| The Maritime Security Forum is pleased to provide you with a product, in the form of a daily newsletter, through which we present the most relevant events and information on naval issues, especially those related to maritime security and other related areas. It aims to present a clear and concise assessment of the most recent and relevant news in this area, with references to sources of information. We hope that this newsletter will prove to be a useful resource for you, providing a comprehensive insight into the complicated context of the field for both specialists and anyone interested in the dynamics of events in the field of maritime security. |
IDF Troops Storm 1-Km Hamas Tunnel, Then Find This In Terror Room| Exclusive Gaza Hotbed Video
MS Daily brief-27 February 2026
- MS Daily Brief-en
- Iran’s air defence system
- The need to reevaluate maritime doctrine following the introduction of maritime drones into the Romanian Navy
- Artificial Intelligence in Defense: Between Technological Enthusiasm and Operational Reality
- 2026 – Will the Munich Security Conference be without expectations?
- The implementation of naval drones in the Romanian Naval Forces – a necessity
- The multi-domain deadlock in the context of Romania and the Black Sea
Contents
News from Ukraine | Unexpected Ukrainian attack! Special forces were used | Russians are shocked. 1
Danish prime minister calls snap election in hopes of ‘Greenland effect’ 3
Pakistan bombs Kabul after intensified conflict on the border with Afghanistan. 5
Cuba vows to combat “terrorist aggression” after attack on US-registered boat 8
US-Iran nuclear talks end without agreement as threat of war looms. 10
Update on the war in Ukraine: IMF approves $8.1 billion loan for Kiev. 12
Trump news in brief: No deal in Iran talks as US attack looms. 13
Trump’s 2026 State of the Union Address in the Spotlight 16
The Risk of Ignoring Foreign Policy – By Emma Ashford, Senior Researcher. 16
Tensions, accusations, and the potential for diplomacy with Iran. 17
The View from Pyongyang -By Rachel Minyoung Lee, senior researcher. 18
Trump’s priorities in two charts — By J. James Kim, director of the Korea program… 20
News from Ukraine | Unexpected Ukrainian attack! Special forces were used | Russians are shocked
Hannah Spencer was elected as the party’s first MP in northern England, while the Labour Party saw a 25.3% drop in votes compared to 2024
Josh Halliday Northern England Editor
Friday, February 27, 2026, 05:32 CET
The Green Party has secured a historic victory in the Gorton and Denton by-election, dealing a significant blow to Keir Starmer.
Hannah Spencer, a local plumber and Green Party councillor, was elected as the party’s first MP in northern England after overturning Labour’s 13,000-vote majority.
Labour came third in this close race, 5, 616 votes behind the Greens, who won 14,980 votes, while Reform UK finished second with 10,578 votes. The result represents a 25.3% drop in Labour Party votes compared to 2024.
The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats lost their deposits as they secured less than 5% of the vote, both below 2%.
The Greens’ victory in a Labour Party stronghold, the first ever in a Westminster by-election, establishes the party as a serious political force and a credible alternative to Reform UK.
This will deepen Labour MPs’ concerns that Starmer’s party is losing votes on the left in its effort to counter the rise of Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party.
The result will also prompt closer scrutiny of the prime minister’s decision to prevent Andy Burnham from standing for the Labour Party in a city where he enjoys significant public support.
This is the first time in almost 100 years that the Gorton area of Manchester has not been represented by a Labour MP.
In an emotional victory speech, Spencer—who becomes the Green Party’s fifth MP—said people are being “sucked dry.”
She said: “Instead of working for a good life, we are working to line the pockets of billionaires. We are being bled dry. And I don’t think it’s extreme or radical to believe that hard work should provide you with a good life.”
Spencer emphasized community solidarity and said she would denounce politicians “who constantly make our communities scapegoats and blame them for all of society’s problems. My Muslim friends and neighbors are just like me — they are people.”
The by-election was triggered by Andrew Gwynne’s resignation for health reasons in January. The former MP was under investigation by parliament for offensive messages he sent in a WhatsApp group of local Labor Party figures.
On election day, Labor Party members seemed more confident, as polls showed they were virtually tied with the Green Party. They hoped that voters would remain loyal to the Labour Party, rather than supporting an insurgent party and risking a Reform Party victory.
However, the Green Party’s energetic campaign—Spencer almost instantly became famous locally as “Hannah the plumber ,” while thousands of volunteers traveled from across the UK to support her — was enough to secure victory.
Sources within the Labour Party said the party had not been forgiven by many Muslim voters for its stance on Gaza — an issue exploited by the Greens in the Manchester part of the constituency.
“Gaza has not been forgotten or forgiven,” said a Labour councillor in the constituency. “Many of us are now worried about our seats.”
A few hours after the polls closed at 10 p.m., Labour Party deputy leader Lucy Powell, confirmed the defeat to journalists watching the vote count at Manchester Central.
Powell, who was the only member of the Labour Party leadership to support Burnham’s bid for the position in last month’s vote, said Starmer was “committed to his role” when asked about the future of the prime minister.
She said: “I know Keir is the right person for the job and that he is doing it very well. It’s also about politics — we need to clarify our policies so that people know we are on their side, that we are defending them.”
Voter turnout in the closely watched constituency was 47.6%, slightly lower than in the 2024 general election.
The Labour Party tried to frame the by-election as a choice between “unity and hope” or the “toxic division” of the Reform Party, whose candidate, Matt Goodwin, was a surprise choice in a constituency where about 28% of the population is Muslim.
Goodwin, an academic turned GB News presenter, called for policies to combat the “Islamization of British society” and claimed that British-born people from ethnic minorities are not necessarily British.
Speaking to journalists upon his arrival at the vote count, Goodwin blamed his defeat on “a coalition of Islamists and woke progressives” who, according to him, “united to dominate the constituency.”
He accused the Green Party of “sectarian politics,” in part by writing to voters in Urdu: “This type of campaigning, in different languages, targeting specific groups based on their characteristics, is unacceptable in modern Britain.”
Asked if he was claiming the result was illegitimate, he did not respond, being rushed off.
Starmer’s party sent a series of cabinet ministers to Gorton and Denton in an attempt to shore up support for Labour, but the prime minister was notably absent from the constituency until this week.
The Labour leader has faced weeks of damning headlines in the press over his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as US ambassador, despite knowing that the former minister had maintained a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein after the paedophile financier’s arrest.
Starmer also faced intense criticism from Labour MPs over his allies’ decision to block Burnham from standing in Gorton and Denton in an attempt to prevent a leadership challenge.
The close contest has also been marked by accusations of dubious polling and dirty tricks.
The Labour Party and the Green Party have repeatedly attacked each other, a sign that the by-election will be won or lost as a result of the battle on the left, with the Reform Party potentially benefiting from a split in the vote.
Meanwhile, Reform was summoned to the High Court on Wednesday over letters purporting to be from a “concerned neighbor” that did not bear the party’s political imprint, as required by electoral law. Farage’s party blamed an error by its printing supplier, which took responsibility.
Danish prime minister calls snap election in hopes of ‘Greenland effect’
Mette Frederiksen hopes to capitalize on her stance against Donald Trump’s attempt to claim Arctic territory.
Miranda Bryant Nordic correspondent
Thursday, February 26, 2026, 6:02 p.m. CET
The Danish prime minister has called early elections to capitalize on the “Greenland effect” after Donald Trump’s threats to invade the Arctic territory.
Mette Frederiksen, who has held the position since 2019, is required by Danish law to call an election by October 31. Setting a date eight months in advance appears to be an attempt to capitalize on improved opinion polls following November’s disastrous local elections, in which the Social Democrats lost control of Copenhagen for the first time in a century.
Last month’s polls showed her party gaining momentum, partly due to its handling of the crisis in Greenland. Frederiksen also promised a wealth tax to fund schools.
After hinting at an announcement on social media, she entered the Danish parliament on Thursday, smiling and hugging her colleagues, including Greenlandic politician Aaja Chemnitz, before handing the president a note requesting the floor for a special statement.
“Winter is finally over, and the days are getting longer and brighter. Spring will soon be here, and the Danish people will go to the polls,” she said, announcing the March 24 vote.
Speaking to a packed chamber, Frederiksen said the election would be “decisive” for Denmark and the future of Europe, promising to rearm and “stand on our own two feet.”
“Dear Danes, today I asked His Majesty the King to call an election to the Folketing,” she said. “Whether I continue to be your prime minister depends on how strong a mandate you give the Social Democrats.”
Frederiksen’s profile on the international stage has grown considerably in the last two months, during which she has rallied European leaders against what could have been an existential threat to the NATO alliance in Greenland.
Other centrist and liberals have gained popularity by opposing Trump, including Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who stood up to the US president’s threats to annex his northern neighbor.
Frederiksen said Denmark would have to redefine its relationship with the US, which was considered its closest ally.
Denmark and Greenland, a former colony that is now largely autonomous but whose foreign and security policy is run from Copenhagen, are in talks with the US about Arctic security.
Frederiksen said: “These will be decisive elections, because in the next four years we, the Danes and Europeans, will have to fend for ourselves. We must define our relationship with the United States and we must rearm to ensure peace on our continent.
We must remain united in Europe and we must secure the future of the Danish community.”
The community includes the Faroe Islands.
Frederiksen’s stance on Greenland appears to have worked in her favor domestically. A poll conducted by Megafon for TV2 last month showed support for the Social Democrats rising to 22.7% of the vote and 41 seats in parliament, up from 32 seats at the beginning of December.
In November, before Trump’s new threats about Greenland, Frederiksen’s party suffered widespread defeats across the country.
The latest polls would put the red bloc — including Frederiksen’s Social Democrats and smaller left-wing parties — at 87 seats, more than the 71 held by the current government.
Peter Thisted Dinesen, a professor of politics at the University of Copenhagen, said US pressure had had a “mobilizing” effect on Frederiksen.
“The crisis in Greenland has undoubtedly helped her by demonstrating her ability to lead the country in an international crisis,” he added. “The Social Democrats are doing better in the polls than after the local elections and have presented a significant number of new initiatives targeting different voter groups.”
Dinesen said the initiatives included Fødevarechecken, a food support program. “Polls indicate that this may have had some effect,” he said, noting that the right-wing nationalist Danish People’s Party has fallen in the polls.
Announcing plans for a wealth tax that would generate 6 billion kroner (£700 million) for primary schools, Frederiksen told parliament: “A wealth tax should reduce inequality and create a better balance in our country.”
She also proposed abolishing property tax for homes worth less than 1 million kroner.
In her speech, Frederiksen thanked Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, who is the leader of the Moderates, and Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen, the leader of the Liberals, for their work in her coalition, joking: “If an elephant and a camel can become friends, so can political opponents.”
However, she said she would remain open to possible coalition options after the election: “Could it be a choice of the political center again? Yes.”,,,,
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/26/danish-pm-calls-election-seeking-greenland-bounce
Pakistan bombs Kabul after intensified conflict on the border with Afghanistan
The escalation of violence between the unstable neighbors makes the Qatari-brokered truce seem increasingly fragile.
Kate Lamb and agents
Friday, February 27, 2026, 04:23 CET
Pakistan bombed the Afghan capital Kabul and two other provinces on Friday, hours after a cross-border attack, the latest escalation of violence between the unstable neighbors who signed a Qatari-brokered ceasefire in 2025.
After months of tit-for-tat clashes, Afghan forces attacked Pakistani border troops on Thursday evening in what the Taliban government called retaliation for previous deadly airstrikes.
A few hours later, at least three explosions were heard in Kabul on Friday morning, but there was no immediate information on the exact location of the attacks in the Afghan capital or on possible casualties.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Friday that his country’s armed forces could “crush” the attackers and that the nation stands “shoulder to shoulder with its armed forces,” while the country’s defense minister declared “open war” on its neighbor.
In a post on X on Friday, Defense Minister Khawaja Mohammad Asif said Pakistan had hoped for peace in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of NATO forces and expected the Taliban to focus on the welfare of the Afghan people and regional stability.
Instead, he said, the Taliban had gathered militants from around the world and begun “exporting terrorism.”
“Our patience has run out. Now it is open warfare between us,” he said.
Afghan government officials did not respond to Asif’s comments.
Relations between the two neighboring countries have deteriorated in recent months, with land border crossings largely closed since bloody fighting in October that killed more than 70 people on both sides.
Islamabad accuses Afghanistan of failing to take action against militant groups carrying out attacks in Pakistan, a charge denied by the Taliban government.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres urges both sides to protect civilians in accordance with international law, and “to continue to seek diplomatic solutions to any differences,” UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric said.
Commenting on Friday’s air strikes, Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi said the attacks on Afghanistan were an “appropriate response.”
“The Pakistani armed forces have given an appropriate response to the open aggression of the Afghan Taliban,” Naqvi said.
Government spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said Pakistan also carried out air strikes in Kandahar in the south and in Pakistan’s southeastern province.
Afghanistan said its military launched a cross-border attack into Pakistan on Thursday night in retaliation for deadly Pakistani airstrikes on Afghan border areas on Sunday, and claimed to have captured more than a dozen Pakistani army posts.
Efforts to reach a lasting agreement between the two nations have failed, with negotiations and an initial ceasefire brokered by Qatar and Turkey in October appearing increasingly unstable.
Afghanistan’s Defense Ministry said 55 Pakistani soldiers were killed in Thursday’s attack, including some whose bodies were taken to Afghanistan, while “several others were captured alive.” Afghanistan said its own casualties amounted to eight dead and 11 wounded.
However, Pakistani Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said that the number of Pakistani soldiers killed was two, and three were wounded. He said that 36 Afghan fighters were reported dead.
Mosharraf Ali Zaidi, spokesman for Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, denied that any Pakistani soldiers had been captured.
Pakistan and Afghanistan share a 2,611 km border, known as the Durand Line, which Afghanistan has not officially recognized.
Afghan authorities were evacuating a refugee camp near the Torkham border crossing after several refugees were wounded and 13 civilians, including women and children, were killed, authorities said.
On the Pakistani side of the border, local police said residents were also being evacuated to safer areas, while some Afghan refugees waiting to cross back into Afghanistan were also moved to safe places.
Tensions between the two neighboring countries have been high for months, and in October there were deadly clashes at the border that killed dozens of soldiers, civilians, and suspected militants. The violence followed explosions in Kabul that Afghan officials blamed on Pakistan. At the time, Islamabad carried out attacks inside Afghanistan to target militant hideouts.
,,,, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/27/afghanistan-pakistan-strikes-kabul
Information obtained by the Guardian paints a disturbing picture of violence committed by the Ukrainian cell of the terrorist group
Thursday, February 26, 2026, 2:00 p.m. CET
The Ukrainian wing of an internationally banned terrorist organization suspected of links to Russia continues to claim responsibility for multiple murders in Ukraine after being implicated in the brutal assassination of an intelligence officer in Kiev last summer.
In a post on Telegram, the Ukrainian cell of the Base organization—founded in the US but with a network of cells around the world—claimed “a successful operation to eliminate an enemy agent in Odessa” in a car bomb attack, which was later reported on in the local Ukrainian media.
“This traitor, whose name we cannot reveal yet for reasons related to the investigation, served Ukraine, but his heart was sold to the enemy,” the post said, suggesting that the “border service” officer was helping Russia in the south of the country. “This action is just the beginning.”
Since April last year, The Base has been offering money to followers and hired assassins to kill military and government officials in Ukraine, coinciding with allegations that its American founder, Rinaldo Nazzaro, was a spy for the Kremlin.
Nazzaro did not respond to a request for comment, but has previously claimed that he does not control the Ukrainian cell and said last year that it “was not run by the Russian government.”
The former Pentagon contractor and Department of Homeland Security employee has strongly denied allegations of coordinating with Russian intelligence and continuing sabotage operations in Europe. Despite this, Nazzaro has been consistently linked to violent cells in Spain — where members of The Base were arrested with a cache of weapons late last year — and in Belgium and the Netherlands, among other European countries.
But counterterrorism experts who track the terrorist group have long described how The Base’s ties to Russia cannot be so easily dismissed.
“The assassination claim in Operation Base in Ukraine shows that they want to be seen as operational, a continuing threat and, based on their statement, firmly opposed to the Russian government,” said Joshua Fisher-Birch, an extremism analyst at the Counter Extremism Project, which has been tracking the group for several years.
“This last point is important because of the strong, though still unproven, appearance that The Base and its Ukrainian affiliate are connected to Russian sabotage operations and have links to Russian intelligence services.”
Fisher-Birch pointed out that the Ukrainian cell, for example, “has only publicized attacks on Ukrainian people, buildings, and infrastructure,” and not on Russian military personnel who invaded the country.
Information leaked from a secure chat group used by the Ukrainian cell of The Base was obtained by the Guardian through a former member and paints a disturbing picture.
“This was one of [The Base’s] operations,” the source said, referring to an image of a decapitated corpse of a man dressed in military uniform next to an SUV somewhere in Ukraine. “Members of the group tracked an employee of the recruitment center in Kiev and waited for the moment when he would be alone.”
Other images showed Kalashnikov assault rifles and other weapons, a bound prisoner captured near two masked members of The Base, and the group’s propaganda. All were verified by multiple artificial intelligence image detectors and indicated with certainty that they were created by humans and were not fake. The anonymous source, who first contacted The Guardian newspaper through its encrypted information line and provided blurry images of his military documents, said the group consisted of about 20 people and was extremely dangerous.
“The main core of [The Base] is in Kyiv,” they said. “I am 100% sure they have followers in Odessa and Kharkiv as well.”
Over the past year, The Base has posted videos and images of police and army vehicles burned inside Ukraine, with at least one image showing an arson attack on a government building. The Base says it intends to force the Ukrainian government, under pressure, to grant it an ethnic white state in the west of the country or face a growing neo-Nazi insurgency.
There are legitimate questions about The Base and its links to Russian sabotage—a major security concern for European intelligence agencies—and it is suspected of being a cog in the Kremlin’s covert operations, which pay anonymous criminals to carry out terrorist attacks across the continent and within Ukraine.
Fisher-Birch has analyzed the images and considers them to be serious.
“The images indicate that the group has at least six members in Ukraine, is willing to carry out brutal executions, and fully embraces the image of neo-Nazism, either out of genuine ideology or to support Russian propaganda views,” he said.
,,, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/26/the-base-far-right-terror-group-ukraine-russia
Cuba vows to combat “terrorist aggression” after attack on US-registered boat
Cuban president says country “will defend itself with determination” after deadly attack by exiles off coast
Ruaridh Nicoll in Havana
Thursday, February 26, 2026, 8:15 p.m. CET
Cuba has vowed to defend itself against any “terrorist and mercenary aggression” a day after border guards said they killed four exiles on a Florida-registered speedboat that opened fire on a patrol.
Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel wrote on X that the Caribbean country “will defend itself with determination and firmness” after the incident in which six other people on the boat were wounded.
The incident has the potential to intensify tensions between Washington and Havana, which have been heightened since US forces captured Cuba’s main ally, Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, and the Trump administration imposed an oil blockade on the island in January.
However, it appears that talks between the two countries are continuing, and both governments seem eager to calm the situation. Díaz-Canel preceded his comments by writing: “Cuba does not attack or threaten.”
On Thursday, the Miami Herald reported that US officials met with the nephew of former Cuban President Raúl Castro on the sidelines of Caricom, the annual meeting of Caribbean leaders, which took place in St Kitts and Nevis.
Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, 41, does not hold an official position in the Cuban government, but remains close to his grandfather, who wields enormous influence in the country’s power structure.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was attending the Caricom session, said the US government had no connection to the incident and told reporters: “We are still gathering information.”
However, the information available remains vague.
The attack took place in a chain of islands east of the tourist beach of Varadero, off the northern coast of the island, according to the Cuban Interior Ministry.
The boat, a small, fast center console boat, appears to have come from the Florida Keys and is believed to have been carrying weapons.
“Its purpose was to go and fight against a criminal and tyrannical [government], to see if that would cause the people to rise up,” said Wilfredo Beyra, head of the Cuban Republican Party in Tampa.
The existence of exiles attempting to provoke uprisings against the Cuban communist government has a long history. Cuban authorities said the occupants fired on border guards when they were intercepted, wounding the Cuban commander and a border guard.
The Interior Ministry said it had already arrested another member of the group who had flown to the island to meet the boat and who had “confessed.”
The boat appears to have been a 24-foot Pro-Line model, typically used for inshore fishing, and may have been stolen. Experts find it unlikely that this boat would have been used to attempt a sea landing in Cuba, more than 90 miles from Florida, given that the 10 occupants would have been cramped and the boat did not have a particularly powerful engine.
Cuban authorities say the survivors were all Cuban residents in the US, who are now accused of intending to “infiltrate for terrorist purposes.” The ministry also said that all of them had criminal records in Cuba and were carrying assault rifles, pistols, Molotov cocktails, and other military-style equipment.
A US official said that at least two people were US citizens, including one of the deceased, and a third person had a K-1 visa, which allows spouses of US citizens to settle in the US.
Several of the wounded were apparently being treated at a hospital in Santa Clara, about 150 miles east of Havana, which was heavily guarded by Interior Ministry troops, Reuters reported.
“There is a lot of Sturm und Drang [about this] in Miami,” said a prominent figure in the exile community.
There are also concerns among some exiles that US efforts to change the regime will be affected by such an independent attack. “There are some segments of the Cuban exile community that have declared two days of mourning,” said Michael Bustamante, chair of the Cuban and Cuban-American Studies Department at the University of Miami. “But I’ve also seen a lot of sarcastic comments asking, ‘What the hell were they thinking?’
“There is a feeling that, at this point, the US is applying restrictive measures and putting the Cuban government in a corner. This could actually give the Cuban government a chance to survive.”
Bustamante said that “the Cuban revolution began with a sea raid.” Granma, the boat that transported Fidel and Raúl Castro, as well as Che Guevara and 79 other people from Mexico in 1956, is now on display at the Museum of the Revolution in Havana.
,,, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/26/what-to-know-cuba-boat-attack
US-Iran nuclear talks end without agreement as threat of war looms
Mediators say new talks will be held next week, but there is no clear evidence that the two sides are any closer to an agreement on uranium enrichment
Patrick Wintour in London and Andrew Roth in Washington
Thursday, February 26, 2026, 10:53 p.m. CET
High-stakes talks between the US and Iran on the future of Tehran’s nuclear program ended Thursday without an agreement, as the White House considers a military operation that would mark its biggest intervention in the Middle East in decades.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said “significant progress” had been made in the talks, and mediators in Oman predicted that negotiations would resume at a technical level next week in Vienna.
However, there is no immediate evidence to support suggestions that the two sides have moved closer on fundamental issues related to Iran’s right to enrich uranium and the future of its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium.
Nevertheless, Iranian and Omani mediators have tried to present the negotiations in an optimistic light, presumably in an attempt to avert the US threat to launch attacks with its fleet of aircraft and warships that have gathered in the region.
Araghchi described the negotiations as “one of the most intense and longest rounds of negotiations .” He confirmed that further contacts would take place in less than a week.
The indirect talks in Geneva took place in two sessions, with reports that the US team led by Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, was disappointed with the proposals presented by Iran.
The brevity of the second session of talks seemed ominous, observers said.
Iranian officials criticized US media reports suggesting that Tehran would be forced to halt enrichment and allow its stocks of highly enriched uranium to leave Iran.
At one point, to the frustration of the Tehran team, Witkoff had to interrupt his talks with Araghchi to drive across the Swiss city to meet with Ukrainian negotiators.
The Omani mediators rejected the suggestion of a breakdown, arguing that new and creative ideas were being exchanged with unprecedented openness in what was considered to be the third and decisive round of indirect consultations.
The US is demanding permanent guarantees from Iran on uranium enrichment and inspection mechanisms that would convince Washington that Tehran will never be able to build a nuclear weapon. Iran has always denied that it has such an objective.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also said that Iran’s refusal to discuss its ballistic missile program is a problem, prompting Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei to complain about the inconsistency of US negotiation demands.
The talks are taking place against the backdrop of Trump’s unprecedented buildup of US assets in the region, including two aircraft carrier groups, attack aircraft, aircraft refueling equipment, and submarines equipped with Tomahawk missiles.
At the heart of the discussions is the question of whether the US will try to ban Tehran from almost any form of uranium enrichment. The right to enrich uranium domestically has long been considered a symbol of Iranian national sovereignty and was recognized by the US in the 2015 nuclear agreement.
Part of the dispute over enrichment may be postponed, as Trump has claimed that Iran’s three main nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan were destroyed by US bombs last June, making it technically impossible to enrich uranium in large quantities in the foreseeable future.
Tehran has refused to allow the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to inspect the extent of the damage to these facilities following the US attack. Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to inspect the extent of the damage caused to these facilities by the US attack.
Rubio said on Wednesday: “Right now, they’re not enriching uranium, but they’re trying to get to the point where they can eventually do that.”
The US demand that the three facilities be permanently dismantled would conflict with Iran’s proposal that low-level enrichment be allowed under UN supervision, possibly after three to five years. The US has not previously opposed such a plan.
Another sticking point concerns the fate of Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity, close to the level needed for nuclear weapons. The IAEA says Tehran has not yet identified the location of the 400 kg stockpile — enough to build five to six bombs with a yield similar to the one that destroyed Nagasaki in 1945. The IAEA also estimated last May that Iran had 8,000 kg of uranium enriched to 20% or less.
The highly enriched uranium reserves could be diluted in Iran, as Tehran proposes, or exported to Russia or the US. It would be a major concession on Iran’s part to send its entire 8,000 kg reserve to the US, even if this would lead to the lifting of many economic sanctions imposed by the US and the UN.
An Iranian official in Geneva insisted: “The principles of zero enrichment forever, dismantling nuclear facilities, and transferring uranium stocks to the US are completely rejected.”
Trump now has the military means to attack Iran, either as part of a broader attack aimed at regime change or to carry out a more targeted attack intended to force Tehran to adopt a more flexible negotiating position. Trump’s coercive deadlines for negotiations have always been flexible, but his military commanders will not want to maintain such a large and costly concentration of forces for long.
Trump is under domestic pressure to prove that he has not led the US into a dead end in negotiations, with Democrats calling for a vote in Congress on what they describe as his war of choice. An Associated Press poll this week showed that 56% of Americans do not trust Trump to make the right decision on the use of military force outside the US.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi has taken center stage in the negotiations because his approval is needed to convince Washington that Iran’s assurances about low-level enrichment in the future can be technically verified.
Tehran also insists that it will not negotiate non-nuclear issues. It has ruled out including its ballistic missile program or its support for “resistance groups” in the Middle East in the talks. Iran describes its ballistic missiles, some with a range of 1,300 miles (2,000 km), as purely defensive.
Rubio said Wednesday that the ballistic missile program will have to be addressed at some point, acknowledging that the issue is not on the immediate agenda but cannot be excluded from future discussions.
He said, “Iran refuses to discuss with us or anyone else the range of its missiles, and that is a big problem for us. Iran has missiles whose range is increasing every year, and that could pose a threat to the United States because the missiles could reach American territory.” He noted that short-range missiles could also strike US bases in the region.
Update on the war in Ukraine: IMF approves $8.1 billion loan for Kiev
The fund says the loan will solve Ukraine’s balance of payments problem while stimulating reconstruction and economic growth prospects. What we know on day 1,465
Guardian staff and agents
Friday, February 27, 2026, 02:05 CET
The International Monetary Fund said its executive board approved a four-year, $8.1 billion loan for Ukraine, of which $1.5 billion will be disbursed immediately. The IMF said Thursday that the new agreement to extend financing facilities to Ukraine will help consolidate an international support package worth $136. 5 billion for the war-torn country, which marked the fourth anniversary of the Russian invasion this week. IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said the loan would address Ukraine’s balance of payments problem and restore medium-term external viability, while boosting prospects for reconstruction and after the war ends and help facilitate Ukraine’s efforts to join the EU.
Ukrainian and US officials met in Geneva on Thursday for talks on post-war reconstruction, despite the deadlock in negotiations with Russia, and officials in Kyiv hoped to finalize key details of an agreement at a trilateral meeting early next month. Top Ukrainian negotiator Rustem Umerov said participants in the meeting spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy after it ended.
Zelenskyy, who spoke with US President Donald Trump on Wednesday, said the trilateral talks would likely take place in Abu Dhabi in early March and would aim to prepare the ground for a meeting between the leaders of Ukraine and Russia.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, held talks with US officials in Geneva on Thursday, Russian news agency RIA reported. Dmitriev declined to comment on the outcome of the meeting, RIA said. Umerov said negotiators were working on economic and security issues to “make the next trilateral meeting with the US and Russia as substantive as possible.”
Romania sent fighter jets on Thursday after a drone violated its national airspace during a Russian attack on Ukrainian infrastructure near the border, the defense ministry said, marking the second airspace violation in two days. The EU and NATO member state has a 650 km land border with Ukraine and has repeatedly recorded violations of its airspace and debris falling on its territory since Russia began attacking Kiev’s ports on the Danube.
Ukrainian missiles struck the Russian city of Belgorod, causing serious damage to energy facilities and cutting off electricity, water, and heating, the regional governor said Friday morning. The attack on the city of Belgorod, located 40 km from the Ukrainian border, and the surrounding district was the second in five days to cause serious damage.
Russia’s Defense Ministry said Thursday that its air defense units shot down 220 Ukrainian drones in a nine-hour period, 24 of which were heading for Moscow. The ministry’s latest statement said 53 drones were intercepted and destroyed in a three-hour period that ended at 11 p.m. Many of the drones were intercepted over regions in central Russia. The ministry said 12 of them were targeting Moscow.
,,, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/27/ukraine-war-briefing-imf-approves-81bn-loan-for-kyiv
Trump news in brief: No deal in Iran talks as US attack looms
Iranian foreign minister says “significant progress” has been made and new talks are expected – Thursday’s top US political stories in brief
The Guardian team
Friday, February 27, 2026, 3:00 a.m. CET
High-stakes talks between the US and Iran over the future of Tehran’s nuclear program ended Thursday without an agreement, as the White House considers a military operation that would mark its biggest intervention in the Middle East in decades.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, said that “significant progress” had been made in the talks, and mediators in Oman predicted that negotiations would resume at a technical level next week in Vienna. Araghchi later confirmed that new contacts would take place in less than a week.
However, there was no immediate evidence to support suggestions that the two sides had narrowed their differences on fundamental issues related to Iran’s right to enrich uranium and the future of its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium.
The indirect talks in Geneva took place in two sessions, with reports that the US team led by Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, was disappointed with the proposals presented by Iran.
Observers said that the short duration of the second session of talks seemed inauspicious.
Nuclear talks between the US and Iran end without agreement, while the threat of war looms
However, Iranian and Omani mediators tried to present the talks in an optimistic light, probably in an attempt to avoid the US threat to launch attacks with its fleet of aircraft and warships that have gathered in the region.
Epstein files contain explicit but unsubstantiated allegations that Trump abused a minor
Three memoranda describing four interviews conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2019 contain explicit but unsubstantiated allegations that Donald Trump sexually abused a woman when she was a minor in the early 1980s with the help of Jeffrey Epstein, according to an analysis of the documents by the Guardian.
Democrats in four states are trying to ban ICE employees from holding public office in the future
Backed by billions of dollars from Congress, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has hired thousands of new officers to carry out Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign, in an effort he has compared to “wartime recruitment.” In several states, Democratic lawmakers want applicants to think twice before joining.
Columbia student arrested was released after Mamdani’s talks with Trump
The Columbia University student arrested and detained Thursday morning by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been released, according to social media. The student, Elmina Aghayeva, confirmed her release on social media shortly after New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani confirmed that Donald Trump had agreed to release Aghayeva following an unannounced meeting between the two leaders.
Hillary Clinton accuses Republicans of “fishing expedition” in Epstein testimony
Hillary Clinton on Thursday issued a stern rebuke to a congressional committee investigating her alleged ties to Jeffrey Epstein, accusing its Republican members of engaging in a “fishing expedition” designed to cover up and distract attention from Donald Trump’s actions.
Cuba vows to combat “terrorist aggression” after attack on US-registered boat
Cuba has vowed to defend itself against any “terrorist and mercenary aggression,” a day after border guards said they killed four exiles on a Florida-registered speedboat that opened fire on a patrol.
“Extremely low IQ and cries like a baby”: Donald Trump renews attack on Robert De Niro
Donald Trump has responded to a recent podcast appearance by Robert De Niro, in which he called the president an “idiot.”
Speaking on Monday’s episode of The Best People with Nicole Wallace, De Niro, a longtime critic of Trump’s politics, morals, and competence, said, “He’s an idiot. We have to get rid of him. He’s going to destroy the country.”
What else happened today:
Employees of Whirlpool, the largest US appliance manufacturer and supporter of Donald Trump’s tariff policies, are criticizing the company for cutting jobs at a factory in Iowa while increasing production in Mexico.
Netflix has abandoned its planned takeover of Warner Bros Discovery, refusing to increase its bid for the media conglomerate’s Hollywood studios and streaming business after deeming rival Paramount Skydance’s offer “superior.”
When Aliya Rahman accepted the invitation from Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, to attend the State of the Union address, she said she had no intention of disrupting Donald Trump’s high-profile speech.
Melania Trump will lead a session of the United Nations Security Council on Monday, coinciding with the US taking over the body’s rotating monthly presidency, the White House announced.
American ice hockey star Brady Tkachuk said he did not appreciate an AI video released by the White House in which he appears insulting Canadians, saying: “They booed our national anthem, so I had to go out there and teach those maple syrup-eating bastards a lesson.”
,,, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/26/trump-news-at-a-glance-briefing-latest-updates
Trump’s 2026 State of the Union Address in the Spotlight
Stimson experts provide a quick analysis of President Trump’s State of the Union Address and its implications for international security and foreign policy
On February 24, 2026, President Trump delivered the longest State of the Union address in US history. Focusing primarily on the strength of the US economy and military, the president provided an overview of domestic concerns and a brief review of his international priorities.
Stimson experts share their thoughts on the main global takeaways, from the recent military operation in Venezuela and ongoing tensions with Iran to the notable absence of foreign policy content in the speech, offering critical perspectives on the Trump administration’s priorities in the days and months ahead.
The Risk of Ignoring Foreign Policy – By Emma Ashford, Senior Researcher
Foreign policy is sometimes an afterthought in the State of the Union address. Presidents are happy to use it to tout their achievements on the international stage or to talk about America’s greatness, but they rarely get into the details of policy. Even by those standards, however, last night’s speech was particularly superficial in terms of foreign policy substance. The president did not talk about foreign policy until more than an hour into his long speech, and when he did, it was more like an hour of storytelling — the president recalling in often gory detail the impressive military missions accomplished under his presidency — than any concrete attempt to justify policy or strategy to the American people.
Although the speech took place on the fourth anniversary of the war in Ukraine, the president was silent on the subject, mentioning only his hopes for peace and his successes in getting Europeans to pay for the weapons now reaching Ukraine. On Venezuela, he focused on the January 2026 military operation and said little about the country’s future. Even on Iran, where there was widespread speculation that the president might offer a justification or direction for the massive buildup of military forces in the Middle East, listeners instead got a standard speech about the many evils of the Tehran regime. No concrete policy was presented.
This absence of foreign policy in the speech was probably to be expected. Although the Trump administration focused heavily on foreign policy in its first year—not unusual for second-term presidents—Americans are much more concerned with the economy, the cost of living, and issues related to the dinner table. The president’s speech focused instead on this issue.
In practice, however, the president’s choice to focus on the cost of living and the absence of clear justifications for strengthening military forces against Iran are contradictory. Donald Trump rightly argued during both of his election campaigns that the American people are tired of foreign wars and that decision-makers should instead put America first. Less than a third of Americans support military action against Iran. Nevertheless, the president appears to be seriously considering starting an open war in the Middle East without a clear strategic justification—a war that could push gasoline prices and the cost of living for Americans to record highs. The administration may want to consider why it did not emphasize foreign policy in the State of the Union address and what that says about the wisdom and popularity of such a choice.
Tensions, accusations, and the potential for diplomacy with Iran
By Barbara Slavin, distinguished fellow
Those who expected President Trump to announce American attacks on Iran—or to present detailed arguments for a new war—were disappointed. Instead, the president listed a series of complaints about Iran’s foreign and domestic policies, including its role in the deaths of American soldiers during the Iraq war and the killing of thousands of Iranians during the January protests.
However, his focus remained on Iran’s nuclear program as a potential casus belli. Just six months after claiming to have “destroyed” Iran’s nuclear program during a 12-day conflict triggered by Israel — and amid the largest US military buildup in the region since 2003 — Trump asserted, without offering any evidence, that Iran was once again “pursuing” nuclear weapons “ambitions.”
“They want to make a deal, but we haven’t heard those secret words, we will never have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said. In fact, Iran has repeatedly promised not to manufacture nuclear weapons and has stated that it seeks to enrich uranium for civilian purposes only. A religious ruling by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei prohibits the production of weapons of mass destruction. And Iran stated unequivocally in the 2015 nuclear agreement, which Trump unilaterally abandoned during his first term, “that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop, or acquire nuclear weapons.” However, the Trump administration has tried, so far unsuccessfully, to prevent Iran from enriching nuclear fuel domestically as a safeguard against proliferation.
With talks set to resume Thursday in Geneva, Trump has said his preference is “to solve this problem through diplomacy.” In fact, his military leadership has expressed reservations about the US’s ability to defend Americans and their allies in the region if US attacks trigger a protracted conflict. Such a war would also contradict Trump’s preference for short, well-defined military operations and his repeated campaign promises never to involve American forces in another chosen war in the Middle East.
A triumphalist tone on Venezuela – By Benjamin N. Gedan, senior researcher and director of the Latin America program
In his 2020 State of the Union address, President Trump invited Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó to the US Capitol, where he promised that “all Americans stand united with the Venezuelan people in their righteous fight for freedom” and vowed to “restore democracy.” Today, following the January 3 arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by US commando troops, Trump appears much closer to that goal.
But judging by his State of the Union address on Tuesday, it is no longer clear that he is pursuing it. Venezuela was indeed a prominent topic in Trump’s speech, but his remarks gave off an aura of mission accomplished rather than a commitment to a complex political transition.
The president described Secretary of State Marco Rubio as “the best ever” and celebrated Maduro’s abduction as a “colossal victory.” The United States, he said, is “working closely” with Maduro’s former deputy and the country’s new unelected leader, Delcy Rodríguez. As for opposition leader and Nobel laureate María Corina Machado, she was absent from the House of Representatives—and from the State of the Union address.
The president’s triumphant tone reflected the atmosphere in Caracas during recent visits by the US energy secretary and the commander of the Southern Command, which was surprising after decades of mistrust of a regime investigated by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity.
Trump referred to these abuses. Among his guests at the State of the Union address was Enrique Márquez, a former presidential candidate and one of approximately 550 political prisoners released since the Delta Force stormed Fort Tiuna in Caracas. He had been detained in El Helicoide, a prison known for torture.
However, it is unclear when Márquez will have the chance to run again or see his guards brought to justice. Unlike in 2020, Trump did not promise democracy or mention the stolen 2024 election. Instead, he praised the country’s dictatorship as a “new friend and partner” and boasted that he had received millions of barrels of Venezuelan oil.
The View from Pyongyang -By Rachel Minyoung Lee, senior researcher
In recent months, experts and officials — including South Korea’s ambassador to the United States — have raised the possibility of another Trump-Kim summit during President Trump’s visit to China in April. And those looking for clues about North Korea policy in President Trump’s February 24 State of the Union address would have been disappointed, though probably not surprised, that there was not even a mention, given that North Korea remains low on the Trump administration’s foreign policy priorities.
President Trump’s That said, his brief remarks about Iran and his even briefer comments about the raid in Venezuela that
captured Nicolás Maduro could raise questions about how Pyongyang perceived the speech — and whether it might be more inclined to engage with the United States, given some parallels with Iran and Venezuela prior to the U.S. raid.
The calibrated reports in the North Korean state media about the US bombings of Iranian nuclear sites in June 2025 and the ongoing tensions between Washington and Tehran, as well as the US raid on Venezuela in January 2026, indicate its sensitivity to these developments. These events likely reminded Pyongyang that the Trump administration is more involved abroad than Trump suggested in his January 2025 inaugural address—and almost certainly reinforced its distrust of the United States. However, they are unlikely to significantly affect North Korea’s policy toward the US, which has fundamentally changed in recent years.
North Korea has reoriented its foreign policy since the failure of the second Trump-Kim summit in Hanoi in 2019, driven by growing skepticism toward the United States, a perceived decline in US global leadership, and an ever-changing geopolitical landscape. The centerpiece of this recalibration was the public reversal of its three-decade policy of normalizing relations with the United States through denuclearization by North Korea in 2022. The following year, it codified the country’s nuclear status in its constitution, effectively extinguishing any lingering hopes for denuclearization. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine accelerated North Korea’s pivot to Moscow. A less mentioned but potentially greater concern is North Korea’s self-perception as a major global actor, a byproduct of a changing international order, strengthened ties with Russia, and the development of its defense capabilities. The omissions of “denuclearization” from recent US and Chinese national security documents, along with Russia’s apparent private recognition of North Korea’s nuclear status, have likely contributed to Kim Jong Un’s self-confidence.
North Korea’s Ninth Party Congress, currently underway and set to unveil a new five-year domestic and foreign strategy, will likely reinforce this trajectory.
Despite the hype, war is not Trump’s choice – By Christopher Preble, senior fellow and director of the Reimagining U.S. Grand Strategy program
In his State of the Union address, President Trump boasted about the US military operations he has ordered around the world, such as the attacks on Iran last June. He threatened to carry out a much wider range of attacks and even suggested overthrowing the regime in Tehran.
He boasted about removing Nicolás Maduro from power in Venezuela and welcomed Enrique Marquez, a political prisoner released following Maduro’s removal, to the gallery of the House of Representatives.
However, while it is appropriate to recognize the heroism of military personnel such as Chief Petty Officer Eric Slover, who skillfully piloted his helicopter in the operation in Venezuela even after being seriously wounded by gunfire, this cannot hide the fact that Donald Trump does not have the authority to take this country to war. Only Congress can do that. In his record-breaking speech, President Trump did not call for a declaration of war on Iran. He did not explain a convincing justification for why such a war with Iran would promote US security or interests.
There is none. And, as expected, polls show that most Americans do not want another war in the Middle East. They seem to understand what the president does not.
Members of Congress should fulfill their constitutional obligations and represent those who elected them to office. Before President Trump initiates any military action against Iran, Congress must vote.
Peace Without a Planet – By Lauren Herzer Risi, senior researcher and director of the environmental security program
Predictably, the word “climate” did not appear even once in yesterday’s State of the Union address. For this administration, that was a choice. Climate, however, came up repeatedly anyway, even in the speech that refused to name it. So did the broader environmental conditions that shape conflicts, drive migration, fuel economies, and determine whether hard-won peace agreements are truly viable.
In a speech that lasted nearly two hours, the administration’s vision of American power and global leadership found no place for the environment — except as a resource to be drilled and extracted. In recent decades, the links between access to natural resources such as water, land, and minerals, and the onset and persistence of conflict have been well established. The president’s broad statements about energy security, resolving difficult conflicts, and heroism in the face of extreme weather phenomena collapse under this weight.
President Trump took credit for ending eight conflicts, from Congo and Rwanda to Pakistan and India, Egypt and Ethiopia. But missing from his account was the role that environmental stress plays in fueling and sustaining them: competition for water in the Nile basin; resource extraction that fuels violence in Central Africa; melting glaciers that put pressure on the Indus Water Treaty between nuclear-armed neighbors. A ceasefire can end a conflict, but it cannot feed a river or stabilize a harvest. Climate change and the environment are silent stakeholders in each of these negotiations.
Their interests may have been absent from the negotiating table, but they will play a decisive role in determining whether these agreements are viable.
The speech provided an accidental illustration of this blind spot. The president recounted how floodwaters rose 7.8 meters in minutes at a girls’ camp in Texas last July. “No one has ever seen anything like this,” he said, referring to the speed and force of the floods. But for him, the story is one of the heroism of the Coast Guard, nothing more. The question of why such events are becoming more frequent and severe remained unaddressed. Even more worrying: the very tools that the US government has built to anticipate weather shocks, protect communities, and support recovery—NOAA, FEMA, and others—have found themselves in the crosshairs of the administration, facing drastic funding cuts just when their work is most needed.
Environmental pressures do not disappear because politics ignores them. They reappear as the next crisis—and sometimes, as the next conflict.
Trump’s priorities in two charts — By J. James Kim, director of the Korea program
Given that this was one of the longest (if not the longest) State of the Union addresses, I decided to make two charts to identify any patterns. As in most State of the Union addresses, the focus was mainly on domestic issues, namely the economy and immigration. But it was interesting to note the contrast with President Trump’s first State of the Union address in 2018, for example, when it came to topics such as border security. The word “border” was mentioned 15 times in this year’s speech, compared to five times in 2018. As an observer of US foreign policy in Northeast Asia, it was also striking to see the omission of the region in this year’s speech compared to 2018. For example, critical foreign policy issues in Asia, such as China and North Korea, were never mentioned this year. But in 2018, China was mentioned three times, and North Korea was mentioned seven times. This is just another example of the difference in political priorities in the first part of the Trump administration’s second term compared to the first.
Figure 1. Comparison of word clouds on the state of the union in 2018 and 2026
Figure 2 is a graph of the word co-occurrence network, scaled according to word frequency. Each node represents a word, and the size of the node corresponds to the frequency of the words. The thickness of the edges indicates the number of co-occurrences of the associated words, and the colors for each node represent a community of corresponding groups of words that also appeared together. What the analysis seems to show is a greater focus and concentration on the nation and its people this year (e.g., America, Americans, country, and people) compared to discussions of substantive issues such as jobs, the economy, or inflation (even though these terms were also mentioned). Overall, there was very little content about foreign policy issues, while there were more references to words such as investment, money, border, tax, inflation, Congress, and world.
Figure 2. Word co-occurrence network from Trump’s SOTU
Note: Raw data includes physical reactions and cues.Source: here