Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Saudi Arabia has urged the US to ramp up attacks on Iran, a Saudi intelligence source has confirmed, while it is weighing a decision on whether to join the fight directly. The Saudi source confirmed reporting that the kingdom’s de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has urged Donald Trump not to cut short his war against Iran, and that the US-Israeli campaign represented a “historic opportunity” to remake the Middle East.The intelligence source said Riyadh was not just calling for the military campaign to be continued, but to be intensified. Trump appeared to confirm the report about the crown prince’s role, telling journalists on Tuesday: “Yeah, he’s a warrior. He’s fighting with us.”There are no reports of active Saudi military involvement in the nearly four-week-old war so far, but a Saudi political analyst said the kingdom was likely to take that step if current peace efforts led by Pakistan failed.“What matters now is Iran’s decision,” Mohammed Alhamed, a Saudi geopolitical analyst, said. “If Iran engages seriously, there is still a path to contain escalation. If it rejects the conditions and continues its attacks, the threshold for Saudi action will be crossed.”Alhamed added that Saudi Arabia “is not reacting impulsively”.“It is calibrating its response and preparing for a scenario where escalation, if it happens, will be deliberate and decisive,” he said, adding that Saudi Arabia “has not been pushing for war.”“It has been trying to avoid being drawn into it, while keeping all options on the table,” he said.Saudi Arabia has come under Iranian drone attack, as part of Tehran’s response to the US-Israeli attack on 28 February. One drone strike a week ago hit an oil refinery in Yanbu on Saudi Red Sea coast.The attack on Yanbu signalled an Iranian warning that it could also threaten that economic lifeline.“I believe that Saudi Arabia still maintains cautious neutrality in the Iran-Israel-US war,” Hesham Alghannam, a Saudi defence expert told Agence France-Presse. But he added: “If the Houthis strike Saudi assets, Riyadh may shift toward defensive coalition support or limited retaliation.”The crown prince solidified his hold on power by cultivating a close relationship with Trump, but will now have to rethink Saudi reliance on the US for its security, observers have argued.“MBS [Mohammed bin Salman] has lost the bet on all his investments over the last several years,” Ellie Geranmayeh, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations said. “He financially invested in Trump and Trump’s family and his corporation and his White House, but at the end of the day the views of the Saudis and of the whole Gulf have been sidelined by the wishes of Benjamin Netanyahu.”

The US Pentagon chief has made a bold claim regarding Iran's naval capabilities, stating that the country effectively no longer has a navy or a leader to command it. This assertion suggests a significant weakening of Iran's naval power, which could have implications for regional and global security dynamics.The statement comes at a time when geopolitical tensions in the Middle East remain high, with various actors vying for influence and power. The Pentagon's assessment of Iran's naval capabilities could be seen as part of a broader narrative about the shifting balance of power in the region.However, without specific details on the criteria used to make this assessment, it's challenging to fully evaluate the claim. Iran's naval capabilities have been a subject of interest for international observers, given the country's strategic location in the Persian Gulf and its past military engagements.

The conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran has expanded into Iraqi territory, creating what analysts describe as the most fragile front in the ongoing regional war. Recent strikes by US and Israeli forces have targeted Iran-backed groups operating within Iraq, prompting retaliatory attacks from Iraqi militias against Western interests. The strategic implications of this escalation are profound, with oil flow through the critical Strait of Hormuz completely halted, disrupting global energy markets. This development comes as Iraq's central government already struggles to maintain control over its territory and resources. As hostilities intensify, concerns mount about Iraq's ability to preserve its sovereignty and prevent the country from becoming a battlefield for proxy conflicts between regional and international powers. The fragile state of Iraqi institutions, combined with external military interventions, threatens to destabilize an already volatile region. International observers warn that the prolonged conflict could have lasting consequences for Iraq's political landscape, potentially fragmenting the country further along sectarian lines and weakening the central government's authority beyond recognition. The situation remains fluid, with diplomatic efforts seemingly unable to de-escalate tensions as the conflict enters a dangerous new phase with direct military confrontation on Iraqi soil.

The ongoing conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran has created a significant disruption in the global helium supply chain, affecting approximately one-third of worldwide production. This critical resource, essential for both medical diagnostics and advanced manufacturing, faces unprecedented challenges as shipping restrictions and production halts impact markets worldwide.The disruption stems primarily from Qatar, the world's largest helium producer, which accounts for about 63 million cubic meters of the roughly 190 million cubic meters of helium produced globally annually. Following Iranian attacks on Qatari energy infrastructure, QatarEnergy has announced a 14% annual reduction in helium exports, citing damage to its LNG facilities that also produce helium as a byproduct.The Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime chokepoint, has seen traffic nearly grind to a halt after Iranian officials announced new transit restrictions. This waterway serves as the primary export route for Qatar's helium, with no viable alternative maritime outlet available.The impact of this helium shortage extends across multiple sectors. MRI machines, which rely on helium's unique cooling properties, face potential operational delays, while the semiconductor industry—a cornerstone of modern technology—also depends on this irreplaceable resource for chip manufacturing. South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and China stand as the most vulnerable economies, being the largest consumers of Gulf-sourced helium.Market analysts project that helium prices could surge by 10-50% depending on the duration of the supply disruption, with buyers lacking long-term contracts experiencing the most immediate price increases. The medical industry, in particular, has been attempting to develop alternatives, including helium-free MRI technologies and helium recycling systems, though most current systems remain dependent on liquid helium.The United States, as the largest global helium producer at over 40% of worldwide supply, cannot fully compensate for the Gulf shortfall. Even North American consumers face challenges, with major distributors like Airgas already cutting shipments by half and parent company Air Liquide reallocating its supply chain to access helium from other regions.This helium crisis represents the fifth significant supply shortage since 2006, highlighting the vulnerability of global supply chains for critical industrial materials with no artificial substitutes. The situation underscores how geopolitical conflicts can have far-reaching consequences beyond traditional energy markets, potentially impacting healthcare accessibility and technological innovation worldwide.

The recent escalation of conflict in the Middle East has sent shockwaves across South Asia, affecting millions of families who depend on remittances from their loved ones working in the Gulf nations. The war between the US and Israel on Iran has resulted in a significant increase in tensions, with Iranian attacks on Gulf neighbours causing widespread fear and uncertainty.For Jaya Khuntia, a father from India's Odisha state, the conflict has brought unimaginable tragedy. His 25-year-old son, Kuna, a pipe fitter in Qatar's capital Doha, died of a heart attack after hearing the sound of missiles and debris from interceptions falling near their residence. Kuna's death has left the family in debt and despair, with their hopes of paying off a 300,000-rupee ($3200) loan for the marriages of their two daughters shattered.Migrant workers from South Asia, totaling nearly 21 million people in the Gulf nations, are often engaged in blue-collar work, building or supporting the industries and services that drive the Gulf's success and prosperity. However, they are also among the most vulnerable, with many working in areas targeted by Iranian attacks, such as oil refineries, construction areas, airports, and docks.The suspension of work at many of these facilities, coupled with fears of a major economic downturn in the region, has left many workers and their families worried about the future of their jobs. Experts warn that remittances from the Middle East, a crucial economic backbone for South Asian nations, could be significantly affected, especially if Gulf economies contract and layoffs follow.For Hamza, a Pakistani migrant laborer working at an oil storage facility in the UAE, the conflict has brought a sense of fear and uncertainty. He witnessed a drone attack on a storage unit and was shaken by the experience. Despite the dangers, he said leaving is not an option, as his family depends on him.Imran Khan, a faculty member at the New Delhi Institute of Management, said migrant laborers from South Asia are often driven by desperation to take up jobs in the Middle East. He warned that these workers are the worst affected during crises, whether war or natural disasters.As the conflict continues, many South Asian workers are planning to return home. Noor, a migrant worker from Bangladesh employed at an oil facility in Saudi Arabia, said he no longer feels safe and plans to return home once his contract ends. His family, too, is deeply affected, with his children crying every time they call him, scared for his life.

Following Donald Trump's recent claims that the US is engaged in 'strong talks' to end the war with Iran, Qatar took the unusual step of publicly distancing itself from any alleged diplomatic negotiations. The Gulf state's government spokesperson Majed al-Ansari explicitly stated, 'Qatar was not involved in any mediation efforts,' adding pointedly, 'If they exist.'This represents a significant departure from Qatar's traditional role as a chief mediator in Middle East conflicts, having previously facilitated negotiations between Israel and Hamas, the US and the Taliban, and peace deals in Lebanon and Sudan.Over the past three weeks, Gulf states have found themselves on the frontlines of the conflict after their mediation efforts to prevent war were ultimately rejected by the US. The pattern of broken negotiations is particularly telling: the US attacked Iran twice during talks aimed at halting the Iranian nuclear program, which were championed by Oman. Discussions last June were halted as the US and Israel conducted strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, and revived talks in February were similarly undermined when Trump began bombing Tehran before the final round of meetings.Since the war began, Gulf states have been forced to spend billions defending against daily Iranian missile and drone attacks, with their economies and sovereignty suffering substantial damage. Analysts suggest their reluctance to engage with the alleged ceasefire efforts reflects both the heavy toll of continued warfare and lingering suspicion about whether Trump's peace initiatives are genuine or merely a pretext for further escalation.As Bilal Saab, senior managing director of advisory group Trends US and former Pentagon official in the first Trump administration, explained: 'They've been burned by their previous experience. They previously thought they played a useful mediating role – until they realised that it was all for naught. Not to mention that they have been directly implicated in the war and are still being attacked by the Iranians. So there's a lot of pent-up frustration and disappointment.'By Wednesday night, the Iranian regime had outright rejected Trump's 15-point plan to end the war, submitted to Tehran via Pakistani generals, as 'extremely unreasonable' and presented their own substantially different proposal.The concern among Gulf states is that any negotiations could become a front for military escalation or even the assassination of additional Iranian leaders. This anxiety is compounded by the simultaneous deployment of thousands of US troops to the region and the persistent fear of being used as pawns in the US and Israel's Middle East strategy.Professor Bader al-Saif of Kuwait University noted: 'Whenever the word negotiation was used by the Trump administration, we unfortunately ended up under the rubric of war.' He emphasized that while Gulf states are reluctant to engage with what they perceive as a potential Trumpian charade, they recognize the critical importance of shaping any realistic peace negotiations that could affect their future.The existential threat to Gulf economic ambitions is particularly concerning. The prospect of Trump ending the war with the current Iranian regime still in place—potentially more vengeful than before and acutely aware of the damage its missiles can inflict on multi-billion-dollar infrastructure—poses significant risks. Additionally, there remains no clear solution to Iran's effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, through which most of the region's oil and gas exports flow.Analysts suggest that beyond relying on US-led negotiations, Gulf states should pursue their own separate dialogue with Iran. As al-Saif stated: 'They shouldn't only count on the US to do the negotiation. They should go and strike a deal with Iran for themselves. This was not our war, and if we can shield ourselves from being impacted any further, we should do it to protect our own national interests.'

Israel stands as the sole nation where overwhelming public support exists for the conflict with Iran, despite the profound impact on daily life. At least 15 people have been killed and hundreds injured by Iranian missiles since the war began in February, with school closures and missile warnings becoming routine. Polling indicates that more than 90% of Jewish Israelis back the war, a figure that sharply contrasts with international sentiment.The global perspective reveals a dramatically different picture. Nearly a month into the fighting, polling shows that 60% of the US public opposes the war with Iran, and just one in four Americans backed the initial strikes. In the Gulf, Europe and Asia, the conflict is widely unpopular as severe economic consequences begin to manifest.According to Emma Graham-Harrison, The Guardian's chief Middle East correspondent based in Jerusalem, many Jewish Israelis view themselves as under siege in a hostile world since the October 2023 massacre. This perception has led many to conclude that an aggressive security policy is the only way to ensure safety, regardless of international reaction.There's a prevailing sentiment in Israel that short-term suffering will lead to long-term security, despite security experts questioning whether Israel has a clear strategy to convert tactical achievements into lasting security. Life in Jerusalem remains restricted, with many working from home and limitations on businesses from cafes to gyms.The public support for the war has not translated into improved political fortunes for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who currently lags in polls for the upcoming general elections. While there is majority support for Netanyahu's decision to launch the war and his handling of it, even among those who don't want to give him another term, his coalition faces challenges in securing enough seats to return him to power.Some Israeli supporters of the war worry that Netanyahu's push to attack Iran has jeopardized the country's crucial relationship with the United States. Historically, Israel's foreign policy has been based on bipartisan ties, but Netanyahu has effectively abandoned that approach to cultivate an extremely close relationship with Trump.Israel's isolation is becoming increasingly apparent as the conflict continues. Unlike historical precedents where Israel achieved security through negotiated agreements with Jordan and Egypt, the current approach emphasizes military power above diplomatic solutions. This isolation is reflected in the fact that Israel may be the only place in the world with broad support for this war, with populations in Lebanon and Iran experiencing the conflict as horrific.

Alireza Tangsiri, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) naval commander killed in an Israeli airstrike, was a veteran hardliner with a reputation for fiery rhetoric. He had a deep understanding of the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway that carries a fifth of the world’s oil and gas.Tangsiri was a prominent figure in the IRGC, having won his credentials during the Iran-Iraq war and rising through the ranks to become the commander of the IRGC’s maritime force in 2018. He was known for pioneering unconventional weapons that allowed Iran to project power in the Persian Gulf and beyond.The US Treasury sanctioned Tangsiri in 2019 and 2023, citing his role in overseeing the IRGC Navy’s testing of cruise missiles and his involvement with a company that developed armed drones. These weapons could potentially be used to maintain the current blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.Tangsiri was also a strong supporter of fast boats, which can threaten civilian shipping and evade modern warship defense systems. His recent statements had dared the US to launch a ground assault on Kharg Island, Iran’s principal hub for oil exports, and warned of the impact on oil prices.The Israeli airstrike that killed Tangsiri has been seen as a significant blow to the IRGC. The commander of US Central Command, Adm Brad Cooper, said the killing “makes the region safer.” Israel’s Defense Minister, Israel Katz, described the strike as a “message” to the IRGC, vowing to “hunt you down and eliminate you one by one.”

The UK government has unveiled a new policy to prioritise British suppliers for public contracts in key sectors deemed vital to national security. Shipbuilding, steel, AI, and energy infrastructure will be the primary areas where British suppliers will be given preference. Under the new guidance, departments will be required to use British steel or justify sourcing it from overseas. This move is part of a broader effort to bolster national security and economic resilience, particularly in the face of global supply chain disruptions highlighted by the war in the Gulf. A Public Interest Test will also be introduced, obliging departments to assess whether outsourced service contracts over £1m could be delivered more effectively in-house. This test is expected to cover more than 95% of central government contracts by value. Chris Ward, a Cabinet Office minister, emphasised that these reforms aim to support British jobs, protect national security, and grow the economy. The policies are part of the National Security Strategy, which seeks to align national security with economic growth and build the resilience of British supply chains. While the UK is still subject to international obligations such as the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) – World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, national security exemptions are being utilised to implement these new rules. Larger departments spending over £100m annually will need to publish an “insourcing” strategy, outlining plans to bring services back in-house where they offer better value. The government will also prioritise community impact in buying decisions, encouraging firms to demonstrate how their bids will create local jobs and apprenticeships. Additionally, a new suite of AI tools has been developed to streamline the commercial process, making it simpler, faster, and fairer for small businesses and charities to bid for work.