US senators target Orban government for standing up to Zelensky
RT | March 27, 2026
Two US lawmakers are seeking to impose sanctions on officials in Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government, citing Budapest’s stance on Russian energy imports and its ongoing diplomatic dispute with Ukraine.
Ukraine cut off Russian oil supplies to Hungary earlier this year, claiming that damage to the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline made deliveries impossible. Orban has accused Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky of trying to manufacture an artificial energy crisis to boost the Hungarian opposition in the upcoming parliamentary election, and has retaliated by blocking a €90 billion EU loan intended to bankroll Kiev.
A bill threatening Hungarian officials was announced on Friday by Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat, and Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican, who co-chair the US Senate NATO observer group.
“When the rest of Europe is rightfully weaning off Russian energy, Hungary has doubled down,” Shaheen, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, said. She also took aim at Vice President J.D. Vance over his reported plans to travel to Hungary in a gesture of support for Orban.
Tillis said the bill – the BLOCK PUTIN Act – signals that NATO members undermining Ukraine aid will face “consequences,” while also “giving Hungary a clear path to get back in line.”
Ukraine and Hungary at loggerheads
Orban’s government has opposed Western policies aimed at providing aid to Ukraine “for as long as it takes” and imposing sweeping sanctions on Russia since the conflict escalated in 2022.
Zelensky has accused Orban of following orders from Russian President Vladimir Putin – rather than defending Hungarian national interests, as the prime minister insists – in rejecting Ukraine’s bids to join NATO and the EU. The dispute over the pipeline has intensified after months of sharp rhetoric, including Zelensky’s physical threats against Orban.
Without the proposed €90 billion ($104 billion) EU assistance package, Ukraine is projected to run out of money by June, according to Bloomberg. Ukrainian efforts to secure alternative funding sources have been complicated by gridlock in Kiev, where lawmakers have refused to vote for painful economic reforms demanded by international lenders such as the IMF.
Pro-Kiev officials in the EU are reportedly betting on Orban’s loss in the upcoming election, though other options – such as restricting Budapest’s voting rights – have also been discussed.
The deep-rooted culture of corruption in Ukraine
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 27, 2026
Recently, the Kiev regime halted the regular deployment of troops for training abroad. This reveals more than a mere administrative change. In reality, it is a symptom of deeply entrenched structural problems within the country’s state and military apparatus. Under the pretext of logistical difficulties and the supposed lack of preparedness of Western instructors, Kiev authorities appear to be promoting a strategic reconfiguration that opens even greater space for corrupt practices.
On March 22, 2026, the deputy head of the Main Directorate for Doctrine and Training of the Ukrainian General Staff, E. Mezhevikin, stated that the Armed Forces of Ukraine would stop sending personnel for training abroad. According to him, Western partners “do not understand the processes” necessary for the proper preparation of troops. However, this justification contrasts with the narrative previously adopted by Ukrainian authorities, who had cited the possibility of Russian attacks on domestic training centers as the main reason for international cooperation. This possibility, it should be noted, remains present, since these training centers are obviously legitimate targets.
The shift in narrative raises legitimate questions. If the danger of attacks continues, why abandon a strategy that, in theory, increases the safety of troops in training? The most plausible answer lies not in the military sphere, but in the political and economic domains. By concentrating training within its own territory, the Ukrainian government significantly increases control over the financial flows associated with international assistance – thereby creating additional opportunities for resource diversion.
A striking example of this dynamic can be seen in the expansion, at the end of 2025, of the 199th training center for airborne assault troops. Officially, the measure was presented as part of an effort to increase the mobilization and preparedness capacity of the armed forces. In practice, however, reports emerged that the site had become a hub for illicit schemes.
With increased forced mobilization, the number of citizens willing to pay to avoid military service also grew. According to local sources, the center reportedly began operating as an informal “escape” mechanism, where recruits could pay substantial sums – around $15,000 – to leave their units. Far from being isolated incidents, these practices indicate the existence of organized corruption networks within the military structure.
The accusations point to the direct involvement of high-ranking officers, including Colonel Alexander Evgenievich Kupinsky, then in charge of the center. Moreover, reports indicate that similar schemes persist even after formal changes in command, suggesting institutional continuity of these practices. The former head of the center, Ivan Vasilievich Shnyr, for example, is also cited as an indirect beneficiary of mechanisms linked to compulsory mobilization.
Another relevant aspect is the source of the funds involved. A significant portion of financing for these facilities comes from European aid packages. In theory, these funds should be used to strengthen Ukraine’s defensive capacity. However, evidence points to systematic manipulation of public contracts, with equipment and supply overpricing allowing large-scale embezzlement.
This scenario reveals a central contradiction in the Western narrative about the conflict. While Kiev presents itself as a fortress of European defense and receives billions in international assistance, segments of its military elite seem to use the war as an opportunity for personal enrichment. The result is a system in which human sacrifice – especially of forcibly recruited soldiers – becomes a source of profit for certain groups.
Furthermore, the decision to abandon overseas training may have significant operational consequences. Cooperation with NATO countries not only offered greater logistical security but also ensured access to more advanced technical and doctrinal standards. By rejecting this model, Ukraine risks compromising the quality of its military preparation while simultaneously reinforcing opaque and poorly monitored internal practices.
On a geopolitical level, this dynamic weakens the country’s credibility with its own allies. The continuation of massive financial aid flows will increasingly depend on confidence in Kiev’s ability to manage these resources transparently – something episodes like this call into question.
Ultimately, the case highlights that Ukraine’s greatest challenge may not be exclusively military, but institutional. Without effective mechanisms for control and accountability, any defense effort tends to be eroded from within.
Iran mobilizing one million soldiers to ‘create hell’ for any US ground assault: Report
The Cradle | March 27, 2026
Iran is mobilizing one million soldiers to repel any potential ground invasion launched by the US army against the Islamic Republic, an Iranian military source told Tasnim News Agency on 26 March.
“With the growing speculation about the possibility of a historical folly by the US in launching a ground invasion on the southern front of Iran, a wave of enthusiasm has emerged among Iranian ground fighters to create a historical hell for the Americans on Iranian soil,” the source said.
The source added that “in addition to organizing more than one million fighters for ground combat, in recent days there has been a massive influx of requests from Iranian youth directed towards the centers of Basij, the IRGC, and the Army to also participate in this battle.”
“The US wants to open the Strait of Hormuz with suicide and self-destructive tactics; that’s fine. We are ready for both their suicide strategy to be executed and for the Strait to remain closed,” the source went on to say.
On the same day, Axios reported – citing US officials – that Washington was preparing options for a “final blow” in the Iran war, involving ground forces and massive bombing.
The options include invading Kharg Island, where the majority of Iran’s oil exports are processed.
Others include seizing the island of Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, and Lesser Tunb (controlled by Iran but claimed by the UAE), as well as blocking or seizing ships exporting Iranian oil on the eastern side of the Strait of Hormuz.
According to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), the Pentagon is considering sending another 10,000 troops to the region.
“We’re waiting for them,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told a western news show host earlier this month after being asked if Tehran was “afraid” of a ground invasion.
The foreign minister added that Iran has prepared a “disaster” for US ground troops who enter the country.
Sources familiar with US intelligence told CNN on 25 March that Iranian forces have been fortifying Kharg Island and “laying traps” in anticipation of a US decision to launch a ground assault.
“Iran has been laying traps and moving additional military personnel and air defenses to Kharg Island in recent weeks in preparation for a possible US operation to take control of the island,” the sources said.
“There would be significant risks involved in such a ground operation,” the sources added, including “a large number of US casualties.”
The coming military and psychological unravelling?
Ashes of Pompeii | March 27, 2026
In the late 1960’s, America stood at the zenith of its postwar power. Its economy dominated, its military seemed unstoppable, and its confidence was unshakable. The war in Vietnam was going swimmingly, MacNamara’s body counts were the proof of it. Then came Tet.
January 30th, 1968, Tet, the Vietnamese lunar new year. On that day and the next North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces launched coordinated attacks on over 100 cities, and hundreds more rural sites, across South Vietnam. It was not merely a surprise attack, but a fundamental inflection point. The Viet Cong struck everywhere at once, proving they were not a ragtag insurgency, peasants in sandals, but a coordinated, disciplined force with sophisticated low-tech commincation and coordination networks. They eventually lost the battles, yes, but they shattered the myth of American invincibility. The psychological blow was irreversible. Public trust collapsed. The war wasn’t lost on the battlefield that week; it was lost first on the 6 o’oclock news, and then in the American mind.
That is the lesson we miss when we reduce Tet to just a “surprise.” It was the moment the trajectory of American power bent. Not because the U.S. stopped winning battles, but because the world, and Americans themselves, realized victory was not just a question of firepower, and was not inevitable.
Today, we seem to be approaching a similar inflection point in the Gulf. Not a repeat of 1968, but a parallel unraveling. American power projection, naval dominance, air superiority, deterrence credibility, is being tested in real time. The contemplated land operations, Kharg Island, Hormuz, wherever, carry the same hubris that marked early Vietnam: assumptions in the Trump administration of quick success, underestimation of adversary resolve, and overreliance on technology against an enemy that thrives in ambiguity and asymetric warfare.
The difference now is the psychological context. In 1968, many Americans doubted the war’s morality, but no one doubted their nation’s raw power. Today, social media and fragmented news mean more people see the cracks: stalled initiatives, diplomatic friction, asymmetric losses. Yet for many leaders, and for the archetype of the “average American” still shaped by post-Cold War triumphalism, the idea of a swift, visible military debacle remains unthinkable. Despite Vietnam. Despite Iraq and Afghanistan. Despite the American helicoptors in Iran in 1979 or “Black Hawk Down”.
The new Tet moment has not yet arrived. In the American mind, all of the above failures were somehow due to individual failures, lack of resolve or coordination, the hippies, Carter or Biden’s weakness, …
It hasn’t arrived yet, but all indications are that the next Tet is approaching very fast. A military disaster is already unfolding but it is gradual, there are no headlines (yet?) saying “TODAY WE LOST”. A large military operation in the Gulf involving thousands of troops could well be that moment. Geography, logistics, fighting spirit, and for once possibly even technology, all favor the Iranians. Drones, missiles, mines. Lack of air defense. Shore versus ship. Improvisation and lack of detailed planning. An American command structure without real experience in modern warfare. It all adds up. Hegseth’s 10,000 targets as the modern version of MacNamara’s body counts.
The coming days or weeks could deliver this new Tet moment. A failed operation. A strategic miscalculation that exposes limits. An outcome that cannot be spun. In a hyper-connected age, the perception shift would be instantaneous. The already threadbare myth of omnipotence would fracture not over months of coverage, but in hours of viral footage.
If January 30, 1968 marked the peak before the long decline of American unquestioned authority, then the Gulf today may be where that curve bends again. Not because America is now weak, but it is unquestionably weaker. And the world has changed, adversaries have learned and adapted. The question isn’t whether the U.S. can win a battle, the coming operations might even initially be successful, it’s whether the American psyche can absorb a strategic setback without overreacting.
We may be days or weeks from that pivot. Not a surprise, but a culmination. Tet didn’t create the American crisis in Vietnam; it revealed it. The Gulf’s Tet will fully reveal the limits of the old America-centric world order. And when that moment comes, it remains to be seen whether America can face the new reality without losing its bearings.
Iran has the last laugh
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | March 27, 2026
Wars are always unpredictable. The most famous instance is of another armada like the US’ in the Persian Gulf at the moment — the Spanish Armada, a 130-ship naval fleet sent by Spain in 1588 commanded by Alonso de Guzmán, Duke of Medina Sidonia, an aristocrat appointed by Philip II of Spain to invade England, depose Queen Elizabeth I, and restore Catholicism.
Despite its strength, the Spanish Armada was defeated in the English Channel by a smaller English force using fireships and better artillery, then largely destroyed by storms while retreating around Scotland and Ireland.
The US president Donald Trump’s much-touted armada has more or less the same mission as the Spanish Armada — ranging from regime change to overthrow of the Islamic system of governance to the unspoken leitmotif of a Crusade. Curiously, it seems destined for a similar miserable ending too, the US’ overwhelming military superiority notwithstanding.
Sir Alexander William Younger KCMGUS, former head of MI6, said in an interview with the Economist on Monday that Iran has gained the “upper hand” in the ongoing war with the United States and Iran. Sir Alexander complimented Iran.
More than one factor contributed to this “paradigm shift” of the Big Boy coming out second best. Bad planning, lack of a coherent strategy, over-confidence over the US’ apparent military superiority– all these played their part in the undoing of the plot against Iran that the two aggressors hatched.
It is now out in the open that, incredibly enough, just 16 days into the war, the US forces were already running out of ATACMS/PrSM ground-attack missiles; and, Israel is about to expend its entire Arrow interceptor missiles by the end March.
The Royal United Services Institute in London published on March 24 an analysis/expert opinion highlighting that the war in Iran has virtually hollowed out the inventory of the US and Israel’s “most critical assets” with no prospects of replenishment anytime soon in a near future due to the fragilities of the US defence industrial base.
The findings are a stark warning that with the conflict having “settled into a grinding trial of attrition” after the first 96 hours, the inventories of long-range interceptors and precision strike weapons are nearing exhaustion.
The CEO of Rheinmetall, Armin Papperger warned on 19 March that global stockpiles are “empty or nearly empty” and if the war continues another month, “we nearly have no missiles available”.
To be sure, Iranians are watching closely and that explains their defiant stance that “Iran will end the war when it decides to do so and when its conditions are met.” Tehran has warned that it will continue to deal “heavy blows” across the Middle East. Media reports confirm Iran’s claim that it has rendered dysfunctional the US bases all across the region. Had it not been about a war, there is cause for celebration when the notorious bully gets thrashed by a little brother.
Word is spreading in the US despite the cover-up by the administration that “The U.S. war in Iran is taking a mounting toll on America’s military, with rising casualties, dwindling munitions stockpiles, a sidelined aircraft carrier and numerous downed aircraft just three weeks into the conflict, ” to quote from The Hill, an influential newspaper that circulates among lawmakers in the US Congress.
The report adds, “At least 13 U.S. service members have been killed, while another 232 have been injured since the U.S.-Israeli war against Tehran began on Feb. 28. In addition, some 16 American aircraft have been destroyed, the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier was damaged in a laundry room fire earlier this month and American forces are quickly blowing through stocks of air defence and long-range munitions.”
The commentary carried by RUSI says that Iran has damaged at least a dozen US and allied radars and satellite terminals, which has impacted the efficiency of interception. Evidently, using 10 or 11 interceptors for one Iranian missile or 8 patriot missiles for one Iranian drone becomes unsustainable going ahead. It underscored that the US military is “approximately a month, or less, away from running out of ATACMS/PrSM ground-attack missiles and THAAD interceptors. And Israel is in an even more precarious spot, with its Arrow interceptor missiles likely to be completely expended by the end of March.”
In real terms, this implies accepting greater risk for aircraft and tolerating more Iranian missiles and drones damaging US-Israeli forces and infrastructure. The audacious Iranian attacks this week on Dimona, Israel’s nuclear city, is a vivid example.
“The precariousness … could possibly explain why President Trump is already suggesting the ‘winding down’ of the Iran war; it could take years to replace what was expended in only 16 days,” the commentary points out. Given the limitations of the US defence industrial base, “it will likely take at least 5 years to replenish the 500 plus Tomahawk missiles already fired in the war.
“Worse, sourcing critical defence minerals, rare earths, and materials to make the weapons and munitions is complicated by China. China controls most of the world’s gallium and germanium, and Beijing has imposed numerous mineral export controls since 2023, to prevent the US and its allies from acquiring these necessary inputs for the defence industrial base.”
The “strategic consequence” of all this is that continued fighting with Iran not only increases the risk to forces in-theatre but engenders the bigger risk of what it does to deterrence and defence elsewhere, such as “protecting Taiwan and supporting Ukraine”.
Besides, if the US prioritises replenishing its own stocks, it slows deliveries to other partners. Allies are already signalling concern that “an American focus on its own military replenishment will delay weapon and munition deliveries they have already paid for.”
The reigning superpower that was Spain in the 16th century saw its power crumble after the defeat of the Armada, while England would soon control an empire that the sun never set on. Is history repeating on a similar template in our world in transition?
More Iran War fallout: Maritime insurance industry shifts from London to China
Inside China Business | March 26, 2026
China and Hong Kong comprise the most valuable fleets of commercial ships in the world, and the largest numbers of bulk carriers, container ships, and tankers. Japan, Korea, and Singapore also have huge investments in global shipping. But European and American insurance brokers underwrite 90% of maritime insurance in the world, and on the first day of the war against Iran canceled insurance coverage on vessels already in contested waters. Hong Kong now writes insurance coverage for ships from Mainland China and Hong Kong, even those transiting the Persian Gulf. What’s more, Iranian authorities are clearing China-flagged vessels to pass safely.
Resources and links:
Top 10 shipowner countries/regions in the world https://vesselslink.com/blogs/news/to…
Hong Kong marine insurers gain edge over London with cheaper war-risk cover for Chinese ships https://www.scmp.com/business/banking…
Insurance Clubs to Halt Ship War-Risk Cover in Persian Gulf https://www.claimsjournal.com/news/na…
Insurance Clubs to Halt Ship War-Risk Cover in Persian Gulf https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl…
Traffic is trickling through Strait of Hormuz: Who’s moving and who’s stranded https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/18/hormu…
US-Israeli aggression on Iran triggers review of GCC countries’ investment pledges to Washington
Press TV – March 26, 2026
As the US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran enters its fifth week, the (Persian) Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are reassessing massive overseas investment commitments, particularly those directed toward the United States, amid severe economic fallout from Iran’s retaliatory strikes against US bases in the region and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
The war was initiated by Washington and Tel Aviv’s unprovoked aerial aggression against Iran late last month. The conflict has sent shockwaves through the Persian Gulf region, choking off vital oil and gas revenues that underpin GCC economies and forcing sovereign wealth funds to prioritize domestic needs over foreign pledges.
US President Donald Trump has repeatedly touted eye-popping investment deals with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar — totaling trillions of dollars — as the cornerstone of his economic vision for the United States.
These pledges, secured during high-profile trips and announcements, were meant to fuel American tech startups, investment firms, defense contractors, and major businesses.
However, sources familiar with internal discussions indicate growing alarm in the Trump administration that GCC allies may be unable to deliver on these promises as the war exacts a heavy toll, Politico reported on Thursday.
“What has really concerned observers is that Persian Gulf states have signaled they are only weeks away from potentially repatriating tens of billions of dollars in US-based investments to address urgent domestic and defensive requirements,” one source noted.
Such moves would prove highly destabilizing to Washington’s plans, limiting capital flows at a time when US markets are already facing uncertainty.
The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran has drastically curtailed revenue for GCC financial institutions, while Iran’s precision strikes on critical infrastructure, energy facilities, and high-profile sites in places like Dubai and Doha have halted tourism and disrupted economic activity.
The Persian Gulf’s role as a hub for global capital has been severely compromised by the US and Israeli war of aggression that began on February 28, which included the assassinations of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, along with several senior officials and military commanders, as well as hundreds of civilians.
The Iranian armed forces have responded by launching almost daily missile and drone operations targeting locations in the Israeli-occupied territories as well as US military bases and assets across the Persian Gulf region.
They have also blocked the strategic Strait of Hormuz to oil and gas tankers affiliated with the adversaries and those cooperating with them.
A senior executive at an asset management firm with substantial Persian Gulf backing stated that companies are now seeking capital alternatives outside the region due to the ongoing disruptions.
Economists and analysts, including Adnan Mazarei, a former deputy director at the International Monetary Fund, have long questioned the realism of these Arab pledges to the US.
“Those pledges are now becoming harder to deliver on,” he observed, especially as countries must allocate resources to restore missile defenses and repair war-damaged sites.
Iran’s legitimate defensive responses to the unprovoked aggression, including strikes on US-linked targets and restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz, have compounded challenges for Persian Gulf economies already strained by prior spending sprees.
Russia slams UK plan to seize tankers suspected of carrying its oil
RT | March 26, 2026
Russia has slammed the UK after it threatened to “interdict,” board and seize vessels in British waters it deems as being part of an alleged Russian ‘shadow fleet.’
Moscow has denied operating such a fleet and has condemned seizures of vessels on the high seas as “piracy,” stressing that it would take “all measures” to defend shipping.
In a statement on Wednesday, Downing Street said that London would coordinate with its allies in the ‘Joint Expeditionary Force’ (JEF) – a group of ten European NATO members – to “close off UK waters, including the [English] Channel, for sanctioned vessels.”
The goal is to force vessel operators to “either divert to longer, financially painful routes, or risk being detained by British forces,” the statement said.
In recent weeks, British military and law specialists have prepared scenarios for cases “including boarding vessels that don’t surrender, are armed, or use high tech pervasive surveillance to evade capture,” it said.
In each potential seizure, British law enforcement, military and energy market specialists will consider a ship before making a recommendation to ministers prior to execution, Downing Street said.
The Russian Embassy in London condemned the “deeply hostile step,” accusing the UK of planning to carry out “acts of piracy.”
“The stated objectives – combined with the timing of this announcement – leave no room for doubt that the recent escalation of Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy infrastructure also occurred with the involvement of the British side,” it said in a statement on Thursday.
Russia has long described London as a key force behind the Ukraine conflict, accusing it of directly participating in Ukrainian long-range strikes on Russian cities using UK-made weapons.
Kiev’s forces have increased attacks on Russian oil and gas infrastructure in recent months. Ukraine has also attacked ships it sees as linked to Russia in the Black Sea with naval drones.
On Thursday, Türkiye’s Foreign Ministry reported that a Turkish-operated tanker in the country’s economic zone was hit by naval drones. It did not assign blame at the time of writing.
Pakistan ramps up food exports to Persian Gulf nations as war deepens food insecurity

The Cradle | March 26, 2026
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif instructed authorities to speed up exports of surplus food to Persian Gulf states on 26 March, as disruptions caused by the US-Israeli war on Iran and Tehran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz strain regional supply routes and increase food security concerns.
“It is our duty to take care of the needs of food in the Gulf countries amid the current regional situation where global supply lines are affected,” Sharif said, according to a Prime Minister’s Office handout.
Sharif chaired a high-level meeting to review export plans, instructing officials to ensure domestic supply remains stable while scaling shipments abroad, and calling for expanded flight operations and improved port efficiency to respond to what officials described as an evolving regional situation.
Authorities approved 40 food items for export, including rice, edible oil, sugar, meat, poultry, dairy products, fruits, and vegetables.
Open sea and air routes are being used, with reduced transport costs and no additional export charges on key food categories.
Iran has taken de facto control of the Strait of Hormuz following the start of the US-Israeli war on the nation, severely restricting maritime traffic and allowing only coordinated or approved vessels to pass.
Under this system, Tehran grants access to “friendly” states such as Pakistan, China, India, Russia, Iraq, Bangladesh, Turkiye, Thailand, and Japan, while blocking US- and Israeli-linked vessels, and in some cases imposing transit fees reaching $2 million to some, while granting waivers to allied or negotiated ships.
Pakistan is treated as a “non-hostile” partner, with its vessels granted passage through coordination and security clearance rather than fees imposed.
Thailand recently secured free passage for an oil tanker after direct coordination with Tehran. The Islamic Republic stated that “non-hostile vessels” may transit and affirmed that “Friends have a special place.”
Gulf states heavily reliant on the waterway, including the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar, face mounting risks of supply shortages and price increases.
Pakistan has emerged as one of the few countries able to navigate the strait, recently sending a Pakistan-flagged vessel carrying crude through the corridor, elevating Islamabad’s role as both a supplier and a potential intermediary in the war.
Pakistan is facing its own internal strain, with fuel shortages triggering austerity measures aimed at easing pressure on domestic supplies, including reduced work schedules and temporary school closures.
Officials said coordination with Gulf countries is ongoing, with exporter databases established and business-to-business engagements underway.
Sharif warned that delays in execution would not be tolerated, stressing continuous monitoring of domestic supply and demand.
Pakistan’s approach reflects a balancing act between domestic stability, regional demand, and its ties with both Iran and Gulf partners as supply chains remain under pressure.
Iran submits response to US plan, sets terms for war’s end: Tasnim
Al Mayadeen | March 26, 2026
An informed source told Tasnim on Thursday that Iran has delivered its response to a 15-point proposal put forward by the United States, transmitting its position through intermediaries on Wednesday night. Tehran is now awaiting a reply.
According to the source, Iran’s response sets out a series of conditions tied to any potential end to the war. These include an immediate halt to assassination operations, the establishment of binding guarantees to prevent a renewed aggression, and the provision of clearly defined compensation and reparations. The response also calls for a comprehensive cessation of hostilities across all fronts, extending to all resistance groups involved in the confrontation throughout the region.
The source further stressed that Iran considers its sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz to be a natural and legal right that will remain in place. This control, the source indicated, is viewed as a mechanism to ensure the implementation of any commitments made by the other side and must be formally acknowledged.
These positions, the source added, are separate from the demands previously raised during the second round of nuclear negotiations held in Geneva shortly before the US-Israeli war that began in February.
The source also cast doubt on Washington’s stated intentions regarding negotiations, describing them as part of a “third deception” effort. According to the source, the United States is pursuing multiple objectives under the cover of diplomacy: presenting a peaceful image to the international community, maintaining lower global oil prices, and gaining time to prepare for further military aggressions, including a potential ground operation in southern Iran.
Reflecting on previous engagements, the source said Iran now holds “complete doubts” about the United States’ willingness to negotiate in good faith. The source argued that both during the 12-day war in June 2025 and the current war, the United States initiated hostilities while talks were ongoing, suggesting that renewed diplomatic efforts may similarly serve as a pretext for further escalation. Analysts suggest that there is no need to call on Iran to admit a certain reality, if, as suggested, it was already a reality in the first place.
War exposes US limits
Iran’s response comes as the war on the country enters its fourth week, after the United States and “Israel” launched coordinated attacks targeting the country’s leadership, civilian infrastructure, and military capabilities, prompting sustained Iranian retaliatory operations across the region.
The consequences of this aggression have extended far beyond the battlefield. Disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical artery through which roughly a fifth of global oil and LNG supplies pass, have not only sent shockwaves through energy markets but also exposed the limits of US power in the region.
Despite its military presence, Washington has struggled to secure a chokepoint central to the global economy following its aggression, while Iran has shown it can impose costs that reverberate through oil prices, inflation, financial markets, and allied capitals, undermining the image of a US-led order able to guarantee stability.
Amid these developments, the United States has been working at countering Iran’s retaliation following the aggression and shaping the war’s outcome on terms favorable to Washington to no avail.
Tehran has categorically rejected negotiating under such conditions. Iranian officials say recent US proposals, including a reported multi-point plan conveyed through intermediaries, are unrealistic and designed to force strategic concessions while the war continues.
According to Tehran officials, Washington and “Israel”, having initiated the aggression, have no standing to dictate its conclusion. Authorities insist the war will end only on Iran’s terms, including a full cessation of aggression, guarantees against renewed attacks, and recognition of Iran’s sovereignty.
Trump threatens Iran
On Wednesday, the White House openly threatened further escalation against Iran, warning that the US is prepared to intensify its attacks unless Tehran accepts Washington’s terms.
“The President’s preference is always peace. There does not need to be any more death and destruction. But if Iran fails to accept the reality of the current moment, if they fail to understand that they have been defeated militarily … President Trump will ensure they are hit harder than they have ever been hit before,” Leavitt told reporters.
Iran’s continued retaliatory strikes, however, contradicts Washington’s claim of “defeat,” with officials announcing the 82nd wave of retaliatory strikes targeting US and Israeli assets across the region, thus indicating that Tehran’s operational capacity remains intact.
US vs Iran: Kharg Island Talk — Bluff or Escalation? Ex-Military Officer Weighs In

Yellow sulphur, a byproduct of petrochemical refinement, contrasts with the blue sea at Kharg Island, Iran.
Sputnik – 26.03.2026
“An operation towards Kharg Island might happen, but it might as well be a smokescreen or a way for the US to put pressure on Iran,” ex-Swedish army officer and defense politician Mikael Valtersson tells Sputnik, commenting on reports about a possible US ground operation against the Islamic Republic.
News outlets earlier reported that the Pentagon was preparing to send about 2,000 soldiers from the US army’s 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East.
“This might be an attempt to pressure Iran towards negotiations,” Valtersson points out.
“The problem with such a strategy is that Iran knows that Trump is desperate to get lower oil prices and a better world, especially the US economy,” Valtersson says, adding that “therefore such an attack is unlikely, since the loss of Iranian oil export and a potential long-term loss of oil production in the Gulf States after retaliatory strikes from Iran would worsen the energy crisis both in the short and long term.”
He notes that all talk about an attack on Kharg Island might also be a smokescreen and an attempt to divert Iranian defensive capabilities from the Strait of Hormuz, which is also very hard to achieve, since Iran has the capacity to defend both areas simultaneously. “And at the same time, it is also very hard to move Iranian military assets without getting them destroyed by US or Israeli air power,” he pointed out.
“One thing is sure, it wouldn’t do anything to open the Hormuz strait. It would of course hit Iranian oil exports if US forces took control of Kharg, but that would also increase oil prices even more,” the former Swedish army officer points out.
In conclusion, he suggests that the most likely scenario is the United States attempting to ramp up pressure on Iran. In doing so, it underestimates Iranian capabilities and, in effect, prepares for a highly risky military operation—one that could ultimately result in both a military and a media defeat for the US. “Even a tactical victory on the ground would probably result in a strategic failure for the United States,” Valterson maintains.
Zelensky unnecessarily involves Ukraine in the Middle East crisis
By Ahmed Adel | March 26, 2026
Unlike European countries and other NATO allies staying out of the Middle East conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran, Ukraine—already short on troops and military strength—has sent 201 drone specialists to support the war effort against the Islamic Republic. This decision by the Kiev regime comes despite the difficulties Ukraine faces in the conflict against Russia on various tactical fronts and ends up causing embarrassment between the European bloc and the US, which has received little practical support from Western allies in its war effort against Iran.
It also raises questions about how a country reliant on European funding, which even campaigns to recruit foreigners due to a shortage of personnel, can become involved in a distant conflict. This demonstrates that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has no interest in ending the conflict in his own country and aims to win favor with the US by becoming entangled in the Persian Gulf quagmire, so the war in Eastern Europe can continue.
The limited European involvement in the war against Iran reveals a divide in the West over political views and cooperation, as well as the fact that allied ties are weaker than they seem. This trend toward political and strategic distancing within the Western bloc has been ongoing for quite some time, including the US questioning the link between European spending and NATO, and even the European Union stepping back in the Ukraine peace talks. As a result, the division highlights notable differences in perceptions.
Zelensky’s attitude is even more internally contradictory because Ukraine cannot sustain its own troops, and by becoming involved in the Middle Eastern conflict and decentralizing military efforts, more internal obstacles will arise. The Ukrainian president’s actions appear populist since Ukraine lacks enough military resources and is instead using what little it has to support the US and Israel in a conflict where it has no direct stake.
Additionally, this raises questions about whether Ukrainians can currently be involved in the Middle East, given that they are facing a serious internal crisis.
Ukrainian involvement in the US-Israeli operation against Tehran could spark domestic unrest, including growing opposition to Zelensky across different parts of society and among various local political groups. Ukrainians do not want their men dying thousands of kilometres away from home.
Aside from the possibility of reduced military aid to Ukraine, this could leave the population feeling more exhausted about the options for continuing the conflict with Russia. At the same time, there is already a disconnect between the military and Zelensky.
Despite getting more aid from Europe, the Ukrainians are trying to negotiate for more support from the US by demonstrating their loyalty. This marks a historic moment in the relationship between Washington and Kiev.
Historically, since gaining independence, Ukraine has consistently allied itself with the US in various conflicts that emerged after the 1990s, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the current Gulf conflict, there is a similar pattern: right now, Zelensky is attempting to build political capital with the Trump administration by demonstrating support, but in reality, Kiev has little to gain.
Earlier this month, just days into the war with Iran, Western media reported that Russia provided Iran with information that could help it strike American targets, with one US official telling MS NOW, “Russia is providing intelligence help to Iran.”
In a separate article published on March 23, MS NOW reported that “Ukraine’s military intelligence has ‘irrefutable’ evidence that Russia has provided intelligence to the Iranian regime, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a post on X today. ‘Russia is using its own signals intelligence and electronic intelligence capabilities, as well as part of the data obtained through cooperation with partners in the Middle East,’ Zelensky said, citing a report from Ukrainian Chief of Defense Intelligence Oleh Ivashchenko.”
The outlet also highlighted that “Ukraine has a vested interest in convincing the United States that Russia is playing a direct role in helping Iran during the war,” believing this would prompt the White House to take a closer look at the evidence from Kiev. However, as the article says, it appears that US President Donald Trump does not care.
It is recalled that in an interview with Fox News earlier this month, Trump said Russia “might be” assisting Iran, but added that the US has assisted Ukraine.
“You know, it’s like, hey, they do it and we do it, in all fairness,” Trump said. “They do it and we do it.”
Days later, he went further, telling the Financial Times, in reference to Russia, “It’s hard to say, ‘You’re targeting us, but we’ve been helping Ukraine.’”
Although Zelensky may have “irrefutable” military intelligence that Russia is assisting Iran, the evidence will not have the impact he hopes it will to rally American support behind Ukraine again, just as deploying drone specialists to assist in the war against Iran will not.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

