Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Israel has unleashed a significant military operation against Iran, launching two waves of attacks on Tehran and killing a senior Hezbollah commander. The attacks have escalated tensions in the region, with Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, denying claims of a ceasefire request.US President Donald Trump has claimed that Iran's leadership is seeking a ceasefire, but Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson has denied this, calling Trump's account 'false and baseless'.The conflict has resulted in at least 1,900 people killed and 20,000 injured in Iran, according to estimates from the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent societies. The Israeli military has also reported that 10 of its soldiers have been killed since fighting broke out on the Lebanese front.The attacks have had significant economic implications, with the strait of Hormuz effectively closed to oil and gas tankers and other merchant shipping since the beginning of the conflict, hiking oil prices and causing critical shortages around the world.Iran's president has written to Americans, asking which of their interests are being served by this war, and stating that Iranians 'harbor no enmity towards other nations, including the people of America'. The conflict continues to escalate, with further waves of attacks reported across the densely populated centre of Israel.

Amid the escalating United States‑Israel confrontation with Iran, parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has emerged as an unexpected voice on financial strategy, posting a series of warnings on X that market‑moving headlines are often engineered to trigger profit‑taking. Ghalibaf’s core advice is simple yet provocative: if a headline inflates prices, bet against it; if it drags prices down, go long. He describes pre‑market news bursts as a “reverse indicator” designed to manipulate investors. His posts are laced with sarcasm, referencing alleged manipulation of oil futures and even joking about turning rhetoric into “actual fuel at the pump.” Behind the humor, analysts say, lies a calculated effort to exploit the overlap between digital propaganda and real‑world conflict. The backdrop to Ghalibaf’s messaging is Iran’s use of asymmetric warfare, notably the brief shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz—a chokepoint through which roughly 20% of global oil and LNG shipments pass. The closure sent crude prices soaring and heightened economic pressure worldwide, underscoring Tehran’s ability to influence U.S. markets by targeting critical supply routes. On March 22, Ghalibaf warned financial institutions that support U.S. military financing in the Middle East, declaring that U.S. Treasury bonds are “soaked in Iranians’ blood” and that their portfolios were under surveillance. Economist Jo Michell of the University of the West of England observes that falling equity markets, rising energy costs, and higher interest rates could eventually force President Donald Trump to seek a diplomatic exit from the conflict. Michell notes that Trump often delivers his most aggressive statements over weekends when markets are closed, only to retreat before the opening bell—a pattern traders have dubbed TACO (“Trump always chickens out”). Indeed, when Trump’s original 48‑hour deadline for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz loomed, he extended it by five days and later pledged a further 10‑day pause on attacks against Iranian energy infrastructure, actions that analysts interpret as deliberate market signaling. Middle‑East specialist Zeidon Alkinani explains that the conflict’s volatility creates new leverage points beyond direct price manipulation. Even light‑hearted rhetoric from officials like Ghalibaf can exacerbate market instability, as investors scramble for any hint of the war’s trajectory. In this environment, uncertainty itself becomes a powerful market driver. Alkinani stresses that the significance of the Strait of Hormuz now extends beyond physical oil flow disruptions; it reshapes investor expectations and amplifies the impact of digital messaging, especially given Trump’s high‑visibility online presence. Overall, Ghalibaf’s social‑media campaign illustrates how Tehran is blending military pressure with information warfare, turning market sentiment into an additional front of the broader geopolitical struggle.

Pakistan's capital, Islamabad, has become a hub for diplomatic activity as key regional powers converge to address the escalating conflict between the US and Iran. Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, and Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud have arrived for talks with Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar. The meetings aim to bring an end to the US-Israeli war on Iran, which has entered its 30th day and caused a global energy crisis. The conflict has led to a significant increase in tensions in the Middle East, with 20 percent of the world's oil and gas supplies passing through the Strait of Hormuz, which has been choked by Iran. Pakistan is walking a diplomatic tightrope, with close defense ties to Saudi Arabia and cultural ties to Iran. The country is also home to the second-largest Shia population in the world after Iran. Analysts describe Pakistan's role as a 'very delicate balancing act' as it tries to bring the Americans and Iranians back to the negotiating table. The diplomatic push is driven by severe economic fears, with millions of Pakistani citizens potentially losing their jobs in the Gulf region if the conflict spreads. The stakes are existential for Islamabad, which risks a major crisis if energy supplies decline. Experts point out that the enormous economic costs borne by the Gulf countries have dropped drastically due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian drone and missile attacks have targeted energy and industrial facilities, forcing petroleum companies to declare force majeure on supply contracts. The Islamabad gathering serves as a foundational step for an 'Islamic alliance' designed to counter the Israeli project in the region, address geopolitical vacuums, and mitigate uncertainties surrounding future US involvement.

Iran has agreed to permit 20 Pakistani-flagged vessels to transit the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway for global oil supplies. This development is seen as a significant step towards alleviating the severe energy crisis affecting the region.Pakistan's Foreign Minister, Ishaq Dar, announced the agreement, stating that two ships will cross daily under the arrangement. He described Iran's decision as 'a harbinger of peace' and a 'welcome and constructive gesture'.The Strait of Hormuz has been effectively shut since the United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes on Iran on February 28, triggering a war that has resulted in significant loss of life and disruptions to global markets. The conflict has killed about 2,000 Iranians and over 1,100 people in Lebanon.The strait is a critical passage for oil supplies, with an estimated 2,000 vessels stranded on either side. This blockade has caused oil prices to surge past $100 a barrel, up by roughly 40 percent. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has turned the strait into a checkpoint, requiring ships to submit cargo details and receive clearance codes.At least two vessels have reportedly paid $2 million per crossing, settled in Chinese yuan, to secure passage. Iran's parliament is now moving to legalize this arrangement as a potential source of revenue.This agreement is the result of intense Pakistani diplomacy, with Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir speaking to US President Donald Trump and Foreign Minister Dar holding calls with his Iranian and Turkish counterparts.

Israel has confirmed that it has struck a uranium processing facility in the central Iranian city of Yazd, in an escalatory move that comes as regional diplomats have been attempting to broker an agreement to halt the joint US-Israeli war on Iran.The Israeli Air Force said it hit a plant used to extract raw materials essential to the uranium enrichment process, describing it as a 'unique facility' in Iran's nuclear infrastructure. Iran's Atomic Energy Organization confirmed the strike, but said there were no casualties or radiation leaks.A projectile also hit near the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation said. The attack caused 'no casualties, financial, or technical damage,' the organisation said.Friday marked day 28 of the conflict, and the assault by the Israeli army was part of a broad wave of attacks on sites across the country. The Khondab Heavy Water Complex in central Iran was hit, as well as two major steel plants: the Khuzestan Steel facility and the Mobarakeh Steel complex in Isfahan.Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran will 'exact heavy price' for Israeli attacks on several important infrastructure sites. 'Israel has hit 2 of Iran's largest steel factories, a power plant and civilian nuclear sites among other infrastructure,' said Araghchi in a post on X.Strikes also hit areas in and around Tehran, the city of Kashan and Ahwaz, while 18 people were killed in Qom. More than 1,900 people have been killed in US-Israeli attacks on Iran since the war began on February 28.Iranian officials said US-Israeli strikes have damaged at least 120 museums and historical sites across the country since hostilities began.Negar Mortazavi, a senior non-resident fellow at the Center for International Policy, told Al Jazeera that even Iranians who had been critical of their own government increasingly view the war as an assault on the Iranian people rather than its leadership, saying the targeting of water, electricity, gas, cultural heritage, schools and hospitals was 'unacceptable.'Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israel would 'intensify' its campaign and expand the range of sites it targets, accusing Tehran of deliberately directing missiles at Israeli civilians.

Iran has formally responded to the US's proposal to end the nearly month-long war, asserting its 'natural and legal right' over the Strait of Hormuz. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-affiliated Tasnim news agency reported that Iran had sent its official response on Wednesday night and was awaiting a response.The Iranian response appears to contradict US President Donald Trump's claim that Tehran was 'begging to make a deal'. Instead, Iran has laid out conditions that signal a continued hardening of its position, including an end to 'aggressive acts of assassination', compensation and war reparations, measures to ensure 'war does not recur', and an end to hostilities from 'all resistance groups that took part in this battle throughout the region'.US special envoy Steve Witkoff claimed on Thursday that Tehran was seeking an 'off-ramp', with signs that Iran had realised there was no alternative to negotiation. However, the source cited in Tasnim's report slammed the US proposal, claiming that Washington sought to 'deceive the world' by presenting a peaceful image while preparing for 'ground invasion'.Trump posted on Truth Social that he would pause attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure for 10 days until April 6, claiming Tehran requested the move amid 'ongoing' talks that were 'going very well'. He also claimed that Iran was 'begging to make a deal', saying 'We are absolutely obliterating Iran' and that Iranians were 'lousy fighters, but great negotiators'. The economic and humanitarian toll of the conflict continues to mount, with Iran effectively blocking the Strait of Hormuz, leading to fuel shortages worldwide.

The UK government's borrowing costs have risen above 5% amid an intensifying global bond market sell-off fueled by the Iran war. The yield – or interest rate – on 10-year debt hit its highest level since the 2008 financial crisis, rising 13 basis points to 5.081%, as investors acted on concerns about the economic fallout from the conflict.Borrowing costs also rose for the US and eurozone governments, underscoring growing turbulence in the global financial system after Donald Trump's extension of a deadline for a peace deal failed to soothe jittery investors. Financial markets worldwide slumped on Friday, extending falls seen since the outbreak of the war, with losses in London and across major US and EU trading hubs. The price of Brent crude remained above $110 a barrel.Kathleen Brooks, the research director for the UK at the financial trading platform XTB, said: “Markets feel more panicky this week, and Friday’s price action suggests that investors are losing faith in Donald Trump’s ability to end this war and reach a deal with the Iranians.”Economists have warned that the Bank of England could be forced to take a tough approach to tackling inflation after losing some of its credibility by underestimating the leap in inflationary pressures in 2022. The increase in borrowing costs will add to the challenges facing Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, amid pressure on Labour to provide a package of financial support for households already reeling from a cost of living crisis.

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.'

As the conflict drags on, Iranians are attempting to maintain a semblance of ordinary life in the face of constant explosions and airstrikes. The days following Nowruz, the Persian New Year, are usually a time of renewal and celebration, but this year, the atmosphere is tense."More and more, people are starting to normalise this war", said Farhad, a photography editor in Tehran. "It's difficult, but we're adapting and trying to return to our daily lives as much as possible. There's no alternative. We're tired. We just want peace."Despite the challenges, some Iranians are finding ways to cope. Aylar, a 39-year-old human rights worker, paid for an expensive VPN to circumvent the internet blackout imposed by Iranian authorities so she could stay in touch with relatives abroad. She also made time for a coffee date with friends, highlighting the complexity of life during conflict.The humanitarian toll is significant, with Iran's official death toll frozen at around 1,500, but the real figure may be more than 3,000, according to the Iranian Human Rights Activists News Agency. Many more have been injured, and the psychological impact is profound.As the situation continues to unfold, uncertainty and division within Iranian society are palpable. While most Iranians oppose the war, some have welcomed it as a potential catalyst for change. The future remains uncertain, with concerns that the conflict could become a recurring reality.