If you have the article's Nostr address (naddr), paste it in the search box below. We'll attempt to fetch it from the relays and add it to our index.
Looking for people? Search users
Nicaragua's Institute of Territorial Studies (INETER) and OFENA have dismissed social media rumors of snow falling in the country, explaining that the geographical conditions are not suitable. However, they confirmed a cold front will bring lower temperatures, potentially dropping to 16°C in the northern highlands.
The shooting of Renee Good, like all of the ICE abuses, is symptomatic of a deeper mental illness.
One of the key topics of the three-day G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains on the shores of Lake Geneva was Ukraine. US President Donald Trump arrived in France on June 15 - the day after his 80th birthday and a few hours after the announcement of a deal with Iran - and promised to once again focus closely on the Russian-Ukrainian settlement. He wasted no time in fulfilling his promise, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky also arrived in Evian-les-Bains. The meeting between the two leaders was positive. Trump's words suggested that he was now confident that the ball was in Russia's court. There was no doubt about the position of the other G7 members. US President Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron, US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and US Ambassador to Ukraine Charles Kuschner on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, June 16, 2026. Photo: Thibault Camus / EPA Eastern France, June 15, 2026. "This should not be happening" Donald Trump arrived in France on Monday evening, June 15, in high spirits: he had celebrated his birthday the day before and announced a deal with Tehran. The signing of the relevant memorandum is scheduled for Friday, June 19. "The Iran deal will be a great success," Trump told reporters immediately upon arrival on the European continent. Later, meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump promised to redirect freed-up forces to the Russian-Ukrainian settlement - to the very war he had promised to end in 24 hours in 2024. "Now that this [Iranian conflict. - Ed.] is over, we will deal with this [Russian-Ukrainian war. - Ed.] and see if we can get it done," said the White House head, sitting next to Macron. "25,000 people die a month, mostly soldiers. This should not be happening." Trump also said that on June 14, he had two "very good" phone conversations - with Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin - "and maybe we can do something." In Washington, the role of the US president is described without false modesty. "It turns out that the only person on the planet who can bring the two sides [Russia and Ukraine. - Ed.] together and try to negotiate an end to this war is President Trump," an unnamed senior US official assured Politico. The question of how exactly and on what terms the matter could be "brought to an end" became key on June 16 at the working session "Building Peace and Security for Ukraine and Europe," held as part of the G7 summit. The leaders of the "seven" and Volodymyr Zelensky participated in the discussion. Before that, Donald Trump, Emmanuel Macron, and Volodymyr Zelensky held a trilateral meeting. The Guardian correspondent reported that most of the G7 leaders had to wait nearly an hour in the meeting room. They were periodically informed that the working session was about to begin, but Trump, Macron, and Zelensky were not yet there. "These unusual scenes show only one thing: despite all the combined power of the G7, the summit is essentially focused around one person - US President Donald Trump - and his positions on the key issues of the day," The Guardian noted. In the end, the wait paid off: the presidents of France, the US, and Ukraine entered the hall and joined the other leaders. In addition, on June 16, Trump and Zelensky met in a bilateral format. "It is always important to coordinate positions," Volodymyr Zelensky briefly captioned photos from the meeting. Following the conversation, he shared some details - in particular, he said that he discussed the possibility of obtaining licenses from the US for the production of anti-ballistic systems and missiles. And President Trump said the meeting was "very good." United and Productive What happened in Evian was a stark contrast to events 12 months ago. At the previous G7 summit in Alberta, Canada, the situation did not go as planned. Initially, it was assumed that the discussion of a just and long-term peace for Ukraine would be one of the key topics of the summit, but it was overshadowed by Israel's operation against Iran. Unexpectedly for everyone, Trump left for Washington at the end of the first working day. This led, among other things, to the cancellation of his planned meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky. All planned meetings took place within the framework of the French summit, albeit in a slightly different atmosphere. Now, a number of G7 participants are concerned not about Trump's withdrawal from the game, but about his return. As Politico wrote, in private conversations, European officials express fears that "freed from the daily burden of the Iranian crisis, the US president may try to 're-take control of peace talks on Ukraine, push Europeans into the background, and disrupt their strategy based on maximum pressure on Russia and full support for Ukraine." "The fact that Trump was distracted [from the Ukrainian issue. - Ed.] is not necessarily bad," admitted one European diplomat on condition of anonymity. US President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron during a working meeting at the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, June 16, 2026. Photo: Thibault Camus / EPA. Meanwhile, an unnamed source close to Macron, speaking to journalists, lowered expectations for the three-day diplomatic marathon in Evian-les-Bains in advance, noting: "It is important that other G7 countries, and especially the United States, do not weaken their position on Ukraine." Emmanuel Macron formulated Europe's logic on TF1 television: "Proper negotiations are when Ukraine and Russia sit at the table, and Europeans and Americans are nearby." One of the unstated goals of the summit, ending on June 17, for Kyiv and Brussels is to secure US support for a unified negotiating position. Europeans formulated the fundamental conditions for a possible peaceful settlement in advance. On June 7, the leaders of Great Britain, France, and Germany, along with Volodymyr Zelensky, enshrined "five principles" in a joint statement: an immediate and complete ceasefire; the front line as the starting point for negotiations and the inadmissibility of changing borders by force; legally binding security guarantees with the deployment of multinational forces; freezing of Russian assets until reparations are paid; consideration of European security interests, for which decisions require the consent of the EU and NATO. Figures are Brussels' best argument in the discussion about the need to be at the negotiating table. According to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, €90 billion from the European Union covers two-thirds of Kyiv's financial needs for this and next year, and only "the remaining third requires partners" (von der Leyen urged G7 summit participants to discuss this topic). US President Donald Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at the Royal Hotel during the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, June 16, 2026. Photo: Thibault Camus / EPA. The number 21 also looks impressive - this is the number of sanctions packages that Brussels is preparing (and is already introducing in stages). The package includes expanded restrictions in the energy, financial services, crypto-assets, and trade sectors, increased pressure on critical infrastructure (including ports, airports, and oil refineries in any way related to Russian oil), the addition of vessels of Russia's shadow fleet, as well as individuals and legal entities to the sanctions lists. In addition, the European Commission proposes to maintain the current "price cap" on Russian oil until January 2027, which helps to curb Russia's oil and gas revenues. The effect of such pressure is increasing: according to EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell, sanctions have already cost the Russian economy between €1 trillion and €1.3 trillion. Directly during the G7 summit, the UK announced new sanctions - they are primarily aimed at Russia's shadow fleet. In addition, financial structures that help circumvent sanctions and provide supplies for the Russian army have come under restrictions. After meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney also announced new sanctions. The restrictive measures are aimed against Russia's shadow fleet, oil and gas revenues, the defense industrial complex, and individuals spreading disinformation. These decisions were in line with the G7's united position: as a French diplomatic source told AFP and Reuters, summit participants, during "very productive" discussions, agreed to be united in supporting Ukraine, continue providing aid (in particular, air defense systems), and increase pressure on Russia. Volodymyr Zelensky confirmed: everyone in the G7 believes that "Putin does not want to end [the war], but he must be forced to do so - primarily through sanctions." US President Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a working meeting at the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, June 16, 2026. Photo: Thibault Camus / EPA. "Russia must reach an agreement." While in France, the Ukrainian delegation took the opportunity to once again demonstrate to Trump who is actually blocking the peace process (for the other leaders, the answer was already obvious). Thus, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga, during a meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on the sidelines of the summit, informed him about Russian strikes on the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra and other civilian, cultural, and historical sites. "They demonstrate that Moscow is waging war against faith, heritage, and Ukrainian identity," the diplomat emphasized. Minister Sybiga also told Rubio about the recent successes of the Ukrainian military at the front and the need for further sanctions pressure on Russia. "We see growing momentum for peace through strength and rely on decisive US leadership and engagement," Sybiga concluded. Meanwhile, on June 15, Volodymyr Zelensky pulled a trump card: he said that the Ukrainian side had offered Volodymyr Putin "to meet anywhere where real decisions to end the war could be made." "We discussed with the US and France the possibility of meeting with Russia on the sidelines of the G7 summit - with the participation of all democratic states. Putin does not want this," the Ukrainian leader stated. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio before the start of a working session at the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, June 16, 2026. Photo: Thibault Camus / EPA. Another option - the possibility of a meeting on American territory - Zelensky discussed on June 14 during a phone call with Trump. In such a format, the Ukrainian leader is confident, "it would be much harder for Putin to refuse, at least to President Trump." "Let's see what comes of it. If Russia rejects this possibility as well, additional pressure will be required," the president summarized. After meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky, Donald Trump made it clear that he had generally listened to his interlocutor's arguments. The White House head said that Russia "must reach an agreement." This implies that Trump does not doubt Kyiv's readiness for a deal. At least, as of the current moment (as Novaya Gazeta Europe has repeatedly written, the Republican president's position regularly fluctuates like a pendulum). Soon, Moscow will have an opportunity to give this pendulum a reverse impulse. In the near future, as expected, Trump's special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner will visit the Russian capital after a six-month break. This visit, the exact date of which has not yet been determined, was agreed upon during a conversation between Putin and Trump on June 14. The Kremlin is now actively sending signals to Washington that it still considers the Trump administration the most constructive player. "Donald Trump again emphasized the need to stop military actions. He stated that he is ready to influence both European partners and Kyiv, including during contacts at the G7 summit," Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov told journalists about the conversation between Putin and Trump. However, according to Ushakov, Europeans and Volodymyr Zelensky are only set on "dragging out the conflict and continuing hostilities." Otherwise, Dmitry Peskov, press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation, added, the President of Ukraine would have come to Moscow long ago for a "responsible and serious conversation."
Serbian boxer Miloš Stojanović Tigar, who is also the boyfriend of popular Serbian presenter Jovana Jeremić, achieved his tenth jubilee victory in his professional career by knocking out Bela Aduašvili from Georgia in the second round.
Donald Trump gets panned, Howard Lutnick inspires outrage, and Matt and Walter debate civil liberties in Minnesota.
For noobs who think market indices indicate national prosperity.
This week on the Active Self Protection Podcast we sit down with Juan Rivas as he tells us about the night he was sitting at home minding his own business when a random gunman shot him through his
US President Donald Trump will undoubtedly find more words of praise for himself this week. On June 19, a memorandum on the terms for ending the war with Iran, which began on February 28, is to be signed in Switzerland. This is a memorandum, meaning a preliminary agreement. All the most contentious issues – from the fate of uranium enriched almost to weapons-grade to the prospects of unfreezing Iranian assets – have been postponed. The only real consequence of the memorandum might be the complete unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz, through which about one-fifth of the world's oil supplies pass. But this can hardly be called a breakthrough achievement, as no one was blocking the strait before the start of the American-Israeli operation. The material from "Novaya Gazeta Europe" discusses why Donald Trump started attacks on Iran and what their ultimate outcome was. US Vice President JD Vance and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio listen to US President Donald Trump's speech to the media in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., USA, on April 23, 2026. Photo: Will Oliver / EPA. Signed and will be signed again. In the coming days, the Trump administration will publish the full text of the agreement with Iran. This was promised by US Vice President JD Vance, speaking on ABC News on June 15. He made a paradoxical statement. On the one hand, Vance noted, some "technical issues" within the framework of the agreement are still being discussed. On the other hand, the document has already been signed, as it turned out. This happened electronically on June 14. According to Axios portal journalist Barak Ravid, JD Vance and Donald Trump signed from the American side, and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who acted as the chief negotiator for Tehran, signed from the Iranian side. A formal signing ceremony will take place in Geneva on Friday, June 19. The text of the memorandum has not yet been officially published, so for now, we can rely only on various statements from the involved parties and the version of the document disseminated by the Iranian agency Mehr on the night of June 15. According to information from Iran, the memorandum implies: immediate and permanent cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon; a commitment by the US not to interfere in Iran's internal affairs and to respect its sovereignty; complete lifting of the naval blockade within 30 days; withdrawal of US troops from regions close to Iran; opening of the Strait of Hormuz; suspension of sanctions on Iranian oil sales; provision by the US and its allies of reconstruction plans for Iranian facilities worth $300 billion; 60-day negotiations to reach a final agreement; Iran's commitment not to produce nuclear weapons; a US commitment not to impose new sanctions or increase military presence in the region during negotiations; unblocking of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets; creation of a control mechanism for the implementation of the agreement; approval of the final agreement by a UN Security Council resolution; unblocking of half of Iran's frozen assets, suspension of oil sanctions, and lifting of the naval blockade as preconditions for starting final negotiations. It is clear from this list that the main negotiation process is still ahead. As Nate Swanson of the Atlantic Council, who was a senior advisor on Iran for several US administrations, notes, the prepared document only "fixes fragile ceasefires in Iran and Lebanon and outlines topics for future negotiations": the memorandum clarifies neither the mechanics of ship passage through the Strait of Hormuz, nor the prospects of the nuclear issue, nor the fate of sanctions against Tehran – all of this is relegated to the "second phase" lasting 60 days. For now, we can state that the situation is far from what Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanted to see when they began their military operations against Iran at the end of February 2026 (the American operation was named "Epic Fury," the Israeli one – "Roaring Lion"). Iran's Military Capabilities. Announcing the attacks on Iran on February 28, Donald Trump promised to "destroy their missiles and level their missile industry." For the most part, this promise was fulfilled, albeit with reservations. According to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), before the war, Iran had about 2,500 missiles capable of reaching Israeli territory. By April 5, this number, according to the IDF, had decreased to just over 1,000. The dynamics are telling: from 480 missile launches from Iran per day on February 28 to 40 by March 9. Meanwhile, there are other assessments. For example, The New York Times reported on May 12, citing a classified US intelligence assessment, that Iran allegedly "retained approximately 70% of its pre-war missile arsenal." In any case, the most significant damage was inflicted not on stockpiles of ready missiles, but on the infrastructure necessary for their creation. In mid-May, the Pentagon claimed that "more than 85% of Iran's defense industry related to missiles, drones, and the navy" had been damaged or destroyed. Before the war, Israel estimated that Iran was moving to increase its arsenal to about 8-10,000 ballistic missiles within two to three years. This would allow Tehran, if necessary, to overwhelm Israel's missile defense systems through massive salvos. Now, this cannot be spoken of. "The remaining missile forces of Iran can increasingly be used not as a tool of warfare, but as a means of terror and ensuring the survival of the regime. If the Islamic Republic decides to use them in a new round of hostilities or launches a preemptive strike, it will essentially go all-in and create a strategic dilemma of its own initiative," noted experts from the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). In addition, at the beginning of the war, Trump promised to destroy the Iranian Navy. And this was largely achieved. On March 1, the head of the White House announced that the US armed forces had destroyed nine ships ("some of them relatively large and important") and the headquarters of the Iranian Navy. The most notable episode was the attack off the coast of Sri Lanka on March 4, when an American submarine fired torpedoes at the Iranian destroyer IRIS Dena and sank it. At the end of April, the Pentagon reported the destruction of approximately 92% of the Navy's largest ships. However, US intelligence admitted that a large part of the IRGC fleet, including small fast boats, remains combat-capable. And this is precisely what is needed, for example, to block the Strait of Hormuz. Nuclear Program. In the same speech on February 28, Donald Trump promised to "make sure Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon." Now, as JD Vance stated recently, it can be confidently asserted that Iran will not get it. However, whether this is true is a debatable question. Before the war, US intelligence services did not conclude that Iran had decided to create nuclear weapons. However, the Trump administration interpreted the very fact of Tehran's possession of enriched uranium reserves as evidence of Iran's dangerous desire to retain the capability to create such weapons. According to the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), the previous military conflict – US strikes on Iranian territory in June 2025 – led to the destruction or disabling of all (about 22,000) gas centrifuges at facilities in Fordow and Natanz. "As a result, for the first time in 20 years, Iran has no traceable path to producing weapons-grade uranium at its enrichment facilities. In addition, the strikes caused enormous damage to Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons itself," noted ISIS experts. But in any case, there is another problem: the uranium remaining in the hands of the Iranian regime. 440.9 kg of uranium enriched to 60% (which is "99% of the way to weapons-grade uranium"; enough material for about ten warheads) physically survived and are presumably "walled up" in the tunnels of the US-attacked facilities. US President Donald Trump addresses reporters in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., USA, on April 23, 2026. Photo: Will Oliver / EPA. Under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran was allowed to enrich uranium up to 3.67% and keep a stockpile of no more than 300 kg. But in 2018, Trump withdrew from the deal, calling it too lenient, and Iran did not restrain itself afterward. Initially, during the Republican's second term, the US sought Iran's agreement for "zero enrichment." But on June 15, Trump told The New York Times that Iran would be allowed to enrich at low levels, far from weapons-grade. This means the US President has already moved away from his previous maximalist positions. But Tehran might not agree to even this. "Iran knows how to drag out such negotiations and try to get concessions along the way," wrote former US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro, who also worked on Iran in the Biden administration, on social media X. "It is quite possible that no deal will be reached at all. And it is very likely that if it is reached, it will be worse than what we could have obtained through diplomatic means before the war." According to Shapiro, Iran is unlikely to take the threat of new US military strikes seriously – at least until the November midterm elections. That is, as the expert notes, the US will not have the tool of a credible threat of force, and this will clearly play into Iran's hands. It will resist significant concessions, and ultimately the resolution of the issue may take months or even years. At the same time, experts agree that the US and Israel have destroyed Iran's infrastructure, but have only strengthened Tehran's desire to have nuclear weapons. According to Victoria Taylor of the Atlantic Council (formerly Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq and Iran), the war may have further convinced the Iranian regime that "nuclear deterrence is the best way to ensure its future." Iranians walk past a mural depicting the Iranian national flag with a missile outline, Tehran, Iran, June 15, 2026. Photo: Abedin Taherkenareh / EPA. Strait of Hormuz and Oil. In addition, thanks to the military campaign of Trump and Netanyahu, Iran realized what a powerful lever of pressure it possesses. We are talking about the Strait of Hormuz, through which about one-fifth of the world's oil supplies pass. Shortly after the war began, Tehran de facto blocked the strait, through which up to 60 tankers passed daily under normal conditions. Then the American blockade was added: the US began intercepting ships of all countries entering and leaving Iranian ports and coastal areas. In early June, for example, the strait was completely blocked – over 340 ships were waiting to pass through it. "There are also many gaps in the story of the Strait of Hormuz, as in the case of the nuclear issue, because versions of what will happen next differ," notes orientalist Marianna Belenkaya, author of the Telegram channel "Falafelnaya," in a conversation with "Nova-Europe," specifically pointing to the issue of payment for passage of ships through the strait. Trump insists that shipping will remain "permanently free." He informed The New York Times of this. Simultaneously, the head of the White House confirmed that the US naval blockade of Iranian ports would be lifted. Meanwhile, the Iranian agency Fars, citing a source, reported that the final version of the memorandum states that "future management of services for navigation in the Strait of Hormuz will be determined by Iran and Oman." This wording, according to the source, means that "the US recognizes Iran's right to charge fees." According to the agency's interlocutor, Iran will allow free passage of ships only for 60 days, after which the Iranian side will "receive financial benefits for the country's economic development." In addition, as Marianna Belenkaya recalls, "the strait will not be opened in one day – it needs to be demined, and the infrastructure needs to be put in order." Finding and neutralizing Iranian mines laid during the conflict is a difficult task. The Pentagon had previously warned that the process could take up to six months. President Trump, however, assured on June 15 that the Strait of Hormuz was partially open – and on Friday it "will be fully open." "And what is very important: oil prices are rapidly falling, and the stock market is soaring like a rocket today, to record highs. Oil has seen its biggest drop, we are reaching low figures," added the American president. How events unfold will inevitably affect further price fluctuations. It should be recalled that the war triggered a sharp increase in oil prices. The price of Brent crude rose to nearly $120 a barrel at its peak. On June 15, Brent on the London exchange traded below $84 a barrel for the first time since the start of the war. Russia became one of the main beneficiaries of the military actions: unexpected additional revenues slowed down the growth of the budget deficit. At the same time, according to the head of Swedish military intelligence, Tomas Nilsson, Russia could close its budget deficit if the price of Urals crude oil remained above $100 a barrel for a year (Urals at loading ports are traded at a discount to Brent – approximately minus $15). Meanwhile, energy policy specialist Kirill Rodionov predicts that "Urals prices in the second half of 2026 will be below $60 a barrel." This means Moscow will have to forget about super-profits. Cargo ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz, off the coast of Bandar Abbas in southern Iran, June 1, 2026. Photo: Amirhossein Khorgooei / EPA. Money and Sanctions. According to Dan Shapiro, the unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz is the most important result of the memorandum. At the same time, the expert notes: "Of course, the strait was open before the war. Now its 'opening' is effectively paid for through sanctions relief [against Iran. – Ed.]." And this is another difficult topic for further discussion. Iran itself, as early as April, estimated the damage from the American-Israeli bombings at $270 billion and demanded reparations. In the version of the memorandum disseminated by the Iranian agency Mehr, it was stated about the unblocking of $24 billion (these are Iranian funds frozen in banks of various countries due to sanctions), as well as – upon reaching a final deal – about a reconstruction program "of at least $300 billion." In addition, according to Mehr, final negotiations will not begin until half of Iran's frozen assets are unblocked, oil sanctions are suspended, and the naval blockade is lifted. This was also confirmed by Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi: according to him, the next stage of negotiations will depend on whether Washington fulfills a number of preliminary conditions, including the unfreezing of Iranian assets abroad. However, the American side categorically rejects such an interpretation. "This is completely untrue. No frozen assets will be unfrozen until the Iranians fulfill their obligations," a senior unnamed official in Washington assured CNN. And JD Vance stated on CBS that the $24 billion figure "is not mentioned in any of the texts" of the agreement. According to him, the issue of assets will be considered later, after the signing of the memorandum of understanding. In an interview with Fox News, he further explained: "The agreement states that they [the Iranians – Ed.] will not receive a single cent of American money. The agreement also states that if the Iranians [are fulfilling the terms of the deal. – Ed.], if sanctions are eased, if the Iranians integrate into the global economy, we will offer other countries – not the US – to invest in their country. But this is only possible if the agreement is observed." "The story that the US is paying Iran 300 million dollars is fake news spread by Democrats!!!" Donald Trump also confirmed. "It is unclear how the US will ease sanctions, who should make the first move," Marianna Belenkaya describes the current situation. "Iran does something, and then the US lifts sanctions, or vice versa... Everything is still in limbo." Anti-American image on a house in Tehran, Iran, May 26, 2026. Photo: Abedin Taherkenareh / EPA. Fate of the Regime. "To the great and proud people of Iran, I say today: your hour of freedom is near... When we are done, take your power into your own hands. It will belong to you," Donald Trump declared on February 28, calling the US and Israeli war against Iran "the only chance [for the Iranians. – Ed.] for generations to come." Trump later repeatedly stated that "freedom for the Iranian people is the main goal" of the American-Israeli attacks. Later, the US President declared that he had accomplished nothing less than a "regime change" in Iran. This is how the head of the White House assessed the consequences of the airstrikes, which killed Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had ruled since 1989, and other leadership figures. As early as the end of March, Israeli military officials noted that during the war, Iran had lost over 250 high-ranking military and civilian officials. Meanwhile, it is obvious that the system has held up. In March, the Iranian Assembly of Experts elected a new supreme leader – the son of the deceased, 56-year-old Mojtaba Khamenei, who has close ties to the all-powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Experts consider him even tougher and more radical than his father was. It is unlikely that Mojtaba Khamenei will drastically soften his stance towards Washington, if only because the US and Israel killed his father, mother, wife, and son. "The Iranian regime is more alive than ever. It has changed, and perhaps not in the way we would like. The role of the IRGC has increased, the regime has become more radical," says Marianna Belenkaya. Iranian authorities are now encouraged by the fact that they survived (meaning, according to them, they won). Meanwhile, Donald Trump, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal on June 14, demonstrated his favorite tactic: he stated that in reality, he was "never interested in regime change" in Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu, following this, also assured that Israel had never intended to change the regime in Iran. Iran's Proxy Forces. "We will ensure that terrorist proxy forces in the region can no longer destabilize the situation in the region or the world, or attack our forces," Donald Trump declared on February 28. This referred to Palestinian Hamas, the Yemeni Houthis, and, primarily, Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, which, in solidarity with Iran, began actively attacking Israel. In response, the IDF opened a new front, and not limited to shelling: Israeli troops entered southern Lebanon. They are creating a buffer zone on the Lebanese side of the border and, as Marianna Belenkaya notes, "do not intend to leave the occupied territory anytime soon." As a senior US official told Reuters, the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon is not a condition of the agreement, and Israel will have the right to defend itself against further "Hezbollah" attacks. Benjamin Netanyahu also noted that the Israeli military would continue to destroy the group's infrastructure and respond to any strikes against Israel. Meanwhile, Trump has repeatedly made it clear that Israel's actions on the Lebanese front are hindering his agreements with Tehran. The Republican president was particularly angered that, a few hours before the electronic signing of the US-Iranian memorandum on Sunday, Israel struck Beirut. "Why the hell did Bibi [Netanyahu's nickname. – Ed.] have to make this damn strike [on Lebanon. – Ed.]? I was so mad. I made that clear to him," Trump told Axios. On June 15, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that the agreement between the US and Iran opens the door for broader negotiations on peace and security in the entire region. "Of course, there can be no peace in the Middle East while Lebanon is ablaze," she added. Meanwhile, it is unlikely that the US-Iranian memorandum will help resolve the problem with "Hezbollah." It is indicative that on the evening of June 15 – amid discussions about prospects for reconciliation in the region – Hezbollah announced an attack on Israeli forces attempting to advance in southern Lebanon. "The fighters of the Islamic Resistance, using guided missiles and Ababil attack drones, confronted the enemy forces as they attempted to advance, forcing them to retreat," the statement said. Israeli and Lebanese flags at a monument called "Fence of Goodness" in Metula, near the Israeli-Lebanese border, June 15, 2026. Photo: Atef Safadi / EPA. Conclusion: Disappointment. Despite all this, the authorities of the US, Israel, and Iran have spoken only of how beneficial the upcoming agreement is since Sunday. "Ships of the world, start your engines! Let the oil flow!" proclaimed Donald Trump, announcing the deal (and, consequently, the unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz). He later returned to the theme of how productively he had worked "for the benefit of the region and the whole world." "We have inflicted enormous damage on Iran's economy; some estimate it at one trillion dollars," boasted Benjamin Netanyahu in turn. "We have achieved victory over America," said Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi without restraint. Meanwhile, alternative opinions were not heard from Iran, but lively discussions have unfolded in the US and Israel in recent days. For example, even many Trump supporters in the US, if not criticizing the agreement, expressed cautious skepticism about it. For instance, Senator Lindsey Graham expressed doubts about the terms of the memorandum, stating that he is "somewhat concerned" that the Iranian version of the agreements differs from the American one. "For days now, I've been asking: why can't we, the people, see this damn memorandum? And not through people informed by some anonymous source. If this is truly an outstanding result for the world, then publish the document," radio host Mark Levin, who repeatedly discussed Iran-related issues with Trump during his second presidential term, indignated on social media X. In addition, he reposted with the words "spot on" a message stating that "the real goal of the Islamic regime is to 'survive, recover and rebuild its strength,' and then refuse to comply with any signed agreements." Conservative foreign policy analyst and former State Department official Christian Whiton, who supported the attack on Iran at the time, stated with disappointment that Trump had given in to Tehran and as a result had "snatched defeat from the jaws of victory." In particular, the expert noted, "Trump has slowed down and likely jeopardized one of the most significant achievements of the war – the possible destruction of Hezbollah, which, through its predecessor, "Islamic Jihad," first gained notoriety in the US after the killing of 241 American servicemen in Beirut." According to Whiton, Secretary of State Marco Rubio "engaged with the governments of Israel and Lebanon and moved towards an agreement that could have ousted Hezbollah (and thus Iran) from the Lebanese government for the first time in a long time," but "this historic initiative stalled after Trump made it clear to Israel that he actually wanted to preserve Hezbollah, as Tehran made it a condition of the deal." "A wise man once told me that every presidential administration leaves Washington having become a parody of itself. Is Trump accelerating this process already in the sixth year of his presidency?" Christian Whiton asked. And Russia expert Fiona Hill, who was Deputy Assistant to the US President for National Security during Trump's first term, expressed confidence that the Iranian campaign had undermined the authority of the US as a military power. Hill drew parallels with the Russian-Ukrainian war: "The stalemate in Ukraine undermines Russia's reputation as a global military power. It destroys Putin's aura of invincibility just as the stalemate in the Persian Gulf undermines the positions of the United States and Trump." According to Hill, the root of the problem is that both presidents poorly understood their opponents: they projected their own idea of centralized power onto Iran and Ukraine and believed that if the system could be decapitated, it would collapse. But everything went according to a completely different scenario. A billboard depicting the late Supreme Leaders of Iran Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on a street in Tehran, Iran, June 15, 2026. Photo: Abedin Taherkenareh / EPA. Meanwhile, in Israel, as Marianna Belenkaya told "Nova-Europe," criticism is coming from both the left and the right political flanks. Among others, centrist opposition leader Yair Lapid harshly stated: "We must still hope that the reports about the agreement with Iran are not true, but if they are, then this is one of the most horrific failures of Israel's foreign and security policy, and it is entirely attributed to Netanyahu." In particular, according to Lapid, the prime minister is to blame for "failing to persuade the Americans to bomb Iran's oil and energy facilities." In addition, the opposition leader continued, Netanyahu did not achieve "the inclusion of [Iranian – Ed.] ballistic missiles in the agreement or at least on the negotiating agenda," nor did he "take into account the consequences of [possible in the future. – Ed.] lifting sanctions and injecting tens of billions of dollars into the Iranian economy under the control of the IRGC." "The Roaring Lion [the name of the Israeli military operation against Iran. – Ed.] returned home with its tail between its legs," concluded orientalist Ksenia Svetlova, author of the Telegram channel "Eastern Syndrome" and former Knesset deputy, summing up the war. "This happens when adventurism overcomes sober analysis, and pride possesses minds." According to her, "Israel and the US are learning the limits of power in real-time, but only one of the two partners remains within reach of Iranian missiles and will suffer from deep changes in the Middle East after a poorly prepared, failed war." "Ships of the world, start your engines! Let the oil flow!" wrote Trump, announcing the deal with Iran. Probably, after the memorandum is signed, it will indeed "flow" through the Strait of Hormuz. But it seems that this is the only thing that can be said with any certainty. Everything else – the fate of uranium, the sequence of sanctions relief and money unfreezing, the future of Iranian proxy forces in the region, and much more – has been put aside and will be decided for at least another 60 days. At the same time, it is possible that Trump will completely lose interest in Iran during this time. And, as he has promised many times, he will shift all his attention to Cuba or, say, return to the resolution of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.
Ukraine reportedly strikes major Russian ammunition depot with domestically produced "Flamingo" cruise missiles in latest escalating conflict development.
