The United Arab Emirates on Saturday condemned what it described as “riots, acts of vandalism, and assaults” outside its embassy and the residence of its head of mission in Damascus.

In a statement, the UAE’s foreign ministry called on Syria to uphold its obligations to secure the embassy and its staff, investigate the incident and hold the perpetrators to account.

A Reuters reporter saw dozens of protesters gathering outside the UAE’s embassy in Damascus at midday on Friday, including some chanting “the Zionist embassy”.

A Syrian security official told Reuters that the incident occurred after some participants split off from a larger pro-Palestinian demonstration being held at the nearby Umayyad Square and tried to storm the embassy.

“Internal security forces prevented them from doing so and dealt with the situation,” the official said, speaking anonymously because he was not authorised to speak to the media.

Syria’s foreign ministry did not directly refer to the incident but said in a statement on Friday evening that it took a “firm and unwavering stance” against any attack on or attempt to approach embassies and diplomatic missions.

Meanwhile, the Foreign Office (FO) condemned the vandalism, stating, “Such acts violate the sanctity and security of diplomatic missions, which are protected under international law, including the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and undermine the norms governing peaceful diplomatic engagement between states.”

It added that Pakistan reiterated its commitment to the principles of international law and diplomatic norms, emphasising the importance of “maintaining peace, stability and mutual respect among nations”.

Demonstrations have taken place across Syria since the Israeli parliament passed a law making death by hanging a default sentence for Palestinians convicted in military courts of deadly attacks.

The UAE normalised relations with Israel in the 2020 Abraham Accords, though diplomatic relations have been strained by Israel’s hard-right turn since then.

ISLAMABAD: Pakis­tan has decided to return $3.5 billion in debt to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) before the end of this month, a senior Pakistani official said on Friday.

The official described the move as a cost the country was willing to bear to uphold “national dignity,” even as it is set to significantly draw down foreign exch­ange reserves.

The official disclosed that Abu Dhabi had sought the immediate return of the amount.

“The amount will be returned as soon as possible,” the official said, adding that “national dignity could not be compromised for financial considerations”.

These funds were part of external financing support extended by the UAE in 2019 to help stabilise Pakistan’s balance of payments.

The official said the dec­i­sion had ended the uncertainty surrounding the deposits placed through the Abu Dhabi Fund for Development, which had been rolled over multiple times since 2019. In recent months, the extensions had become as shorter as month long, reflecting Emirati unease over the continuation of the arrangement.

Under its ongoing International Monetary Fund programme, Pakistan is required to secure around $12.5bn in rollovers from three key partners — China, Saudi Arabia and the UAE — to maintain reserve levels and meet external financing needs. The UAE deposits were, therefore, a critical part of this arrangement.

The latest available data shows Pakistan’s central bank reserves at about $16.3bn. A payment of $3bn from the reserves would reduce these holdings sharply by 18 per cent, significantly lowering the external buffer and import cover.

Other officials acknowledged that the return of the funds would have implications for reserve levels but said the decision was taken in view of evolving bilateral considerations and the UAE’s demand for immediate settlement.

Economic analysts say the return of the funds could increase pressure on the rupee and complicate Pakistan’s position under the IMF programme if not offset by fresh inflows. However, officials did not indicate any immediate arrangement for replacement financing.

On the other hand, Finance Ministry, through a post on X, said it was “continuously monitoring and managing Pakistan’s external flows in order to ensure stable foreign exchange reserves”.

“The government of Pakistan remains committed to fulfilling all its external obligations,” it added.

The post referred to “speculation and commentary in some section of the media regarding the government of Pakistan’s external flows”, saying that it may be noted that the finance ministry was “continuously monitoring and managing external flows in order to ensure stable foreign exchange reserves”.

ISLAMABAD: A Pakistan-led initiative to facilitate US-Iran talks has been held up, with Tehran yet to formally respond to proposals for dialogue despite back channel exchanges in recent days, a senior official told Dawn on Friday.

The official, who was speaking on background, said some ground had been covered, with messages relayed between Washington and Tehran, but the absence of a clear Iranian signal has slowed momentum at this critical stage.

“It is surprising that despite the obliteration of significant naval, air force, and other military and civilian infrastructure, Iran has not responded positively to calls for negotiations,” the official, who is familiar with the discussions, said.

He said both Pakistan and China had urged Iran to engage, but “Tehran has so far not conveyed its readiness to take part in the dialogue.”

He added that Pakistani leaders, despite Tehran not giving a reply, have remained in contact with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in an effort to revive the process persuading them to accept American offer of talks.

Pakistan has positioned itself as a facilitator in this process, leveraging its ties with US, its working relationship with Iran, and its strategic partnership with China. This initiative is being spearheaded by Army Chief and Chief of Defense Forces Field Marshal Asim Munir.

The official said that besides messages between the two sides, Pakistan was simultaneously building support for the prospective talks through parallel engagements with Gulf countries, Turkiye and Beijing. He underscored the challenge of convincing Arab countries, who remain staunchly opposed to Iran and are maintaining a harsh line against it, for not opposing de-escalation.

A framework for potential negotiations has already been discussed, and all sides have indicated Islamabad as a possible venue.

“Once Iran consents, negotiations are expected to take place there,” the Pakistani official said stressing that Iran’s go ahead was the only remaining element before the talks get underway. He claimed that US had even indicated that Vice President J.D. Vance could lead its delegation.

Yet, he feared, developments inside Iran were complicating decision making there. He said key decisions were now being shaped by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, with authority further diffused after strikes in which senior political and military figures, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were martyred. This fragmentation, he suggested, was making it harder for Tehran to take a clear negotiating position.

Iranian position

When contacted an Iranian official in Tehran, meanwhile, pointed to a different set of constraints. The official, who too spoke on background, said the terms conveyed by Washington were unacceptable. “The conditions, or the 15-point proposal, put forward by the United States are too difficult to accept,” the official said, describing the situation as “highly complex.”

The Iranian official denied reports that Iran had refused to participate the dialogue in Islamabad, after a Wall Street Journal reported Iran “officially told mediators that it is unwilling to meet US officials in Islamabad in the coming days and considers US demands unacceptable”.

He said Iran’s immediate focus is on the war and not negotiations. Moreover, he cited deep mistrust of US intentions. “Recent US deployments to the region do not align with its stated intentions of pursuing talks, and therefore Iran has zero confidence in US,” he said.

As part of its planning for potential ground operations against Iran, US has deployed specialised military hardware and personnel in the region. Most notably, 18 A-10C Thunderbolt II “Warthog” close air support aircraft, designed specifically for providing low altitude protection for ground troops, have been moved to Middle East. Pentagon has also positioned USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group in the Arabian Sea, placed the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit and thousands of additional Marines on ready mode, besides moving large numbers of heavy lift transport aircraft including C-17s and C-5s along with aerial tankers towards the theater.

These movements coincide with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s visit to paratroopers already involved in the operation and internal planning for two high risk ground assaults, including potential special forces raids or temporary occupation of Iranian islands in the Strait of Hormuz for seizing of highly enriched uranium.

Security concerns are also weighing on Tehran’s calculus. The Iranian official recalled that former Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi, who was to be part of the negotiating team, was targeted few days back, similarly, former Secretary Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani, who was pursuing an initiative for de-escalation, was assassinated.

“There are serious concerns that anyone participating in negotiations could also be targeted,” the worried Iranian official underlined.

Nevertheless, the official praised Pakistan for its efforts saying “Pakistani leaders were undoubtedly doing their best for cessation of hostilities.”

The initiative reflects Pakistan’s attempt to act as a middle power facilitator, using its access to multiple sides to keep channels open in a conflict that has disrupted energy flows, threatened shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and raised fears of a wider regional war.

Diplomats say the window for talks is narrow and fragile. They emphasize that while both sides have exchanged messages indirectly, the gap between US demands and Iranian expectations remains wide.

Pakistan’s immediate priority in this situation, another diplomat said, was to sustain the contacts and prevent a complete breakdown. He said whether or not that could translate into formal negotiations will depend on decisions in Tehran and Washington, where military developments continue to shape the pace and direction of diplomacy.

Header image: In this file photo, a staff member removes the Iranian flag from the stage after a group picture with foreign ministers and representatives of the US, Iran, China, Russia, Britain, Germany, France and the European Union during Iran nuclear talks at the Vienna International Center in Vienna, Austria in July 14, 2015. — Reuters/ File

A US fighter jet has been shot down over Iran and search-and-rescue efforts have so far recovered one of two crew members who ejected, a US official told Reuters, in the first known incident of its kind in the nearly five-week-old war.

The Pentagon and US Central Command did not respond to requests for comment.

The prospect of a US pilot being alive and on the run inside Iran raises the stakes for the United States in a conflict that, according to opinion polls, has struggled to win popular support among Americans.

It also presents a challenge to the US military, which faces the twin goals of trying to save the life of an American behind enemy lines while safeguarding anyone involved in perilous rescue missions.

Iranian officials called on civilians to be on the lookout for survivors and have flooded social media with images that purport to show wreckage from the aircraft.

Two US officials said the aircraft was an F-15E fighter jet, which has two seats: one for a pilot and the second for a weapons systems officer. It was unclear which of the two was recovered, and the US official who confirmed the recovery did not offer any details on how it took place.

William Goodhind, a forensic imagery analyst with Contested Ground, said images of the plane’s tail fin seen in photos posted on social media are consistent with those of an F-15E Strike Eagle, which carries two crew.

The governor of Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province said anyone who captured or killed the crew “would be specially commended,” Iran’s semi-official news agency Isna reported.

The incident follows threats by US President Donald Trump to bomb the country back to the “Stone Age,” including to attack Iran’s energy infrastructure and desalination plants, as he presses Tehran to end the war on US terms.

So far, 13 US military service members have been killed in the conflict and more than 300 have been wounded, according to the US Central Command. No US troops have been taken prisoner by Iran.

The US and Israeli war with Iran has spread across the Middle East, killing thousands of people and hitting the global economy with soaring energy prices that are fuelling fears of inflation in countries around the world.

The war is unpopular with Americans, with two-thirds believing the US should work to end its involvement in the conflict quickly, even if that means not achieving the goals set out by the Trump administration, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed this week.

The 34th day of the US-Israel war against Iran unfolded in the immediate aftermath of US President Donald Trump’s speech, which, rather than opening any pathway to de-escalation, appeared to have hardened positions across the conflict spectrum. The remarks triggered swift Iranian retaliation, and reinforced a trajectory of sustained attrition with an increasingly central focus on economic pressure and maritime control.

In his speech, Trump declared that US and Israeli objectives were nearing completion, while committing to another two to three weeks of intensified strikes and warning that Iran could be pushed “back to the Stone Age” if it failed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Trump’s formulation looked to be a combination of coercive diplomacy and continued military escalation, even as it left ambiguity over the precise end state being sought.

The immediate Iranian response underscored the limited deterrent effect of the speech as Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched one of its largest single-night barrages in recent weeks within minutes of the address, including ballistic missiles targeting central Israel, particularly the Tel Aviv metropolitan area, alongside drone and missile strikes on Gulf targets. The Iranian response underscored both its capability and intent to escalate in parallel domains.

Over the past 24 hours, kinetic operations have continued at a high tempo. US and Israeli forces conducted multiple strikes across Iran, including more than 20 reported hits in the greater Tehran area as well as additional operations in Isfahan and Mashhad, and targeted maritime infrastructure such as facilities on Qeshm Island.

Strikes on the B1 bridge in Karaj and the century-old Pasteur Institute, which is also being described as an icon of Iran’s healthcare system, have, meanwhile, emerged as symbolically significant hits on civilian infrastructure. The Pasteur Institute attack was the latest in the series of attacks undertaken by the Israeli/US alliance on the Iranian pharmaceutical industry and healthcare facilities.

Iran, meanwhile, expanded the scope of its retaliatory campaign carrying out strikes against US and Israeli assets across the Gulf, including the destruction of early-warning radar systems in the United Arab Emirates, a hit on a tanker linked to Israel that was left burning, and attacks on US command facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait, alongside a drone swarm directed at USS Abraham Lincoln, which was subsequently reported to have re-positioned further into the Indian Ocean.

Proxy fronts also showed signs of qualitative escalation, where Hezbollah carried out its first use of longer-range Scud-type missiles from Lebanon targeting Israeli military installations, while the Houthis signalled their readiness to expand the maritime dimension of the conflict by potentially moving to close the Bab el-Mandab Strait if Gulf states increased their involvement.

Despite the intensity of operations, there were isolated indications of tactical adjustments, including the absence of US bomber sorties during a specific overnight window, which some Iranian sources interpreted as a sign of temporary restraint, though this remained unconfirmed by official channels and did not translate into any broader reduction in operational tempo.

On the political front, Iran’s leadership maintained a firm rejection of negotiations under current conditions, with senior figures reiterating demands for sanctions relief and compensation for war damages as preconditions for any talks, while official messaging framed the conflict as an existential defence and emphasised resilience in the face of attacks on civilian and scientific infrastructure.

International reactions to Trump’s speech revealed growing divergence within the Western and allied camp. European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and former German chancellor Olaf Scholz, publicly cautioned against the efficacy of military solutions and called for negotiated off-ramps. Simultaneously, a UK-led diplomatic initiative has begun to take shape involving European and other partners, notably excluding the United States, in an effort to explore alternative pathways to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

At the same time, China attributed responsibility for the worsening crisis and disruption in the Strait of Hormuz to US and Israeli actions, urging an immediate ceasefire. Gulf states on their part were quietly reassessing their strategic posture amid concerns that the conflict, which is increasingly being seen as externally driven, was imposing disproportionate risks on their own economic and security environments.

The economic fallout of the war intensified further after Trump’s speech as oil prices rose sharply and maritime insurance costs escalated in view of the Strait of Hormuz remaining effectively contested, reinforcing the view that economic disruption, rather than purely military outcomes, is likely to be the decisive factor shaping the eventual course of the conflict.

Overall, the happenings of Day 34 confirmed that Trump’s speech entrenched a self-reinforcing escalation dynamic in which neither side sees immediate incentive to compromise. US and Israeli forces continued to apply sustained military pressure, while Iran retained sufficient asymmetric capability to impose costs and maintain strategic leverage, particularly through control over critical energy chokepoints.

With no credible diplomatic breakthrough in sight and parallel diplomatic efforts struggling to gain traction, the conflict is set to continue along its current path of high-intensity attrition. The immediate outlook is being shaped by the interplay between Iranian retaliation, allied military operations, and the mounting economic consequences that are increasingly defining the stakes of the war.

Header image: A camera screen shows US President Donald Trump speaking during a televised address on the conflict in the Middle East from the Cross Hall of the White House in Washington, DC on April 1. — AFP

MUZAFFARABAD: The Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) High Court on Thursday ruled that Afghan nationals residing in the region, even if subject to repatriation policies, could not be detained or deported without due process of law and directed the government to immediately establish a legal mechanism to regulate such cases.

In a detailed judgment authored by Justice Syed Shahid Bahar, the court disposed of three identical constitutional petitions challenging the detention of Afghan nationals allegedly taken into police custody for repatriation.

The petitioners had contended that despite possessing valid documents and residing lawfully in AJK for decades, they were taken into custody by police without lawful justification and faced imminent deportation. The government, in its reply, maintained that Afghan nationals were being taken into custody as a precautionary measure under a broader repatriation policy, though it conceded that no specific criminal charges had been levelled against them. 

The court observed that while foreigners did not enjoy a vested right to permanent residence, they were entitled to legal protection and due process during the validity of their stay. It said that a valid visa conferred a limited but lawful right of residence, and action against a foreign national before its expiry could only be taken on specific grounds such as fraud, violation of visa conditions or threats to public order.

The court further ruled that deportation must be preceded by cancellation of visa, where applicable, and carried out strictly in accordance with law, declaring that arbitrary detention or informal “pushback” without formal legal proceedings was unlawful.

Highlighting gaps in the implementation of the law, the judge noted that under the AJK Foreigners Act, 1952, action against foreign nationals must originate from a duly appointed “civil authority”. However, it was conceded by the government’s law officer that no such authority had yet been formally appointed, rendering the initiation of proceedings legally deficient. 

Terming the matter one of “first impression” involving significant constitutional and humanitarian considerations, Justice Bahar underscored that Afghan nationals who had been residing in AJK for decades — in some cases spanning three generations — could not be treated at par with recent undocumented entrants.

The judgment also emphasised that family ties, including marriages between Afghan nationals and local residents, warranted protection under constitutional principles safeguarding family life. It suggested that such cases required a more nuanced and humane approach rather than blanket repatriation measures. 

While recognising the government’s authority over matters relating to foreign nationals and repatriation, the court urged it to adopt a structured and differentiated approach. It observed that undocumented entrants could be dealt with strictly in accordance with policy, while long-term residents, including those integrated into local society through family and business ties, required humanitarian consideration. Similarly, cases of visa holders or those with lawful entry documents were to be examined separately, even in instances of overstay.

 The court further observed that where deportation was deemed necessary, reasonable time should be afforded to affected individuals to wind up businesses and settle their affairs on a case-to-case basis.

 Disposing of the petitions, the court issued key directions to the government, including the immediate appointment of civil authorities in all districts to handle cases under the Foreigners Act, mandatory reporting of arrests to the government within five days, and expeditious, case-by-case decisions regarding the status of detained Afghan nationals.

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump signalled that the ongoing US-Israeli military campaign against Iran could conclude within weeks, even as he warned of intensified strikes and issued sweeping claims about the scale of damage inflicted on Tehran.

In a 19-minute prime-time address from the White House, Trump described the conflict as a “decisive, overwhelming victory” and said the United States was “getting very close” to finishing the “job” in Iran.

“We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We are going to bring them back to the stone ages, where they belong,” Trump said during the address from the White House. “In the meantime, discussions are ongoing.”

While suggesting that the war may soon end, the president made clear that military operations would intensify before any resolution. He did not define the terms of the “deal” he is demanding from Tehran, nor did he outline a diplomatic framework.

Trump claimed Iran’s military capacity had been severely degraded. He said its missiles and drone systems have been “dramatically curtailed and their weapons factories and rocket launches are being blown to pieces.” He further asserted that “never in the history of warfare has an enemy suffered such clear and devastating large-scale losses in a matter of weeks.”

At the same time, he acknowledged that Iran continues to retaliate, though he maintained that its “ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed.”

The president said nuclear facilities had been struck again in recent days and declared that “it would take months to get near the nuclear dust,” indicating that material buried under rubble no longer concerned him.

Reiterating a position he says he has held for years, Trump stated that Iran would never be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons “from the very first day I announced my campaign for president in 2015.”

He alleged that Iran had “raced for a nuclear weapon like no one has ever seen before,” a claim disputed by neutral observers.

Linking the present conflict to past US policy, he argued that Israel’s survival would have been jeopardised had the 2015 nuclear agreement remained intact. “Israel wouldn’t exist if the Obama nuclear agreement had continued,” he said.

In one of the most striking remarks of the evening, Trump denied pursuing regime change but suggested it had effectively occurred. “Regime change was not our goal. We never said regime change, but regime change has occurred because of all of their original leaders’ death. They’re all dead.”

The president also addressed concerns about the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic waterway through which about 20pc of global oil passes. He predicted that it would “open up naturally” and urged countries dependent on Gulf energy to assume responsibility for securing it. “We will be helpful, but they should take the lead in protecting the oil that they so desperately depend on,” he said.

Oil markets reacted during the speech. According to The New York Times, prices were down when Trump began speaking but rose by more than 3 per cent by the time he finished. Asian markets showed a muted initial response.

Although Trump briefly mentioned the economic consequences of the war for ordinary Americans, he largely brushed off the concerns as temporary and argued that the economy remained strong.

Seeking to reassure an American public wary of prolonged foreign entanglements, Trump compared the current operation to past wars. He listed US involvement in World War I (1 year, 7 months, 5 days), World War II (3 years, 8 months, 25 days), the Korean War (3 years, 1 month, 2 days), the Vietnam War (19 years, 5 months, 29 days), and the Iraq War (8 years, 8 months, 28 days). The present conflict, he noted, has lasted 32 days.

“It’s very important that we keep this conflict in perspective,” Trump said. “We are in this military operation so powerful, so brilliant against one of the most powerful countries for 32 days, and the country has been eviscerated and essentially is really no longer a threat. … This is a true investment in your children and your grandchildren’s future.”

Despite the confident tone, the address contained no new announcements and largely repeated positions the president has advanced in recent days.

The absence of a clearly defined diplomatic path, combined with promises of intensified strikes over the next two to three weeks, leaves open questions about whether the conflict is truly nearing its end or entering a more volatile phase.