Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Mysterious wreckages photographed in Iraq have given the clearest indication yet of how Israel might have launched its counterstrike against Iran.

The pictures, scoured by military analysts and open-source intelligence enthusiasts, suggest that Israel may have used an air-launched Sparrow ballistic missile to demonstrate to Tehran that it can successfully attack targets inside the country at range.

One Israeli official also indicated that the country’s armed forces used a stand-off missile attack launched far from Iran’s borders. “Israel has informed its partners that the primary attack vectors were airborne, with no entry into (Iranian) airspace,” the official said.

The exact combination of arms used in the counterstrike remains unclear, but it comes a week after Iran launched an unprecedented drone and missile salvo at Israel, itself a response to a suspected Israeli strike against Iran’s consulate in Damascus.

The missile segments, photographed and posted on social media by Sabereen News, an outlet linked to Iraqi Shia militias, were identified by some experts as most likely being the expended fuel propulsion units of Israeli-made Blue Sparrow missiles. Early Pentagon assessments pointed in the same direction, according to one person briefed on the work.

The Sparrow family of air-launched missiles have a range of up to 2,000km and could have been fired by Israeli fighter jets refuelled by tanker planes in Syrian airspace, according to OSINT analysts citing air flight data from late on Thursday.

Buttressing that theory, Syria’s Sana state news agency reported that Israeli missiles had targeted air defence positions in its southern region. Such a move would fit with Israel “clearing the air corridor in Syria for a stand-off strike on Iran”, said one former senior US defence official.

Opening a safe air raid corridor in Syria would in turn enable long-range attacks by Israeli fighter jets well outside Iranian airspace. As the Israeli missiles then flew east over Iraq, they would have jettisoned their fuel booster units, with the armed sections carrying on to their targets in Iran.

Israel has not commented on the strike, as per its traditional policy of strategic ambiguity. The US has said it played no role. The International Atomic Energy Agency also said none of Iran’s nuclear sites were damaged.

Iran has meanwhile downplayed what happened, with officials signalling there are no plans to respond. One Iranian official told the Financial Times that a limited number of missiles were part of the attack but said they were intercepted.

“There is a lot of uncertainty still,” said John Ridge, an OSINT analyst. “But Sparrow missiles most closely fit the mission parameters . . .[especially] of range.”

Sparrow missiles have three variants: the short-range Black Arrow, and the mid-range Blue and Silver Arrow versions. Blue Sparrow missiles have “performed flawlessly in its missions so far”, according to its producer, Israeli defence company Rafael.

Ridge added that another possible weapon used by Israel may have been Rocks missiles, an air-launched precision missile similar to the Sparrow. Both are made by Israeli defence tech group Rafael.

Initial reports from Iranian state media suggested that Israel may have also used small drones or quadcopters rather than missiles for the attack. Iranian foreign minister Hossein Amirabdollahian said the “mini drones” that Israel reportedly launched at Iran “did not cause any damage or casualties”.

That may be part of a deliberate Iranian strategy to play down the impact of the Israeli strike and the effectiveness of its long-range weapons. An Israeli drone strike also fits with previous covert Israeli operations inside Iran, which on at least two occasions have used drones to target weapons facilities.

Amos Yadlin, a former Israeli air force general and military intelligence chief, said that regardless of how Israel conducted the strike on Iran, the mere fact that it took place would send a powerful message.

“What the Iranians and their proxies did with hundreds of projectiles we did with just a handful of missiles,” he said. It shows Tehran that “you’re vulnerable, we have much greater capabilities than you think”.

Commenting on the Iraqi images of the fallen missile segments, Yadlin added that they looked like parts of an “armament that has never been used before, with long-range capabilities”. 

Israel originally developed Sparrow missiles to test the effectiveness of its Arrow air defence system, which is used to down incoming ballistic missiles. Israel subsequently manufactured a variant with a live warhead. Rocks missiles are a derivative version of the Sparrow.

Noting that the Israeli attack appeared to have struck a balance between showing the country’s military strength without provoking an Iranian response, the former senior US defence official praised its “impressive execution”.

Further evidence came on Friday morning, when the Iraqi militias that photographed the expended missile segments declared on social media that they “were evidence of the great failure of the Zionist attack”.

Additional reporting by Raya Jalabi in Beirut, Mehul Srivastava in London and Felicia Schwartz in Capri

Illustration by Ian Bott and cartography by Steven Bernard

The Sheetz convenience store chain has been hit with a lawsuit by federal officials who allege the company discriminated against minority job applicants.

Sheetz Inc., which operates more than 700 stores in six states, discriminated against Black, Native American and multiracial job seekers by automatically weeding out applicants whom the company deemed to have failed a criminal background check, according to U.S. officials.

President Joe Biden stopped by a Sheetz for snacks this week while campaigning in Pennsylvania.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit in Baltimore against Altoona, Pennsylvania-based Sheetz and two subsidary companies, alleging the chain’s longstanding hiring practices have a disproportionate impact on minority applicants and thus run afoul of federal civil rights law.

Sheetz said Thursday that it “does not tolerate discrimination of any kind.”

“Diversity and inclusion are essential parts of who we are. We take these allegations seriously. We have attempted to work with the EEOC for nearly eight years to find common ground and resolve this dispute,” company spokesperson Nick Ruffner said in a statement.

The privately held, family-run company has more than 23,000 employees and operates convenience stores and gas stations in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland, Ohio and North Carolina.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court on Wednesday, the day Biden stopped at a Sheetz market on a western Pennsylvania campaign swing, buying snacks, posing for photos and chatting up patrons and employees.

Federal officials said they do not allege Sheetz was motivated by racial animus, but take issue with the way the chain uses criminal background checks to screen job seekers. The company was sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion and national origin.

“Federal law mandates that employment practices causing a disparate impact because of race or other protected classifications must be shown by the employer to be necessary to ensure the safe and efficient performance of the particular jobs at issue,” EEOC attorney Debra M. Lawrence said in a statement.

“Even when such necessity is proven, the practice remains unlawful if there is an alternative practice available that is comparably effective in achieving the employer’s goals but causes less discriminatory effect,” Lawrence said.

It wasn’t immediately clear how many job applicants have been affected, but the agency said Sheetz’s unlawful hiring practices date to at least 2015.

The EEOC, an independent agency that enforces federal laws against workplace discrimination, is seeking to force Sheetz to offer jobs to applicants who were unlawfully denied employment and to provide back pay, retroactive seniority and other benefits.

The EEOC began its probe of the convenience store chain after two job applicants filed complaints alleging employment discrimination.

The agency found that Black job applicants were deemed to have failed the company’s criminal history screening and were denied employment at a rate of 14.5%, while multiracial job seekers were turned away 13.5% of the time and Native Americans were denied at a rate of 13%.

By contrast, fewer than 8% of white applicants were refused employment because of a failed criminal background check, the EEOC’s lawsuit said.

The EEOC notified Sheetz in 2022 that it was likely violating civil rights law, but the agency said its efforts to mediate a settlement failed, prompting this week’s lawsuit.

For more from NBC BLK, sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Almost immediately after blasts erupted over an air base near Isfahan in the early hours of Friday, Iran did its utmost to play down Israel’s retaliatory attack against the Islamic republic.

Iranian commanders said there was no damage and that the explosions were caused by air defence batteries taking out unidentified objects. There were no accusations thrown at Israel or calls for revenge.

President Ebrahim Raisi made no mention of the attack when he gave a live televised speech hours later, even though officials have previously vowed to retaliate immediately to any direct Israeli assault on Iranian territory.

In Israel, there was a similarly muted response. Ever since Iran launched its first direct assault on Israel from Iranian soil last week, there was never any doubt that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government would respond. The only question was when and on what scale.

But when the response came it appeared — so far — to be limited. And Israel neither confirmed nor denied the attack, choosing not to take ownership as Israelis went about their normal daily business.

For the moment, it appears the arch foes — which have been gambling with the stability of the Middle East as they upped the ante in their long-simmering conflict — have pulled back from the brink.

Netanyahu, known to be risk-averse despite his belligerent rhetoric, seems to have heeded the advice of the US and Israel’s other western allies rather than his far-right allies who called for a “crushing” counterstrike. The measured, targeted response to Iran’s attack for now eases the risk of sparking a full-blown regional war.

Last weekend’s Iranian assault, though huge in terms of the projectiles launched, was telegraphed well in advance and also caused minimal damage. Tehran, which mounted that attack in response to an Israeli strike on its consulate in Damascus this month, also made clear it was “mission accomplished” and that it did not want a further escalation.

But even if the region, which has been on tenterhooks for days, breathes a sigh of relief, it will be only momentary.

Since Hamas’s brutal attack on October 7 and Israel’s ferocious retaliatory offensive in Gaza, the Middle East has been on a dangerous escalatory spiral.

Hostilities have erupted on multiple fronts between Israel and Iranian-backed militants. US troops have been drawn into combat in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Israel and Hizbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese militant movement, have been locked in daily cross-border combat that at any other time would be considered all-out war.

Pre-existing red lines between Israel, Iran and its proxies have been blurred while old precedents have gone by the wayside.

Iran’s direct strike on Israel was a huge gamble by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader. He put aside, at least temporarily, his long-held strategy of “strategic patience” to underline that he was willing to risk his top priority — the survival of the republic — and direct conflict if he felt Israel crossed a line.

By striking Iran’s diplomatic mission in Damascus, Israel had also pushed Tehran too far, crossing a critical line for the regime. For Netanyahu, the strike was a signal that no target was off limits as Israel seeks to restore its deterrence after the huge intelligence failure it suffered on October 7.

The overnight attack on Friday bore the hallmarks of Israel’s more traditional approach to hitting Iranian assets through calibrated targeted strikes and assassinations. But it is far too early to assume the long-simmering Israeli-Iranian conflict has gone back into the shadows.

Israel can be expected to continue to target Iranian assets, particularly in Syria where it has already killed at least 18 Revolutionary Guards members, including senior commanders, since October. Israeli jets reportedly struck military targets in Syria as it mounted Friday’s attack on Iran.

Even if both sides — as they claim — want to avoid a full-blown war, another miscalculation or provocation could light the fuse for the next escalation. The volatile situation is made all the more precarious because the rules are constantly changing and the stakes are increasing: what one side deems a calculated action, the other might consider an unacceptable provocation.

Both are also determined to show that their respective deterrents are being restored and both face pressures from domestic constituencies to respond to the others’ hostility.

This is the grim reality that has been in existence since Hamas’s attack killed 1,200 people, according to Israeli officials. And the longer Israel’s offensive in Gaza continues, adding to a death toll that Palestinian officials say has reached almost 34,000 people, the greater the risks will be.

All-out war may have been averted for now, but the danger for the Middle East and beyond has far from passed.