World
‘Overshadow Gaza crimes’: World reacts to US attacks on Iraq and Syria
The United States has conducted a wave of air strikes on Iran-aligned targets in Iraq and Syria in retaliation for an attack that killed American soldiers in Jordan.
On Saturday, Iraq said 16 people, including civilians, were killed on its soil, and a monitoring group reported 18 people were killed in Syria.
Washington has warned of more strikes to purportedly deter the Iran-backed “axis of resistance” amid Israel’s war on Gaza. In announcing the overnight attacks, US President Joe Biden said: “Our response began today. It will continue at times and places of our choosing.”
Here is how the world reacted to the US action:
Iran
“The attacks are a violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria, international law, and a clear violation of the United Nations Charter,” said Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Nasser Kanaani.
“In addition to an all-out support of the US for four months of relentless and barbaric attacks by the Zionist regime against the residents of Gaza and the West Bank, and military attacks on Yemen and violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country, last night’s attacks on Syria and Iraq were another adventurous action and another strategic error by the US government which will have no result but to intensify tensions and instability in the region.”
“The attacks merely support the goals of the Zionist regime. Such attacks increasingly involve the US government in the region and overshadow the crimes of the Zionist regime in Gaza.”
Iraq
“This aggressive strike will put security in Iraq and the region on the brink of the abyss,” the Iraqi government said in a statement, and denied Washington’s claims of coordinating the air raids with Baghdad as “false” and “aimed at misleading international public opinion”.
The presence of the US-led military coalition in the region “has become a reason for threatening security and stability in Iraq and a justification for involving Iraq in regional and international conflicts”, read the statement from Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani’s office.
“Iraq reiterates its refusal to let the country be an arena for settling scores,” said government spokesperson Basim Alwadi.
Yahya Rasool, the Iraqi military spokesperson, said the attacks “constitute a violation of Iraqi sovereignty, undermine the efforts of the Iraqi government, and pose a threat that could lead Iraq and the region into dire consequences”.
“The outcomes will have severe implications on the security and stability in Iraq and the surrounding region,” Rasool added.
Syria
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the strikes served to “inflame the conflict in the Middle East in an extremely dangerous way” and added to Washington’s “record of violations against Syria’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the safety of its people, proving once again that it is the main source of global instability”.
The military said: “The area targeted by the American attacks in eastern Syria is the same area where the Syrian Arab Army is fighting the remnants of the Daesh [ISIL] terrorist organisation, and this confirms that the United States and its military forces are involved and allied with this organisation, and are working to revive it as a field arm for it both in Syria and Iraq by all dirty means.”
“The aggression of the American occupation forces at dawn today has no justification other than an attempt to weaken the ability of the Syrian Arab Army and its allies in the field of fighting terrorism, but the army.”
Islamic Resistance in Iraq
The coalition of US and Israel-opposed armed groups in Iraq, which had “suspended” its attacks earlier this week, said it launched drones at a US base in Erbil.
Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed reported from Baghdad that Iraqi groups have also carried out attacks with missiles targeting the al-Tanf military base in Syria which is home to US personnel, as well as the Ain al-Assad base in western Iraq.
Hamas
“We condemn in the strongest terms the American aggression against Iraq and Syria, and consider it a dangerous escalation, an infringement on the sovereignty of the two Arab countries, and a threat to their security and the stability of the region, in service of the occupation’s expansionist agenda and covering up its horrific crimes against our Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip,” read a statement from Hamas.
“The administration of US President Biden bears responsibility for the consequences of this brutal aggression against both Iraq and Syria, which adds fuel to the fire, and we affirm that the region will not witness stability or peace except by stopping the Zionist aggression, crimes of genocide and ethnic cleansing against our people in the Gaza Strip, and ending the Zionist-Nazi occupation.”
European Union
“Everybody should try to avoid that the situation becomes explosive,” said EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell.
While Borrell did not address the US strikes directly, he repeated a warning that the Middle East “is a boiler that can explode”.
He pointed to the war in Gaza, violence along the Israel-Lebanon border, bombings in Iraq and Syria, and attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. “That’s why we call everybody to try to avoid an escalation.”
United Kingdom
“The UK and US are steadfast allies. We wouldn’t comment on their operations, but we support their right to respond to attacks,” a British government spokesperson said in a statement.
“We have long condemned Iran’s destabilising activity throughout the region, including its political, financial and military support to a number of militant groups.”
Poland
“Iran’s proxies have played with fire for months and years, and it’s now burning them,” Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski told reporters as he arrived for a meeting with his EU counterparts in Brussels.
US House speaker
Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the US House of Representatives, accused Biden of “placating” Tehran after the strikes, and said that “to promote peace, America must project strength”.
Council on American-Islamic Relations
“Instead of waging war across the Middle East, the Biden administration should demand an end to the far-right Israeli government’s ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza,” said CAIR’s National Executive Director Nihad Awad.
The US has ignored Israel’s “escalating human rights abuses”, maintained its troops in Syria, Iraq and other places “where they are not welcome”, and refused to re-enter the Iranian nuclear deal, Nihad noted.
“These latest strikes in Iraq and Syria are just further evidence of the total failure of the president’s Middle East policy. President Biden should change course to protect both American soldiers and people of the region from more violence … Justice and freedom for the Palestinian people – not more bombs – is what can build a more peaceful future for the region.”
Analysts
“I’m not surprised there has been this reprisal and retaliation by the United States,” HA Hellyer, a military analyst at the UK-based think tank Royal United Services Institute, told Al Jazeera, adding that if the US wants to de-escalate and not go to war with Iran, the key to that is Gaza.
Washington has “failed to apply any real leverage in order to bring a ceasefire to Gaza, which I think would really diminish the tensions in the region and remove the fuel for this sort of escalation taking place, which is likely to continue over the coming days and weeks and beyond”, he added.
Joshua Landis, associate professor and director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, told Al Jazeera that politicians in Washington are pressuring Biden for a stronger response as the US presidential election looms.
“He has to respond, but at the same time he’s made it very clear he does not want to escalate, and that means two things; he can hit Syrians, that’s easy and nobody cares about the Syrian government, but the Americans do care about the Iraqi government.”
“America does not want to get ejected from Iraq, particularly not before the elections in November. So, it wants to be strong but it doesn’t want to kill too many Iraqis.”
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A massive ruby unearthed in Burma is being hailed as the second-largest ever discovered in the conflict-ridden country.
The ruby weighs about 11,000 carats — about 4.8 pounds — and was unearthed near Mogok in the Mandalay region, the center of Burma’s gem industry and an area affected by ongoing conflict, according to The Associated Press, citing state media.
The stone was found in mid-April, shortly after the country’s traditional New Year celebrations.
MAN STUMBLES ONTO RARE DIAMOND TREASURE DURING ARKANSAS PARK TRIP WITH FAMILY: ‘KNEW IT WAS DIFFERENT’
Burma’s newly discovered ruby is displayed at the president’s office in Naypyitaw on May 7, 2026. (Myanmar Military True News Information Team/AP)
Although it is roughly half the size of a 21,450-carat ruby discovered in 1996, experts say the new find could be more valuable because of its higher quality, the outlet reported.
It has a purplish-red color with slight yellow tones, moderate transparency and a highly reflective surface.
Burmese President Min Aung Hlaing and his cabinet have already inspected the stone in the country’s capital of Naypyidaw.
ONCE-IN-A-CENTURY TREASURES DATING BACK 4,500 YEARS UNEARTHED IN LEGENDARY CITY
Burmese officials inspect a newly discovered ruby at the president’s office in Naypyidaw on May 7, 2026. (Myanmar Military True News Information Team/AP)
Burma produces up to 90% of the world’s rubies, mostly from Mogok and nearby Mong Hsu.
The gem trade — both legal and illegal — is a major source of income in the country.
However, rights groups, including Global Witness, have long urged jewelers to avoid buying Burmese gemstones, saying the trade helps fund the country’s military governments, according to The Associated Press.
RARE 10-CARAT BLUE DIAMOND AMONG $100M WORTH OF GEMS GOING UP FOR AUCTION
This photo taken on May 16, 2019, shows miners working in a ruby mine in Mogok, north of Mandalay. (Ye Aung Thu/AFP via Getty Images)
Gem mining also finances ethnic armed groups fighting for autonomy, contributing to Burma’s long-running conflicts.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The mining regions remain unstable.
Mogok was seized in July 2024 by the Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA), an ethnic armed group. Control later returned to the military under a ceasefire deal brokered by China late last year.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
The European Union is still struggling to decide if, how, and when it wants to talk directly with Russia to advance negotiations towards a lasting peace in Ukraine, as member states remain split on whether the benefits would outweigh the risks.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The absence of political unity, an indispensable precondition for such a significant undertaking, was laid bare on Monday during a meeting of foreign affairs ministers in Brussels, where several representatives urged fresh sanctions rather than dialogue.
“(Vladimir) Putin is really not interested in real peace talks yet. So we need to put more pressure on Russia in order to change the calculus and make him interested,” Sweden’s Maria Malmer Stenergard said upon arrival.
“What will we discuss? What will be our demands? Can we agree on our demands on Russia?” said Lithuania’s Kęstutis Budrys. “What is our strategy and agenda, and what’s the goal? What’s the end state? It’s not dialogue as dialogue per se.”
Italy’s Antonio Tajani said the EU was “not at war” with Russia and it was “important” to be part of the ongoing negotiations, while Austria’s Beate Meinl-Reisinger noted it was time for Europeans to become active participants through their own team.
“We need to make up our mind,” said Finland’s Elina Valtonen.
The only point on which ministers agreed was that Europeans themselves should pick their envoy. The Kremlin’s suggestion to nominate Gerhard Schröder, the former German chancellor who has worked for Russian energy firms, was unequivocally dismissed.
At the end of the meeting, High Representative Kaja Kallas acknowledged that the topic was not yet mature and required further reflection among governments.
“The EU has always supported attempts to achieve a just and lasting peace,” Kallas said.
“For Europe to take a more active role, we must agree amongst ourselves what we want to talk to Russia about and what our red lines are.”
The High Representative, who previously said the EU should not “humiliate” itself by seeking direct talks with Russia, has been trying to bridge gaps among capitals with a draft document outlining the concessions Moscow should make.
The confidential document will be discussed later this month when foreign ministers meet again for an informal gathering in Cyprus. However, given the considerable divergences, a unified position is unlikely to emerge any time soon.
“We are not there entering the negotiations in any way,” Kallas cautioned. “Right now, we don’t see that Russia is really negotiating in good faith.”
If, how and when
The question of whether the EU should engage directly with Russia to end its war of aggression has been popping up in and out of the conversation since US President Donald Trump unilaterally launched a diplomatic process to end the war in Ukraine.
Earlier this year, French President Emmanuel Macron, who last spoke with Putin in July 2025, and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni publicly called on the bloc to change policy, arguing the fate of European security could not be left in American hands.
The debate lost traction after Macron’s advisor, Emmanuel Bonne, travelled to the Kremlin for exploratory talks and was given the cold shoulder.
But it has once again risen to prominence as a result of the conflict in the Middle East, which has shifted Washington’s focus and slowed down the mediation in Ukraine.
Last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who seems increasingly frustrated with the White House’s course of action, asked Europeans to take a more active role.
“We need to find a workable diplomatic format, and Europe must be at the table in any talks with Russia,” Zelenskyy said at a summit in Armenia. “It would be good to develop one common European voice for talks with Russia.”
A few days later, European Council President António Costa said there was “potential” for the bloc to negotiate one-on-one with the Kremlin.
“I’m talking with the 27 national leaders to see the best way to organise ourselves and to identify what we need effectively to discuss with Russia when it comes to the right moment to do this,” Costa said in Florence, Italy.
The European Commission also weighed in. “We can see the merit of having one single figure speaking on behalf of the 27,” a spokesperson said.
Both Costa and the Commission were quick to note that direct talks would only make sense once the Kremlin showed willingness to compromise and make concessions. Putin insists that Kyiv give up the entire Donbas region and that the West recognise the occupied territories aslegally Russian — both demands that Zelenskyy firmly rejects.
Brussels is keen to avoid creating the impression that it is attempting to replace Washington, which might give Trump a reason to walk away for good.
On Monday, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said the EU should not pursue “alternative peace talks” but rather play a “complementary” role in the ongoing process.
Russia’s relentless bombardment of Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure, including a kindergarten last week, is another factor that makes officials and diplomats think twice.
Instead, some capitals prefer to wait and weaken Russia’s hand at the negotiating table. The country has begun to show signs of economic strain after 20 rounds of sanctions and was forced to pare down its Victory Day parade over fears of Ukraine’s strikes.
At the same time, Kyiv’s standing has been reinforced by the approval of the EU’s €90 billion assistance loan and the signing of multiple defence deals with Gulf countries.
“Russia must be pushed back to Russia,” Estonia’s Margus Tsahkna said. “Putin is not ready to talk about a lasting and just peace at all.”
Poland will soon host production lines for South Korean tanks. Australia is buying warships from Japan. Canada will send uranium to India, while India offers cruise missiles to Vietnam, and Brazil builds military transport planes for the United Arab Emirates.
All of these deals were sealed in the past few weeks. Each one represents an attempt by middle powers to protect themselves as the conflict in Iran throttles global energy supplies, and as a high-stakes summit between President Trump and Xi Jinping of China looms.
Global polls show the world has little trust in the United States and China. Mr. Trump and Mr. Xi have both used their enormous leverage over trade and security to coerce or punish. And in response, smaller nations are behaving as if they are stuck in “Godzilla” or “Dune” — moving quietly in small groups, trying not to provoke the wrath of petulant giants.
“It’s fifty shades of hedging,” said Richard Heydarian, a Filipino political scientist at Oxford University. Or, as Ja Ian Chong, a security analyst in Singapore put it, “No party wants to cross Beijing and now Washington, too.”
For countries watching from afar, dread and hope hover over the Trump-Xi meeting in Beijing, which is scheduled for this week. In Asia, which has been hit hardest and fastest by oil shortages caused by the war and China’s tight control of oil-product exports, the mood is particularly grim. Interviews with officials, and statements from leaders traveling the globe to secure trade and defense deals, suggest that most middle powers feel overwhelmed by the deteriorating world order.
Many believe the summit carries more potential for harm than help. And Mr. Trump’s gut-driven approach to complex issues is the main source of anxiety.
For months, officials in Asia have worried that the president might be too eager to make a deal with Mr. Xi, ending weapons sales to Taiwan or agreeing to softened policy language that could make it easier for China to undermine the democratic island.
“That would be the biggest nightmare,” said one Taiwanese official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal government matters. He insisted that reduced support from the U.S. was unlikely.
But any concession on Taiwan could lead other American partners to fear abandonment. Beijing’s push for compliance on contested territory elsewhere would be bolstered, from the border with India to the South China Sea.
Vietnamese officials said that if President Trump makes a conciliatory gesture or flatters Xi, even without bigger compromises, China will gain leeway to press harder on smaller countries.
Another concern being discussed across the region: that Mr. Trump might alter long-term security plans in exchange for better economic terms with China.
Mr. Trump’s decision to redirect a carrier strike group from the Pacific and munitions from South Korea for the war in Iran may have created momentum for broader redeployments. When the Pentagon announced it would pull at least 5,000 troops from Germany after Mr. Trump expressed annoyance with the German chancellor, allies in Asia were again reminded how quickly collective deterrence can be weakened.
Mr. Trump has threatened in the past to make troop withdrawals from Japan, which hosts around 53,000 American military personnel — more than any other country — and South Korea, where another 24,000 Americans are stationed. If he could get something big from Mr. Xi for a drawdown, would he turn down the deal?
Analysts noted that plans opposed by China, such as AUKUS, a pact between Australia, England and the U.S. designed to counter Beijing’s influence by equipping Australia with nuclear-powered submarines and advanced technology, could also be suddenly canceled.
“The sense that U.S. allies have to look to one another because they can no longer look to America is very real,” said Hugh White, a former Australian intelligence official who teaches strategic studies at the Australia National University.
That sentiment is much stronger than “the cautious public language” of national leaders might suggest, he added.
European and Asian officials often talk privately in frank terms about giving up their faith in America, prompting a no-turning-back effort to diversify away from the United States. In casual discussions with reporters, they can sound a lot like Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada, who received a standing ovation in Davos this year for a speech that declared, “We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.”
But in public, they’re more circumspect. Some officials admit their countries are trying to buy time and evade Mr. Trump’s fits of pique, while continuing the performance of imperial fealty.
South Korean officials have simply expressed resignation over American military diversions, after making clear they felt betrayed in 2004, when President George W. Bush announced plans to move troops from Asia to the war in Iraq. Australia, Taiwan and Japan publicly and repeatedly stress the value of American leadership without caveats — even as U.S. tariffs and the war Mr. Trump started with Iran kneecap their economies.
Walking with Caution
No one wants to be seen stepping out of line.
Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, has been bolder than most in trying to foster stronger relationships with other countries. Yet even as she crisscrossed the region promoting military cooperation, officials in Tokyo worried about how Washington would view her efforts.
“The Japanese don’t want Takaichi’s security cooperation and tour, especially to Australia, to be seen as a version of Mark Carney,” said Michael J. Green, the author of several books on Japan, and chief executive of the United States Study Centre at the University of Sydney.
Others have apparently reached the same conclusion. Mr. Carney’s recent visits to India and Australia did not yield strong statements from their leaders echoing his criticism of great power rivalry or his warning that if middle powers are “not at the table, we’re on the menu.”
At the same time, many countries — including some that are benefiting from the thickening of middle-power bonds — have been careful not to anger the world’s other hegemon, China.
Nations managing their own disputes with Beijing, such as Indonesia, have done less to rally around Japan than some in Tokyo would have liked, since Ms. Takaichi became embroiled in a diplomatic crisis after telling her Parliament that if China attacked Taiwan, Japan could respond militarily.
Vietnamese officials even pressed Ms. Takaichi to avoid directly criticizing China in her speech at a university on May 2 in Hanoi, according to diplomats who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions. It is not clear if adjustments were made. Chinese officials later condemned her diplomatic efforts as “war preparation.”
And yet, in a sign of how middle powers are still doing more while saying less, the two countries signed six cooperation agreements, including one on satellite data sharing and another to secure deliveries for Vietnam’s largest oil refinery, potentially easing shortages.
“The U.S. has become more unreliable, so it makes sense to try to develop alternatives,” said Robert O. Keohane, an international relations professor at Princeton University. Even if what’s been formed so far is insufficient, he added, “having a weak alternative is better than having no alternative at all.”
Reporting was contributed by Tung Ngo from Hanoi, Vietnam; Javier C. Hernández from Tokyo; Amy Chang Chien from Taipei, Taiwan; Jim Tankersley from Berlin; Ian Austen from Ottawa; and Matina Stevis-Gridneff from Toronto.
-
Pittsburg, PA5 minutes agoDragon softball sweeps Kansas City Piper
-
Augusta, GA10 minutes agoBrent McMillian named as Augusta University’s new Athletics Director – AOL
-
Washington, D.C17 minutes agoNonprofit sues the federal government over plans to paint Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool blue
-
Cleveland, OH22 minutes agoPaint the Town: Sherwin-Williams Opens Massive 36-Story Headquarters in Cleveland – Scioto Post
-
Austin, TX28 minutes agoMan fatally shot during dog walk in Northwest Austin, neighbor arrested
-
Alaska40 minutes ago10 Reasons the 2026 Princess Cruises Season Is the Ultimate Alaska Power Move – AOL
-
Arizona46 minutes agoArizona Diamondbacks Gameday Thread, #40: 5/11 @ Rangers
-
Arkansas52 minutes agoSax star Merlon Devine joins Lupus Foundation of Arkansas to jazz up awareness month