednesday, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that London would host talks bringing together 35 nations to pursue a diplomatic solution to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic chokepoint through which roughly one-quarter of the world’s global oil supplies transit. The initiative builds on earlier joint efforts by the UK and France to secure unimpeded safe passage for commercial shipping in the waterway, which has been closed amid the ongoing conflict. Starmer emphasized that the gathered nations will collaborate to evaluate every viable diplomatic and political pathway to restore freedom of navigation, secure the release of trapped vessels and seafarers, and restart the flow of critical global commodities through the strait.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps pushed back on the same day, reaffirming that the strait will remain closed to what it describes as the “enemies of this nation,” and asserting full, unchallenged control over the waterway. This statement contradicts repeated claims from Trump that a negotiated end to the war is imminent.

Trump’s aggressive rhetoric toward Europe began a day earlier, when he launched a blistering tirade against European leaders who have refused to join the US-Israeli war on Iran. He called European leaders “cowards,” told them to “go get your own oil,” and warned that the US would no longer come to their defense, stating “you will have to start learning how to fight for yourselves, because the US won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us.”

These remarks came amid confirmed reports that multiple major European nations have restricted access for US military aircraft involved in the Iran campaign to their airspace and military bases. On Monday, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s socialist government, which has publicly condemned the war as illegal, formally closed Spanish airspace to all US aircraft participating in operations against Iran. Italy has also followed suit, labeling the conflict illegal and denying US warplanes permission to refuel and stage from the key Sigonella air base in Sicily. France, meanwhile, issued a formal denial of Trump’s claims that it had blocked US military overflights of its territory.

In a revealing development, The Telegraph reported Wednesday that Trump is actively considering a full US withdrawal from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, describing the alliance as nothing more than a “paper tiger” in comments to the British outlet. Secretary of State Marco Rubio amplified this position in an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity Tuesday evening, arguing that the alliance must be fundamentally reevaluated. “If now we have reached a point where the NATO alliance means that we can’t use those bases, that in fact we can no longer use those bases to defend America’s interests, then NATO is a one-way street,” Rubio added.

Founded in 1949 to counter Soviet influence in Europe, NATO faces an unprecedented existential crisis from Trump’s threats. Any US withdrawal would require congressional approval, a high bar after lawmakers passed 2023 legislation explicitly requiring congressional consent for any US exit from the alliance, a measure directly drafted in response to Trump’s earlier threats to leave the pact.

Starmer, responding to Trump’s comments on NATO, reaffirmed the UK’s unwavering commitment to the alliance during a Wednesday press conference. “NATO is the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen,” the Labour leader said. “It has kept us safe for many decades.”

“Whatever the pressure on me and others, whatever the noise, I’m going to act in the British national interest,” Starmer continued. “And that’s why I have been absolutely clear that this is not our war, and we’re not going to get dragged into it. But I’m equally clear that when it comes to defense and security, and our economic future, we have to have closer ties with Europe.”

Critics have pushed back on Starmer’s claim that the UK is not a participant in the conflict, pointing out that his government continues to allow US forces to use British military bases to launch strikes against Iran. UK Green Party leader Zack Polanski has called on Starmer to demonstrate genuine leadership by ending all British involvement in the war and canceling King Charles III’s upcoming state visit to the United States.

This is not the first time NATO has faced deep internal rifts over US military action. In 1986, France, Italy and Spain denied US overflight access for Ronald Reagan’s bombing of Libya, and a far deeper split opened in 2003 over George W. Bush’s illegal regime-change war in Iraq, which split European allies between participating and opposing nations. Anti-war critics have long argued that NATO has been obsolete since the end of the Cold War 35 years ago, and that its expansion eastward helped provoke Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, while supporters maintain the alliance has been the foundation of post-WWII European peace and prosperity.

Starmer’s call for closer alignment with Europe comes a decade after the UK’s 2016 Brexit referendum, amid growing public regret over the decision to leave the European Union. A September 2025 poll by Best for Britain found more than 60% of respondents now view Brexit as a mistake, with only 11% calling the departure a success.

The escalating tensions come as conflicting claims emerged this week over a potential ceasefire. Trump posted on his Truth Social platform Wednesday claiming Iran “has just asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE!” — a claim immediately denied by official Iranian media. Trump doubled down on his hardline position, echoing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s mantra that the US is “negotiating with bombs,” stating: “We will consider [a ceasefire] when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!”

The human cost of the 33-day US-Israeli bombing campaign has been steep. Iranian officials confirm nearly 2,000 Iranians have been killed. A coalition of international human rights groups reported Friday that nearly 1,500 of those killed were civilians, including 217 children. A large share of these civilian deaths came from a late February US cruise missile strike on a girls’ school in Minab that killed approximately 175 people.

During a Wednesday press briefing with reporters in Washington D.C., a senior Trump administration official tasked with United Nations reform laid out the White House’s stance on the global body, confirming that President Donald Trump still endorses the UN’s core founding missions while pushing for sweeping changes to help the institution exceed its long-unrealized potential.

This positioning comes amid well-documented friction between the Trump White House and the UN, after the administration cut U.S. funding earlier this year to several UN-affiliated bodies, including the UN Register of Conventional Arms and the Global Counterterrorism Forum — initiatives that have traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support across successive U.S. administrations. The Trump administration also implemented further withdrawals from UN-led climate action programs, building on its first-term policy of pulling out of the Paris Agreement.

Jeff Bartos, the U.S. Ambassador for UN Management and Reform — a political appointee confirmed to the post in July with no prior formal diplomatic experience — emphasized that the administration’s reform push aligns with the president’s core belief that the UN holds untapped potential. “It’s our responsibility, under the president’s leadership, to help the UN reach and exceed that potential,” Bartos told Middle East Eye in response to a question during the briefing.

As a partial gesture of commitment to the institution, Bartos confirmed the administration has disbursed $159 million toward the UN’s regular assessed budget, alongside an additional $2 billion in pooled funding for the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. However, the full financial picture remains deeply strained: when Trump took office 15 months ago, Washington halted all scheduled payments to the UN, leaving the institution — which relies heavily on U.S. contributions to operate — facing a severe liquidity crisis with more than $3.5 billion in unpaid U.S. arrears. This backlog is not unique to the current Trump term; the prior Biden administration also accumulated significant unpaid dues during its time in office.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres has repeatedly warned that the institution risks total financial collapse if the U.S. does not resolve its outstanding arrears.

Bartos pushed back on criticism of the funding hold, saying his team has worked “very, very effectively” with UN leadership and other member states to advance targeted reforms within the UN Secretariat, the administrative body that oversees the institution’s daily operations. The core of the U.S. reform agenda, he argued, is refocusing the UN on its foundational mission of global peace and security, with major changes proposed for long-running peacekeeping operations.

“The idea that missions can go on for 20, 30, 40, 50, even 70 years is unacceptable,” Bartos said. He argued all new and existing peacekeeping deployments must include clear strategic objectives, measurable performance milestones, and a predefined exit strategy to prevent open-ended, costly missions that outlive their purpose.

One immediate cost-saving reform the administration is pushing changes the way the UN reimburses member states for peacekeeping equipment. Bartos explained the new policy would end reimbursement for unused gear, a shift projected to save the institution tens of millions of dollars annually. “We’re deeply grateful to the countries and the troops who serve in these missions, but we can’t keep paying for equipment that isn’t being used,” he noted.

Bartos recently returned from a field visit to peacekeeping operations in the Central African Republic, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where he said he was impressed by the leadership quality of on-the-ground mission command. He even raised questions about the UN’s processes for selecting senior peacekeeping leadership during the trip.

His positive on-the-ground assessment comes amid heightened scrutiny of UN peacekeeping, however. Just days before the briefing, three UN peacekeepers were killed amid Israel’s escalating ground invasion of southern Lebanon. No group has yet claimed responsibility for the attack, but Israeli officials have repeatedly expressed open hostility toward the UN as an institution, which has repeatedly accused Israel of violating international law in multiple regional conflicts and ongoing military operations in the occupied West Bank. Israeli forces have also deliberately targeted UN facilities in Gaza during its ongoing military campaign, killing multiple UN civilian staff based in the enclave.

When questioned about the Trump administration’s pledge to crack down on what it calls “anti-Israel bias” within the UN system, Bartos launched a sharp attack on Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, who was sanctioned by the U.S. after she labeled Israel’s military assault on Gaza a genocide and published a report naming U.S. corporations allegedly complicit in potential war crimes. Bartos did not name Albanese explicitly during his comments.

“The UN has this remarkable global brand on the humanitarian side, but it’s doing an incredible disservice — almost like self-sabotage — to allow this type of unaccountable special rapporteur to run around wreaking havoc and spewing hatred,” Bartos said. “I strongly encourage UN leadership to finally put an end to this poison that others are injecting into what is otherwise a remarkable achievement for the institution on the humanitarian side.”

Looking ahead to the upcoming election of a new UN Secretary-General later this year, Bartos said the U.S. is open to considering all candidate nominations, as long as they commit to implementing the broad package of reforms Washington is pushing. However, recent developments suggest one leading candidate could face a U.S. veto.

In a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio obtained by development outlet Devex, Republican members of Congress urged the Trump administration to use its Security Council veto power to block the candidacy of former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet. Lawmakers cited Bachelet’s long-held pro-choice position on abortion rights and her failure to confront China over the treatment of the Uyghur minority — an issue the first Trump administration labeled a genocide in 2020. This is not the first time the U.S. and Israel have sought to block Bachelet from a senior UN role; the two countries unsuccessfully tried to block her confirmation as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2018. Last month, Bachelet lost the support of her home country after Chile’s new right-wing president, José Antonio Kast — an open admirer of Trump who was endorsed by him during his election campaign — withdrew Chile’s backing for her bid.

Against a backdrop of escalating regional conflict and growing religious nationalist rhetoric within Israeli society, a group of Israeli army reservists has independently developed and distributed a Temple-themed board game to fellow service members ahead of the 2026 Passover holiday, the Israeli military has confirmed. First reported by Israeli journalist Or Kashti in a social media post on March 31, the game, titled *From Egypt to Jerusalem*, centers on a core objective: guiding players from a starting point representing Egypt across a game board dotted with religious, national, and military imagery to reach the site of the ancient Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. The game’s instructions open by inviting players to “choose a route from Egypt” and advance along the path toward Jerusalem, closing with the traditional Passover refrain “Next year in Jerusalem” that anchors the holiday’s liturgy. Passover, one of the most sacred observances in the Jewish calendar, commemorates the biblical narrative of the Israelites’ escape from enslavement in ancient Egypt to seek freedom in the land of Israel, which this year began on the evening of Wednesday last week, coinciding with the game’s distribution. As players move across the board, they land on “revival” spaces adorned with Jewish and Israeli national symbols alongside military graphics, and can draw special cards marked “miracles and heroism.” Additional gameplay challenges included whimsical but politically charged tasks such as standing on one foot to share a positive recent event for the Israeli people, and performing a skit of a phone call between the biblical Pharaoh and Iran’s president, according to details shared in Kashti’s post. The game board also bears the logo of the Har Tzion battalion in the IDF’s Jerusalem brigade, indicating formal organizational connections between the creators and the unit. But not all spaces on the board carry positive framing: other squares depict figures labeled as historical and modern enemies of Israel, ranging from ancient adversaries like the Babylonians and Crusaders to contemporary political leaders. Those named include Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, assassinated Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah, a Hamas fighter, and recently killed Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei. The game’s text echoes another core Passover liturgical phrase: “In every generation they rise up to destroy us,” a line that has been recontextualized for modern political messaging in recent years. When contacted for comment by Middle East Eye, an Israel Defense Forces spokesperson clarified that the game was not an official military initiative. “It was created by reservists on their personal initiative,” the spokesperson said, distancing the institution from the project. The emergence of this privately made military-themed religious game comes amid a well-documented rise in religious nationalist rhetoric and symbolism across Israeli society and within the military, against the backdrop of the ongoing 2025 U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran. Just one month prior, during the Jewish holiday of Purim, many Israelis framed the ongoing conflict through a religious lens, drawing parallels between the war against Iran and the biblical Purim narrative of overcoming a Persian threat to Jewish communities. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has explicitly integrated Passover religious imagery into public remarks about the war against Iran. In comments last month ahead of the holiday, Netanyahu declared: “On the eve of this Festival of Freedom, Israel is stronger than ever.” He went on to rework the iconic Passover line cited in the board game: “In every generation they rise up to destroy us, and in this generation, the regime of the ayatollahs made a massive effort to annihilate us, to take over the Middle East, and to threaten the entire world,” he said, adding that the joint U.S.-Israeli assault was “crushing Iran.” He even invoked the biblical story of the ten plagues of Egypt, stating “We have dealt ten plagues upon the Axis of Evil.” At the time of reporting, the scale of the game’s distribution remains unconfirmed. The development also arrives alongside ongoing shifts in the long-standing status quo at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem, a site sacred to both Muslims (as one of Islam’s holiest sites) and Jews (who refer to it as the Temple Mount, the location of the ancient Jewish First and Second Temples). Last month, Israel extended the closure of the compound, and since far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir took office in 2022, the site has seen a sharp increase in the number of Jewish nationalist visitors and worshippers entering the complex, a practice that violates the decades-old status quo agreement, which restricts Jewish prayer at the site to preserve Muslim administrative control. The increased prominence of religious symbolism within the Israeli military also tracks back to the start of the 2023 Gaza war, with growing reports of religious nationalist messaging among active-duty soldiers. Just last month, a CNN reporting team was detained by Israeli soldiers while covering the establishment of a new unauthorized settler outpost in the Palestinian village of Tayasir in the occupied West Bank. Footage from the encounter captured one soldier openly boasting about plans to take revenge against Palestinians, while a second soldier was seen wearing a patch referencing the Jewish Messiah on his uniform – a practice the Israeli army officially banned for all service members last year. Middle East Eye, which first published this report, provides independent on-the-ground coverage of the Middle East and North Africa region.

As the conflict between the US-led coalition and Iran enters another week, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has delivered a televised address to the nation seeking to ease widespread public anxiety over the UK’s potential entanglement in the war. Standing behind a Downing Street podium on Wednesday morning, flanked by two Union Jacks and clad in a somber blue tie, the prime minister appeared visibly fatigued and grave as he addressed the unfolding crisis in the Gulf region.

Starmer’s speech shifted between moments of calm reassurance, expressions of sympathy for those affected by escalating tensions, and weighty, often abstract warnings about the historic stakes of the current conflict. Opening with a message of resolve, he told the British public: “No matter how fierce this storm, we are well placed to weather it.”

The core policy announcement of the address was the formation of a 35-nation unified coalition dedicated to protecting maritime security in the Gulf waters. Starmer confirmed that UK Foreign Secretary will host the first in-person gathering of coalition members later this week, with the explicit goal of securing unimpeded, safe access to the Strait of Hormuz — the strategically critical chokepoint currently held under de facto Iranian control. Acknowledging the challenge ahead, Starmer admitted: “This will not be easy.”

Throughout the 20-minute address, the prime minister repeatedly pushed back against growing public fears that the UK would be pulled into active combat. “People worry that the UK will be dragged into this,” he said. “We won’t. This is not our war. We will not be drawn into the conflict.”

The address comes amid significant pressure on Starmer from former US President Donald Trump, who has spent weeks publicly mocking and criticizing the British leader for his initial hesitation to back the US-Israeli operation against Iran. Wednesday’s speech was widely seen as an attempt to balance defiance against US pressure with reassurance for a war-weary British public.

But Starmer’s insistence on UK neutrality has left many Britons confused, given the critical role British territory plays in US military operations against Iran. RAF Fairford, a Royal Air Force base located in southwest England’s Gloucestershire, has become a key launching pad for US strikes targeting Iranian military infrastructure. As of the start of this week, 23 long-range US bombers are stationed at the base, which the US has been permitted to use for strikes against Iranian missile sites and offensive operations intended to open the Strait of Hormuz, a deployment that entered its second week this week.

Just hours before Starmer’s address, Iran’s ambassador to the UK, Seyed Ali Mousavi, told Times Radio that Tehran was actively considering retaliatory strikes against British bases hosting US forces. A week and a half earlier, Iranian Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araghchi had already warned the UK’s foreign secretary that allowing the US to use British soil for military action amounted to “participation in aggression.” Speaking Wednesday, Mousavi called the UK’s position “very unfortunate.”

Beyond the question of military involvement, Starmer sought to manage public expectations around the economic fallout of the crisis, pushing back against optimistic claims from Donald Trump that the war is nearly over. Trump, who on Tuesday publicly told the UK to “go get your own oil” and insisted the US would not assist European allies in re-opening the Strait of Hormuz, has framed the conflict as nearing a successful conclusion. Starmer pushed back against that optimism, telling the public: “I don’t think it can necessarily be assumed that a de-escalation of the conflict at the same time brings a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.”

On the topic of domestic energy costs, which have been rocked by Gulf conflict volatility, Starmer confirmed that existing government support measures remain in place: a four-month cap on household energy bills and a freeze on fuel duty lasting until September. He claimed the government was “ahead of the game” in responding to price swings, and deflected repeated questions from reporters about whether he would follow Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s lead, who earlier the same day urged his citizens to reduce fuel consumption by switching to public transport where possible. “I’m sick and tired of your energy bills fluctuating up and down,” Starmer said. “We’re taking back control of our energy security by investing in clean British energy.”

The prime minister also used the crisis to announce a vague long-term strategy, promising that the UK would not return to “business as usual” after the conflict ends. “This time will be different,” he pledged, revealing that the government has drafted a “long term plan to emerge from this war a stronger and more secure nation” — though he offered no specific details on what the plan entails. “How we emerge from this crisis will define us for a generation,” he said. For Starmer, the immediate political priority remains upcoming local elections scheduled for May, as the prime minister balances national crisis management with domestic political pressures.

In a high-profile verdict that has reignited debates over protest rights and the criminalization of pro-Palestine activism in the United Kingdom, two veteran movement leaders have been convicted of violating police-imposed restrictions stemming from a major January Gaza war protest in central London. Chris Nineham, 62, vice-chair of the Stop the War Coalition, and Ben Jamal, 61, chair of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign (PSC), were found guilty on two counts of breaching the UK Public Order Act following a three-day trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday.

The case traces back to a mass national demonstration organized by a coalition of pro-Palestine advocacy groups, which had planned a march from a starting point outside the BBC’s headquarters to protest what organisers decry as the outlet’s pro-Israel media bias in its coverage of the Gaza conflict. The route was first publicly announced in late November 2024, and received initial approval from the Metropolitan Police. However, following objections from pro-Israel groups, Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis, and multiple sitting Members of Parliament, police revised the permit, relocating the starting point over concerns about its proximity to a nearby synagogue. On the day of the protest, police imposed a last-minute additional restriction that converted the planned march into a static demonstration confined to Whitehall.

The two activists were arrested after a small contingent of demonstrators left the static rally to travel to Trafalgar Square to lay flowers in honor of children killed in Gaza. Prosecutors argued that protesters deliberately forced their way through a police cordon after the rally ended, and that Jamal delivered a speech that incited the crowd to defy the legally imposed restrictions.

Delivering the ruling, District Judge Daniel Sternberg upheld the prosecution’s position, ruling that the police’s restrictions were lawful, issued under valid statutory powers, and based on a reasonable assessment of risks including large crowd size (estimated by PSC itself at 100,000 attendees) and potential disruption to local businesses and worshippers at nearby synagogues. Sternberg stated that Jamal’s speech amounted to incitement, framing it as deliberate persuasion and inducement to encourage attendees to breach the imposed conditions. He also rejected a defense application to dismiss the case entirely.

During the trial, the defense mounted a vigorous challenge to the prosecution’s narrative. Mark Summers KC, representing Nineham and Jamal, argued the entire case was unlawful, citing a previous Court of Appeal ruling that found legislation granting police unlimited power to restrict protests was enacted outside legal bounds. Body-worn police footage played in court revealed significant operational chaos among officers on the ground: one officer was captured referring to the police response as a “massive clusterfuck,” while another can be heard shouting orders to withdraw as the cordon was overwhelmed by crowd density. Summers emphasized the footage undermines claims of a premeditated breach, instead showing inconsistent communication, poor planning, and reactive policing that failed to manage the large demonstration. He also noted that multiple video recordings from the day show police themselves ushered organisers through police lines, contradicting the prosecution’s version of events.

Outside the courthouse following the verdict, both Nineham and Jamal announced they would immediately appeal the conviction, framing the ruling as a major blow to civil liberties in the UK. Nineham described the verdict as part of a systemic campaign to criminalize the pro-Palestine movement, saying: “This is clearly part of an ongoing criminalisation of the Palestine movement in which people protesting against a genocide are being targeted by a British establishment that is colluding with it. It is an attempt to send a chilling message across society that people shouldn’t risk protesting – it is an attempt that will not stop us.”

Jamal echoed the criticism, noting the judge’s acknowledgment that the pair had previously possessed good character, which the conviction now revokes. He responded by referencing a core moral question from Palestinian activists: “What did you do when Gaza was going through a genocide? History will judge which of us stood on the right side of history. Chris and I will not be silenced. You will not be silenced. This movement will not be silenced.”

The verdict drew widespread condemnation from across UK left-wing politics. Labour MP John McDonnell, who was arrested alongside the two organisers on the day of the protest, called the ruling a “grotesque” attack on civil liberties. Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, now leader of the left-wing Your Party and a longstanding critic of UK foreign policy in the Middle East, described the decision as “disgusting,” and reiterated calls for the UK to end its military and political support for Israel and U.S. operations in the region.

The January protest was one of more than 20 national pro-Palestine demonstrations held across the UK since the outbreak of the Gaza war in October 2023, all calling for an immediate ceasefire and an end to British state backing for Israel’s military campaign.