Connect with us

World

Iran’s president sets terms to end the war: Is an off-ramp in sight?

Published

on

Iran’s president sets terms to end the war: Is an off-ramp in sight?

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has laid out terms for ending the war with the United States and Israel in what analysts say is a possible sign of de-escalation from Tehran as the US-Israel war on Iran entered its 13th day on Thursday.

In a post on Wednesday on social site X, Pezeshkian said he had spoken to his counterparts in Russia and Pakistan, and that he had confirmed “Iran’s commitment to peace”.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

“The only way to end this war – ignited by the Zionist regime & US – is recognizing Iran’s legitimate rights, payment of reparations, and firm int’l guarantees against future aggression,” Pezeshkian wrote.

This is a rare posture from Tehran, which has maintained a defiant stance and initially rejected any possibility of negotiations or a ceasefire when war broke out nearly two weeks ago.

Pezeshkian’s statement comes as pressure mounts on the US to halt what has become a very costly mission. Analysts say speculation from Washington that Iran would quickly submit after the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were misguided.

Advertisement

Tehran is likely going to determine the end of this war, not the US or Israel, because of its ability to inflict economic pain broadly, they say.

Amid a military pummelling by the US and Israel, Iran has launched heavy retaliatory strikes at US assets and other critical infrastructure in Gulf countries, upsetting global supplies. It has also adopted what analysts call “asymmetric” tactics – such as disrupting the critical Strait of Hormuz and threatening US banking-linked entities – to inflict as much economic pain on the region and wider world as it can.

This is what we know about Pezeshkian’s stance and what the pressures are on both sides to draw the conflict to a close, quickly.

A building lies in ruins after a strike, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, on March 12, 2026 [Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters]

What has the war cost so far?

Economically, both sides have weaponised energy. Israel first targeted Iran’s oil facilities in Tehran on March 8, prompting an outcry from global health experts over the potential risk of air and water pollution.

Iran has, meanwhile, tightened its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz shipping route – the only route to open sea for oil producers in the Gulf – with its military promising on Wednesday that it has the capabilities to wage a long war that could “destroy” the world economy.

Advertisement

Attacks on ships in the strait, through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas traffic normally passes, have effectively closed the route.

Oil prices rocketed above $100 per barrel late last week, up from around $65 before the war, with ordinary buyers feeling the increases at pumps in the US, Europe and parts of Africa.

On Wednesday, Iran upped the ante, saying it would not allow “a litre of oil” to pass through the strait and warned the world to expect a $200-per-barrel price tag.

“We don’t know how quickly it’ll revert back,” Freya Beamish, chief economist at GlobalData TS Lombard, told Al Jazeera. “We do think it’ll revert back to $80 in due course, but the ball is to some degree in Iran’s court,” she said, adding that because Iran needs oil revenue, the price hikes are expected to be time-limited.

The International Energy Agency agreed on Wednesday to release 400 million barrels from the emergency reserves of several member states but it is not yet clear what impact that will have, nor how quickly this quantity of oil can be released.

Advertisement

Tehran has also been accused of directly attacking oil facilities in neighbouring countries this week. Iraq shut all its oil port operations on Thursday after explosive-laden Iranian “drone” boats appeared to have attacked two fuel tankers in Iraqi waters, setting them ablaze and killing one crew member.

A drone was filmed striking Oman’s Salalah oil port on Wednesday, although Tehran has denied involvement.

What are Iranian officials saying about ending the war?

There has been conflicting messaging from the Iranian leadership.

Iran’s elite army unit and parallel armed force, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), continues to show defiance, issuing threats and launching attacks on Israel and US military assets and infrastructure in neighbouring Gulf countries.

However, the political leadership has appeared more inclined towards diplomacy, analysts say. On Wednesday, President Pezeshkian said that ending the war would take the US and Israel recognising Iran’s rights, paying Iran reparations – although it’s unclear how much is being asked for – and providing strong guarantees that a future war will not be waged.

Advertisement

In a video recording last week, he also apologised to neighbouring countries for the strikes and promised that Iran would stop hitting its neighbours as long as they do not allow the US to launch attacks from their territory.

“I personally apologise to the neighbouring countries that were affected by Iran’s actions,” the president said, adding that Tehran was not looking for confrontations with its neighbours.

However, it is not known how much sway the political leadership has over the IRGC. Hours after the president’s apology last week, air defence sirens went off in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE and Bahrain, as strikes continued on the Gulf.

So, what is Iran’s actual position?

“Iran wants to go to the end to make sure that the United States and Israel never attack Iran again … so this has to be the final battle,” Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar Atas explained.

Indeed, the IRGC sees this as an existential war, but the timing of Pezeshkian’s statement about ending the conflict also shows Tehran is pressured economically, politically and militarily, Zeidon Alkinani of Qatar’s Georgetown University told Al Jazeera.

Advertisement

“These differences and divisions [between IRGC and political leaders] always existed even prior to this war but we may notice it now more, given the fact that the IRGC believes that it has the right to take the front seat in leading this regional war, which is why a lot of the statements and positions are contradicting with the official ones from Pezeshkian,” he said.

The IRGC reports directly to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and not to the country’s political leadership. That council is led by Ali Larijani, a top politician and close aide to the late supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who analysts describe as a “hardliner”.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Larijani responded to threats from Trump about attacks on the Strait of Hormuz, saying: “Iranian people do not fear your hollow threats; for those greater than you have failed to erase it … So beware lest you be the ones to vanish.”

The newly elected supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, was once in the IRGC and was put forward by the unit as the next ayatollah after his father was killed on the first day of the war, analysts say. He is thus not expected to follow the reformist, diplomatic ideals of President Pezeshkian and other political leaders which his father managed to marry with the IRGC militarised stance, they say.

Mojtaba Khamenei, son of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, attends a gathering.
Mojtaba Khamenei, son of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, attends a gathering in Tehran on March 2, 2016. Iran marked the appointment of Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei to replace his father as its supreme leader with a barrage of missiles against Israel and the Gulf states [File: Rouhollah Vahdati/ISNA via AFP]

What do the US and Israel say about ending the war?

There have also been conflicting messages from the Trump administration and Israel regarding when the war mission on Iran, codenamed Operation Epic Fury, is likely to end.

Trump told US publication Axios on Wednesday that the war on Iran would end “soon” because there’s “practically nothing left to target”.

Advertisement

“Anytime I want it to end, it will end,” he added. He had said earlier on Monday that “we’re way ahead of our schedule” and that the US had achieved its goals, even as speculation mounts about a possible US ground mission.

On the other hand, Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that the war would go on “without any time limit, for as long as necessary, until we achieve all the objectives and decisively win the campaign”.

Analysts say Trump’s stance that the conflict will be quick reflects increasing pressure on his administration ahead of upcoming mid-term elections in November.

Trump’s advisers privately told him this week to find a quick end to the war and avoid political backlash, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal. That came as polls from Quinnipiac University and The Washington Post suggested that most Americans are opposed to the war in Iran.

In his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump promised to lower prices, and inflation had stabilised at 2.4 percent ahead of the war, according to government data released on Wednesday. Analysts speculate the conflict will likely push it back up.

Advertisement

The US spent more than $11.3bn in the first six days of the war, Pentagon officials told lawmakers in a classified briefing on Tuesday, Reuters reported this week – nearly $2bn a day.

The Washington-based think tank, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), estimated that the war cost Washington $3.7bn in its first 100 hours alone, or nearly $900m a day, largely due to its expenditure on costly munitions.

“It’s quite ironic that [Trump] chose a war that would make affordability worse, not better,” Rebecca Christie, a senior fellow at the Bruegel think tank, told Al Jazeera’s Counting the Cost.

“Every time the US loses even one object, air defence or a plane or something like that, that represents an awful lot of money that could have been used on some of these issues that have an impact on people’s day-to-day lives in the United States.”

Advertisement

World

State Department congratulates Keiko Fujimori as Peru’s president-elect following razor-thin vote count

Published

on

State Department congratulates Keiko Fujimori as Peru’s president-elect following razor-thin vote count

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The State Department on Tuesday congratulated conservative candidate Keiko Fujimori after she was declared the winner of Peru’s presidential runoff election by a razor-thin margin.

The statement marked a significant milestone in Latin American relations, with Washington signaling it expects to work closely with Fujimori’s administration on shared priorities.

“The United States congratulates President-Elect Keiko Fujimori of Peru on her important electoral victory,” the department said. 

“The Trump Administration looks forward to deepening collaboration with the Fujimori Administration to advance security cooperation and to strengthen bilateral cooperation on investment and trade in our region.”

Advertisement

TRUMP ADMIN WARNS PERU IT COULD LOSE SOVEREIGNTY AS CHINA TIGHTENS GRIP ON NATION

Peru’s presidential candidate for the Fuerza Popular party, Keiko Fujimori, waves to supporters during a closing campaign rally in Lima on June 4, 2026. (Anthony Nino de Guzman/AFP)

Her victory comes as Washington seeks to strengthen ties with pro-market allies in Latin America amid growing Chinese economic influence in the region.

Beijing recently completed the Chancay deepwater port in Peru — a $1.3 billion mega-project that serves as China’s key logistics hub on the Pacific coast.

Fujimori’s tough stance on organized crime also aligns with U.S. efforts to expand regional security and anti-trafficking cooperation.

Advertisement

BIDEN, XI TO MEET ON SATURDAY IN PERU, US OFFICIALS SAY

Secretary of State Marco Rubio looks on during a ceremony at the U.S. embassy in New Delhi on May 23, 2026. (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AFP)

Fujimori was declared the winner Monday by Peru’s National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE), the electoral authority responsible for reporting vote count results. The country’s final authority on election matters, the National Jury of Elections (JNE), has yet to issue its official proclamation, according to Reuters.

According to the ONPE, Fujimori secured 50.1% of the vote, winning by fewer than 50,000 votes out of roughly 18 million ballots cast.

Her victory over leftist challenger Roberto Sánchez marks her fourth presidential bid and makes her Peru’s first female president-elect. 

Advertisement

The result caps a deeply divisive election cycle in a country that has gone through nine presidents in the past decade.

Fujimori is also the daughter of former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori, who ruled the country during the 1990s.

TRUMP VICTORY BOOSTS CONSERVATIVES IN LATIN AMERICA, WAKE-UP CALL TO DICTATORS: ‘THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES’

Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori waves outside his home in Santiago, Chile, on May 18, 2006. (Claudio Santana/AP Photo)

Fujimori’s presidency marks a return of her family’s political brand to Peru’s highest office — a movement that has long carried a complicated relationship with the United States.

Advertisement

While Washington once backed her father for his fight against communist guerrillas and economic reforms in the 1990s, the U.S. later condemned his government over the dismantling of democratic institutions and allegations of human rights abuses.

Keiko Fujimori has since spent more than two decades attempting to reshape “Fujimorismo” into a modern conservative, law-and-order political movement.  

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Peruvians voted in favor of Fujimori amid a surge in violent crime, extortion and years of political instability.

Fujimori campaigned on an “iron fist” approach to security and a pledge to protect Peru’s free-market economy, while her opponent focused on rural economic grievances. 

Advertisement

Reuters contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

World

Russian gas imports rise despite EU phase-out

Published

on

Russian gas imports rise despite EU phase-out

Gas imports from Russia into the European Union increased during the first months of 2026, a new report has revealed, even as the bloc formally begins a historic withdrawal from Russian natural gas.

ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

The EU banned Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) from entering the bloc by the beginning of 2027 and mid-2027, albeit with exceptions for Hungary and Slovakia, which were allowed to tap Moscow’s gas in case of supply disruption given their landlocked position.

Yet according to the report from the EU’s agency of energy regulators (ACER), which was published on Wednesday, Russian gas imports have increased rather than declined during the reporting period, with pipeline imports rising 7 percent year-on-year compared to 2025 and LNG imports growing by 11 percent.

LNG imports accelerated further after the ban took effect in March, rising 17 percent against the same period in 2025.

Advertisement

The new release is ACER’s first monitoring report since the law was adopted in March. The agency attributed a rise in imports to companies accelerating deliveries under existing contracts before stricter prohibitions take effect, rather than to a reversal of EU rules.

“LNG authorised contracts for deliveries into the EU account for 20 to 32 billion cubic metres (bcm), entering the EU at the external borders of four member states: Spain, France, Belgium and the Netherlands. In turn, long-term contracts for Russian pipeline gas remain authorised in Hungary, Slovakia and Greece,” reads the report.

New Russian gas contracts have effectively been prohibited since March 2026, while older long-term agreements are being allowed to expire gradually through 2027 to avoid market disruption.

For now, authorised contracts still represent between 45 and 55 bcm of annual supply capacity, ACER said, down from the 150-157 bcm that Moscow used to export to the EU prior to the war in Ukraine.

Not a sanctions failure

ACER argues that this trend does not indicate a growing dependence on Russia, and nor does it mean that the bloc’s sanctions against Russia are failing.

Advertisement

Instead, importers appear to be maximising deliveries before future restrictions and responding to global supply uncertainty after disruptions caused by the war between Israel, the US and Iran affected Middle Eastern LNG trade.

The ban on transhipments of Russian LNG via the EU to other destinations also seems to have contributed, the energy regulators argue, as some of the Russian LNG that had previously been transshipped at selected EU ports until March 2025 may have remained within the EU market.

Ronald Pinto, an LNG analyst at the market intelligence firm Kpler, endorsed ACER’s assessment, noting that Russian LNG imports into the EU reached record highs in both April and May.

“Faced with disruptions to global LNG supply, European market participants relied on other available sources of LNG, likely making full use of the flexibility available within their existing contractual volumes,” Pinto told Euronews.

However, Pinto also pointed out a slight year-on-year decline in Russian pipeline imports into the EU following maintenance in early June, suggesting a commercial reaction to the 17 June deadline banning imports of Russian pipeline gas under short-term contracts.

Advertisement

“This could indicate that market participants are beginning to reduce their exposure in light of the phase-out regulation,” the analyst said.

Remaining dependencies

While Russian gas now accounts for roughly 12 percent of EU gas demand, ACER says that dependence is no longer evenly spread across Europe.

Most EU countries have sharply reduced purchases since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, except for Hungary, Slovakia and Greece.

These countries, particularly Hungary and Slovakia, continue to receive Russian pipeline gas primarily through the TurkStream corridor and face the greatest challenge in replacing supplies before the 2027 deadline.

“In 2024, Hungary and Slovakia are estimated to source approximately 70–80 percent of their gas from Russia, while Russian gas is deemed representing approximately 50-55 percent of Greek gas imports,” reads the report.

Advertisement

The principal remaining challenge is not overall gas availability, ACEA said, but ensuring sufficient infrastructure to deliver alternative supplies into landlocked Central European markets.

“The remaining dependence on Russian gas remains unevenly distributed across member states; while most countries have significantly reduced their exposure, a small number of countries continue,” reads ACER’s report.

Diversification and new challenges

ACER concludes that Europe is significantly better prepared than during the 2022 energy crisis due to profound diversification in the gas market.

However, such diversification comes at a new cost, as the bloc has developed new dependencies, particularly with the US, Algeria, and Qatar, the latter having suffered a loss in production due to the war against Iran.

These countries are currently pressuring the EU to scrap its methane rules, which would require oil and gas producers to pay for the pollution linked to their production, with the US suggesting that the EU could lose imports.

Advertisement

“If things (methane rules) stay as they are today, they’re almost certain to reduce the energy flows from the United States to Europe,” US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said at a press briefing on 25 June. “I think this leads to very significant problems in the EU, which already suffers from much higher than global average energy prices.”

The EU is also counting on more gas from planned Romanian Black Sea production and increasing imports through Azerbaijan’s Southern Gas Corridor.

Overall, ACER concludes that the real economic consequences of ditching Russian gas have yet to arrive, pointing instead to the complete ban on LNG imports from January 2027 and the end of pipeline imports in September 2027 as the real tests.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Map: 6.0-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes Off Mexico’s Coast

Published

on

Map: 6.0-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes Off Mexico’s Coast

Advertisement

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Mountain time. The New York Times

Advertisement

A strong, 6.0-magnitude earthquake struck in the Gulf of California on Tuesday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 1:45 p.m. Mountain time about 47 miles southwest of El Progreso, Mexico, data from the agency shows.

Advertisement

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Aftershocks detected

Subsequent quakes have been reported in the same area. Such temblors are typically aftershocks caused by minor adjustments along the portion of a fault that slipped at the time of the initial earthquake.

Quakes and aftershocks within 100 miles

Advertisement

Aftershocks can occur days, weeks or even years after the first earthquake. These events can be of equal or larger magnitude to the initial earthquake, and they can continue to affect already damaged locations.

Advertisement

When quakes and aftershocks occurred

 All times are Mountain time. The New York Times

Advertisement

Sources: United States Geological Survey (epicenter, aftershocks, shake intensity); LandScan via Oak Ridge National Laboratory (population density) | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Mountain time. Shake data is as of Tuesday, June 30 at 2:02 p.m. Mountain time. Aftershocks data is as of Tuesday, June 30 at 6:01 p.m. Mountain time.

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending