Exclusive: Iran deal includes $300 billion fund, more than half of which already committed, source says

Exclusive: Iran deal includes $300 billion fund, more than half of which already committed, source says

By Andrew Mills, Maha El Dahan and Parisa Hafezi

June 17, 20263:58 AM GMT+10

Updated 48 mins ago


Summary

• Commitments exceed $150 billion across five regions, says source
• The investment fund vehicle contains no government money
• New fund is separate from frozen asset talks, says source
• Fund only becomes operational after a final U.S.-Iran deal is signed

DUBAI, June 16 (Reuters) - A $300 billion private ​fund designed to trigger investment into Iran is outlined in the U.S.-Iran framework agreement and more than half that sum has already been committed, a source with ‌direct knowledge of the deal told Reuters.
The fund is designed to give both sides an economic incentive to conclude a final deal to end the war, said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan has not yet been announced as Washington and Tehran prepare to sign on Friday.

The fund's existence has been previously reported but Reuters is revealing for the first time that more than half of the amount ​has already been committed and that it will be comprised entirely of private-sector funds.

U.S. and Iranian officials said on Sunday they had agreed on a framework to ​end their war, which began when U.S. and Israeli forces attacked Iran on February 28, halt the U.S. blockade of Iran and reopen ⁠the Strait of Hormuz, a key supply route for global oil and gas.

The new fund is a private investment vehicle, not a reconstruction or reparations programme and will not include any ​government money or grants, the source said, adding that companies based in the U.S., the Gulf Arab states, Asia, South America and Africa have agreed to commit financing.

Investments pledged span energy, ​logistics, manufacturing and transport, the source said.

A senior Iranian source told Reuters that Tehran had originally sought $400 billion as compensation for war damages from the U.S. but Washington had said it would not provide it.

The idea for the fund, which is to be named the Reconstruction and Development Fund, then emerged.
The mechanism envisages regional countries contributing in various ways, the Iranian source said. These include securing loans, establishing credit lines or ​directly financing the reconstruction of sites damaged in the war, including facilities such as the Mobarakeh Steel complex, refineries, airports and, more broadly, infrastructure affected by the conflict.

Iran, one of ​the Middle East's largest economies, has attracted almost no significant foreign direct investment in the past four decades, frozen out of global capital markets by successive waves of U.S. and international sanctions.

The country has ‌the world's second-largest ⁠proven natural gas reserves and the fourth-largest proven oil reserves.

It also has a young, educated population of more than 92 million people, a diversified industrial base and significant untapped potential in sectors ranging from petrochemicals and mining to tourism and agriculture.

The investment fund is entirely separate from a parallel negotiating track over the lifting of U.S. sanctions and the release of Iranian sovereign assets frozen abroad, the source with knowledge of the deal said, describing the two as distinct financial mechanisms with different purposes and timelines.
The fund will not be created or become operational until ​a final and satisfactory deal is concluded. The ​memorandum of understanding, once signed, is intended ⁠to structure the process over the next 60 days.

"It'll only be created once the final deal is signed," the source said. "During these 60 days the fund administrators will work with Iranians and investors to plan and scope projects."
Iran's foreign ministry and Pakistan's foreign ministry, which helped ​mediate the investment fund deal, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
A White House spokeswoman pointed to a CBS interview with ​Vice President JD Vance on ⁠Monday in which he said that Iran could gain access to a $300 billion reconstruction fund backed by Gulf states if it complies with an agreement with Washington, including dismantling its nuclear program, eliminating its stockpile of enriched material, and accepting a stringent inspection and enforcement regime.

The source would not say how the fund will be administered or by whom, noting that key details were still ⁠to be worked ​out.
The source named companies from South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia and the United States among those that had ​made commitments, but declined to provide a comprehensive list.

The 60-day memorandum is a framework, not a final agreement, and U.S. and Iranian negotiators are expected to work across multiple tracks during that period covering nuclear, sanctions and regional ​security issues.

Businessperson denies US mansion purchase link, Rosmah lodges police report

Businessperson denies US mansion purchase link, Rosmah lodges police report


Published: Jun 14, 2026 12:10 PM
Updated: 2:10 PM


Businessperson Daing A Malek Daing Rahaman has denied allegations linking him to the purchase of a luxury mansion in Alpine, New Jersey, in the US, which is alleged to have ties to Rosmah Mansor.

The property is reportedly located on Margo Way, an ultra-exclusive enclave in the affluent borough that is home to some of the wealthiest individuals in the US.

The allegations were made by an X user named Mark Lansvin in a video shared on the social media platform.

The viral post, citing unnamed sources, alleged that the property valued at about US$13 million (RM53 million) was purchased on July 30, 2025, at the direction of and using funds provided by Rosmah, the wife of jailed former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak.

It further alleged that Rosmah's son-in-law, Daniyar Kessikbayev, was listed as the buyer.

In response to this, Rosmah's lawyer Firoz Hussein Ahmad Jamaluddin told Malaysiakini that she has lodged a police report regarding the allegations.

"She has made a police report. It will be circulated soon.

"Report made today," Firoz said when contacted.


Alleged shareholder

The X post also claimed that the property was transferred in May to Daran Investments Capital Inc, a British Virgin Islands-registered company, through a confidential declaration of trust, and alleged that Daing was a shareholder in the company who is listed on record.

It also alleged that US authorities were tracing the money trail through proxies.

Bernama reported that Daing called the allegations “gravely misleading”.

Businessperson Daing A Malek Daing Rahaman


“All the allegations that relate to me in the publication are false, baseless, defamatory and gravely misleading. I categorically, unequivocally and without reservation deny each and every statement in the publication as far as the same are directed at me.

“The allegations against me are wholly untrue. The publication, circulation and recirculation of the false statements are wrongful and have caused serious injury to my reputation, character and personal integrity.

“All persons are placed on notice that the making, publication, republication, forwarding, sharing of the false statements will expose them to legal liability and criminal prosecution,” he was quoted as saying in a statement last night.


Don’t spread allegation

He also reportedly cautioned the public against relying on, repeating or further circulating the allegations, and warned that any continued dissemination would be treated as a further publication of defamatory material.

“I expressly reserve all rights and remedies in law, including the right to commence proceedings against persons responsible for the publication of criminal and defamatory statements.

“I will not hesitate to take necessary action against the perpetrators responsible for the publication and its republication or circulation by whatever means,” he added.

He said a police report has also been lodged, and that investigations, including efforts to identify those responsible for the publication and its circulation, are underway.

Teo slams manipulated poster aimed at scaring non-Muslim voters ahead of Johor polls

The original poster on the right showing Johor DAP’s potential women candidates for the July 11 state election, and the manipulated version on the left showing them wearing the Muslim headscarf. - Teo Nie Ching Facebook, June 17, 2026

Teo slams manipulated poster aimed at scaring non-Muslim voters ahead of Johor polls


Deputy Communications Minister says AI was used to show DAP’s potential female candidates wearing the Muslim headscarf


Scoop Reporters
Updated 3 minutes ago
17 June, 2026
6:07 PM MYT



KUALA LUMPUR — Johor DAP chairman Teo Nie Ching has slammed attempts to tarnish the party ahead of the Johor state election with manipulated photos of its women members wearing the Muslim headscarf.

“There are parties who have deliberately manipulated a poster of Johor DAP’s potential female candidates by making them appear as Muslim women wearing the tudung in a wrong position. The intent is to scare away non-Malay voters, especially the Chinese, from voting for Pakatan Harapan,” she said on Facebook.

She also posted the original poster alongside the manipulated image which has been stamped with the words “AI Edited”.

Teo, who is also Deputy Communications Minister, advised the public not to be influenced by dirty tactics ahead of the Johor election slated for July 11.

“DAP respects all religions, and we understand and are aware that the headscarf as part of Muslim women’s clothing cannot be played with. The dirty tactics of changing the poster pictures are a despicable act that must be rejected,” said the DAP national Women’s chairman.

“Hopefully voters of all races reject this act. Let’s all choose harmony, unity and peace,” she added.

The Johor legislative assembly, which has 56 seats, was dissolved on June 1.

Nomination day ahead of polling will be held on June 27. – June 17, 2026

***

If the photo is of Hannah Yeoh wearing Muslim headscarf, then it's not fake 😂😂😂

Guan Eng slammed for “insulting Islam, testing Muslims’ patience” with Butterworth mega pork sale

Guan Eng slammed for “insulting Islam, testing Muslims’ patience” with Butterworth mega pork sale

WHILE he was showered with praises for his bold idea by his fanbase, DAP adviser Lim Guan Eng has found himself lambasted by the rightist fraternity for disrespecting the nation’s official religion by mooting the so-called Butterworth mega pork sale last weekend (June 14).


Staged for the fourth straight year at the covered basketball court at the Taman Selat Tua Pek Kong Temple in mainland Penang with prior approval of the Seberang Perai City Council, the event in conjunction with the annual Dragon Boat Festival saw some 2,000 porcine consumers literally snatched up 60 swine in two hours.

“Other places don’t want, can’t or don’t even dare to hold pork sales but not Butterworth because we want to prove to everyone that Butterworth folks live with dignity, hence wish to usher in the Dragon Boat Festival with pride,” the four-term Bagan MP penned in a recent Mandarin-only Facebook post.

Lim Guan Eng

on Monday

#既然没有错那就敢敢做
#猪肉大促销60头猪2小时抢空

其他地方不要、不能、不敢办猪肉大促销，但北海敢，因为我们要向大家证明，北海人民活得有尊严，迎接端午节是有尊严的，买猪肉也是有尊严的！

...See more

1.2K

81

63

Although at the beginning there were some opposition voices saying that pork should not be sold in public places, I believe that buying and eating pork is part of the freedom and right of the people.

Therefore, I decided to continue to support such activity with an allocation of RM100,000.

According to Guan Eng, response was encouraging with buyers started queuing up as early as 4.40am.

“A total of 20 stalls participated in selling meat from 60 pigs. The meat was sold at the price of RM10 cheaper per kg than the market price,” enthused the four-term Air Putih state assemblyman.

“Purchase is only open to non-Muslim citizens who possess MyKad with a maximum limit of 4kg per person while pork belly is limited to 1kg per buyer.”


Belittling Islam

But when Malay language news portal MYNEWSHUB featured Guan Eng’s post on its FB page, brickbats of sorts were hurled at the seasoned DAP lawmaker with the post having attracted 6K likes, 4.2K comments and 1.4k shares at the time of writing.

Program Jualan Daging Babi Besar-Besaran Di Tempat Awam Bukti Butterworth Hidup Penuh Maruah - Guan Eng

Oleh Mynewshub

BUTTERWORTH – “Tempat lain mungkin tidak mahu, tidak boleh atau tidak berani menganjurkan promosi besar-besaran daging babi, tetapi Butterworth berani melakukannya.”

...See more

1.1K

3.3K

1.5K

One commenter described the mega pork sale as an activity “that seemingly challenges Muslims in Malaysia at a time when the pig farming issue (is Selangor) is being hotly debated”.

“Now they (DAP) organised a massive pork sale programme in Penang … that’s how DAP always harp on sensitive issues pertaining to Muslims in Malaysia,” berated the presumably PAS loyalist from Kota Bharu.

“We are the ones to decide if there should be another (DAP) Cabinet minister in the Putrajaya government after GE16 (16th General Election).”

Another commenter provoked his brethren with his remark that “the kafir (infidels) will not be satisfied as long as Muslims do not follow their lead”.

One netizen claimed that DAP “has clearly broken the law”. “The open sale of pork is against the law. Action should be taken against the local authority which granted the license,” he hit out.

One commenter contended that “it is within the right of the Chinese to consume as much pork as they wish so long as they rear the hogs in the vicinity of Chinese settlements”.

“Muslims eat beef with cows being farmed close to where Muslims live. Mutton is a favourite of Indians, henceforth goats are reared in the confines of where Indians live,” he justified.

Yet it was lamented that “many Malay Muslims still proudly support DAP”.

The bottom line, as one opposition-slant commenter put is, the days of the Madani government are numbered. – June 17, 2026

Inside the UEC Facebook debate: Who shapes the controversy?

Inside the UEC Facebook debate: Who shapes the controversy?

Azreen Madzlan
Published: Jun 17, 2026 10:00 AM
Updated: 2:17 PM



On Dec 9, 2025, Housing and Local Government Minister Nga Kor Ming announced that DAP would meet Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to push for federal recognition of the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC).

The announcement quickly reignited a familiar national debate.

Yet this was far from the first time the issue had returned to the political spotlight.

In January 2020, with Pakatan Harapan in the federal government, Nga said DAP would not hesitate to leave the government if the UEC was not recognised, describing the issue as one of the party’s core principles.

Five years later, the certificate once again became the centre of public debate.

This time, the issue resurfaced less than two weeks after DAP suffered a major setback in the Sabah state election. Nga’s remarks at a Chinese independent school fundraising dinner reignited debate over the UEC’s political significance.

Housing and Local Government Minister Nga Kor Ming


A Malaysiakini analysis of 430 public Facebook posts published between December 2025 and mid-June 2026 found that discussion within Malaysia’s BM and English political sphere was driven by a relatively stable group of recurring actors, many of whom appeared across multiple controversies months apart.

While it does not capture the full range of discussion taking place in Chinese-language online spaces, it provides insight into how the UEC becomes a recurring subject of national political debate.


Different triggers, same patterns

To understand why the UEC repeatedly returns to public debate, Malaysiakini analysed 430 public Facebook posts from two major discussion waves between December 2025 and mid-June 2026.

Facebook was chosen because it remains a key platform for political discussion, making it useful for tracking how narratives emerge and spread.

The analysis focused mainly on public posts in BM and English.

While some Mandarin-language posts appeared in the dataset, Chinese-language Facebook discourse was not systematically sampled due to language limitations in the data collection and coding process.

The findings, therefore, reflect how the UEC is discussed within BM- and English-language political networks, rather than a full account of all online discourse on the issue.

Within these networks, the UEC more frequently becomes a subject of national political contestation involving major political parties, advocacy groups, commentators, and media organisations.

This analysis should therefore be understood as an examination of political mobilisation and narrative framing in the BM- and English-language sphere, rather than a measure of overall public opinion on the UEC.

ADS




The first wave followed Nga’s renewed push for UEC recognition in December 2025 and generated 252 posts.

The second followed the Higher Education Ministry’s announcement in May 2026 that UEC and tahfiz graduates could apply to public universities through a pathway requiring credits in SPM BM and History, generating a further 178 posts.

Posts were identified using keywords such as “UEC”, “Dong Zong”, and “tolak UEC” to capture discussion from both supporters and opponents. Each post was manually coded as anti-UEC, pro-UEC, or neutral before undergoing AI-assisted narrative analysis to identify recurring themes and arguments.

Although triggered by different events and separated by several months, both waves produced broadly similar distributions of opinion.

In the first wave, 75.4 percent of posts opposed UEC recognition, while 14.3 percent supported it. In the second wave, anti-UEC content accounted for 71.3 percent, compared with 12.9 percent supporting recognition.

The same voices keep returning

One of the analysis’ most striking findings was how often the same actors reappeared.

Twenty-four individuals, organisations, and media platforms were active in both waves despite the controversies being separated by several months and triggered by different events.

Among them, TV Pertiwi emerged as the single most prolific actor in the dataset. The platform published 46 posts during the first wave and another six during the second, making it one of the few voices to maintain a sustained presence across both periods.

TV Pertiwi is led by chief executive Firdaus Salleh Huddin, a commentator associated with the Muslim advocacy movement Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma).

Responding to Malaysiakini’s findings, Firdaus argued that the recurring controversy reflects the government’s reluctance to take a definitive position on the issue.

“So long as the government does not dare make a final decision on this issue, it will never be resolved,” he said, adding that public pressure often drives official responses.

Beyond TV Pertiwi, the anti-UEC ecosystem brought together a mix of activists, academics, commentators, and political actors.

Recurring figures included Aminuddin Yahaya, Ridhuan Tee Abdullah, Anuar Ahmad, and Eric See-To, alongside a network of political and community-based Facebook pages.

PAS and Perikatan Nasional-linked voices were particularly prominent throughout both waves, suggesting that opposition to the UEC is not sustained by a single organisation but by a broader network that repeatedly activates around the issue.

The pro-UEC coalition is noticeably smaller and more concentrated. Its most visible participants include DAP leaders such as Teo Nie Ching, political analyst James Chin, and Dong Zong - the umbrella body for Chinese independent schools and administrator of the UEC examination.

Unlike the anti-UEC camp, which draws on a wide network of commentators and advocacy-linked actors, pro-UEC mobilisation is more concentrated among political figures and Chinese education organisations.

This concentration reflects the scope of the dataset, which is limited to BM- and English-language Facebook posts and does not systematically sample Chinese-language discourse.


Not really about education

At first glance, the UEC appears to be a debate about educational qualifications.

Issued by Chinese independent secondary schools, the certificate is recognised by universities in countries including Singapore, Australia, the United Kingdom, Taiwan, and China.

Yet education policy occupied only part of the discussion.

READ MORE: KINIGUIDE | A guide to the Chinese schools’ education system in Malaysia

Among anti-UEC actors, the most common themes revolved around race and ethnicity, the BM language, electoral politics, constitutional concerns, and national unity.

Pro-UEC actors focused more heavily on education rights, mother-tongue education, institutional recognition, equality, and government commitments, often framed through promises of policy consistency and equal access.

Opponents tend to frame UEC as an issue of national identity and integration, while supporters frame it as a question of fairness, recognition, and minority rights.

Electoral framing appears frequently across both camps, suggesting that political considerations cut across the debate rather than belonging to one side alone.

Anti-UEC actors often portray the qualification as part of DAP’s political agenda or an appeal to Chinese voters, while supporters frame recognition as a matter of honouring manifesto commitments and government promises.

Taken together, these patterns suggest that the UEC functions less as a technical education issue than as a proxy for broader debates about identity, representation, and nationhood.


Why do these debates keep returning?

If the UEC has become more symbolic than practical, why does it continue to resurface?

Chin argued that the certificate occupies a symbolic position in the Chinese Malaysian community, closely tied to the preservation of Chinese-language education.

Although only a relatively small proportion of students sit for the examination, its significance extends beyond those directly affected.

For many supporters, recognition is no longer primarily about educational access but about cultural and political identity within Malaysia’s multicultural framework.

Political analyst James Chin


“This is really an issue of Chinese Malaysian identity and political recognition of minorities,” Chin said.

Political analyst Mazlan Ali offered a complementary explanation, pointing to the gap between policy arrangements and political perception.

From a policy perspective, he noted that successive governments have created pathways for UEC graduates to access public universities, teacher training institutes, and parts of the civil service through requirements such as SPM BM and History.

“The solution has actually been there for some time,” he said.

However, Mazlan argued that these arrangements have not reduced controversy because the issue is frequently interpreted through the lens of identity, integration, and nation-building.

“When people hear UEC, many automatically view it negatively. They see it as something separate from the national system,” he said.

He added that the controversy endures because the issue has become politically useful to competing actors.

Political analyst Mazlan Ali


“The UEC has become a label that can be used to mobilise nationalism, identity, and ideas about nation-building,” Mazlan said.

“So long as political actors continue to use the UEC for political purposes, the issue will continue to resurface.”


At the centre of identity politics

Across BM and English Facebook discourse, the same actors reappear, familiar narratives resurface, and similar political framings are repeatedly mobilised across different moments of debate.

Within these networks, the UEC functions less as a technical education issue than as a recurring site of political and identity contestation.

While framing in other linguistic communities may place different emphasis on education policy or institutional recognition, the findings show how the issue is articulated within Malaysia’s BM- and English-language political networks, where it most consistently intersects with debates over identity, representation, and nationhood.

As long as these broader questions remain politically salient, the UEC is likely to remain a recurring source of controversy despite changes in policy.

Trump said Israel owes its continued existence to the United States and him personally

THANKS MF




Shaiel Ben-Ephraim

@academic_la

Israel feels that in the last few days Trump has turned against it. They are worried the change is permanent. But Israeli sources are not claiming Trump is being unfair necessarily, they are describing a trap of Netanyahu's own making: 

1) Israelis read the rebuke as deliberate humiliation. A senior official close to Netanyahu told Channel 12 that Jerusalem was "stunned" by Trump's criticism and called it "a resounding slap in the face." The Times of Israel 

2) Israelis accept they oversold the war and got caught. Former PM Ehud Barak, on Israel's public broadcaster, said "Israel is paying the price of Netanyahu's hubris and blindness, and the price of the manipulations that he tried to pull on Trump." 

3) Israelis believe Trump now sees Netanyahu as a possession. A critic quoted in Israeli media warned that Netanyahu "is turning us into a client state that takes orders about its national security." Maariv columnist Ben Caspit put it more sharply: "Israeli policy is dictated by Trump's social media posts." 

4) Israelis read the Netanyahu "won't run again" remark as Trump reaching into their politics. After Trump floated that it was an open question whether the 76-year-old wants to continue his political career, Likud was forced to publicly confirm Netanyahu would run. 

5) They see Lebanon signals as abandonment of a front they consider existential. Nadav Strauchler, a former Netanyahu adviser, conceded to the Times of Israel that the premier was counting on Trump's support in the election, and how the war ends will affect the result more than anything. This lands hard given fourteen IDF soldiers killed by Hezbollah since the April ceasefire. The Times of IsraelThe Times of Israel 

6) Israelis see Netanyahu boxed in with no answer. Yair Golan, the center-left party leader and former general, posted on X that Trump "signs an agreement that funnels billions to the Ayatollahs' regime, leaves the nuclear infrastructure intact, preserves the ballistic threat as is, and throws a lifeline to the murderous regime in Tehran." 

7) Netanyahu's camp is minimizing the rift, which is the tell. Strauchler argued the perception of a rift was overstated, yet a senior Israeli source briefed on the relationship conceded the leaked call was not helpful to Netanyahu ahead of an election he is polling to lose 

Bottom line: the Israeli interpretation is not that Trump betrayed a loyal ally. It is that Israel overpromised a war, Trump caught on, and Netanyahu now has no leverage, no alternative patron, and no way to answer a public humiliation except to deny it is happening.


***


Times of Israel:



Trump: Israel’s war on Hezbollah is too long, too deadly; Syria should fight the group instead

‘Without me, there’d be no Israel,’ president claims at G7 summit; threatens ‘ultimate consequences’ if Iran seeks nukes; MOU to be signed Friday in Swiss mountaintop resort

By Nava Freiberg, Agencies and ToI Staff

16 June 2026, 7:31 pm



US President Donald Trump meets with Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, not seen, during a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the G7 summit, June 16, 2026, in Evian-les-Bains, France. (AP/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)


US President Donald Trump said Tuesday that Syria should replace Israel in the fight against Lebanon’s Hezbollah, arguing that the Jewish state’s war on the Iran-backed terror group has been too prolonged and indiscriminate, and adding that Israel would have been “blown off the face of the earth” if not for him.

He also threatened unspecified “ultimate consequences” if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon in defiance of the US-Iran agreement to end the war, which was signed digitally on Sunday.

Speaking at the G7 summit of global leaders in France, Trump criticized Israel’s conduct in its fight against Hezbollah. He said that the conflict has gone on for too long, suggesting that Israel has been killing too many noncombatants.


“Israel is fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed,” Trump said. “And you don’t have to knock down an apartment house every time you’re looking for somebody. Because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses. And they’re not all Hezbollah, that I can tell you.”

Trump said later: “I’m not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon and with Hezbollah. They should have been able to do the job faster. It just goes on forever. And when that happens, it throws a negative light on the big deal, and that’s the deal with Iran.”


He reiterated that he was upset about Israel’s strike on Hezbollah in Beirut on Sunday, shortly before the interim peace deal between Iran and the US was announced.

“I didn’t like where, two hours before we’re signing the agreement, that there was an attack in Lebanon, in Beirut,” he said.

Israel launched the strike after Hezbollah fired several rockets into Israel.


He referred to Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former Islamist rebel leader and now the president of Syria, saying that he would more effectively lead the fight against Hezbollah.

“I suggested to Israel to let Syria take care of Hezbollah,” Trump said. “Because to be honest with you, I think they’d do a better job of doing it.”

He said of Sharaa: “He’s very capable. And he’s been very good for me. He’s protected everything that I’ve asked for… And if Israel can’t do the job without killing everyone else, he’ll do the job. Syria will do the job.”

Hezbollah had assisted former Syrian dictator Bashar Assad in keeping control during the more-than decade-long Syrian civil war. Sharaa was only eventually able to rout Assad’s forces after Israel severely weakened Hezbollah and killed much of its leadership in late 2024.

US President Donald Trump (L) shakes hands with Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa at the White House in Washington, DC, on November 10, 2025. (Handout of the official Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) / AFP)



Israeli troops are currently stationed deep within southern Lebanon, and the Israeli military has struck targets throughout the country, ever since the Iran-backed Hezbollah terror group attacked Israel on March 2 in support of Tehran.

Later Tuesday, Hezbollah’s media relations office told Reuters that the Shiite organization had received assurances from its backer Iran that it would demand a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon in its next phase of talks with the United States.


An IDF withdrawal will be the result of, and not a precondition for, continuing talks between Tehran and Washington, following the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the two countries on Friday, Hezbollah said.

The group said there would be “no nuclear deal between Iran and the United States unless the Israelis withdraw” from Lebanon.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has publicly warned that any Israeli attack on Lebanon or continued presence in Lebanese territory would constitute a violation of the agreement with the United States.

Location announced for formal signing ceremony

On Sunday, US President Donald Trump announced that Washington and Tehran had signed a memorandum of understanding to extend their ongoing ceasefire by 60 days and to open the Strait of Hormuz, while holding negotiations on a long-term resolution to the conflict over Iran’s nuclear program.

The MOU, already signed digitally, is set to be signed formally in Switzerland on Friday. That same day, Iran and the US will start a new round of negotiations to reach a final agreement.

According to Axios, Trump aides Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner will attend the meetings, alongside US Vice President JD Vance, as will Araghchi and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf.

A military helicopter hovers as leaders arrive to take part in the ‘Summit on Peace’ in Ukraine at the luxury Burgenstock resort, near Lucerne in central Switzerland, on June 15, 2024. (Ludovic MARIN / AFP / File)

The signing ceremony is expected to be held at the Burgenstock mountaintop resort in central Switzerland, according to a statement issued by the Swiss government on Tuesday. The site, located near Lucerne in central Switzerland, is difficult to access and therefore easily secured.

The Swiss foreign ministry said in a statement that it had been in close contact with the US, Iran, Pakistan, and Qatar, regarding the possible signing of a memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran.


“At this stage, the signing is scheduled for Friday, June 19, at Burgenstock in the canton of Nidwalden. The location was proposed by the Pakistani and Qatari mediators, as well as by the US and Iran,” the ministry said.

Vance said Monday that he believes Israel will become a party to the emerging US-Iran deal at some point in the future, adding that the MOU is “about a page and a half, so it is a very general document,” and that many details have been left for the next phase of negotiations.

An administration official, briefing reporters on Monday, said that the text would likely be released in the next 24 to 48 hours, though Trump himself said Monday that it would only be released after the Friday ceremony.

‘Israel would not exist right now’

Also in his comments at the G7, Trump said Israel owes its continued existence to the United States and him personally.

“If it weren’t for the United States of America — with me, because Obama was the opposite — Israel would not exist right now. Israel would have been blown off the face of the earth, 100 percent. And every smart person in Israel knows that,” the US president said.

“Without us, without the United States, there would be no Israel. Without me, there’d be no Israel,” he stressed, “because no other president was willing to do what I did [in tackling Iran].” He said Iran was “two weeks away from having a nuclear weapon” and would have used it against Israel if the US had not intervened.

Trump also praised his relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, following a series of negative comments he made about the premier in recent days, including saying that the premier was “crazy” and had “no fucking judgement.”

US President Donald Trump meets with Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani during a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the G7 summit, June 16, 2026, in Evian-les-Bains, France. (AP/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

Asked whether he is frustrated with Netanyahu after the two clashed over Israel’s bombing of Hezbollah targets in Beirut on Sunday, Trump said: “We have a very good relationship… an unbelievable relationship.”

Trump also warned that “all hell will rain down” on Iran if it attempts to develop, purchase, or otherwise acquire a nuclear weapon.


“They’re not going to acquire a nuclear weapon. If they do, all hell will rain down on them,” Trump said.

He added that the preliminary deal “says it loud and clear. They’re not going to develop it. They’re not going to buy it. They’re not going to do anything with it. And if they do, they suffer unbelievable consequences.”

He said that he only agreed to sign the document after Tehran agreed to adjust the wording so that it prevented them not only from developing a nuclear weapon, but also from purchasing one or acquiring it through some other means.

Trump did not specify what the consequences for doing so would be, however, saying: “I won’t even tell you the consequences. But the consequences are the ultimate consequences. And with that being said, I hope we have a very good relationship.”

“I think it’s going to go pretty quickly,” Trump told reporters about the next phase of negotiations with Iran, stipulated with a 60-day deadline.

“Iran wants to get it done. They have to get back to business, and the relationship is now normalized, so I think it’s going to go pretty quickly,” Trump told reporters during his meeting with Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the president of the United Arab Emirates. “Could go faster, could take longer too, but it could go fast.”

However, European allies have voiced concern that an inexperienced US negotiating team could struggle to secure a robust agreement, potentially leading to a prolonged standoff.

Diplomats and analysts note that Iranian negotiators are highly skilled in nuclear diplomacy, often exploiting weaknesses in their counterparts and buying time to advance their agenda, making the prospect of a comprehensive agreement within 60 days challenging.

In 2015, former US president Barack Obama secured a nuclear deal with Iran in exchange for sanctions relief, a process that took two years to finalize. Trump withdrew the United States from that accord during his first term.

“This deal is a wall to a nuclear weapon. [Obama’s] deal was a road to a nuclear weapon. My deal, they can’t have a nuclear, they get blown up,” Trump said.

Netanyahu made a similar argument in a press conference on Monday evening, saying that while Obama’s deal was not accompanied by a credible military threat if Iran does not comply, the recent war provides such a threat in the case of the current deal.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holds a press conference at the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem, June 15, 2026. (Olivier Fitoussi/POOL)


Iran has long insisted that it does not seek a nuclear weapon, and made such a commitment in the 2015 deal that Trump vilified and withdrew from in 2018.

Both of Trump’s administrations, along with Israel, have refused thus far to take Tehran at its word, something the US president seemed to indicate he was now prepared to do.

Iran, whose leaders frequently call for the destruction of Israel, has always maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, but it has enriched uranium to levels far beyond what is necessary for civilian use and has obstructed inspectors from examining its facilities.
Trump claims he does not ‘believe in regime change’

Continuing his remarks, Trump claimed he had “never cared about regime change” as a goal in the US-Israeli campaign against Tehran, while reiterating his belief that the elimination of so many senior Iranian officials effectively amounts to regime change, even though the Islamic Republic’s theocratic system has remained intact and stable.

“You talk about regime change. I never cared about regime change. It [was] never a part. But I guess you have regime change because you know better than anybody, the first group, they’re all dead. The second group, they’re dead. A part of the third group is gone,” he said, referring to echelons of the Iranian leadership.

“And we’re dealing with people that I think are very rational people. They were nice to deal with. They were strong people, smart people. I think actually they’re smarter than the first and second group, but they’re not radicalized and they’re, you know, looking to help their country,” he continued.

“I don’t believe in regime change,” he added. “And I’ve watched regime changes for years. They never work. It has to just happen [naturally].”

On the first day of the war in late February, Trump indicated that the goal of the strikes in Iran was to topple the regime, and called on the Iranian people to seize the opportunity to take over their government, telling them that “the hour of your freedom is at hand.”

“When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations,” he said at the time.

WEST THEN EXPLOITING INDIA AS A PARTNER, NOW ABANDONING HER

From the FB page of:

Khai Beng Tan

tdrseSnpoo6g30f4gt9l23f47hfu4ct7a21l5c9af09u3tfct71ic2amgagl ·

India is being cut out of the title of the US force dominating Asia, it was revealed just now.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth tweeted on X an hour ago that “US Indo-Pacific Command” will revert to its old name, “US Pacific Command”.

This is the latest of multiple moves from the western allies against India.

- The US attacked three Indian ships last week, killing three sailors. The US left the ships to sink, and the surviving sailors were rescued by Oman.

- Earlier this week, the UK armed forces grabbed an Indian-run ship, the Smyrtos, as it passed through the Straits of Dover on its way to India.

Both acts appear to contravene international law, specialists say.

EXPLOITING INDIA AS A PARTNER

The “Indo-Pacific” name was introduced in May 2018 by the US armed forces to emphasize the US's favoring of India and the Indian Ocean area.

In mid-2025, the US military instructed the international mainstream media to use “Indo-Pacific” in place of “Asia-Pacific”. The media obeyed, as Google searches confirm, with a huge spike in the use of that name.

At the time, the US believed it could exploit India as a partner to maintain western domination over Asia--as specified in US foreign policy.

But the US and its vassal ("ally") the UK appear to have changed attitude to India these days, and so the “Indo” is disappearing from the name with immediate effect. US Indo-Pacific Command is now US Pacific Command.

Hegseth’s announcement of the name reversion today echoes his earlier move – to change Department of Defense to the (admittedly more accurate) Department of War.

ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

The UK seizure is an astonishing story.

On Sunday this week, the UK armed forces grabbed the Smyrtos, as it passed through the English channel on its way to Sikka in India.

The Smyrtos is owned by a Hong Kong-registered company, Zhao Yao Shipping Ltd, and is managed by a company in Tamil Nadu, India.

The UK claimed it was a stateless ship carrying Russian oil – but the seizure would still be illegal under international law, said Craig Murray, former Head of Maritime Section of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Just because the US or an ally creates a sanction, that has no force of law in a transnational context.

DIRTY TRICK

Murray shared an untold story. When the Smyrtos began its journey, it was flying the Cameroonian flag and was listed on the Cameroonian register.

But after it had set sail, the EU and UK threatened to halt development aid to Cameroon unless they removed Russia-friendly vessels from their shipping register.

“So the UK blackmailed Cameroon into deregistering the ship. Then, before the ship could reach a friendly port, the UK boarded it because it had been deregistered,” said Murray.

It may surprise some people that western nations should do such a dirty trick. “The UK actions are patently – and deliberately – unreasonable,” Murray added.

But the UK public is not hearing the real facts – it is “an astonishing story which the media will not tell you”, he said.

MODI IN A SPOT

These actions put Indian leader Narenda Modi in a spot. He has been energetically cozying up to the United States and Israel, despite their unpopularity among the people of India.

Now his people are asking: when will he give India a more independent, assertive stance?