Khamenei, who had remained out of public view since Israel’s opening strike and avoided appearances even after the ceasefire announcement, participated in the religious commemoration in Tehran where he was greeted with chants of “hero” from attendees. The appearance marks his first public event since the outbreak of hostilities with Israel, during which reports emerged that Israel was considering targeting the Iranian leader for assassination.

Media coverage compiled indicates mounting concern within Iran that Israel may be seeking to assassinate Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, leading to a substantial intensification of his security measures. In the wake of Iran’s failure to safeguard senior military commanders and key strategic assets during the recent confrontation with Israel, Khamenei had largely refrained from public appearances, limiting his engagement to occasional pre-recorded statements. Nonetheless, in a rare address last week, he proclaimed what he described as a “victory” and vowed that Tehran would “swiftly” repair the damage sustained by its nuclear infrastructure.

The Telegraph newspaper has reported that Iranian missiles directly struck at least five Israeli military installations during the fighting, citing radar data obtained by the publication. The newspaper noted that Israel has not officially reported these strikes and that they cannot be publicly disclosed within Israel due to strict military censorship regulations.

According to a map published on The Telegraph’s website, the targeted installations included Camp Tzipporit near Nazareth, Camp Galilot, and the Tel Nof Air Force base. The article did not specify whether these represent all facilities that sustained direct hits, noting that researchers from the University of Oregon plan to publish a more comprehensive analysis within two weeks.

The Telegraph reported that the radar data indicates five previously unreported military facilities were struck by six Iranian missiles across northern, southern, and central Israel, including a major air base, an intelligence collection center, and a logistics base. When approached for comment, an Israel Defense Forces spokesman declined to address the specific claims but stated that “all relevant units maintained operational continuity throughout the fighting”.

The strikes on military installations occurred in addition to 36 other missiles that penetrated Israel’s air defense systems and caused substantial damage to residential buildings and industrial infrastructure, according to The Telegraph. The newspaper observed that while most Iranian missiles were intercepted, Tehran’s accuracy rate improved as the conflict progressed, though experts describe the reasons for this improvement as “unclear”.

Potential explanations for the increased effectiveness include Israel’s conservation of ammunition due to limited stocks of interceptor missiles, as well as Iran’s adoption of improved firing tactics and deployment of more sophisticated missile systems. The Telegraph’s analysis indicates that approximately 16 percent of missiles breached the defense systems operated by Israel and the United States, a figure that aligns with previous IDF assessments that determined an 87 percent success rate for defensive interceptions. The missile attacks resulted in 29 fatalities.

Iranian sources have claimed that the primary method for overcoming defense systems involved the simultaneous deployment of drones and missiles. According to these sources, the combination of fast-moving missiles with slower drones forced defensive systems to divide their attention, with the drones serving primarily to “keep the systems busy”. Iranian officials added that while many drones were intercepted, they succeeded in creating confusion within Israeli defense networks.

The emergence of Khamenei from his extended period of seclusion comes as intelligence revelations challenge previous assessments of Iran’s military effectiveness during the conflict. The Supreme Leader’s public appearance suggests a calculated effort to project strength and continuity of leadership following a period of heightened security concerns.

The Telegraph’s reporting, based on independent radar data analysis, provides new insights into the scope and effectiveness of Iranian missile strikes during the 12-day conflict. The newspaper’s findings indicate that several direct hits on military installations went unreported in Israeli media, highlighting the challenges in assessing the full extent of damage and casualties during the hostilities.

The conflict’s conclusion has left both nations claiming victory while dealing with significant military and infrastructure damage. Iran’s ability to penetrate Israeli air defenses, as documented by The Telegraph’s analysis, demonstrates the evolving nature of missile warfare and the limitations of even advanced defensive systems when confronted with coordinated, multi-vector attacks.

The improved Iranian missile performance over the course of the conflict suggests adaptive tactics and potentially enhanced weapons systems, raising questions about the long-term implications for regional security. The simultaneous use of drones and missiles, as described by Iranian sources, represents a tactical innovation that proved effective against sophisticated air defense networks.

Khamenei’s return to public appearances, combined with his declarations of victory and promises to restore nuclear facilities, signals Iran’s intention to project resilience despite the extensive damage sustained during the conflict. The Supreme Leader’s three-week absence from public view had fueled speculation about his security situation and the regime’s stability during the crisis.

The University of Oregon’s forthcoming comprehensive analysis, expected within two weeks, may provide additional details about the extent and nature of Iranian missile strikes on Israeli military facilities. Such independent academic assessment could offer valuable insights into the effectiveness of both offensive and defensive capabilities demonstrated during the conflict.

The revelation of successful strikes on multiple Israeli military installations, previously unreported due to censorship restrictions, underscores the information warfare aspects of modern conflicts and the challenges in obtaining accurate, real-time assessments of military effectiveness and damage sustained by opposing forces.

Photo: AP

The post Khamenei Exits Bunker as Iran Strikes Hit appeared first on My Blog.

The barrage targeted residential neighborhoods and infrastructure throughout Kyiv, with missiles and drones striking dozens of residential buildings and damaging hundreds of vehicles. The attacks shattered windows across several districts, while towering columns of black smoke rose above the city’s skyline for hours, visible from considerable distances. The scenes of destruction painted a grim picture of the ongoing conflict’s impact on civilian areas.

Ukrainian air defense forces demonstrated mixed success in countering the assault. While they managed to intercept the majority of drones launched toward the capital, only two of the 11 missiles fired were successfully neutralized by defense systems. The low missile interception rate contributed significantly to the extensive damage sustained throughout the city, highlighting the challenges faced by Ukrainian forces in defending against sophisticated weaponry.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba responded to the night’s events with a forceful statement on social media, describing it as “a terrible and sleepless night in Kyiv” and calling it “one of the worst so far”. Kuleba emphasized the timing of the attack, noting that hundreds of Russian drones and ballistic missiles “rained down on Ukraine’s capital” immediately following Putin’s conversation with President Trump.

“He does this deliberately,” Kuleba wrote, suggesting the Russian president’s actions were intentionally timed to send a message. The Foreign Minister accused Putin of demonstrating “complete contempt for the US and everyone who called for an end to the war,” urging the international community to abandon passive approaches to the conflict.

Kuleba’s response included calls for imposing the harshest possible sanctions on Moscow and providing Ukraine with comprehensive defensive capabilities. His statements came amid reports that the United States has frozen weapons shipments to Ukraine that had been previously agreed upon during the former administration, adding another layer of complexity to the current situation.

The Ukrainian Foreign Minister warned against what he termed “wrong decisions” that could encourage further escalation of violence. “All criminal regimes in the world are now closely watching Putin’s actions and the response to them”, Kuleba stated. “If he gets away with this, they will all receive a very clear message”. He urged immediate action rather than continued waiting, advocating for “peace through strength” rather than passive diplomatic approaches.

The timing of the attack has raised significant questions about its connection to the Trump-Putin telephone conversation that preceded it. This pattern of behavior aligns with previous instances where the Russian president has demonstrated defiant actions and strategic messaging during critical diplomatic moments. The synchronization suggests a calculated approach to international relations through displays of military force.

The assault represents the latest in a prolonged series of Russian attacks on Kyiv since the invasion of Ukraine began nearly three years ago. However, both the intensity and timing of this particular attack distinguish it from previous strikes, highlighting Moscow’s apparent intent to send a clear message during a period when diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict are reportedly underway.

The extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and residential areas underscores the continued targeting of non-military locations in the ongoing conflict. The attack serves as a stark illustration of the war’s persistent impact on Ukrainian civilians, despite high-level diplomatic discussions taking place internationally.

The night’s events demonstrate the complex relationship between diplomatic initiatives and military actions in the ongoing conflict. While conversations between world leaders continue at the highest levels, the reality on the ground in Ukraine remains characterized by violence and destruction directed at civilian populations.

The attack’s aftermath leaves Kyiv dealing with significant infrastructure damage and injured residents, while the international community faces renewed questions about effective responses to continued military escalation. The incident reinforces the ongoing challenges in balancing diplomatic engagement with decisive action to protect civilian populations in conflict zones.

As Ukraine continues to face these intense attacks, the international response to this latest assault may prove crucial in determining the trajectory of both military actions and diplomatic efforts in the coming weeks. The timing and scale of the attack ensure it will remain a significant factor in ongoing discussions about the conflict’s resolution.

The post Russian Attack on Kyiv Follows Trump-Putin Call appeared first on My Blog.

In a classified briefing made available to the media, Mr. Netanyahu declared that Israel had “removed two immediate existential threats” to its national security, describing the campaign’s opening manoeuvres as “a blow that will be inscribed in the annals of history”. The Prime Minister stated that Israeli forces, in coordinated action, had not only neutralised key nuclear infrastructure but had also decapitated Iran’s senior military and scientific leadership.

According to Mr. Netanyahu, the operation entailed the elimination of Iran’s top brass—including three chiefs of staff and additional senior figures—as well as leading nuclear scientists allegedly responsible for the country’s atomic weapons programme. He asserted that “in one swift action we eliminated Iran’s senior command… and the senior nuclear scientists who led the nuclear programme and sought to bring destruction and death upon us”.

Targets included some of the most fortified and symbolically significant facilities in Iran’s nuclear apparatus: the uranium enrichment centre at Natanz, the conversion plant at Isfahan, and the heavy water reactor at Arak. Under U.S. directive, Netanyahu claimed, American forces destroyed the subterranean Fordow facility, while Israeli assets concurrently struck “dozens of facilities, including laboratories and centrifuge production sites”. Israel, he said, also obliterated what he described as “the entire archive” of Iran’s nuclear knowledge—allegedly the sum total of its research and technological expertise necessary for atomic weaponisation.

In a sweeping assertion of strategic achievement, Mr. Netanyahu claimed that the operation had also neutralised Iran’s ballistic missile threat. “Iran’s intention to threaten Israel with thousands of ballistic missiles has been removed”, he said. He outlined strikes on Revolutionary Guard installations, Basij paramilitary compounds, command-and-control hubs, and what he called “symbols of the regime”. The most severe blow, according to the Prime Minister, was delivered in the final hours prior to the ceasefire: a coordinated assault which he claimed resulted in “hundreds of regime operatives” being killed in what he described as “the most devastating attack Tehran has witnessed in fifty years”.

Despite clear diplomatic strain, Mr. Netanyahu expressed public gratitude to President Trump for what he characterised as the unprecedented level of U.S. military cooperation. “On behalf of the State of Israel, I thank my friend President Trump and the United States for their role in defending Israel and in removing the Iranian nuclear threat”, Netanyahu said. “The participation of the United States—not merely in a defensive posture but as an operational partner—is without historical precedent. Israel has never had a greater friend in the White House”.

Yet that friendship was sorely tested behind closed doors—and, increasingly, in public. While the ceasefire officially came into effect at 7:00 a.m., President Trump expressed pointed dissatisfaction with Israel’s conduct scarcely two and a half hours later. Speaking before departing for the NATO summit in The Hague, he remarked, “I’m not satisfied with both sides, and especially not with Israel. Both countries violated the ceasefire. I didn’t like that Israel discharged ammunition after declaring it”.

Tensions escalated further when the President took to his social media platform, issuing a blunt warning: “Don’t drop the bombs. If you do this, it’s a serious violation. Bring your pilots home now”. He continued, “Israel needs to calm down. I have to make it happen. I’ll see if I can make this happen”.

Sources in both Washington and Jerusalem confirmed that President Trump had personally intervened to halt a planned Israeli airstrike on Tehran, demanding its immediate cancellation. In a reportedly tense telephone exchange, Netanyahu ultimately acceded to the President’s demand, agreeing to limit Israel’s retaliation to a symbolic strike on an Iranian radar installation. Israeli aircraft, already en route, were ordered to return to base after being designated “friendly” by U.S. command.

The Israeli Cabinet formally endorsed the ceasefire more than two hours after its implementation, releasing a statement declaring that “Israel has removed a double immediate existential threat: both in the nuclear domain and in the ballistic missile domain”. The Iranian missile salvos that preceded the truce—intercepted successfully by Israeli defence systems—prompted calls within the Israeli defence establishment for retaliatory action. Yet President Trump, refusing to assign culpability to Tehran, publicly chastised Israel for its response, however limited in effect.

Despite the declared military success, Mr. Netanyahu stressed that the threat to Israel’s security had not been wholly extinguished. Citing the continued presence and activity of Hamas in Gaza, he reaffirmed Israel’s commitment to securing the release of hostages held by the militant organisation. “We must defeat Hamas and free all the hostages”, the Prime Minister stated. “To the families of the hostages, I say this: we have not ceased for a single moment—even during the height of the war—in our efforts to bring your loved ones home. We shall not relent in this sacred mission”.

Framing Lion’s Den as a paradigm-shifting military operation, Mr. Netanyahu described it as a “historic victory” that would shape military doctrine globally. “The opening blow,” he declared, “will be studied in the world’s military academies for generations to come”. He issued a stark warning to Tehran and its allies: any attempt to reconstruct Iran’s nuclear capacity would be met “with the same determination and power to cut down any such effort at its inception”.

The episode has laid bare the fragility of even the closest alliances. While Netanyahu’s language towards President Trump remained laudatory, the American President’s evident displeasure underscores a new phase of complexity in the U.S.–Israel strategic relationship. Whether this divergence marks a temporary strain or a more enduring recalibration remains to be seen, but it is clear that the geopolitical reverberations of Lion’s Den will not end with the last bomb dropped.

Photo: Office of the Prime Minister – Israel

The post Israel Destroys Iran’s Nuclear Program, Trump Condemns Strikes appeared first on My Blog.

In a dramatic tweet published at night, Trump wrote: “I am happy to congratulate the courage and wisdom to end the ’12-day war'”. According to him, a graduated framework was achieved whereby, if everything “goes well”, an official declaration ending the war with Iran is expected to be received on Wednesday around 7:00 AM. Trump added: “This will last forever. A wonderful day for the world”.

Following the announcement, it emerged that behind the scenes a complex diplomatic process had been conducted through Qatar’s mediation. An official Reuters source revealed that Trump spoke with the Emir of Qatar and told him that Israel had agreed to the proposal, while Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani in turn secured Iran’s agreement. White House sources confirmed that Prime Minister Netanyahu approved the proposal in a conversation with Trump, with the central condition being the cessation of attacks by Iran.

The official Iranian response came in the early morning hours from Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who explicitly denied the existence of a formal agreement. “As of now, there is no agreement, ceasefire, or halt to military operations”, Araghchi wrote on social media. However, in the continuation of his statement he left a significant opening: “If the Israeli regime stops its aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4:00 Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response”. Araghchi added that “the final decision on stopping our operations will be made later”. It should be noted that the tweet was published after 4:00 in Iran, raising questions about the practical meaning of the ultimatum.

In support of the president’s announcement, a senior Iranian official confirmed in a conversation with foreign media that Tehran had indeed agreed to the proposal, though he did not detail its exact conditions. The apparent contradiction between the minister’s and the official’s statements indicates internal disagreements in Iran’s decision-making mechanism.

Parallel to the diplomatic announcements, the military reality continues to be turbulent. The Israeli Air Force conducted “heavy strikes” at noon on dozens of targets across Iran, with more than 50 fighter jets participating in the operation. The main focus was the extensive attack on Tehran, which included hitting Revolutionary Guard headquarters and strategic infrastructure. Among the prominent targets was also the entrance to the notorious “Evin” prison, where Iranian regime opponents are held.

An IDF spokesperson detailed that the wave of attacks targeted missile production sites, radars, and missile storage infrastructure in the Tehran area. The strikes are being carried out against the backdrop of Israeli preparations for possible barrages, with security forces at maximum alert level.

In Jerusalem, the narrow security cabinet convened in a bunker for an emergency discussion. Prime Minister Netanyahu instructed ministers not to comment on the matter until discussions were completed. Sources in the Prime Minister’s Office refrained from any official reference to Trump’s announcement, emphasizing that Israel would continue to act according to its security considerations.

In Washington, the American Vice President defined the “12-day war” as “an important reset for the entire region”, emphasizing the strategic importance of the ceasefire agreement. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee welcomed the announcement in an emotional post, writing: “It’s 3:00 AM in Israel, and I woke up to a phone call instead of a ballistic missile. President Trump announced wonderful news to the world about a ceasefire that will soon take effect – these 12 days felt like 12 years. The President didn’t just ‘pray for the peace of Jerusalem,’ he delivered it”.

Despite the diplomatic announcements, the civilian reality in Israel remained unchanged. The Home Front Command clarified that there was no change in guidelines for the public, and that people should continue to follow instructions given through official channels. Following the attacks, the IDF decided to tighten defense policy and move all areas of the country from partial and limited activity level to essential activity level at least until evening. The prohibition includes educational activities, gatherings, and conducting activities in workplaces, except for vital economy.

The tension between diplomatic announcements and military reality continues to cast a shadow over the implementation of the ceasefire. While Trump promises “a wonderful day for the world”, Israeli attacks continue and Iran maintains deliberate ambiguity regarding its future response. The coming hours are expected to determine whether an agreement is indeed crystallizing that will bring an end to tensions, or whether this is a temporary respite in what could become a longer war.

Photo: AP

The post Trump announces Israel-Iran ceasefire amid continuing strikes appeared first on My Blog.

The summit’s most striking moment came when President Trump refused to sign a joint declaration affirming Israel’s right to self-defense and opposing Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The proposed statement, which G7 leaders had drafted to present a unified Western position on the Middle Eastern crisis, encountered unexpected resistance from the American president. Trump’s refusal to endorse the declaration carries significant diplomatic weight, particularly given the United States’ role as Israel’s primary ally in the region, and raises questions about America’s commitment to containing Iranian influence.

The Iranian issue has taken center stage at the summit as oil prices surge following the Israel-Iran conflict, providing substantial revenues to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine. European leaders are pressing for enhanced sanctions against Moscow, including further reductions to the Russian oil price cap, to prevent the Kremlin from capitalizing on elevated global energy prices. However, these efforts face resistance from Trump, who has expressed markedly different views on how to handle Russian aggression.

Trump’s position on Russia became particularly apparent when he criticized the G8’s decision to expel Russia following the 2014 annexation of Crimea. “That was a big mistake. You wouldn’t have had this war. Putin talks to me, he doesn’t talk to anyone else because he got insulted when he was thrown out of the G8”, Trump stated during discussions. His remarks, interpreted as a defense of Russian President Vladimir Putin, underscore the growing divide between American and European approaches to Moscow’s actions.

The diplomatic tensions have been further complicated by French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent high-profile visit to Greenland, where he met with the Danish and Greenlandic prime ministers. The visit is widely viewed as a calculated diplomatic maneuver designed to demonstrate European support for Greenland’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. More significantly, it represents a direct response to Trump’s previous statements about potentially acquiring Greenland, including his refusal to rule out military action to achieve this objective, despite the island being under Danish sovereignty.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is scheduled to arrive in Canada tomorrow as a guest of honor, where he will meet with Trump and other G7 leaders. His participation is expected to intensify discussions about the appropriate Western response to Russian aggression, particularly given the divergent positions among allies regarding military and economic support for Ukraine.

The summit’s challenges extend beyond security matters to economic policy, as Trump’s tariff policies continue to strain relationships with European partners. The tariffs impose additional economic pressure on allies already grappling with the costs of supporting Ukraine and managing energy security concerns. This combination of economic and security disagreements creates a complex web of tensions that summit organizers are struggling to navigate.

European leaders are advocating for a more confrontational stance toward Russia, arguing that Moscow’s refusal to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine necessitates stronger punitive measures. They contend that additional sanctions, particularly those targeting Russia’s energy revenues, are essential to weakening Putin’s capacity to sustain his military campaign. However, Trump’s apparent openness to dialogue with Putin and his criticism of previous Western actions against Russia suggest a fundamentally different approach to managing the crisis.

The divisions at Kananaskis reflect broader questions about the future of transatlantic cooperation during a period of unprecedented global instability. With multiple crises demanding coordinated international responses, the inability of Western allies to reach consensus on fundamental issues raises concerns about their collective capacity to address emerging security challenges effectively.

The summit’s outcome will likely have far-reaching implications for international efforts to contain Iranian nuclear ambitions, support Ukrainian resistance, and maintain the cohesion of the Western alliance. As leaders continue their deliberations, the stark differences in approach between the United States and its European partners have become impossible to ignore, potentially signaling a new phase in transatlantic relations characterized by increased strategic competition rather than cooperation.

The Kananaskis gathering has thus far demonstrated that even among the world’s most developed democracies, achieving unity in the face of authoritarian challenges remains an elusive goal, with implications that extend far beyond the summit’s conclusion.

Photo: AP

The post Trump breaks with G7 Allies on Iran, Russia appeared first on My Blog.