Connect with us

News

Britain blocking use of air bases Trump says would be needed for strikes on Iran, UK media report | CNN

Published

on

Britain blocking use of air bases Trump says would be needed for strikes on Iran, UK media report | CNN

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has blocked a request from US President Donald Trump to allow US forces to use UK air bases during any preemptive attack on Iran, saying it could break international law, according to multiple reports in British media citing government sources.

According to The Times of London, which first reported the split over airbase access, Starmer has denied the use of RAF Fairford in England and Diego Garcia – the British overseas territory in the Indian Ocean – for any strike on Iran.

The two bases have long served as crucial overseas US military staging posts for operations far from home, with Diego Garcia a key airfield for the US’ heavy bomber fleet.

The Times reports Britain is concerned that allowing the US to use the bases “would be a breach of international law, which makes no distinction between a state carrying out the attack and those in support if the latter have ‘knowledge of the circumstances of the internationally wrongful act.’”

The Times cited UK government sources. The BBC, The Guardian and The Telegraph also subsequently published their own reports on the UK blocking access to the bases, citing sources.

Advertisement

The UK Ministry of Defence declined to comment on what it called operational matters. “There is a political process ongoing between the US and Iran, which the UK supports. Iran must never be able to develop a nuclear weapon, and our priority is security in the region,” a government spokesperson said.

American requests to use UK bases for operational purposes historically have been considered on a case-by-case basis, with precise criteria withheld for security reasons under long-standing agreements.

“All decisions on whether to approve foreign nations’ use of military bases in the UK for operational purposes considers the legal basis and policy rationale for any proposed activity,” Veterans Minister Al Carns wrote in response to questions from independent British member of parliament Jeremy Corbyn, according to a January report from the UK Defence Journal.

Starmer and Trump held a phone call on Tuesday evening, with readouts saying the two discussed peace in the Middle East and Europe.

The following day Trump took to his Truth Social platform to withdraw support for a deal that would see sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, the Indian Ocean chain that is home to the joint US-UK Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia, handed to Mauritius in return for a 99-year lease on the military base.

Advertisement

CNN has approached the White House for comment.

Britain had split the Chagos Islands from Mauritius before that colony gained independence, something that has been a source of diplomatic friction as well as multiple legal battles with locals who were evicted. In 2019, the International Court of Justice ruled Britain should return the islands “as rapidly as possible,” so that they could be decolonized.

A deal to return them has been making its way through British government channels since, with London arguing a lease compromise would ward off further expensive and likely futile legal battles while maintaining military access in the Indian Ocean.

After initially opposing the UK-Mauritius deal, Trump in early February said it was the “best” Britain could get under the circumstances.

But as the US has been surging forces into the region for a possible attack on Iran, Trump reversed course, saying in a Truth Social post that Starmer is “making a big mistake” in agreeing to the lease deal with Mauritius.

Advertisement

“Prime Minister Starmer is losing control of this important Island by claims of entities never known of before. In our opinion, they are fictitious in nature,” Trump’s post said.

But just a day earlier, the US State Department issued a statement saying in part that Washington “supports the decision of the United Kingdom to proceed with its agreement with Mauritius.”

Asked about the discrepancy between the Truth Social post and the State Department statement, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president’s post should be taken as the “policy” of the Trump administration.

In his social media post, Trump directly referenced the two UK airbases, cited by British media, as important in a possible strike on Iran.

“It may be necessary for the United States to use Diego Garcia, and the Airfield located in Fairford, in order to eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous Regime,” Trump wrote.

Advertisement

Neither Diego Garcia nor Fairford, the key forward operating base for US strategic bombers in Europe, was used in last June’s one-time B-2 bomber strike on Iranian nuclear sites. In that case, the stealth bombers flew a round trip of about 37 hours from their home base in Missouri.

But analysts are expecting that any new US attack on Iran might be a much longer campaign, possibly of weeks or more.

In such a campaign, having the B-2s, as well as B-1 and B-52 bombers, using bases thousands of miles closer to Iran would enable quicker turnarounds to rearm and refuel for more strikes.

While the US may have access to other bases in friendly countries closer to Iran, using them could put its prized heavy bomber fleet in reach of retaliatory Iranian missile strikes.

Advertisement

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

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 Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

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.

Source: United States Geological Survey | 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 Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending