webfact

The ongoing war in Iran is placing increasing strain on Ukraine, as diplomatic efforts stall and Vladimir Putin prepares for potential new military advances. US-led peace talks aimed at ending the war in Ukraine have slowed significantly as attention shifts to the escalating crisis in the Middle East. Analysts say the diversion of political and military resources is creating an opportunity for Moscow to intensify pressure on Kyiv. Get today's headlines by email Rising global energy prices linked to the conflict have boosted Russian revenues, strengthening its ability to sustain military operations. At the same time, US defence resources, including air defence systems, are being heavily used in the Gulf region, raising concerns about reduced support for Ukraine. Oil revenues and shifting prioritiesEuropean allies have pledged continued backing for Kyiv, but disagreements over a proposed €90bn support package have highlighted growing divisions. Tensions have also surfaced within NATO, particularly after reluctance from European members to commit naval forces to secure shipping routes in the Strait of Hormuz. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has sought to maintain US engagement, including offering military expertise to counter Iranian drone threats. However, US President Donald Trump has indicated such assistance is not required. Russia prepares battlefield pushAlong the front line, which stretches more than 1,200 kilometres, Russian forces are believed to be preparing for renewed offensives in the coming months. Military analysts say Moscow is concentrating efforts on capturing remaining Ukrainian-held areas in the eastern Donetsk region, while also considering advances in other sectors. Increased artillery fire and drone strikes suggest preparations are under way to weaken Ukrainian defences ahead of ground assaults. War conditions have evolved into a prolonged conflict of attrition, with small-scale engagements dominating the battlefield. The widespread use of drones has limited the ability of either side to conduct large manoeuvres. Ukrainian resistance and counterattacksUkrainian forces have attempted to disrupt Russian plans with counteroffensives in regions including Dnipropetrovsk and Zaporizhzhia. These operations aim to prevent Russian troops from establishing positions that could support further advances toward key industrial centres. According to battlefield assessments, Ukrainian strikes on Russian supply lines and equipment may force Moscow to divide its resources between defence and offensive operations. Despite these efforts, US intelligence officials say Russia continues to hold an advantage. Tulsi Gabbard told lawmakers that Moscow retains the upper hand and is likely to continue a slow, grinding campaign until its objectives are met. Uncertain path to peaceDiplomatic negotiations have so far produced no breakthrough, with both sides remaining far apart on key demands. Russia is insisting that Ukraine withdraw from territories it claims to have annexed and abandon its NATO ambitions—conditions Kyiv has rejected. Ukraine, meanwhile, is seeking a ceasefire and long-term security guarantees. Observers say Moscow may be prolonging talks while attempting to secure further gains on the battlefield. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s leadership has expressed concern that the war in Iran is weakening international focus on its own conflict. Zelenskyy warned that delays in negotiations and shifting global priorities could have serious consequences, particularly if shortages of critical military supplies deepen in the months ahead. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

Three men who accused Kevin Spacey of sexual assault have settled their civil cases ahead of a planned trial in London, according to court documents. The claims, which related to alleged incidents between 2000 and 2013, were due to be heard at the High Court later this year. However, proceedings have now been halted after both sides agreed to confidential settlement terms. Get today's headlines by email Judge Christina Lambert ordered a pause to the legal action last week, stating that the parties had reached an agreement. The order formally suspends any further proceedings in the case. Court confirms agreementDetails of the settlement have not been made public, and the court did not issue any ruling on legal costs. The agreement, dated 13 March, was released publicly on Wednesday. Representatives for Spacey have been contacted for comment. Background to the allegationsThe three claimants alleged that Spacey had sexually assaulted them over a period spanning more than a decade. The actor has consistently denied all allegations. Two of the individuals involved in the civil claims had previously given evidence during a criminal trial in London in 2023, in which Spacey faced multiple charges relating to alleged sexual offences. He was acquitted of all nine charges in that case. Previous legal battlesThe settlement marks the latest development in a series of legal challenges involving the actor in recent years. In 2022, Spacey successfully defended himself against a civil lawsuit in New York brought by actor Anthony Rapp, who had accused him of misconduct. A jury ruled in Spacey’s favour in that case. The actor, now 66, had been one of Hollywood’s most prominent figures before the allegations emerged, leading to a significant decline in his career. Career and legacyBefore the controversy, Spacey was widely recognised for his work in film and television. He won Academy Awards for his roles in The Usual Suspects and American Beauty, and starred in productions such as “Glengarry Glen Ross” and the television series “House of Cards”. He also served as artistic director of London’s Old Vic Theatre from 2004 to 2015. The settlement brings an end to the civil proceedings in London, though it does not involve any admission of liability. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

The United States has intensified military operations targeting Iranian vessels suspected of laying naval mines in the Strait of Hormuz, as efforts continue to counter a blockade that has disrupted global energy supplies. Speaking at the Pentagon, General Dan Caine said US forces had destroyed 44 Iranian boats believed to be involved in deploying mines. The vessels are seen as a key part of Tehran’s strategy to restrict movement through the narrow waterway, a vital route for around a fifth of the world’s oil shipments. Get today's headlines by email US military officials say the use of sea mines has become a central concern, preventing commercial ships from safely navigating the strait. Air Force A-10 aircraft, commonly known as Warthogs, have been deployed to target fast-moving boats that could be used to lay mines. These aircraft are designed for close-range support and are capable of attacking small maritime targets. Focus on mine threatsPresident Donald Trump has indicated that US naval forces could escort commercial vessels through the strait if required. However, military experts caution that such convoy operations cannot begin until the mine threat is significantly reduced. Limited naval resourcesThe US Navy’s capacity to conduct mine-clearing operations has been constrained. Two vessels equipped with counter-mine systems, the USS Tulsa and the USS Santa Barbara, are currently in Singapore for maintenance, while the location of a third ship has not been disclosed. The US no longer operates dedicated mine-sweeping ships, after its last specialised vessels were decommissioned in 2025. This has increased reliance on multi-role ships and allied support for any large-scale demining effort. Military analysts describe naval mines as a relatively cheap but highly effective “asymmetric” weapon, capable of being deployed from small or disguised vessels. Retired Admiral James Foggo said even boats resembling fishing vessels could be used to lay mines undetected. Broader military responseIn addition to targeting vessels, US forces have carried out strikes along Iran’s coastline, aimed at neutralising missile and drone systems that could threaten shipping in the region. Officials have also suggested that US Marines being deployed to the Middle East could take part in limited ground operations to target coastal infrastructure linked to these threats. General Caine said military planners are considering a range of options to secure the strait, with final decisions resting with the president. Allies cautious on involvementWhile Washington has called on allies to assist in safeguarding the waterway, there has been reluctance among European countries to become directly involved, citing the ongoing conflict between the US, Iran and Israel. During a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, Trump said the US could manage the situation independently but added that it would be appropriate for partners to contribute. Takaichi later emphasised the importance of keeping the strait open, while noting that Japan’s actions would be limited by its legal framework. The continued disruption to shipping has contributed to rising global energy prices, with markets reacting sharply to uncertainty over supplies moving through the strategically critical passage. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

The eastern English city of Norwich has been named the best place to live in the United Kingdom for 2026, praised for its blend of historic charm and modern vibrancy. The accolade comes from the The Sunday Times annual guide, which assessed more than 70 locations across the country. Judges highlighted the city’s distinctive character, strong community spirit and balance between heritage and contemporary life. Get today's headlines by email Describing Norwich as a “creative, contemporary city with a small-town feel”, the judges pointed to its unique atmosphere as a key factor in its success. Historic appeal meets modern energyThe city’s long history remains central to its identity, with landmarks such as Norwich Castle singled out for attention. The castle recently reopened following a major refurbishment, adding to the area’s cultural appeal. Norwich’s famous market, which dates back around 900 years, also contributes to its enduring appeal, offering a mix of tradition and everyday life in the city centre. In addition to its heritage, Norwich has gained recognition for its cultural standing, having been named a UNESCO City of Literature in 2012. Judging criteria and competitionThe annual rankings are based on a wide range of factors beyond property prices or reputation. Judges visited each shortlisted location and assessed criteria including schools, transport links, broadband connectivity and mobile coverage. Rather than focusing on wealth or prestige, the guide aims to identify places where communities are thriving and residents enjoy a high quality of life. Other towns and cities in eastern England were also featured in the list, including Chelmsford, Manningtree and Saffron Walden in Essex, as well as Bedford, Cambridge and Woodbridge in Suffolk. Local pride and recognitionLocal business leaders welcomed the recognition, saying it reflected Norwich’s distinctive identity and steady development. Holly Bamford, from Norwich Business Improvement District, said the city had “long quietly done things differently” and described the award as an important moment of national recognition. She added that Norwich’s mix of creativity, independence and strong local character continues to attract both residents and visitors, helping to support economic growth. The organisation, which represents businesses across the city, said it would continue to promote Norwich as a place to live, work and invest. A city with lasting appealJudges concluded that Norwich stands out for combining history, culture and community in a way that few other locations achieve. Its ability to offer both urban energy and a close-knit feel was seen as a defining strength, securing its position at the top of this year’s rankings. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

A growing group of Labour MPs is considering forcing a symbolic parliamentary vote to highlight opposition to proposed immigration changes led by Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood. The move reflects mounting internal tensions within the party over plans to tighten rules on settlement, particularly the proposal to extend the qualifying period for permanent residency. Get today's headlines by email Under the proposed reforms, most migrants would need to wait 10 years—rather than the current five—before being eligible for indefinite leave to remain, which allows individuals to live and work in the UK permanently. The changes would also affect care workers and refugees, requiring longer waiting periods before they can settle. Dispute over settlement rule changesThe Home Office has indicated that the reforms can be introduced without new legislation, meaning they would not automatically be subject to a parliamentary vote. However, critics are now exploring procedural options to trigger a non-binding vote to publicly register their opposition. Settlement rights, also known as indefinite leave to remain, provide access to employment, education and, where eligible, state benefits. Backbench backlash growsOpposition within Labour has so far largely been expressed privately, but discontent is becoming more visible. A group of around 100 MPs has already written to Ms Mahmood urging her to reconsider the proposals. Angela Rayner has also criticised aspects of the plan, particularly the intention to apply new rules to migrants already living in the UK, describing the approach as unacceptable. Some MPs argue the reforms would break implicit commitments made to people who had already built lives in Britain under the existing system. Others have described their opposition as fundamental, calling for the proposals to be scrapped entirely rather than adjusted. One MP said reversing course would be preferable to proceeding with policies they viewed as flawed, while another warned that the issue had already surfaced during recent local election campaigning. Government considers adjustmentsDowning Street has suggested it may introduce transitional arrangements that could soften the impact on migrants already in the UK. The Home Office is reviewing responses to a public consultation that has received around 200,000 submissions. Officials say the reforms are necessary to restore confidence in the immigration system and address the effects of high levels of net migration in recent years. A spokesperson said settlement should be earned rather than automatic, pointing to government figures showing net migration increased the UK population by 2.6 million between 2021 and 2024. Political divisions widenDespite the backlash, the proposals have support within parts of the Labour Party, particularly among MPs concerned about electoral pressure from rival parties. Some lawmakers have warned that abandoning the reforms could damage Labour’s standing in constituencies where immigration is a key issue. Opposition parties remain divided. The Conservatives have indicated they may support tougher measures, while the Liberal Democrats oppose the changes. Reform UK has said it would go further by removing settlement rights altogether if elected. Although any parliamentary vote would not be binding, MPs pushing for it believe it could expose internal divisions and increase pressure on ministers to reconsider. The issue is expected to be debated in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords in the coming months. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

The United States is considering loosening restrictions on some Iranian oil exports as it seeks to limit the impact of the ongoing conflict with Iran on global energy markets. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the idea is under discussion, suggesting that allowing certain shipments to reach buyers could help stabilise supply at a time when prices are rising sharply worldwide. Speaking in a television interview, Mr Bessent indicated that the US could allow the sale of Iranian oil already at sea, estimated at around 140 million barrels. He said such a move might temporarily ease global prices for up to two weeks. Get today's headlines by email The proposal would represent a significant shift from longstanding US policy, which has aimed to restrict Iran’s oil exports through sanctions. Proposal to release oil into global markets Before the conflict, much of Iran’s oil was sold at discounted prices to China due to these restrictions. Mr Bessent suggested that easing rules could redirect supplies to other countries, including India, Japan and Malaysia, while forcing China to pay higher market rates. However, officials have not provided details on how such a plan would work in practice, including whether safeguards could prevent proceeds from reaching the Iranian government. Limited impact expected, experts sayAnalysts have expressed scepticism about the potential effectiveness of the measure. Some argue that the volume under consideration is relatively small compared with global demand and would therefore have only a modest impact on prices. Rachel Ziemba, an expert at the Center for a New American Security, said the move might add some supply but was unlikely to be a “game changer”. Others warned the policy could have unintended consequences. David Tannenbaum said allowing Iranian oil sales could ultimately provide financial resources to a government the US is actively confronting. “It raises a whole lot of questions,” Ms Ziemba added, particularly over how any revenue controls could be enforced. Broader efforts to stabilise supplyThe proposal follows other steps taken by the administration of Donald Trump to increase global oil supply, including releasing strategic reserves and easing certain restrictions on Russian exports. Those measures have already drawn criticism, particularly from European leaders concerned they could strengthen rival governments and prolong existing conflicts. It remains unclear whether the latest proposal will face similar opposition in Washington, where lawmakers have recently moved to tighten sanctions on Iran’s energy sector. Global supply shock drives urgencyThe consideration of easing sanctions reflects growing concern about the scale of disruption to global energy flows. Around a fifth of the world’s daily oil supply typically passes through the Strait of Hormuz, but shipping through the route has largely halted since the conflict began. Experts estimate that roughly 10% of global oil supply has been temporarily removed from the market, despite some rerouting efforts. Further risks have emerged from attacks on energy infrastructure, including key gas facilities linked to Iran and Qatar, raising fears that production capacity could be affected for years. Analysts say the US is now searching for additional sources of supply wherever possible, as governments worldwide grapple with rising prices and the prospect of prolonged disruption. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel will suspend further attacks on Iranian gas facilities following a request from US President Donald Trump, as tensions continue to escalate across the Middle East. Speaking at a press conference, Mr Netanyahu confirmed that Israel would “hold off” on targeting gas infrastructure after discussions with Washington. He also rejected claims that he had drawn the United States into the conflict, insisting Israel was acting independently. Get today's headlines by email The announcement came as explosions were reported in both Jerusalem and Tehran, underlining the ongoing hostilities despite the apparent shift in Israeli strategy. Earlier, Iran’s foreign minister had warned that Tehran would respond with “zero restraint” if further attacks were carried out against its infrastructure, signalling the risk of further escalation. In recent hours, several Gulf countries have reported missile and drone strikes. The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain attributed the attacks to Iran, while Kuwait and Saudi Arabia also confirmed incidents affecting their territories. Rising casualties and humanitarian concernsThe conflict, which began in late February, has led to a mounting death toll. The Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) said the number of people killed in Iran had risen to 3,186 since the start of the war on 28 February. The figures highlight the growing humanitarian impact of the conflict, as fighting continues across multiple fronts in the region. Energy infrastructure under pressureThe war has also had significant consequences for global energy markets. Prices have risen sharply in Europe and the United Kingdom following an attack on Qatar’s Ras Laffan energy complex. Qatar’s prime minister described the strike as a “very dangerous escalation,” reflecting concerns about the targeting of critical infrastructure linked to global energy supplies. The decision by Israel to pause further attacks on Iranian gas fields may ease some immediate fears of disruption, though uncertainty remains high as both sides continue military operations. Regional tensions remain highDespite the temporary restraint announced by Israel, the broader conflict shows little sign of de-escalation. Ongoing strikes, retaliatory threats and widening regional involvement have raised fears of a prolonged crisis. Diplomatic efforts to contain the situation have so far struggled to gain traction, with both sides maintaining firm positions. Observers say the coming days will be critical in determining whether the pause in attacks on energy facilities leads to a wider reduction in hostilities or proves to be a limited measure amid an intensifying conflict. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

Iran has carried out the first known executions linked to recent anti-government protests, hanging three men convicted of قتل police officers during unrest earlier this year, according to state media. Among those executed was teenager Saleh Mohammadi, who was reported to be a member of Iran’s national wrestling team. The executions were carried out on Thursday in Qom province after the country’s Supreme Court upheld the sentences. Get today's headlines by email Iran’s semi-official Tasnim News Agency reported that Mohammadi, along with Mehdi Ghasemi and Saeed Davoudi, had been found guilty of killing two police officers in separate incidents. First executions tied to protestsThe men were also convicted of “moharebeh”, or waging war against God, a charge frequently used by Iranian authorities in cases involving political dissent and protest activity. The executions mark the first hangings directly connected to the wave of protests that began in December and intensified in January. Rights groups raise concernsHuman rights organisations have strongly criticised the process leading to the executions. They allege the men were forced to confess under torture and were denied fair trials. The protests themselves were met with a severe crackdown by Iranian authorities. According to the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency, thousands of people were killed during the unrest. The demonstrations, which spread across all 31 provinces and reached around 180 cities and towns, were initially triggered by economic grievances, including currency collapse and rising living costs. They later evolved into broader calls for political reform. Additional execution draws international reactionThe hangings came a day after Iran executed Kouroush Keyvani, a dual national convicted of spying for Israel. Sweden’s foreign minister criticised the case, stating that the legal process leading to the execution had not met acceptable standards. Keyvani was reportedly detained during last year’s brief conflict between Iran and Israel, though details surrounding his arrest remain limited. Ongoing tensions and international scrutinyThe executions have drawn renewed attention to Iran’s handling of dissent and the use of capital punishment in politically sensitive cases. Earlier in the year, Donald Trump warned that “strong action” could follow if protesters were executed, while Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had said there were no plans for such measures at the time. In at least one other case, a detained protester reportedly facing execution was later released on bail, with authorities denying that a death sentence had been issued. The broader situation in Iran remains difficult to assess, with communications heavily restricted during the protests. Activists say the scale and severity of the crackdown were unprecedented in recent years. The developments come amid ongoing regional tensions following military strikes involving Iran, the United States and Israel, further complicating the international response. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

US President Donald Trump has drawn criticism after making a remark referencing the Attack on Pearl Harbor during a White House meeting with Japan’s prime minister. The comment came as Mr Trump hosted Sanae Takaichi in the Oval Office on Thursday, where discussions focused in part on the ongoing conflict involving Iran. Get today's headlines by email During a question-and-answer session, a Japanese journalist asked why the United States had not informed allies, including Japan, ahead of military action against Iran. In response, Mr Trump said that maintaining an element of surprise was important in military operations. Exchange during Iran war discussion“One thing you don’t want to do is signal too much,” he said, before adding: “Who knows better about surprise than Japan?” He then followed up with another remark, asking: “Why didn’t you tell me about Pearl Harbor?” The comments prompted initial laughter in the room, though the mood reportedly shifted after the reference to the 1941 attack. Historical reference raises uneaseThe Japanese strike on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on 7 December 1941 killed more than 2,000 Americans and led to the United States entering the Second World War. Then-president Franklin D. Roosevelt described it as “a date which will live in infamy.” The war between the two nations ended in 1945 following the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Observers noted that Ms Takaichi appeared uncomfortable following the exchange, as the topic touched on a sensitive chapter in US-Japan relations. Mixed reactions to remarksSupporters of the president praised the comment as a sharp response to the question. Eric Trump described it on social media as one of the most notable exchanges with a reporter. Others were more critical. Journalist Mehdi Hasan said the remark was striking but expressed concern about its tone given the historical context. The exchange was not the first time Mr Trump has faced criticism over references to historical conflicts. In a previous meeting with Germany’s chancellor Friedrich Merz, he described the D-Day landings as “not a pleasant day,” prompting a correction that the event marked the liberation of Germany from Nazi rule. Broader tensions over Iran conflictThe meeting also highlighted ongoing tensions between the United States and its allies over the conflict involving Iran. Mr Trump has repeatedly criticised partner countries for their reluctance to provide military support, particularly in securing the Strait of Hormuz. Japan faces domestic constraints in deploying its Self-Defense Forces abroad, due to its post-war constitution, which limits military engagement. Following the meeting, Ms Takaichi said both sides agreed on the importance of safeguarding key shipping routes, while outlining the legal limitations on Japan’s military role. Despite the awkward moment, officials suggested the overall tone of the meeting remained constructive, with both leaders seeking to maintain close diplomatic ties. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

Denmark drew up contingency plans to disable key infrastructure in Greenland earlier this year amid concerns that the United States could attempt to assert control over the Arctic territory, according to reports citing government and military sources. The preparations reportedly included plans to destroy airport runways to prevent aircraft landings, as well as the deployment of additional troops and medical supplies to the island. Get today's headlines by email According to Denmark’s public broadcaster DR, a limited number of Danish personnel were aware of the plans due to their sensitive nature. Soldiers sent to Greenland were said to be prepared to render runways in Nuuk and Kangerlussuaq unusable if necessary. Contingency plans and military deploymentMedical provisions, including blood supplies, were also transported in anticipation of potential casualties in the event of conflict. The Danish defence ministry declined to comment on the reports. A senior military official, speaking anonymously, said knowledge of the operation was tightly restricted for security reasons. The deployments were presented publicly as part of joint military exercises involving Denmark and several European allies. However, sources indicated that the underlying purpose was to prepare for a possible escalation involving the United States. Rising tensions over GreenlandTensions were fuelled by repeated statements from US President Donald Trump expressing interest in acquiring Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory under Danish sovereignty. Concerns intensified following a separate US military operation in Venezuela in early January, which some European officials viewed as raising the likelihood of further unilateral actions. In response, Denmark is said to have sought political backing from allies including France and Germany, as well as Nordic partners, to demonstrate unity and deter any potential move. One defence source cited in the reports said the aim was to increase the cost of any intervention, ensuring that any attempt to seize Greenland would require a significant and overt use of force. Strategic importance of the Arctic territoryGreenland’s location makes it a key strategic asset, positioned between North America and Europe and close to important Arctic shipping routes. The island is also believed to hold significant natural resources. The United States already maintains a military presence in Greenland, but both Danish and Greenlandic leaders have consistently rejected any proposal to transfer control of the territory. Despite earlier rhetoric, President Trump later signalled he preferred negotiations and said he did not intend to use military force to resolve the issue. Concerns ease but questions remainWhile immediate fears of confrontation appear to have subsided, the episode has highlighted underlying tensions between allies. European coordination during the period was seen as an effort to reinforce collective security and deter escalation. However, officials suggest the situation has left lingering uncertainty about future developments. Danish authorities have reiterated their commitment to Greenland’s sovereignty, while continuing to work within the NATO alliance framework. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 20 March 2026 View full article

The United States defence secretary has said there is no fixed timetable for ending the ongoing war with Iran, as fighting continues to escalate across the region and tensions remain high. Speaking to reporters, Pete Hegseth said it would be up to Donald Trump to determine when military operations conclude. Get today's headlines by email “We wouldn’t want to set a definitive time frame,” Hegseth said, adding that the campaign remained “on track” and that any decision to halt operations would depend on whether US objectives had been achieved. No timeline set for conflictThe conflict, now entering its third week, began with coordinated US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets and has since expanded into a broader regional confrontation. The latest developments follow a sharp escalation involving attacks on key energy infrastructure. Iran launched missiles at facilities in Qatar after strikes targeted the South Pars gas field, the world’s largest gas reserve. The Qatari site at Ras Laffan, one of the largest liquefied natural gas export hubs, was reported to have sustained significant damage. These incidents have contributed to rising global energy prices, with oil markets reacting sharply amid fears of supply disruption. Ongoing military exchangesAir strikes and missile attacks have continued across multiple fronts, including Iran, Israel and parts of the wider Middle East. Casualty figures have risen steadily, with deaths reported in Iran, Lebanon, Israel and Gulf states, as well as among US forces. Hegseth said Iranian naval capabilities had been significantly weakened, claiming the country’s surface fleet was no longer operational and that its small submarine force had been eliminated. These vessels are typically designed for operations in shallow waters such as the Strait of Hormuz. His comments echoed earlier statements from President Trump, who said Iran’s military had been “obliterated”, though no detailed evidence was provided. Communication challenges inside IranEfforts to assess the situation within Iran have been complicated by an ongoing internet blackout imposed by authorities in Tehran. The disruption has limited communication from within the country, making it difficult to independently verify conditions on the ground or gauge public response to the conflict. Meanwhile, US officials said they were continuing efforts to communicate with different audiences inside Iran, though no further details were given. Regional and global implicationsThe conflict has drawn condemnation from countries across the Gulf, with regional leaders warning that attacks on energy infrastructure risk further destabilising global markets. As fighting continues without a clear end point, uncertainty remains over how long the conflict may last and what conditions would lead to a ceasefire. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026 View full article

A court has ruled that a convicted migrant can remain in the United Kingdom after a prolonged legal battle over his deportation, with judges concluding that removal would have an excessively harsh impact on his child. Klevis Disha, 39, had faced deportation following a criminal conviction but successfully appealed the decision on human rights grounds. The case has drawn attention due to arguments presented about the impact on his 11-year-old son. Get today's headlines by email Disha first arrived in the UK in 2001 as an unaccompanied minor and initially sought asylum using false personal details. His claim was rejected, but after a lengthy appeals process he was granted indefinite leave to remain in 2005. Deportation challenge reaches final rulingIn 2017, he was sentenced to two years in prison after being found in possession of £250,000 in cash deemed to be the proceeds of crime. Under UK law, foreign nationals sentenced to more than 12 months in prison are typically subject to automatic deportation. Legal arguments focus on family impactDuring the appeal process, Disha’s legal team argued that deportation would be “unduly harsh” on his son. The case centred on the child’s welfare and whether he could reasonably relocate to Albania or remain in the UK without his father. Earlier tribunal proceedings had questioned the strength of these arguments, including references to the child’s dietary preferences. However, in the final ruling, Judge Veloso accepted broader concerns about the boy’s wellbeing. The court noted that the child has a restricted diet and difficulties with certain food textures, as well as wider challenges that would make relocation particularly difficult. The judge concluded that deportation would have a disproportionate impact under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which safeguards the right to family life. Prolonged legal processThe case has moved through multiple stages of appeal. An earlier decision blocking deportation was overturned, leading to further hearings before the final judgment was issued. Officials from the Home Office had argued that deportation should proceed, maintaining that the threshold for preventing removal had not been met. Political reactionThe ruling has prompted criticism from some political figures, who argue that human rights laws are being misused to prevent the removal of foreign offenders. The government has said it remains committed to deporting individuals convicted of serious crimes, while also complying with legal obligations under human rights legislation. The case highlights the continuing tension between immigration enforcement and the protection of family life under UK law. oin the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026 View full article