theguardian

‘I may do it, I may not do it,’ US president says as Tehran reportedly prepares to strike US bases in response

Donald Trump said he had not decided whether or not to take his country into Israel’s new war, as Iran’s supreme leader said the US would face “irreparable damage” if it deployed its military to attack.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Israel had made a “huge mistake” by launching the war, in his first comments since Friday. “The Americans should know that any US military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage,” he said in a statement read out by a presenter on state TV.

Tehran was preparing missiles and other equipment to strike US bases in the region if Washington joined the war, the New York Times reported, citing US intelligence officials.

Hours later, Trump said Iranian officials had reached out to request a meeting and proposed a visit to the White House.

He told reporters on the White House lawn that he felt “it’s very late to be talking” but he had not yet made a final decision about entering the war. “I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do,” he said.

That lack of clarity about what comes next may extend to the president himself, who was still in deal-making mode, one ally said. The US is understood to want to keep all its options open to exert maximum pressure on Tehran.

It was moving air tankers for midair refuelling to Spain and Greece, where they could be used to supply B-2 bombers on a long run from the Whiteman airbase in Missouri to Iran.

It is understood thatno request has been put to the UK for use of the Diego Garcia airbase in the Indian Ocean for a B-2 bombing runor of the Akrotiri airbase in Cyprus for the refuelling aircraft, though the latter is considered likely.

Other US military assets are on their way. The Pentagon ordered the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier to sail from Singapore to the Middle East, which is expected to take between five and seven days. The USS Carl Vinson is already in the Arabian Sea.

Qatar and Oman were trying to mediate a ceasefire, the Jerusalem Post reported, hours after at least one aircraft associated with the Iranian government flew to Muscat in Oman, flight tracking showed.

Iran sent a message that it was willing to negotiate a deal with the US, but Israel needed to “calm things down”, a source told the Jerusalem Post.

Trump’s claim that Iranians had offered to come to the White House for talks prompted an enraged response from Iran’s mission to the UN. “No Iranian official has ever asked to grovel at the gates of the White House,” the mission posted on a social media account.

The foreign ministers of the UK, France and Germany are planning to meet their Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, in Geneva on Friday in what could represent a potential diplomatic breakthrough after five days of Israeli bombing.

Final confirmation from Tehran is still pending, but if confirmed it would represent the first face-to-face diplomatic meeting since the crisis began.

In a social media post late on Wednesday, Aragchi wrote that Iran “remain[s] committed to diplomacy. As before, we are serious and forward-looking in our outlook.”

The talks in Geneva will focus on how Iran is willing to reduce or close its nuclear program, and will also be attended by the EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas.

But Aragchi has refused to meet Donald Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, on the grounds that the US is supporting Israel’s attacks.

TheTrump administrationhad initially distanced itself from the war, saying Israel had acted alone, but in recent days it has stepped up its rhetoric and its military presence in the Middle East.

Iran’sFordow nuclear facilityis at the heart of demands for the US to join the war, both in Israel and from hawks in Washington. Damage from strikes on other facilities could be repaired within months, Israeli military officials and nuclear experts say. Destroying or crippling Fordow would have much more of a long-term impact.

It is buried deep below a mountain near the holy city of Qom, and the only munitions that could possibly damage or destroy it are the most powerful US bunker-buster bombs, which only US B-2s can carry.

Israel’s national security adviser, Tzachi Hanegbi, said the war had been an entirely Israeli campaign but it “will not end without damaging Fordow”, in an interview with Israel’s Channel 12 television.

If the US does not join, Israel may still have military options but they would be riskier and more complicated. It could fly in special operations troops for a ground operation, like one that targeted a missile factory in Syria last year, or disable Fordow by attacking critical support systems such as its power supply.

Israel says it launched the war in self-defence, to destroy Iran’s nuclear programme, but Netanyahu and several ministers have made no secret of their desire for regime change.

Trump reportedly vetoed an Israeliplan to assassinate Khamenei, and critics have questioned why Israel targeted civilian institutions such as the state broadcaster.

On Wednesday, the defence minister, Israel Katz, said Israel was bombing “symbols of power” in Iran and suggested the regime could be in its last days.

“A tornado is sweeping through Tehran,” he wrote in a post on X. “Symbols of power are being bombed and collapsing, from the broadcasting authority and soon other targets, and masses of residents are fleeing. This is how dictatorships collapse.”

The escalating conflict has prompted a growing international chorus of concern. The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, offered to mediate between Iran and Israel, after one of his top diplomats urged Washington not to consider “speculative options” for intervention.

On a sixth night of attacks, Israel bombed a site that manufactured uranium centrifuges and also said it had targeted a missile component factory and destroyed five attack helicopters.

Iran’s military has been battered but not fully destroyed. An advanced Israeli drone was shot down on Wednesday, despite Israel claiming control of the skies over western Iran and Tehran. Overnight, Iran fired 15 missiles at Israel.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that Israeli strikes had hit two centrifuge productions in Iran, one in the capital and another just outside it.

Iran has reported at least 224 deaths from Israeli attacks, mostly civilians, although it has not updated that toll for several days. A US-based watchdog, Human Rights Activists in Iran, says at least 585 people have been killed and more than 1,300 injured.

Iranian attacks on Israel have killed 24 people, all civilians. Israeli air defences have intercepted most of the 400 missiles fired by Tehran, with only about 10% hitting targets inside the country.

Israel could become more vulnerable if the war continues much longer as supplies of its most effective air-defence missiles are running low, the Wall Street Journal has reported, citing a US official.

Its Arrow interceptors are complex missiles that cost several million dollars each, and they have a long production process.

Although the US has been supporting Israel’s defences with Thaad ground-based systems, interceptions by F-16 jets and missiles launched by the navy, it does not have unlimited supplies of these defensive systems either.

Iran is thought to still have a substantial proportion of the estimated 2,000 missiles that were in its arsenal at the start of the war. Israeli strikes have focused on launcher systems that are needed to fire them.

Additional reporting by Quique Kierszenbaum

‘We want freedom on our own terms,’ says one Tehran resident, while another writes, ‘Someone is helping us’

Despite a substantial internet blackout, news spread quickly in Iran on Tuesday night: the US wasconsidering joining Israelin its war on Iran.The US president, Donald Trump, wrote on Truth Social: “We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding. We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now … Our patience is wearing thin.” Three minutes later, in a second post, he added: “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”

When Mehnaz*, a 24-year-old student activist in east Tehran, heard the news, she did not think of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. Instead, she thought of her fellow students who were detained, shot and executed by Iranian security forces during the “woman, life, liberty” protests in 2022.

“AfterMahsa [Amini]’s death, we tried to stand up. Teenagers were shot point blank, our compatriots were hanged. We could never get rid of the Islamic Republic on our own. Now, someone from outside is helping us,” Mehnaz told the Guardian via text on Wednesday after a sleepless night of Israeli bombing.

The prospect of imminent US involvement in an Israeli bombing campaign, which is suggested to be in pursuit of regime change, has laid bare deep divides in Iran’s population, even among the opposition. Many are deeply suspicious of the US’s intentions in Iran, which has a bitter history of foreign adventurism gone awry. Others do not care who is the one to topple the government.

A large portion of Iran’s population is bitterly opposed to the government, which has only grown more repressive as the country slips deeper into economic crisis. Just two weeks ago, much ofIranwas paralysed by a nationwide strike in protest at the dismal economic situation.

To some of the opposition, anything that could topple the Iranian government is welcome, whether it comes from street protests or US bunker busters.

Mehnaz said: “Yes, we’ll probably have massive destruction in Tehran and other cities, but this regime will fall – and then we can rebuild everything again.”

The toll of fighting – now in its sixth day – is growing. Israeli strikes have killed at least 585 people and wounded 1,326 others in Iran, according to Iranian media. At least 24 people have been killed and 600 injured by Iranian strikes in Israel.

Fighting started after Israel launched hundreds of pre-dawn strikes on Iran last Friday, which it said were aimed at preventing the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Iran quickly retaliated by firing a barrage of missiles and drones at Israel, kicking off a steadily escalating tit-for-tat war.

To Alborz*, an athlete from Tehran, the cost of Israeli bombing was already too high.“I can’t explain how we pass each day, in fear. It feels like I am walking on a street of hot coal and having acid rain down on me,” Alborz said via text. “We want to get our freedom on our own terms, not through US bombs,” he added.

Iran has a long history of foreign intervention that has left the population suspicious of offers of help.

A 1953 coup that deposed the democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, wasbacked by the CIA and MI6 to protect western oil interests. The intelligence plot features heavily in the national narrative of the current government, which overthrew the western-backed Shah of Iran in the country’s 1979 revolution.

The more recent 21st-century history of US adventurism in the Middle East has inspired further scepticism among Iranians.“Look at Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq – they destroyed the countries, then walked away. It’s funny how they call this ‘exporting democracy’ while they always have paralysed all the democratic institutions in those countries,” Abbas*, a 26-year-old artist from west Tehran, said.

The Israeli prime minister,Benjamin Netanyahu, has called for Iran’s opposition to rise up, suggesting in an interview on Monday that his military operation could help liberate Iranians from an oppressive regime.

Our US morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

Netanyahu told the London-based opposition news outlet Iran International: “A light has been lit, carry it to freedom. This is the time, your hour of freedom is near, it’s happening now.”

His calls rang hollow in Iran, which has seen nightly news broadcasts of starvation, displacement and mass killings in Gaza over the last 36 months.

Abbas said: “Now Trump wants to unite with Israel – and people here are scared. If they come here like they did in other places, we will be left with nothing but ruins and extremist groups.”

While Israeli bombings have battered Iran, its security services have intensified their crackdown on dissidents and political organisation.

“Activists and former political prisoners have been rearrested. They’re basically targeting anyone who’s talking about the war,” said Bahar Ghandehari, the director of advocacy and communications at the US-based Center for Human Rights in Iran.Iranian authorities have restricted internet access, detained activists, and on Saturday arrested 16 people on charges of “spreading rumours” on social media.

The renewed wave of oppression has hardened the desire for regime change for some of the opposition, who now find themselves having to deal not only with Israeli bombings but also fear of arrest.

“Yes, 585 people were killed in this war till now, but in four days of demonstration after Mahsa Amini’s killing, almost 1,000 people were killed by the regime,” said Mohammad Reza, a resident of Tehran in his 50s who took part in the 2022 protests.

UK continues to urge de-escalation as concerns grow about possible US intervention in Middle East

Middle East crisis – live updates

The UK government will have to sign off on the US use of its Diego Garcia base in any bombing raid onIran, it has emerged, as ministers gathered to discuss a range of scenarios amid further increasing tensions in the region.

The prime minster, Sir Keir Starmer, chaired an emergency Cobra meeting to discuss the UK’s response to the crisis in the Middle East which could escalate further should theUS enter the conflictbetween Israel and Iran.

After the prime minister landed back in Britain following theG7summit in Canada, he brought together ministers and senior officials to update the UK’s response beyond urging de-escalation.

But withDonald Trumpstill not revealing what action he may take, the UK government is working on a series of options dependent on whether the US pursues military action, and if it asks allies for support at any stage.

One key issue for the UK would be whether to give permission for the US to fly B-2 stealth bombers from the Diego Garcia airbase in the Indian Ocean to attack Iran’s nuclear enrichment site, which is between 80 and 90 metres inside a mountain at Fordow.

The decision on whether to grant the US permission to use the base, should it request to do so, would be a political one, and Starmer would be expected to seek the advice of his national security adviser, Jonathan Powell, who was Tony Blair’s No 10 chief of staff at the time of the Iraq war.

However, government insiders suggested it would put the prime minister in a difficult situation, balancing his stated preference for a diplomatic solution with his desire to safeguard the US-UK relationship that he regards as of the utmost importance.

The US president declined to answer reporters’ questions on whether the US was planning to strike Iran or its nuclear facilities. “Nobody knows what I’m going to do,” he said. He added the Iranians had reached out, but he felt “it’s very late to be talking”.

Starmer had said he was confident the US would not join Israel’s bombing campaign despite US military deployments to the region andmixed messages from Trump, but Downing Street was unwilling to repeat Starmer’s comments on Wednesday.

The foreign secretary, David Lammy, has also travelled to Washington for urgent talks with his American counterpart, Marco Rubio.

British officials have repeatedly emphasised that the UK is not expected to participate with its own military in any attack on Iran, unless there were some exceptional circumstances.

The UK has deployed 14 Typhoon jets at Akrotiri to protect its bases and forces and to help regional allies such as Cyprus and Oman if they come under attack.

Britain has not received a formal request from the US to use Diego Garcia in the south Indian Ocean or any of its other airbases to bomb Iran, it is understood, and Trump is thought to want to keep all his options on the table for the moment – including military – to exert maximum pressure on Iran.

The president is described as wanting to seek a deal, though there is a recognition that could change.

Existing agreements mean the US, or any other country, needs British government permission to use any RAF airbase, including Diego Garcia, which was recently the subject of a new 99-year lease agreement with Mauritius that left the UK in full operational control.

Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

In practice, Diego Garcia is mainly used by the US, but the fact that it is ultimately a British base means that Starmer would have to approve its use for an attack on Iran. The US is thought likely to want to request the use of RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus for its air tankers, used to refuel B-2 bombers.

Similar permission would be required if the US wanted to use RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, where B-2s are based in Europe, though this is considered a less likely option for an attack on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Refusal by the UK would not prevent an attack on the deep-lying nuclear enrichment site at Fordow because it is possible for the B-2 bombers to strike from their home base in Whiteman, Missouri, but it would be interpreted as a lack of British support for the attack.

The deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, standing in for Starmer at prime minister’s questions, insisted the UK would continue to back a diplomatic route to resolving the conflict.

“The one thing I will say is we agree with President Trump that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon, but we’ve been consistent in urging Iran to engage in the diplomatic process and work with the United States, and we continue to support that diplomatic approach,” she told MPs.

The Foreign Office advised British citizens inIsraelto stay put and close to shelter, despite the families of embassy staff leaving Israel on Tuesday night.

Downing Street said the government’s priority was to de-escalate the conflict, while Starmer called allies in the region to urge a diplomatic solution.

A spokesperson said: “The prime minister, the foreign secretary, have spoken with partners and counterparts across the region and beyond, including all our allies, to reiterate the need for de-escalation and a return to diplomacy. Our priority is de-escalation and that is what ministers will continue to push.”

Tooth extraction and root canal work among procedures offered by self-taught 22-year-old and two family members

A fake dentist and two assistants who treated dozens of patients after learning the trade on the internet have been charged in theCzech Republic.

The three family members opened a fully equipped dental practice, without a licence or the necessary expertise, in the central Czech town of Havlíčkův Brod in 2023, police said on Wednesday.

A 22-year-old man posing as a dentist provided checkups but also extracted teeth, gave root canal treatments and applied anaesthesia, drawing on information obtained online.

A 50-year-old woman worked as a nurse, while a 44-year-old man, who provided the premises, produced prosthetic devices for patients.

In a statement, police said: “The woman, who worked in the health sector, provided anaesthetics but also other dental material to which she had access, such as fillings, cleaning powder, glue, impression material and much more.”

Asked by AFP if the patients had complained, the police spokesperson Michaela Lebrova declined to comment.

The illegal clinic treated dozens of patients and made 4m Czech koruna (£138,000), police said.

Police detained the trio earlier this month and charged them with conducting illegal business, money laundering, attempted battery, drug dealing and theft.

All three had a clean criminal record. They have been provisionally released after pleading guilty and face up to eight years in prison.

A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day

Due to a shortage of dentists, the Czech parliament last year passed a bill facilitating the employment of dentists from countries outside the EU, of which theCzech Republicis a member.

Labour MPs fighting Reform want action and a European renegotiation looks unappealing. How would the PM sell a third way?

Mahmood says UK will seek reform of human rights convention

Can a lefty human rights lawyer be the one to take on Britain’s uneasy relationship with the European convention on human rights (ECHR)?

It is the most unlikely of causes forKeir Starmer. But there is a growing feeling in government that he should seize the initiative.

It will not just be a renegotiation in Europe, which ministers fear would echo the failed EU one attempted by David Cameron, but unilateral reform in the way the fundamental rights in the convention can be applied.

It is fraught with complication and risk and no one knows that better than the prime minister. Starmer is steeped in the language and history of the Strasbourg court. Allies say he can – and does – reel off the most important cases and precedents from memory.

The first time Starmerwrote for the Guardian was in 2009on the fundamental importance of human rights, saying that to dismiss them was to “lose all notion of justice and surrender to the sometimes understandable but always inappropriate yearning solely for retribution”.

But it is from this position that those in government – and a growing number ofLabourMPs – believe there is an opportunity to lance the boil of the far-right argument to leave the convention altogether.

“Under this government the question of whether to stay in the ECHR is settled, it’s not even a question,” one senior government minister said.

“But this is not the EU – it’s not about in or out – it’s about whether we can use our national sovereignty to address what is a legitimate concern from the public to how this law is being applied in order to preserve what are really fundamental human rights laws which we all believe in.”

The rightwing press have made a bogeyman of the ECHR – making wildly misleading accusations of it being responsible forallowing criminals to stayin Britain because their children don’t like foreign chicken nuggets.

It is the bete noire ofRobert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, and leaving the ECHR was the platform for his Conservative leadership attempt. It looks almost certain to be adopted as a policy by Kemi Badenoch. Nigel Farage said it would be his first act to leave, if he were PM.

But a growing number of Labour MPs say that although much of the criticism of the ECHR is hyped-up nonsense that falls apart when details of the cases are revealed, some of the commentary is valid. Many are in Reform-facing seats and want the government to seize the issue and act decisively.

The two key aspects of the convention that have caused the most controversy are article 8, which includes privacy and right to family life; and article 3, freedom from torture and degrading treatment. The Home Office is undertaking reviews of both – and how courts apply them.

ITV’s investigation this week is an obvious illustration; two fugitives wanted for murder and child rape, one of whom has offended again in Britain, cannot be deported because of overcrowded conditions in Brazilian prisons.

In a joint article responding to the ITV investigation, two of the most vocal Labour MPs of the 2024 intake – Jake Richards and Dan Tomlinson – said the government needed to neutralise the calls from the Tories and Reform to leave the ECHR. To do that, it should “offer serious and practical changes to see off this threat and deliver for the British people”.

Many more MPs say they believe there are examples the world over of voters reacting violently against international law and treaties because of their perceived anti-democratic inflexibility, which they believe stops them getting the changes they vote for.

The way to stop this growing backlash happening in Britain, they say, is to show that change can happen without throwing away decades of long-fought-for human rights.

The attorney general, Richard Hermer, a veteran human rights lawyer like Starmer, whose legal career has made him a big target for the right, has hinted he is in agreement. His view will be essential to the path Starmer takes. “British leadership to strengthen and reform the international rules-based system is both the right thing to do and the only truly realistic choice,” he said in a recent speech.

Senior government figures say there may be a path for a bill that sets out the principles on how the ECHR can be applied going forward, shaped by modern circumstances.

But there is a strong feeling that seeking European-wide agreement to change the ECHR is a non-starter – it would take too long, be too tortuous, and give the impression the UK is going “cap in hand” to Strasbourg to ask for permission to change things.

It is true that nation states, including France, have begun to vary their interpretations of those laws, especially article 8. Some cabinet minsters believe that the change can come through guidance, especially to the first-tier immigration tribunal, about how to apply the law.

But MPs in favour of change would like to see the government seize the cause more robustly and publicly than that, which is why they favour legislation. “There have been too many occasions where the centre left haven’t seized a cause that could turn very ugly and found a way to respond to public concern in a way that is progressive,” one said.

The challenge is how to land that message of a third way, instead of the binary choice the populist right will present between leave or remain. That will feel queasily familiar to veterans of the Brexit years – Starmer again is among them.

While some in Moscow have tried to put positive spin on Israel’s assault, Kremlin risks losing key strategic partner

When a group of Russian and Iranian foreign policy officials arranged to meet in Moscow for a conference titled “Russian-Iranian cooperation in a changing world”, they probably did not anticipate just how timely that phrase would turn out to be.

Seated around a table on Wednesday at the President hotel near the Kremlin, officials from both sides were forced to confront a stark new reality: Iran’s regime – a key ally of Moscow – is facing its most serious threat in decades.

As Israel and Donald Trump demand Tehran’s“unconditional surrender”, Moscow is growing increasingly anxious about the fate of Iran, while tacitly acknowledging its limited ability to influence the unfolding events.

Nikita Smagin, an independent expert on Russia-Iran ties, said: “It has long been clear that Russia wouldn’t defend Iran militarily, because it is simply not prepared to risk a confrontation withIsraeland the United States for Iran’s sake.”

Analysts say Moscow’s cautious response reflects a cold political calculus: prioritising its war inUkrainewhile simultaneously trying to dissuade the US from direct involvement in a conflict that could lead to regime change in Tehran.

The Kremlin is unlikely to arm Iran, let alone get involved in the fighting, said a Russian source with ties to the foreign ministry. “Moscow clearly doesn’t want conflict with Trump and is also doing everything it can to urge the US to return to diplomacy. But Russia’s priority remains avoiding any moves that could undermine its warming ties with the new US administration or prompt a shift in Trump’s stance on Ukraine,” the source said.

Still, the Kremlin stands to lose from a prolonged US-backed Israeli military campaign that devastates Iran’s economic and military infrastructure and threatens the survival of the regime in Tehran.

“If the current Iranian regime collapses, it would be both a strategic and reputational blow for Russia,” the source with ties to the Russian foreign ministry said.

“A bigger loss than the fall of Damascus,” the source added, referring to Moscow’sdiminished influence over Syriaafter the fall of Bashar al-Assad, a longtime Kremlin ally whose eventual defeat marked the end of a costlydecade-long Russian intervention.

On the surface, Russia’s muted response and restrained condemnations stand in contrast to thedeepening ties it has forged with Iransince its 2022 invasion of Ukraine – a war that placed Moscow alongside Tehran among the regimes most heavily hit by sanctions.

In the early months of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Iranprovedto be an important partner to the Kremlin, supplying Moscow with thousands of combat drones used to strike Ukrainian cities. Tehran also later sent instructors to Russia to help set up a drone production facility, based on Iranian designs, deep in the Ural mountains.

Vladimir Putin in turn praised the deepening ties between the two countries. In January he and his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian, signed a wide-ranging “comprehensive strategic partnership treaty” aimed at strengthening military cooperation and intelligence sharing.

Still, the two nations’ relationship has always been complex, observers say. When signing the military agreement, both countries insisted on omitting a mutual defence clause, meaning Moscow now is under no legal obligation to provide military assistance to Iran. Russia has also been slow to deliver a range of weapons Tehran has requested.

“Despite repeated requests from the Iranian side for various types of weapons – air defence systems and fighter jets – none of this has been transferred to Iran by Russia to date,” Smagin said.

Partly due to its entanglement in Ukraine and its growing ties with other regional players,including Saudi Arabia, Moscow has shown little urgency on propping up Iran, even as Tehran’s position has weakened after blowsagainstits key proxy, the Lebanese movement Hezbollah.

The Kremlin, meanwhile, has largely decoupled its reliance on Iranian military support, having already acquired the expertise to mass-produce drones domestically.

Our US morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

Some in Moscow have even sought to put a positive spin on Israel’s assault on Iran. For one, oil prices have surged to their highest level in four months – and are expected to rise further – offering Moscow a much-needed economic boost at a time when falling global energy prices had threatened to squeeze its wartime budget.

The conflict has also drawn the full attention of Trump, who in recent days has barely mentioned Ukraine. Hecut short a trip to the G7 summit, skipping a previously scheduled meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Ruslan Pukhov, the director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, a Moscow defence thinktank, wrote on Telegram: “It is likely that Ukraine will suffer the greatest military and political damage in this situation, apart from Iran itself, of course. A new war in the Middle East will not only distract the world’s attention from the [conflict in Ukraine] but will also, apparently, contribute to the final reorientation of the US towards providing military assistance to Israel.”

But while these may offer short-term gains, the long-term picture is far more precarious for Russia, analysts and insiders say.

Russia risks losing a key strategic partner – along with years of political and economic capital – in a blow that could seriously undermine its broader geopolitical ambitions. Over the past two years, Moscow has become Iran’s leading foreign investor, committing billions to gas, energy and infrastructure projects – all of which could be jeopardised if the regime in Tehran falls.

And unlike some of Moscow’s other allies, such as Belarus, Russia shares little in the way of historical or cultural affinity with Iran. Their partnership has been forged less through tradition than through a shared hostility towards the west – and the experience of navigating life under sanctions.

“If this regime falls, I think it will be much harder for Russia to retain its assets and influence in the country,” said Hanna Notte, a Berlin-based expert on Russian foreign policy.

Notte said the worst-case scenario for Moscow would be a Middle East dominated by US-aligned powers. “That would be a heavy blow to Russia.”

As many as 70 said to be planning to show solidarity at LGBTQ+ march after Hungary’s PM tried to ban it

Dozens of MEPs are expected to attend the Pride march in Budapest this month, in defiance of the Hungarian prime minister,Viktor Orbán, who has tried to ban the event.

In a debate in the European parliament in Strasbourg, MEPs from liberal, left and green groups pledged to be in Budapest on 28 June for the parade to show solidarity with gay Hungarians.

The pledges came after the city’s mayor said the event would go ahead, circumventing a law that allows police to ban LGBTQ+ marches.Gergely Karácsonysaid on Monday that the march would be a municipal event – and a celebration of freedom – so “no permits from authorities are needed”.

“In this city, there are no first- or second-class citizens … neither freedom, nor love can be banned, and the BudapestPridecannot be banned either,” Karácsony said.

Iratxe García Pérez, the Spanish leader of the Socialist group in the European parliament, addressed gay people inHungarydirectly during the debate on Wednesday: “We see you, we hear you and on 28 June we will march with you in Budapest, side by side, proud and loud.”

Tineke Strik, a Dutch Green MEP, who recently leda delegation of lawmakers to Hungary, said she and 70 European deputies would be in Budapest. “Me and 70 colleagues will do what the commission won’t. We will come to the Pride. We will show the Hungarians that they are not alone.”

Amsterdam’s mayor, Femke Halsema, and a junior Dutch minister have also said they will attend the event,according to local media.

The European commissioner for democracy and justice, the Irish politician Michael McGrath, who took part in the debate, did not respond to repeated requests to join the event in Budapest.

McGrath confirmed the commission was examiningthe Hungarian law that outlaws Pride marchesover its compatibility with EU law and provisions on fundamental rights. “The European Commission is ready to use all its tools to ensure that EU law is upheld right across our union,” he said.

The commission is already taking legal action against Hungary over a 2021 law thatbans LGBTQ+ content from schools and primetime TV, meaning pupils wondering about their sexuality cannot access help, while shows or adverts reflecting themes of tolerance may be impossible to air during peak viewing hours.

A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day

In a significant step, a senior legal scholar – known as an advocate general – at the European court of justice sided with the commission, finding that the Hungarian law banning LGBTQ+ content was based on “prejudice that homosexual and non-cisgender [transgender] life is not of equal value”. The court follows the advocate general’s opinion in most cases.

Kinga Gál, a member of Orbán’s Fidesz party and the vice-president ofthe far-right Patriots for Europe group, said the debate was “nothing new” and “perfectly fits into the witch-hunts and hysteria we have experienced for several years about Hungary”.

In the right-leaning parliament, Hungary found vocal support from far-right and nationalist MEPs from France, Italy, Spain and Germany.

Christine Anderson of the Alternative für Deutschland party, said: “Where you see scandal, I see reason, common sense and decency,” while accusing the commission of running an “inquisition”.

MEPs from the centre-right were muted in support of gay rights, focusing on concerns over freedom of assembly and democratic standards. “Opposition is rising in Hungary and Orbán is clearly afraid,” Tomas Tobé, a Swedish member of the European People’s party (EPP), said. “They are doing everything they can to limit freedom of speech, restrict freedom of assembly and prevent people from determining their own future.”

The EPP is allied toPéter Magyar,a former Fidesz insider who is widely seen to present the most serious electoral challenge to Orbán since his return to power in 2010.