Emmanuel Macron has sharply criticised Donald Trump’s inconsistent and often contradictory pronouncements on the Iran war and Nato, saying if “you want to be serious” it was better not to come out with a something different every day.

“There is too much talk … and it’s all over the place,” the French president said on Thursday during a state visit to South Korea. “We all need stability, calm, a return to peace – this isn’t a show!”

Macron added: “You have to be serious. When you want to be serious, you don’t go around saying the opposite every day of what you just said the day before. And perhaps you shouldn’t talk every day.”

Macron also mounted a strong defence of Nato, accusing Trump of undermining the transatlantic defence alliance through repeated remarks questioning the United States’ commitment to its continued membership.

“I believe organisations and alliances like Nato are defined by what is left unsaid – that is, the trust that underpins them,” he said. “If you cast doubt on your commitment every day, you erode its very substance.”

The comments follow mixed messages this week from the US president and others in Washington on the progress of the war, as well as criticism of European leaders for declining to back it and suggestions that the US might leave Nato.

Trump has suggested variously that the war was as good as won and the US did not need the support of its allies; that he expected allies to join the US military operation; and that they should act alone and “go get their oil” in the strait of Hormuz.

He also said this week at a private White House lunch that Nato had “treated us very badly” and “will be treating us badly again if we ever need them”. In comments to Reuters, he said he was “absolutely without question” considering leaving.

He told the Daily Telegraph that a US exit was “beyond consideration”, calling the organisation a “paper tiger”, and has elsewhere criticised the defence alliance for its reluctance to support the month-old war, labelling its members “cowards”.

Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, this week also suggested the US would “re-examine” whether the alliance that was still serving US interests, while Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, declined to confirm the US would defend Nato allies in the event of an attack.

Nato’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, is to visit Washington next week to try to repair relations, and other European leaders have defended the alliance, with the UK’s Keir Starmer calling it “the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen”.

Two US senators, Republican Mitch McConnell and Democrat Chris Coons, said in a joint statement late on Wednesday that the Senate would “continue to support the alliance for the peace and protection it provides” the US, Europe and the world.

While Trump did not mention Nato in an evening address to the nation on Wednesday night, the repeated remarks from Washington have further strained transatlantic relations already damaged by the US president’s attempted Greenland grab in February.

Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, said on Thursday Trump’s repeated threats to withdraw from Nato, along with the prospect of a “massive” energy crisis in Europe and other factors, all looked like a “dream plan” for Russia’s president Vladimir Putin.

EU diplomats said Trump’s increasingly frequent attacks on Nato were “nothing very new” and largely reflected “the difficulty of the situation he’s landed himself in”. One official said they would start to worry “when the paperwork actually goes in”.

Congress passed legislation in 2023 that would prevent any president from pulling out of Nato without its approval. Nato’s mutual defence clause requires all members to respond to an attack on one, but does not imply support for a unilateral offensive.

Many EU leaders are under political pressure over the war, which is deeply unpopular in Europe and has sparked a surge in energy prices and rising inflation since Iran effectively shut the strait of Hormuz, which carries about one-fifth of the world’s oil.

Trump said on Wednesday he may end the war without a deal and told countries that rely on fuel shipments through the strait to “just grab it”. European and other states have said they will only help secure the strait if there is a ceasefire.

With pressure growing, about 40 countries on Thursday explored ways to restore freedom of navigation to the waterway during online talks. The UK, which convened the talks, said they were focused on diplomatic and economic tools.

France said the process would be multi-phased and could not begin until hostilities had calmed or ended. “It can only be done in consultation with Iran,” Macron said, adding that Paris considered a military operation to free the strait “unrealistic”.

Macron, who said remarks by Trump poking fun at the French president’s marriage were “neither elegant nor up to standard” and did not “merit a response”, also said US and Israeli strikes would not resolve the issue of Tehran’s nuclear programme.

“A targeted military action, even for a few weeks, will not allow us to resolve the nuclear issue in the long term,” he said. “If there is no framework for diplomatic and technical negotiations, the situation can deteriorate again in a few months.”

Iran’s armed forces responded to Trump on Thursday with a warning for the US and Israel of “more crushing, broader and more destructive” attacks.

The war will continue until the “permanent regret and surrender” of Iran’s enemies, said Ebrahim Zolfaqari, the spokesperson for the Iranian military’s Khatam al-Anbiya central headquarters, in a statement carried by Iranian media.

Trump said in his address on Wednesday that the US was “very close” to achieving its objectives but attacks would intensify and Iran would be brought “back to the stone ages, where they belong” unless Tehran agreed a negotiated settlement.

“Messages have been received through intermediaries, including Pakistan, but there is no direct negotiation with the US,” Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baqaei, was quoted as saying by the ISNA news agency on Thursday.

The Guardian

Emmanuel Macron has sharply criticised Donald Trump’s inconsistent and often contradictory pronouncements on the Iran war and Nato, saying if “you want to be serious” it was better not to come out with a something different every day.

“There is too much talk … and it’s all over the place,” the French president said on Thursday during a state visit to South Korea. “We all need stability, calm, a return to peace – this isn’t a show!”

Macron added: “You have to be serious. When you want to be serious, you don’t go around saying the opposite every day of what you just said the day before. And perhaps you shouldn’t talk every day.”

Macron also mounted a strong defence of Nato, accusing Trump of undermining the transatlantic defence alliance through repeated remarks questioning the United States’ commitment to its continued membership.

“I believe organisations and alliances like Nato are defined by what is left unsaid – that is, the trust that underpins them,” he said. “If you cast doubt on your commitment every day, you erode its very substance.”

The comments follow mixed messages this week from the US president and others in Washington on the progress of the war, as well as criticism of European leaders for declining to back it and suggestions that the US might leave Nato.

Trump has suggested variously that the war was as good as won and the US did not need the support of its allies; that he expected allies to join the US military operation; and that they should act alone and “go get their oil” in the strait of Hormuz.

He also said this week at a private White House lunch that Nato had “treated us very badly” and “will be treating us badly again if we ever need them”. In comments to Reuters, he said he was “absolutely without question” considering leaving.

He told the Daily Telegraph that a US exit was “beyond consideration”, calling the organisation a “paper tiger”, and has elsewhere criticised the defence alliance for its reluctance to support the month-old war, labelling its members “cowards”.

Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, this week also suggested the US would “re-examine” whether the alliance that was still serving US interests, while Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, declined to confirm the US would defend Nato allies in the event of an attack.

Nato’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, is to visit Washington next week to try to repair relations, and other European leaders have defended the alliance, with the UK’s Keir Starmer calling it “the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen”.

Two US senators, Republican Mitch McConnell and Democrat Chris Coons, said in a joint statement late on Wednesday that the Senate would “continue to support the alliance for the peace and protection it provides” the US, Europe and the world.

While Trump did not mention Nato in an evening address to the nation on Wednesday night, the repeated remarks from Washington have further strained transatlantic relations already damaged by the US president’s attempted Greenland grab in February.

Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, said on Thursday Trump’s repeated threats to withdraw from Nato, along with the prospect of a “massive” energy crisis in Europe and other factors, all looked like a “dream plan” for Russia’s president Vladimir Putin.

EU diplomats said Trump’s increasingly frequent attacks on Nato were “nothing very new” and largely reflected “the difficulty of the situation he’s landed himself in”. One official said they would start to worry “when the paperwork actually goes in”.

Congress passed legislation in 2023 that would prevent any president from pulling out of Nato without its approval. Nato’s mutual defence clause requires all members to respond to an attack on one, but does not imply support for a unilateral offensive.

Many EU leaders are under political pressure over the war, which is deeply unpopular in Europe and has sparked a surge in energy prices and rising inflation since Iran effectively shut the strait of Hormuz, which carries about one-fifth of the world’s oil.

Trump said on Wednesday he may end the war without a deal and told countries that rely on fuel shipments through the strait to “just grab it”. European and other states have said they will only help secure the strait if there is a ceasefire.

With pressure growing, about 40 countries on Thursday explored ways to restore freedom of navigation to the waterway during online talks. The UK, which convened the talks, said they were focused on diplomatic and economic tools.

France said the process would be multi-phased and could not begin until hostilities had calmed or ended. “It can only be done in consultation with Iran,” Macron said, adding that Paris considered a military operation to free the strait “unrealistic”.

Macron, who said remarks by Trump poking fun at the French president’s marriage were “neither elegant nor up to standard” and did not “merit a response”, also said US and Israeli strikes would not resolve the issue of Tehran’s nuclear programme.

“A targeted military action, even for a few weeks, will not allow us to resolve the nuclear issue in the long term,” he said. “If there is no framework for diplomatic and technical negotiations, the situation can deteriorate again in a few months.”

Iran’s armed forces responded to Trump on Thursday with a warning for the US and Israel of “more crushing, broader and more destructive” attacks.

The war will continue until the “permanent regret and surrender” of Iran’s enemies, said Ebrahim Zolfaqari, the spokesperson for the Iranian military’s Khatam al-Anbiya central headquarters, in a statement carried by Iranian media.

Trump said in his address on Wednesday that the US was “very close” to achieving its objectives but attacks would intensify and Iran would be brought “back to the stone ages, where they belong” unless Tehran agreed a negotiated settlement.

“Messages have been received through intermediaries, including Pakistan, but there is no direct negotiation with the US,” Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baqaei, was quoted as saying by the ISNA news agency on Thursday.

The Guardian

The destruction of a key US airborne radar aircraft in an Iranian strike is being seen as a significant setback to Washington’s battlefield awareness and command capabilities, with analysts warning it could weaken the ability to detect and respond to threats across the region.

Dramatic images of the wreckage — geolocated by CNN — show a US Air Force E-3 Sentry aircraft with its tail severed and its distinctive radar dome lying on the ground at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia. The aircraft is part of the Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS), long considered a cornerstone of US military operations.

The loss of the platform is “a serious blow to (US) surveillance capabilities,” said CNN military analyst Cedric Leighton, a former US Air Force colonel who has flown on the aircraft.

“It can potentially impact (US) ability to control combat aircraft and vector them to their targets or protect them from engagements of hostile aircraft and missile systems,” he said.

The E-3 is far more than a radar plane. Often described as a flying command post, it can monitor vast areas of airspace — up to 120,000 square miles — tracking hundreds of targets simultaneously, including aircraft, missiles, drones and even ground movements. Its onboard personnel relay real-time intelligence to commanders, ships and ground forces, while also directing fighter jets and coordinating strikes.

A recent report by the Center for a New American Security described AWACS as the “quarterback” of the battlefield, highlighting its role in turning individual missions into a coordinated and dominant force.

The strike, which reportedly injured at least 10 US service members and also damaged a tanker aircraft, underscores a worrying shift in Iran’s targeting strategy. Analysts say Tehran appears to be focusing on high-value assets that underpin US operational effectiveness.

What is AWACS? The ‘eyes in the sky’

• Full form: Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)
• Role: Flying radar and command centre that monitors battlespace in real time
• Coverage: Can scan up to 120,000 sq miles of airspace
• Tracking power: Detects and tracks hundreds of targets — aircraft, missiles, drones, even ground movement
• Battle control: Directs fighter jets, guides intercepts, coordinates strikes
• Real-time link: Sends live data to commanders, ships and ground forces
• Why it matters: Often called the “quarterback” of modern warfare — turns separate missions into coordinated operations
• Key advantage: Spots threats far earlier than ground radar, giving critical reaction time
• US fleet: About 17 aircraft, many dating back to the 1970s
• Vulnerability: High-value but limited asset — loss significantly impacts surveillance and coordination

Kelly Grieco, a fellow at the Stimson Center, said the attack reflects a broader pattern. “Iran’s going after the radars that detect threats, the tankers that keep jets flying, and the AWACS that direct the battle. That’s a counter-air campaign. Adapted to what Iran can actually do. And the damage is real,” she wrote.

Experts note that airborne radar systems like the E-3 significantly extend detection time. Peter Layton, a former Royal Australian Air Force officer, said an AWACS aircraft could spot an incoming Iranian drone up to 85 minutes earlier than ground-based radar — a critical advantage in modern warfare.

The circumstances of the strike have also raised serious questions about force protection. Leighton described the loss of the aircraft on the ground as “a serious breach of our Force Protection efforts,” noting that such assets are typically heavily guarded and often escorted when airborne.

He added that external assistance may have played a role in the targeting. “Russia most likely gave Iran geographic coordinates and satellite imagery that provided the precise location,” he said.

Beyond the immediate impact, the incident highlights a deeper structural concern: the limited and aging nature of the US AWACS fleet. The US operates just 17 E-3 aircraft, down from 32 in 2015, with some dating back to the late 1970s. Despite their importance, replacements have yet to be fully finalised, leaving a critical capability under strain.

Why losing one AWACS matters — even if the US has 17

• At first glance, losing one aircraft from a fleet of 17 may not seem critical. But AWACS platforms are not ordinary assets — they are rare, high-value systems that underpin the entire air war.
• Not all 17 are available: A significant number are under maintenance, upgrades or rotation, meaning only a fraction are mission-ready at any time
• Global commitments: These aircraft are deployed across multiple regions, from Europe to the Indo-Pacific — not just the Middle East
• High operational demand: In conflict, AWACS aircraft are flown continuously, putting heavy strain on a small fleet
• Force multiplier effect: One AWACS doesn’t just replace one aircraft — it supports dozens of fighters, intercepts and missions simultaneously
• Coverage gaps: Losing even one reduces early warning range and coordination capacity, especially in a fast-moving missile and drone war

Each aircraft carries a crew of up to 23 personnel and represents a major investment — costing roughly $540 million in today’s terms.

While alternatives such as the US Navy’s E-2 Hawkeye exist, analysts say they cannot fully replace the E-3’s capabilities due to limitations in altitude, range and onboard personnel.

As the conflict intensifies, the loss of even a single AWACS aircraft could have outsized consequences — reducing situational awareness, slowing response times and complicating coordination across an increasingly contested battlespace.

In modern warfare, losing one AWACS is not losing one aircraft — it’s losing the battlefield’s central nervous system.

GN

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Tuesday said his country is willing to host talks between the U.S. and Iran in pursuit of a “comprehensive settlement” of the ongoing war.

“Pakistan welcomes and fully supports ongoing efforts to pursue dialogue to end the WAR in Middle East, in the interest of peace and stability in region and beyond,” Sharif said on X.

“Subject to concurrence by the US and Iran, Pakistan stands ready and honoured to be the host to facilitate meaningful and conclusive talks for a comprehensive settlement of the ongoing conflict,” he said.

The post tagged the social media profiles of President Donald Trump, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Trump, on his Truth Social platform, shared a screenshot of Sharif’s post later Tuesday morning.

The messaging followed reporting that regional leaders are engaged in behind-the-scenes diplomatic efforts to help broker an end to the conflict, which has resulted in thousands of deaths and wreaked havoc on the global economy since it began less than a month ago.

But much remains unclear about where things stand between the U.S. and Iran, which have made contradictory claims about the status of their discussions.

At the same time as the diplomatic efforts appear to be evolving, the Pentagon is reportedly readying plans to deploy about 3,000 soldiers from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East.

A written order to deploy those troops to support operations in Iran is expected in the coming hours, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday afternoon, citing two U.S. officials.

The reported development follows at least two other large U.S. deployments to the Middle East in recent days, joining the tens of thousands of troops already stationed in the region.

The U.S. has not ordered boots on the ground. Trump last week told a reporter he is “not putting troops anywhere,” but added, “If I were, I certainly wouldn’t tell you.”

Asked about the Journal’s report, an Army spokesperson told CNBC, “I can tell you that the 82nd Airborne Division is currently at Fort Bragg, NC.”

Trump said Monday that top U.S. negotiators and their Iranian counterparts have been engaged in “very, very strong talks” as recently as Sunday evening.

As a result of those purported talks, Trump said he would postpone the ultimatum he had issued Saturday for Iran to either open the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours or face major strikes on their power plants and energy infrastructure.

U.S. stocks rallied on that announcement. Iranian officials, however, denied that any such discussions have taken place.

CNN on Tuesday reported that an Iranian source said the U.S. has initiated “outreach” to Iran, though full-on negotiations have not yet begun.

That statement also contradicts Trump, who said Monday that Iran had reached out to the U.S.: “I didn’t call. They called. They want to make a deal.”

The Washington Post, citing U.S. and foreign officials, reported Tuesday morning that Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey have acted as intermediaries in talks between Witkoff and Araghchi.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the foreign ministers of those countries and Saudi Arabia had gathered in Riyadh on Thursday for talks on finding a diplomatic end to the war.

But Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman over the last week has pushed Trump to continue fighting Iran, The New York Times reported, citing people briefed by U.S. officials on their conversations.

CNBC