Pentagon Removes Press Offices After Federal Judge Blocks Trump Restrictions
The Defense Department has announced plans to remove media offices from the Pentagon after a Clinton-appointed federal judge sided with The New York Times in a lawsuit challenging limits on reporters’ access to the building. The action is seen as a “loophole” strategy to bypass the ruling against restrictions which the Trump Administration has struggled to enforce in the wake of a hailstorm of national security leaks.
The press area of the Pentagon, known as “Correspondents’ Corridor”, has been used for decades to cover U.S. military operations. Journalists stationed at the Pentagon offices often enjoyed extensive freedom of movement and access to officials. However, heightened hostilities involving leftist activists and the progressive media have brought operational security into question.
Not since the Civil War has the political divide in the US been so deep, to the point that left-wing journalists might represent a clear and present danger to national security. As a result, the Correspondent’s Corridor will be closed immediately according department spokesperson Sean Parnell.
Journalists will eventually be able to work from an “annex” outside the primary Pentagon building, which Parnell says “will be available when ready.” He did not offer details on how long that will take. The Pentagon Press Association said the announcement “is a clear violation of the letter and spirit of last week’s ruling.” But, it does not necessarily go against the ruling. The Pentagon will still issue press credentials, but journalists won’t be allowed access to the corridor or move freely inside the building.
On March 20, 2026, a U.S. District Court judge vacated key security provisions of the Pentagon’s October 2025 media access policy. The court removed every provision that allowed the Department to screen press credential holders for security risks and every provision that allowed…
In the lawsuit brought by The New York Times (filed in December 2025), Judge Paul Friedman ruled that portions of the October 2025 press policy, imposed under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, violated the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment. He argued that the rules were vague and “viewpoint-discriminatory”, as they allowed the Pentagon to revoke credentials for journalists who solicited or reported information not officially pre-approved.
BREAKING – Pete Hegseth confirms journalists will no longer roam the Pentagon freely, now requiring badges, escorts, and strict rules against soliciting classified or sensitive information to crack down on leaks and “fake news” reporting inside the building. pic.twitter.com/NyHjq9TSwW
— Right Angle News Network (@Rightanglenews) October 5, 2025
The judge ordered the restoration of press passes for seven Times reporters and vacated the challenged provisions for all affected journalists. The most recent Pentagon office closures, though, are not targeted at any specific reporters for non-compliance with the new rules. Rather, they are targeted to all reporters regardless.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s restrictions called for tighter oversight on approvals for information sharing, journalists had to be escorted through the Pentagon, and increased security screenings for any media employees working at the Pentagon. The restrictions also made it easier for the Defense Department to revoke press badges if a journalist was “reasonably determined” to pose a security risk through unauthorized access, attempted access, or disclosure of sensitive information.
The Trump Administration has dealt with a flood of information leaks to the press in the past year, often in relation to military operations. In April 2025, the Pentagon launched a large scale investigation (including polygraphs) into “recent unauthorized disclosures” of national security information. The danger of Obama and Biden appointed officials working against Trump from the inside, even if this harms the US, is an unfortunate reality of the current political climate.
Specific leaks under probe included military operational plans for the Panama Canal, deployment of a second carrier to the Red Sea, Elon Musk’s Pentagon visit/briefing on China war plans (which was canceled after the leak), and a pause in intelligence collection for Ukraine.
Three senior political appointees were suspended/placed on leave (Dan Caldwell, senior adviser to Hegseth; Darin Selnick, deputy chief of staff; and Colin Carroll, chief of staff to the deputy defense secretary). Democrats used the scandals to demand Hegseth’s resignation, calling them breaches that threatened national security.
While the decision does challenge traditional courtesies given to the press, and perhaps even disrupts access that some would consider a First Amendment obligation, it cannot be denied that the establishment media as it exists today has proven time and time again to be dangerously biased against Trump and conservatives. This bias has, in the recent past, bordered on treason (the Russiagate hoax being a clear example).
It is not surprising that Trump would seek to distance the press from Pentagon access. Why would he invite the enemy inside the wire?
U.S. electric utilities need new tools and regulatory authorizations to protect the power grid from drone attacks, experts and industry groups say.
The issue has taken on new urgency recently. The Department of Homeland Security reportedly urged U.S. energy companies to increase security in response to potential threats from Iran, which has successfully used drones to target American military personnel and assets since the U.S. and Israel launched a war against Iran on Feb. 28.
But power grid asset owners and operators have “growing concern” around “unmanned aircraft systems,” or UAS, attacks and their “ability to protect critical assets and infrastructure,” the North American Electric Reliability Corp. said in a report this week.
Hundreds of organizations stress-tested emergency preparedness protocols and game-planned responses to hypothetical scenarios. In one of those scenarios, multiple UAS targeted a switchyard at a nuclear generating station and a transformer station.
The report said participants noted that there is a “variety of guidance” from different government agencies on drones regarding what laws and regulations apply to detection, and what technologies can be legally deployed.
“Collaboration between industry and government partners would allow for a better understanding of the concerns that [asset owner or operators] maintain related to [drones] and how the government can support [asset owner or operators] during impending and active threats,” it said.
“Currently, utilities leverage detection capabilities to establish baseline traffic near critical assets but are limited to engaging with [drones] only after they are safely on the ground, which is often too late.”
– Kimberly Mielcarek, Vice President of Corporate and External Communications at the North American Electric Reliability Corporation
Drones have become ubiquitous in modern warfare, from Ukraine to the Middle East. The United States military is finding drones a difficult threat to counter — and even well-funded electric utilities do not have the budget of the U.S. military.
“The electric grid was never designed with aerial threats in mind,” said Charlie O’Connell, chief business officer of Fortem Technologies, an airspace security firm.
There have been drone attacks on the U.S. electric grid, but the threat is relatively new. In 2021, federal law enforcement issued a warning to state and local officials about an incident the year before where a crashed drone appeared to have been modified to “specifically target energy infrastructure.”
Since then, the threat has grown as the technology evolves. Small drones are “inexpensive, widely available, and increasingly capable, which means utilities now have to think about security not just at the fence line, but in the airspace above critical infrastructure,” O’Connell said.
Federal airspace regulation limits utility options
Power grid asset owners and operators said efforts should be made to consolidate federal guidance for consistency and clarity, NERC’s report noted.
U.S. airspace is regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, which “grants very few exceptions to interdicting unmanned aircraft systems, which are treated the same as any aircraft,” NERC Vice President, Corporate and External Communications Kimberly Mielcarek, said in an email.
Utilities “are reluctant to engage UAS in flight because of these restrictions and penalties,” Mielcarek said. “The GridEx discussions highlighted this concern across the industry and the need for our government partners to decide the safest and best way to interdict drones over utility assets.”
Meanwhile, the drone challenge facing utilities is “evolving quickly,” said Melissa Swisher, chief revenue officer at SkySafe, an airspace intelligence company with a focus on drone visibility.
Currently, most drone incidents near critical infrastructure appear to involve surveillance or reconnaissance rather than direct attacks, Swisher said. But that reconnaissance can enable more coordinated cyber or physical assaults.
“Drones represent a new domain of exposure for utilities,” she said in an email. “The challenge is less about reacting to a single drone sighting and more about understanding patterns of activity and having visibility into what is happening in the airspace around critical infrastructure.”
Utilities prepare while pursuing policy changes
Many utilities are exploring ways to incorporate airspace monitoring and drone detection capabilities into broader physical security strategies, Swisher said, “alongside traditional protections like perimeter security, surveillance systems, and coordination with law enforcement.”
Utilities track many threats to the grid, the Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned utilities, said in an emailed statement.
“While physical threats to the grid are not new, drones do present unique challenges,” it said.
Grid operators currently use a “defense-in-depth approach to secure critical grid assets” from drones, EEI said, including “counter-drone measures, limiting single-points of failure, and responding and repairing systems should assets be impacted.”
EEI also said it is pursuing “technology and policy changes” that would allow utilities to limit drone use near critical facilities, and allow companies to interdict drones that enter their airspace.
According to Fortem’s O’Connell, the first thing utilities need is “airspace awareness” — the ability to detect and track drones operating near their facilities. Technologies such as compact radar and integrated command-and-control platforms can allow utilities to monitor low-altitude airspace around substations and generation sites, he said. When suspicious activity is detected, utilities can then coordinate with law enforcement and federal partners.
“The electric grid was never designed with aerial threats in mind.”
– Charlie O’Connell, Chief Business Officer of Fortem Technologies, an airspace security firm.
O’Connell also said that the FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law in December, expanded domestic counter-UAS authorities and created a framework for state and local law enforcement agencies to “detect, track, and mitigate” credible drone threats.
“That change should make coordination between utilities and local authorities more practical going forward,” he said.
NERC’s primary UAS recommendation resulting from GridEx was for U.S. and Canadian federal government partners to “work with industry partners to identify legally accessible technology to address threats from UAS and clarify available government support.”
Additionally, the reliability watchdog called for government agencies to clarify guidance regarding UAS and the methods available or drone detection, and for more clarity around governmental support available to industry in the event of an incident or attack.
“Currently, utilities leverage detection capabilities to establish baseline traffic near critical assets but are limited to engaging with UAS only after they are safely on the ground, which is often too late,” NERC’s Mielcarek said.
Senate Democrats Blink: DHS Deal Emerges After Weeks Of Gridlock
After more than a month of political stalemate, the Senate Democrats are finally flinching, and a deal to reopen the Department of Homeland Security seems within reach – even if the path looks like a compromise designed to please no one.
Key Senate Republicans left the White House late Monday in a noticeably upbeat mood, telling colleagues that there is now a realistic framework to get DHS running again, even as President Donald Trump continues to demand that the SAVE America Act be “welded in” to any funding package.
According to a report from Punchbowl News, the outlines of the emerging agreement would fund nearly all of DHS while carving out ICE’s migrant removal operations, then use a separate reconciliation bill to backfill ICE and press ahead with the two key provisions of the SAVE America Act (proof of citizenship to register to vote and a photo ID to cast a ballot in federal election) that Trump has made very clear is his top legislative priority.
“This framework is similar to the outlines of an agreement that Senate Majority Leader John Thune discussed with Trump on Sunday – a strategy that the president rejected. Trump has insisted on tying the SAVE America Act to DHS funding, complicating matters even further. Thune said this was ‘not realistic,” explains Punchbowl. “It’s too early to say whether this DHS framework will satisfy Senate Democrats. There are several key details that still need to be ironed out. But many Democrats pointed to what they see as a sense of urgency to get something done, especially as nightmarish TSA security lines cause chaos for millions of air travellers.”
Republican leaders, including Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), are openly talking about a two‑step reconciliation strategy: first, fund the rest of ICE using budget‑reconciliation so Democrats do not have to vote “yes,” and second, attach pieces of the SAVE America Act to a broader reconciliation package that could also include a $200 billion defense‑spending push and random pet priorities from the GOP base. Kennedy has framed reconciliation as the only way to get policies through amid Democratic obstruction, but he acknowledges there is a question as to whether the votes are there.
“It’ll take a little longer,” Kennedy said. “But we could do it. If you want to throw in the SAVE Act, I’m fine with that. I don’t know how feasible that is in terms of the whip count.”
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) noted that the reconciliation process itself takes “about a month,” meaning even if leadership wanted to rush a deal, the machinery of the Senate would impose a natural delay.
Behind the closed‑door negotiations is another quiet calculation: the Senate parliamentarian. Republicans know that using reconciliation to pass the SAVE America Act’s citizenship‑verification and voter‑ID provisions is no sure thing, and many privately doubt the parliamentarian will bless such a move.
That raises the possibility of a vote to overrule Elizabeth MacDonough, a nuclear‑option maneuver that would infuriate Democrats and probably trigger a fresh round of partisan recriminations. Thune has previously cast doubt on that idea, suggesting he would rather avoid the backlash than force the vote. However, there is precedent, since Democrats used reconciliation to pass Obamacare back in 2010.
Both sides also know that the DHS shutdown cannot go on indefinitely, and both want to emerge from this standoff claiming victory. But, with Democrats appearing eager to do something, it’s clearly progress.
Circle Plunges Most Ever On Stablecoin Legislation, As Tether Prepares Full Audit
Circle Internet Group, the issuer of the USDC stablecoin, plunged the most on record as investors reacted to potential stablecoin regulation changes that could make the firm’s cryptocurrency less attractive to large holders, as it would be stripped of interest payments. Concerns that a competitor is readying a move into the US market also hurt Circle’s share price.
The stock declined as much as 22%, its steepest intraday drop ever, and leading losses across crypto-linked equities. Coinbase fell as much as 11%, while MARA Holdings, Bullish, Galaxy Digital Holdings and Robinhood Markets also moved lower.
Bitcoin also dropped as much as 2.8% to $68,906.31, breaking below $70,000 after rising above it yesterday.
Circle’s decline comes as investors grappled with the implications on the economics of stablecoins of proposed US legislation. Draft language of the so-called Clarity Act could prevent exchanges like Coinbase from offering rewards on holdings of stablecoins such as USDC, Circle’s US dollar-pegged token.
While the Clarity Act seeks to establish a comprehensive regulatory regime for cryptocurrencies and other forms of tokens, the proposed legislation has faced delays largely due to disagreements between the crypto industry and the banking sector over whether stablecoins can offer rewards similar to interest rates on bank accounts.
“We believe it is almost entirely related to the Clarity Act language out today,” John Todaro, an analyst at Needham & Co. said. His firm expects that if the draft language is adopted, it would curtail Coinbase’s program offering certain customers 3.5% rewards on their USDC balances.
Meanwhile, competition among stablecoin issuers is drawing renewed attention. On Tuesday, Tether said it has entered into a formal agreement with a big four accounting firm to complete its first full audit, creating speculation that the El Salvador-based firm could be preparing to move into the US, said Gus Gala, senior equity research analyst at Monness, Crespi.
“That’s what’s hitting the stock more so today,” he said.
Circle shares surged as much as 750% above its initial public offering price last year in anticipation of the US Genius Act stablecoin legislation that passed in July. But the euphoria has since faded as crypto prices have plummeted, competition has increased and the Clarity Act has stalled in Washington. Circle’s shares are now down more than 60% from their peak.
The freight market is no stranger to disruptive forces – tariffs, recessions, weather, economic fluctuations, and capacity crunches have all reshaped freight demand over the years.
But a new contender is emerging from an unexpected corner: the widespread adoption of GLP-1 medications (think Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, and similar GLP-1 receptor agonists).
These drugs, originally developed for diabetes management and now massively popular for weight loss, suppress appetite and reduce overall caloric intake. Early estimates suggest that even at current penetration levels — roughly 12% of U.S. adults — the downstream effect on food and beverage demand could be substantial.
Recent analyses, drawing from academic studies out of Purdue, Cornell, and others (including 2025 updates), point to an approximate 3% drop in total caloric food demand due to appetite suppression. That may sound modest, but in the context of America’s food supply chain, the numbers scale quickly.
U.S. trucks move more than 2 billion tons of food and beverages annually. At an average payload of around 20 tons per truckload, that’s roughly 100 million+ truckloads per year dedicated to food and bev freight.
Apply a 3% reduction across that volume, and you’re looking at approximately 3 million fewer truckloads annually.
To put that in perspective: the proposed Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern merger — one of the most significant potential rail consolidations in recent memory — is projected by some analysts to divert around 2 million truckloads off the road over time through improved intermodal efficiency and rail capture.
In other words, GLP-1 adoption, at its current (and still growing) level, could already eclipse that rail merger’s expected impact on truckload volumes — and we’re only in the early innings of penetration.
The categories hit hardest align with classic “snack-and-beverage” freight lanes:
Processed snacks and beverages: user spending down 7-11% among adopters
Alcohol: significant volume reductions
Refined grains and similar carb-heavy products
Fresh produce and proteins appear more resilient, with some evidence of slight upticks in mix as consumers prioritize nutrient-dense foods even while eating less overall. Beer, as one slice of the broader beverage decline, fits squarely in the crosshairs.
This isn’t just theoretical. Real-world freight signals are beginning to whisper the trend: softer reefer and dry van demand in certain consumer packaged goods (CPG) segments, anecdotal reports from brokers of lighter loads in snack-heavy lanes, and early category-specific volume softness that doesn’t fully align with broader economic headwinds.
Of course, counterbalancing forces exist. Construction of new pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities (for GLP-1 production itself) is generating significant truckloads today. Food conglomerates may reformulate products to better appeal to GLP-1 users, potentially offsetting some losses. And broader demographic trends — including slower population growth — exert their own downward pressure on total consumption.
But the core math is hard to ignore: a structural reduction in caloric intake at scale translates directly into fewer pallets, fewer loads, and ultimately fewer miles for truckers hauling America’s food supply.
For carriers, brokers, and shippers, this represents both risk and opportunity. The biggest losers may be those heavily exposed to discretionary, high-calorie categories. Winners could include haulers of fresh/perishable goods, health-focused CPG, and — ironically — the specialized logistics supporting the pharmaceutical boom.
The freight market has always been shaped by macroeconomic forces, policy shifts, and technology. Now add public health trends to the list. GLP-1s aren’t just rewriting waistlines, they’re changing freight demand.
Galaxy Digital’s latest report says the risk that quantum computing could compromise Bitcoin is real, but so is the work underway to protect the network.
The firm’s research frames the issue as a long-term engineering and governance challenge rather than an imminent crisis, with developers already building tools that could reshape how the network secures trillions in value.
At the center of the concern is a simple premise. Bitcoin relies on cryptographic signatures to prove ownership of coins. Those signatures, based on elliptic curve cryptography, are considered secure against classical computers.
How Quantum Computing could break Bitcoin
A sufficiently advanced quantum machine could break that assumption, allowing an attacker to derive a private key from a public one and spend funds without authorization.
The scenario has a name within the industry: “Q-day,” the moment a cryptographically relevant quantum computer becomes viable.
The timeline remains uncertain. Estimates range from years to decades, and no consensus exists among experts. The report stresses that uncertainty itself is the problem. Bitcoin’s decentralized structure means upgrades take time, often measured in years, not months.
Still, the risk is uneven. Most Bitcoin is not exposed today.
Wallets only reveal their public keys when funds are spent, meaning coins sitting untouched behind hashed addresses remain shielded.
Vulnerability emerges in two main cases: coins whose public keys are already visible onchain, and coins in transit during a transaction.
Which Bitcoin is actually at risk
Galaxy cites estimates suggesting that millions of bitcoin could fall into the first category, including funds tied to early network activity and long-dormant wallets.
These coins, often associated with early adopters and even the pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto, present a unique challenge. If quantum capabilities arrive before protective measures are deployed, such holdings could become prime targets.
The implications extend beyond individual losses. A sudden unlocking of dormant supply could ripple through markets, placing pressure on price and, by extension, on mining incentives that underpin Bitcoin’s security. The report frames this as a systemic risk, not just a technical flaw.
Yet the tone of the research is measured.
Rather than signaling alarm, it points to a growing body of work aimed at preparing the network.
Among the most prominent proposals is a new transaction structure known as Pay-to-Merkle-Root, outlined in Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 360.
The design removes a key exposure point by eliminating always-visible public keys, reducing the attack surface for long-term threats.
Other ideas take a broader approach. One proposal, known as “Hourglass,” attempts to manage the fallout from vulnerable coins by limiting how quickly they can be spent in a worst-case scenario. The goal is not to prevent access, but to slow it, giving markets time to absorb potential shocks.
There is also movement toward new forms of cryptography. Hash-based signature schemes, such as SPHINCS+, have emerged as candidates for a post-quantum future. These systems rely on mathematical assumptions different from those used today and are viewed by some researchers as a more conservative foundation.
Post-Quantum cryptography brings tradeoffs
The tradeoff is efficiency. Larger signatures could increase transaction sizes and strain network resources.
In parallel, developers are exploring contingency plans. One proposal introduces a commit-and-reveal process that could protect transactions even if a quantum breakthrough occurs before new cryptography is deployed. Another line of research looks at zero-knowledge proofs to allow users to verify ownership of funds without exposing sensitive data.
Taken together, these efforts suggest a layered defense. No single fix solves the problem. Instead, the strategy resembles a toolkit, with protections aimed at different stages of exposure and different levels of urgency.
The harder question may not be technical. Bitcoin has no central authority to mandate changes. Every upgrade requires coordination among developers, miners, exchanges, and users. Past changes, including major upgrades like SegWit and Taproot, took years to activate and often sparked intense debate.
Quantum preparedness could prove even more complex. Some proposals touch on sensitive issues, including whether coins that fail to migrate to safer formats should lose spendability. Such ideas raise philosophical questions about property rights and the social contract embedded in the network.
Even so, the report points to a key difference from past conflicts. Quantum risk is external. It does not divide the community along economic lines or competing visions for Bitcoin’s future. Instead, it presents a shared threat.
Every participant, from long-term holders to infrastructure providers, has an incentive to maintain the network’s security.
In the end, the report suggests that the outcome will hinge less on whether quantum computers arrive and more on whether a decentralized network can coordinate in time.
The answer, as with much of Bitcoin’s history, will emerge through slow consensus rather than sudden change.
IRGC Navy Turns Back Containership Seeking Hormuz Passage As Iran Starts Charging $2 Million Toll
Amid reports of increasing traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, Alireza Tangsiri, a commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy, said on X that the containership Selen was turned back by the IRGC Navy for “failing to comply with legal protocols and lacking permission to transit the Strait of Hormuz.” Needless to say, that is an upgrade from firing missiles at it.
کشتی کانتینربر SELEN به دلیل عدم رعایت پروتکلهای قانونی و نداشتن مجوز عبور از #تنگه_هرمز، توسط نیروی دریایی سپاه به عقب بازگردانده شد.
عبور هرگونه شناور از این آبراهه مستلزم هماهنگی کامل با حاکمیت دریایی ایران است و این مهم جز به پشتوانه مردم شریف ایران به دست نمیآمد. pic.twitter.com/g6ei29Y90Q
Tangsiri said passage through the waterway requires full coordination with Iran’s maritime authorities. His comments echo what he said a week ago when he told local media that has not yet closed the Strait of Hormuz and the vital waterway is “only being controlled.”
Tangsiri, who almost certainly is toward the top of the Pentagon’s most wanted list, warned a week ago after the Israeli attack on the South Pars gas field that “oil facilities associated with America are now on par with American bases and will come under fire with full force” and “warned citizens and workers to stay away from these facilities.”
While the reason why the Selen was turned back is unclear, it probably is because the captain refused to pay the toll Iran has started charging on some commercial vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz, in yet another sign of Tehran’s control over the world’s most important maritime energy channel.
Payments of as much as $2 million per voyage are being sought on an adhoc basis, effectively creating an informal toll on the waterway, according to Bloomberg. Some vessels have made the payment, though the mechanism wasn’t immediately clear – including the currency used – and it doesn’t appear to be systematic.
Stil, the payments show Iran’s influence over Hormuz, through which normally about a fifth of the world’s oil and gas, and vast amounts of food, metals and other materials are shipped every day. With the war in the Middle East now in its fourth week, it also highlights the desperate need for some consumers to ensure continued energy flows.
Hormuz traffic sends mixed signals
Iran appears to be pursuing a calibrated strategy in the Strait of Hormuz, using selective vessel passage as strategic signalling rather than imposing full disruption. According to #MarineTraffic data, some activity may be resuming, with nine… pic.twitter.com/fKjlPhdHYx
Bloomberg sources said the payments have been handled quietly. The lack of transparency and uncertainty over who might be targeted next is adding a fresh layer of friction to the shipping lane. Only a trickle of vessels have crossed the waterway since the war, many of them Iranian-linked. Some of the few others appear to have taken similar routes close to Iran’s coastline.
According to Lloyds List,. “at least two vessels transiting through the strait are understood to have paid in exchange for safe passage, with one fee reported to have been around $2 million.” As some quickly calculated, this actually is not that much if it means removing the Hormuz energy bottleneck: “$2 million on a VLCC carrying 2 million barrels = $1/barrel premium. Quite a bargain in this market. Expect more to follow suit.”
LloydsList: “At least two vessels transiting through the strait are understood to have paid in exchange for safe passage, with one fee reported to have been around $2m.”
$2 million on a VLCC carrying 2 million barrels = $1/barrel premium. Quite a bargain in this market.
Yesterday we reported that India, which got four vessels carrying liquefied petroleum gas to exit the Persian Gulf through Hormuz, said Tuesday that international laws guarantee the right of freedom for navigation through the strait and no one can levy any fee for use of the channel even though the four ships almost certainly paid the fee. Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that he discussed the Iran war on a call with President Donald Trump, including the conflict’s impact on the maritime corridor.
“Ensuring that the Strait of Hormuz remains open, secure and accessible is essential for the whole world,” Modi wrote in a social media post.
While Iran is demanding the transit fee on a case-by-case basis, the Islamic Republic has floated the idea of formalizing the charges as part of a broader postwar settlement, one person said. Last week, an Iranian lawmaker said that parliament was advancing a proposal to require nations to pay Iran for using the Strait of Hormuz as a secure shipping route.
For Arab producers in the Gulf, even an informal toll is unacceptable, people familiar said, as it raises the issues of sovereignty, precedent and the potential weaponization of a vital trade route for their energy exports. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates depend on the route to ship their oil to global markets, but are now relying on alternative pipelines bypassing Hormuz to get crude to their customers.
US To Order 3,000 82nd Airborne Troops To Mideast Amid Reports Of Potential Thursday Peace Talks
Summary
WSJ, Fox reporting 3,000 elite Army Airborne soldiers to be ordered to Middle East. Axios says US awaits Iran response to proposed Thursday peace talks. Trump says Iran has been destroyed “militarily”.
Backchannel diplomacy vs skepticism: Abbas Araghchi reportedly signaled openness to negotiations with the US via envoy Steve Witkoff, but Israel has appeared cool on deal prospects or offramp.
Heavy exchange of fire and testing red lines: Iran continues missile and drone waves targeting Israel and US bases, amid reports of overnight airstrikes on military and gas infrastructure near Isfahan.
Iran reshuffles its security leadership, appointing Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr: he’s a former IRGC commander and replaces the assassinated Ali Larijani.
Iran haltsnatural gas exports to Turkey: follows last week’s Israeli strike on the massive South Pars gas field; QatarEnergy declares force majeure on some LNG contracts due war.
* * *
No Change in Trump Iran Rhetoric in latest from WH
Trump in the oval once again addressed the Iran conflict, saying “this is a change in the Iranian regime,” and went further, stating, “I think we can say this is regime change.”
Trump expressed confidence that negotiations would conclude successfully, saying, “they are going to make a deal; they gave us a significant prize worth tremendous amount of money,” later reiterating that Iran had “gave us a very big present” worth “a very big amount of money” – supposedly the Strait of Hormuz. He asserted “we’ll have control of anything we want.”
He also hailed that Iran has been completely destroyed “militarily” – but without addressing the fact that Iranian forces continue to fire rockets on targets across the region. He at one point proclaimed once again: “we won” – but blamed the “fake news media” for not acknowledging that.
Trump on Iran:
They gave us a big present worth a tremendous amount of money; it arrived today.
Axios reports another ‘maybe’ planned peace talks: “The U.S. and a group of regional mediators are discussing the possibility of holding high-level peace talks with Iran as soon as Thursday, but are still waiting for a response from Tehran, two sources with knowledge of the discussions” were cited as saying.
As has been the case for days, Tehran is denying that it is in dialogue with Washington, also as the White House has talked about “escalating to de-escalate” – and now amid reports of elite 82nd Airborne troops about to deploy to the region. Trump is reportedly interested in “winding down” the war, but is there an actual plan to do this? More from Axios:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is concerned Trump might strike a deal that falls well short of Israel’s objectives, includes significant concessions, and limits Israel’s ability to conduct strikes against Iran, two Israeli sources say.
A third source said Israeli leaders were skeptical Iran had actually offered the concessions the U.S. claimed.
Trump confirms efforts, which may still be unreciprocated:
TRUMP: WE’RE IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH IRAN RIGHT NOW
TRUMP: RUBIO, VANCE, OTHER PEOPLE ARE NEGOTIATING WITH IRAN
TRUMP SAYS IRAN IS ‘TALKING SENSE’
TRUMP: IRAN AGREED THEY’LL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON
82nd Airborne Division Deploying to Middle East
Amid speculation that President Trump could seek to force open the Strait of Hormuz by some kind of ultra high risk Kharg Island takeover operation, Fox chief national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin has posted the following:
Fox News has learned that the Commander of the 82nd Airborne Division Maj Gen Brandon Tegtmeier and his “command element,” members of his headquarters staff, have been ordered to deploy to the Middle East as the Pentagon and White House weigh whether to send the 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East for possible land operations.
It was only on Monday that the NYT began reporting Pentagon was seriously weighing whether to send the elite 82nd Airborne. This would be a sure sign of escalation into potential ‘ground operations’.
The Pentagon is planning to deploy about 3,000 soldiers from the Army’s elite 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East to support operations against Iran, according to two U.S. officials, with a written order expected in the coming hours.
Officials cautioned that a decision to put boots on the ground in Iran hasn’t been made. But deploying the 82nd opens the door to President Trump for several strategic options.
Iran & Israel Trade Blows Despite US Promoting Backchannel Talks
Despite the White House touting backchannel interactions with the Iranians as basis for some kind of peaceful offramp, Israel and Iran intensified direct and regional strikes, in continued escalation of the war. The Israeli military said it had “completed a wave of extensive strikes targeting production sites” across Iran, including in Isfahan, following overnight reports that gas facilities were hit, triggering fears of potential Iranian retaliation on Gulf energy and infrastructure sites – which doesn’t appear to have happened yet.
Iran has kept up its attacks on Israel, launching at least eight overnight missile waves, including reports of cluster munitions as well as new cutting-edge warheads and projectiles. Impacts were reported across Tel Aviv, causing heavy building damage and multiple casualties, as well as with sirens sounding from the Judean Foothills to Eilat. One strike marked a shift in capability, per the NY Times: “One of the Iranian missiles that hit Tel Aviv carried a warhead of around 100 kilograms… This missile was ‘something we have not yet encountered in the war,'” said Col. Miki David.
A 100-kg warhead was used on the Iranian missile that slammed into Tel Aviv early this morning. Significant damage was caused to a residential area. pic.twitter.com/ujkuJpxUVO
More energy flows impact and blowback as Iran has halted natural gas exports to Turkey following last week’s Israeli strike on the massive South Pars gas field, according to regional sources and Bloomberg. Turkey sourced roughly 14% of its gas from Iran last year, per industry data, but continues to rely on Russia and Azerbaijan as primary suppliers while drawing on existing reserves. Ankara has not initially confirmed or commented.
The South Pars field, part of the world’s largest natural gas reserve, sits at the core of Iran’s energy system, underpinning both domestic supply and export flows. Per Middle East Eye: “Data from Turkey’s Energy Market Regulatory Authority suggests that the country imports around 13 percent of its gas needs annually, roughly 7 billion cubic metres (bcm), from Iran.”
The report concludes that “A sharp drop in Iranian gas flows to Turkey following Israel’s strike on the South Pars gas field and Tehran’s retaliatory attacks across the Gulf has raised energy security concerns. But analysts say Ankara will likely be able to cushion the blow.
New National Security Chief (former IRGC), Ongoing Retaliation on Gulf
Iran has continued to signal resilience, downplaying threats to its grid and stating damaged infrastructure could be quickly rebuilt, even as a gas pipeline at Khorramshahr was hit apparently without disruption. Saudi Arabia said it “intercepted and destroyed” more than a dozen drones in its east, while the UAE reported intercepting five ballistic missiles and 17 drones in a single day, bringing totals since the war began to hundreds of missiles and more than 1,800 drones. Bahrain said another facility was set ablaze “as a result of Iranian aggression.”
Tehran has reportedly simultaneously struck US bases, and Gulf states including Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, while warning any attack on its energy network will trigger region-wide blackouts. Northern Iraq has continued to see drone threats. “The entire region will go dark” – Iranian leadership has threatened. Meanwhile, Iran has reshuffled its security leadership, appointing Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr to replace the assassinated Ali Larijani, underscoring wartime consolidation at the top. Zolghadr is a former Revolutionary Guards commander.
Lebanon has declared the Iranian ambassador persona non grata and ordered him to leave the country by Sunday, after an Iranian ballistic missile fell on Lebanese territory. This appears also a way to pressure Hezbollah, given the Lebanese state has long wanted the Tehran-linked group to lay down is arms so war doesn’t engulf the whole country.
Both Pakistan and Qatar have stepped up mediation efforts, with chatter that Islamabad could play host to future Iranian and US talks. Despite the rumors of ongoing backchannel communications, and President Trump himself insisting Sunday into Monday this is happening, there’s as yet no clear evidence that Tehran and Washington are actually dialoguing. Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry has told Al Jazeera that Islamabad is ready to host talks between the US and Iran: “If the parties desire, Islamabad is always willing to host talks,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Tahir Andrabi said. Andrabi’s comment came a day after Trump put on hold, for a period five days, his threat to bomb Iranian power plants.
WSJ meanwhile writes, “Foreign ministers from Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan gathered before dawn Thursday in Riyadh for talks aimed at finding a diplomatic off-ramp to the war in Iran.” The report continues, “But there was one big problem, according to Arab officials involved in the discussions: finding a counterpart in Iran to negotiate with. Earlier that week, Israel killed Iran’s national security chief, Ali Larijani, who had been considered a viable partner who could engage with the West.”
USAF B-52s began to carry out Iran strike missions yesterday using 2,000 pound JDAM guided bombs.
And Bloomberg’s assessment: “Fighting between the US-Israeli alliance and Iran raged unabated, even as President Donald Trump claimed talks are under way to end the conflict.” The report then notes no observable cooling or offramp in the tit-for-tat exchanges of fire:
Iran carried out overnight missile and drone attacks on the Israeli cities of Tel Aviv, Eilat and Dimona, as well as on US bases in the Middle East. Israel launched a wave of strikes in western and central Iran, including Tehran, with Defense Minister Israel Katz saying the campaign would continue “at full intensity.”
Israel is Cool on Prospect of a Deal
Reports out of regional and Israeli media claim Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi quietly signaled to US envoy Steve Witkoff that Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has agreed to negotiations, while Iranian officials said they have received US proposals via intermediaries and are reviewing them. However, Tehran keeps threatening and delivering more ‘retaliatory’ action, perceiving that it has the long-term strategic leverage given the Strait of Hormuz crisis and Trump seeming to issue forth dictates on a back foot.
Israeli officials have by and large dismissed the prospects of a deal, warning the chances of agreement are “very small” and stressing that US force deployments and joint operational planning remain unchanged.
More Regional Spillover: Caspian & Lebanon
The Kremlin has newly warned that any expansion into the Caspian Sea would be viewed “extremely negatively” after Israeli strikes reportedly targeted Iranian naval assets there. Meanwhile, a parallel ground war in Lebanon is accelerating. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz signaled a long-term buffer zone and mass displacement, stating, “Hundreds of thousands… will not return south of the Litani River until security is guaranteed.”
Video purports to show large Israeli strike on Southern Lebanon overnight – an apparent hit on a gas station:
Israel has already destroyed key infrastructure, with Katz confirming, “All five bridges over the Litani… have been blown up,” as forces move to control the area. There are over 1,000 dead and more than a million displaced in Lebanon, with much of Israel’s north also still under emergency evacuation orders, given Hezbollah rocket fire there. At least two Lebanese died in the last day due to Israeli strikes Bshamoun.
NASA Head Adds Lunar Base, Nuclear-Powered Mars Rocket To Space Road Map
NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman is moving ahead with the agency’s ambitious push to return astronauts to the moon, unveiling new plans for a lunar base alongside a nuclear-propelled spacecraft intended to pave the way for a future Mars mission.
At an earlier event, The New York Times reported that Isaacman laid out the agency’s three-phase plan: first, expand robotic missions and surface systems; second, build semi-habitable infrastructure for regular astronaut visits; and third, construct permanent infrastructure for a sustained human presence on the moon.
“We are calling today’s event Ignition because it represents the start of a transformative journey for NASA,” Isaacman told an audience of representatives from aerospace companies, international space agency officials, and Congress.
BREAKING: NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman announces plans to build a PERMANENT U.S. base on the Moon—the plan rolls out in three phases: rover and tech deployments, semi-habitable infrastructure for astronauts, and ultimately a permanent human presence on the lunar surface.… pic.twitter.com/5wansZv09f
Isaacman’s top objective is to return astronauts to the moon in a series of missions called Artemis by 2028. At the same time, he outlined plans to launch a nuclear-propelled spacecraft to Mars by the end of 2028.
He said NASA will deploy $20 billion over seven years to ensure America leads the Moon and Mars missions.
“The moon base will not appear overnight,” Isaacman said. “We will invest approximately $20 billion over the next seven years and build it through dozens of missions.”
The announcement comes just ahead of Artemis II, the mission expected to send astronauts around the moon and back for the first time since 1972.
Isaacman also said Artemis missions would accelerate to twice a year after Artemis V in 2028, and NASA is seeking replacements for Boeing’s Space Launch System, or SLS, rocket and Orion capsule. We reported this last week.
He added that work on the planned Gateway lunar station program has been suspended.
China Condemns US Starting ‘Vicious Cycle’ Of ‘Chaos’ In Attacking Iran
Chinese Special Envoy to the Middle East Zhai Jun has said at a briefing after his shuttle-diplomacy trip that included recent stops in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait that the US-Israeli operation against Iran must immediately cease or else a “vicious cycle” toward destabilizing the region and disrupt global trade would persist.
“Should hostilities continue to escalate and the situation deteriorate further, the entire region will be plunged into chaos. The use of force will only lead to a vicious cycle… the war should not have begun in the first place,” Zhai declared.
Washington’s latest war of choice in the Middle East has been focus of growing condemnation from Beijing, with Zhai having added: “The one who tied the bell must be the one to untie it.” Or this is another way of saying whatever the US broke it must quickly fix.
Separately, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian reiterated at the start of this week that continued military action risks deepening instability, and reminded Washington that its past wars in the same region “are not far behind us.”
It was only days ago that President Trump called on China and Japan to assist in getting the Hormuz Strait back open, but something which especially China has little incentive to do, as its instead content to watch the US get bogged down in a quagmire amid Tehran’s unexpected resilience under the bombs.
Iran has meanwhile held a phone call with China’s foreign minister, per Bloomberg: “Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Tuesday called on all parties in the Iran war to seize every opportunity and window for peace and start peace talks as soon as possible, Xinhua reports. Wang made the appeal in a phone conversation with Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi.”
China has long been a powerful ally of Tehran providing with diplomatic cover, institutional support, military cooperation and an economic lifeline – especially as its major oil buyer; however, China is not expected to go further with any kind of direct military support.
There are claims that it could be, alongside Russia, providing some intelligence support though. If this is the case, there is not much Washington can do about it – also as the White House response to widespread reports of Russian intelligence-sharing has been met with some pretty mild and meager statements out of the White House.
