标签： Asia

A rapidly escalating cycle of retaliatory violence has plunged the Persian Gulf into chaos this week, after the United States launched a third consecutive night of airstrikes targeting Iranian assets across Iranian territory, prompting Tehran to launch sweeping missile and drone counterattacks across multiple Gulf states and announce the immediate closure of the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

The latest escalation traces back to an early Sunday strike by U.S. forces, launched after Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) opened fire on a Cyprus-flagged container vessel that the Iranian force claimed was traversing the Strait of Hormuz via an unapproved shipping route. The IRGC confirmed shortly after that it had targeted a second commercial vessel, accusing it of also violating regional maritime regulations.

Local Iranian media reported multiple large explosions across key Iranian locations within hours of the U.S. Sunday strike, including the southern port city of Bandar Abbas, the coastal towns of Sirik and Jask, Qeshm Island off Iran’s southern coast, and the southwestern Khuzestan province — regions that host critical Iranian military and energy infrastructure.

The conflict quickly spilled across national borders as air raid sirens blared across Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) just hours after the initial strikes. Qatar reported that it had intercepted incoming Iranian missile fire, with three people including one child wounded in the attack. Kuwait confirmed it was also working to intercept incoming hostile projectiles, while Jordan announced that three Iranian missiles had impacted inside its territory.

In official statements carried by Iranian state media, the IRGC claimed responsibility for all cross-border attacks, stating it had destroyed a command and control center and drone storage hangars in Jordan, targeted a U.S. radar installation in Kuwait, and taken out a fighter jet maintenance hub and command facility in Qatar. The force also claimed it had destroyed U.S. naval logistics support centers and aircraft carrier refueling infrastructure at Oman’s Port of Duqm. The UAE later clarified that all missile threats detected earlier in the day had fallen outside its national borders, causing no damage or casualties on its territory.

Per Iran’s official state news agency IRNA, the IRGC issued a formal announcement of the Strait of Hormuz closure shortly after the initial vessel attacks, stating: “Following this incident … the Strait of Hormuz will be closed until further notice and until the end of American interventions in this region.” The U.S. Central Command (Centcom) pushed back against this announcement immediately, confirming that commercial shipping traffic continues to move through the critical waterway, which handles roughly 20% of global oil trade.

Details of the initial vessel attack have slowly emerged: Centcom confirmed the Cyprus-registered container ship GFS Galaxy was disabled by fire and structural damage to its engine room, with one crew member unaccounted for. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) agency reported the entire crew abandoned the damaged vessel and took shelter on a life raft, noting the incident occurred roughly 17 kilometers east of Omani territorial waters. India’s Ministry of External Affairs later confirmed that the missing crew member is an Indian national; of the 11 Indian citizens on board the vessel, 10 have been successfully rescued, and the Indian government has formally condemned the attack.

U.S. defense officials laid out the scope of the three-night campaign this week, noting that U.S. forces struck 140 Iranian targets on Saturday alone, bringing the total number of targets hit to more than 300. Centcom says the strikes are intended to degrade Iran’s capacity to attack civilian mariners and commercial vessels moving freely through the strait. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a blunt warning following the counterattacks, stating: “Iran made a poor choice. Now they pay.”

The rapid escalation of violence has effectively ended a weeks-long ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, a development confirmed by U.S. President Donald Trump. The breakdown of the truce has thrown deep uncertainty over ongoing diplomatic efforts to reach a long-term ceasefire and de-escalation agreement, which had been progressing slowly in recent weeks.

Iran’s top parliamentary speaker and leading nuclear negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf reinforced Tehran’s hardening stance in a post on the social platform X, writing: “The era of one-sided deals is OVER. We told you: keep your word or pay the price. Reality is knocking.”

Interestingly, the large-scale fighting broke out just one day after a round of diplomatic talks held in Oman on Saturday, which brought together Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and his Omani counterpart Badr Albusaidi. Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmail Baqaei confirmed Sunday that the talks were focused on coordinating new shipping and transit rules for the Strait of Hormuz, with legal and technical delegations from both sides discussing maritime security and safety standards. A Qatari delegation also attended the talks, and Baqaei added that both sides agreed to continue political and technical talks to reach a shared understanding on the issues.

The escalation also comes on the heels of a formal statement from Iran’s new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, who issued a written threat Saturday to avenge the death of his father and predecessor, Ali Khamenei.

Qatar’s royal court announced Sunday the passing of former Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the transformative leader who turned a small Gulf state into a consequential global player across energy, diplomacy, and media. He was 74 years old, and no official cause of death has been released to the public.

In an official statement, the Amiri Diwan expressed: “With hearts steadfast in faith in God’s decree and destiny, the Amiri Diwan mourns the great loss to the nation of the late – may God have mercy on him – His Highness the Father Amir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, who passed away this morning.”

Sheikh Hamad held power from 1995, when he rose to the position via a bloodless palace coup that ousted his father Sheikh Khalifa bin Hamad Al Thani, until 2013. In a move that shocked observers across the Middle East and beyond, he made the unprecedented choice to voluntarily abdicate the throne in favor of his son, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. This peaceful handover of power marked a first in modern Arab history, a rare departure from a regional pattern where leadership transitions only follow the death of a ruler or violent political upheaval. At the time of his resignation, Sheikh Hamad framed the shift as a new chapter for the nation, saying: “The future lies ahead of you, the children of this homeland, as you usher in a new era where young leadership hoists the banner.”

Over his 18-year tenure, Sheikh Hamad engineered a radical transformation of Qatar’s global and domestic standing. He guided the small state to become the world’s top exporter of liquefied natural gas, turning its vast energy reserves into outsized geopolitical influence that stretched far beyond the country’s tiny borders. Domestically, his administration oversaw a series of landmark changes: the launch of influential global media network Al Jazeera in 1996, the adoption of Qatar’s first permanent constitution in 2004, and the introduction of municipal elections that extended voting and candidacy rights to women, a progressive step for the region.

Sheikh Hamad also built Qatar’s reputation as a trusted regional mediator, with the country playing key diplomatic roles to resolve conflicts spanning Lebanon, Sudan, Afghanistan, and the Palestinian territories. For the Gaza Strip, his government committed hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure investment, including major coastal road projects, and a hospital in Gaza City still carries his name in recognition of his contributions.

Beyond diplomacy and energy, Sheikh Hamad’s administration pursued aggressive international investments across aviation, infrastructure, business, and sports. These long-term investments laid the critical groundwork for Qatar’s successful hosting of the 2022 FIFA World Cup, an event that cemented the country’s status on the global stage. Even after stepping back from official rule, Sheikh Hamad remained a widely respected public figure in Qatar, and received a warm welcome during the opening ceremony of the 2022 tournament in Doha.

Following the announcement of his death, tributes quickly poured in from leaders across the Middle East and beyond. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi offered condolences to Qatar’s ruling family and public, while Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari commended Sheikh Hamad’s “visionary leadership” and his far-reaching contributions to Qatar’s development and cross-regional cooperation. United Arab Emirates President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan also shared his respects, writing on X: “I extend my sincere condolences and sympathy to my brother Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and his family on the passing of his father, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani.”

Sheikh Hamad is survived by Sheikh Tamim and his extended family. Today, the Qatar that his family governs is a country whose enormous influence across global energy markets, international diplomacy, and global affairs is almost entirely the product of the vision and policies Sheikh Hamad put in place during his rule. For context, Qatar is one of the smallest Arab states, with a total population of roughly 3 million, the majority of whom are migrant workers. It was a British protectorate for 55 years until gaining independence in 1971, and has been governed by the Al Thani royal family since the mid-19th century.

Germany’s federal legislative upper chamber, the Bundesrat, has given its formal approval to a contentious draft law that would impose criminal penalties including up to five years of prison time or substantial fines for anyone who publicly denies Israel’s right to exist or calls for the abolition of the Israeli state. The proposal, which was initially put forward by lawmakers from the German state of Hesse, cleared the upper house in a vote held Friday. It will now head to the Bundestag, Germany’s lower parliamentary body, for deliberation following the body’s upcoming summer recess.

A key point of contention around the legislation is the unequal legal status it creates between Israel and Palestine: the draft extends unprecedented legal protections to Israel that the German government has repeatedly refused to grant to a Palestinian state. Berlin has maintained a longstanding policy of rejecting formal recognition of Palestinian statehood, continued to ship large volumes of weapons to Israel throughout its ongoing military campaign in Gaza that global observers have labeled genocide, and kept uninterrupted bilateral trade ties despite widespread international condemnation of Israel’s apartheid policies and accelerating ethnic cleansing practices in the occupied West Bank.

The new criminal law is just one part of a broader nationwide crackdown on pro-Palestine solidarity activism across Germany. German authorities have moved to restrict peaceful demonstrations, academic conferences, and cultural events organized in support of Palestinian human rights, a pattern that drew formal rebuke from United Nations independent experts last October. Four UN special rapporteurs and two independent legal experts issued a statement at the time accusing German institutions of systematically criminalizing, penalizing, and suppressing completely legitimate activism in solidarity with the Palestinian people. The experts noted that protesters were only advancing widely recognized legitimate demands: halting German arms exports to Israel, ending the Israeli military campaign in Gaza and illegal occupation of Palestinian territories, guaranteeing unimpeded access for humanitarian aid to Gaza, securing formal international recognition of a Palestinian state, and holding perpetrators of documented international crimes accountable.

Even independent German institutional assessments have raised red flags about the legality of the proposal. The Bundestag’s own in-house research service warned in a May analysis that the Hesse-backed draft is very likely incompatible with Germany’s post-WWII constitution. The assessment concluded the law would effectively create a legally protected special status for one specific viewpoint, directly contradicting the protections for freedom of expression enshrined in Article 5 of Germany’s Basic Law.

The research service report explained that both denying Israel’s right to exist and calling for the elimination of the state generally qualify as subjective value judgments, not unprotected incitement. Extending the narrow constitutional exception that bans Nazi propaganda to cover this type of political speech about Israel would be extremely difficult to justify under existing German legal principles, the report added. If that extension cannot be legally justified, the resulting restriction on freedom of expression has no basis in Germany’s constitution.

Global human rights organization Amnesty International has also publicly opposed the legislation. While the group emphasized that the protection of Jewish life in Germany carries unique historical and moral weight, it noted that this proposed initiative poses a massive threat to fundamental freedom of expression across the country. Left Party Member of Parliament Luke Hoß echoed those criticisms, describing the proposal as an obviously unconstitutional act of symbolic politics that will weaken rather than strengthen efforts to combat antisemitism in Germany.

On Sunday, a coalition of 14 nations led by the United States and the United Kingdom issued a joint statement from Manila reaffirming that China’s sweeping territorial claims over the South China Sea lack any legal foundation, in a public backing of the landmark 2016 international arbitration ruling.

The statement was timed to mark the anniversary of the July 12, 2016, decision handed down by a permanent arbitration tribunal based in The Hague. The tribunal was convened under the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the global treaty that governs all maritime activity. The joint statement describes the arbitration outcome as a definitive, final and legally binding milestone that settles core legal questions around competing claims in the strategic waterway.

The arbitration case was first launched by the Philippines in 2013, one year after a tense months-long standoff at a contested shoal ended with China taking effective control of the feature. China declined to participate in the proceedings, and has refused to acknowledge the ruling ever since it was issued. Beijing continues to assert sovereignty over nearly the entire South China Sea, a critical global shipping chokepoint that has been labeled one of the most dangerous potential conflict flashpoints in East Asia.

The waterway is claimed in whole or in part by multiple governments: China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. Repeated territorial standoffs between claimant states have played out in the region for decades, with confrontations growing more frequent and high-risk in recent years.

Beyond the U.S. and UK, the other signatories to Sunday’s statement are the Philippines, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Germany, Italy, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Slovenia. In the text, the coalition explicitly rejected “China’s expansive maritime claims in the South China Sea, including those based on ‘historic rights,’” echoing the core finding of the 2016 tribunal.

The 2016 ruling sided overwhelmingly with the Philippines’ legal arguments, concluding that UNCLOS provides no legal support for China’s claims to historic resource rights in areas of the South China Sea beyond its internationally recognized territorial boundaries. UNCLOS, which entered into force in 1994, has been ratified by more than 170 countries and regions including both China and the Philippines.

The 14-nation statement condemned destabilizing unilateral actions across the disputed waters, singling out the use of coast guard vessels, military assets and maritime militia to intimidate and obstruct lawful maritime and air operations conducted by other states. “Such actions endanger the safety of personnel and fishermen and seriously degrade regional peace and security,” the statement read.

The coalition stressed that freedom of navigation and overflight, as enshrined in UNCLOS, must be protected and preserved, and called for all territorial disputes to be resolved through peaceful diplomatic means consistent with the 1982 UNCLOS framework.

China had not issued a public response to Sunday’s joint statement as of press time. But in recent public comments through its embassy in Manila, Beijing has repeatedly made clear it will never recognize the 2016 ruling, which it labels “illegal, null and void.” “The award will not alter the historical and factual basis for China’s sovereignty over the islands of the South China Sea and their adjacent waters,” the embassy said in a previous statement, adding that the outcome “will not weaken China’s resolve and determination to safeguard its sovereignty and maritime rights and interests.”

Territorial tensions in the South China Sea have spiked in recent years, most frequently involving Chinese forces and vessels alongside Philippine and Vietnamese fishing fleets and government vessels. Chinese coast guard vessels have been documented using high-powered water cannons, military-grade laser dazzlers, and dangerous blocking maneuvers against Philippine vessels and fishermen from other claimant states. These actions have led to high-seas collisions and multiple high-risk near encounters between aircraft and vessels in the area.

Washington has repeatedly pressured Beijing to comply with the 2016 arbitration ruling. Both the current Biden administration and previous Trump administration have reaffirmed that as part of the long-standing mutual defense treaty between the U.S. and the Philippines — America’s oldest treaty ally in Asia — Washington is legally obligated to come to the Philippines’ defense if Filipino forces, civilian or military vessels, or aircraft come under armed attack in the South China Sea.