Three loud blasts were heard in the Iraqi capital, according to an AFP reporter on the ground. A security source said the artillery fire was ceremonial and intended to mark the establishment of the new administration.

The celebratory firing came days after Iraq finalized the formation of a new government following extended political negotiations among rival factions.

Earlier on Friday, Antonio Guterres welcomed the creation of the new Iraqi government and reaffirmed the United Nations’ commitment to supporting the country’s economic and social development efforts.

The formation of the cabinet under Al-Zaidi is viewed as a key step in efforts to stabilize Iraq’s political landscape amid continuing economic challenges, regional tensions and security concerns.

In a statement issued by Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, Guterres said he looked forward to working with the new Iraqi administration to advance the aspirations of the Iraqi people.

The statement said the UN chief remained committed to supporting Iraq in its efforts toward development, governance and long-term stability.

The announcement follows the formation of a new Iraqi government after months of political negotiations and comes at a time when Baghdad faces economic challenges, reconstruction demands and regional security pressures.

The United Nations has maintained a long-standing political and humanitarian presence in Iraq, assisting with institutional development, humanitarian coordination and post-conflict recovery initiatives.

When Iranian student militants seized the United States embassy in Tehran in November 1979, taking 66 Americans hostage, the crisis quickly evolved into one of the defining geopolitical confrontations of the late Cold War.

Yet among the most politically consequential decisions made during the 444-day standoff was Iran’s release of 13 hostages only 16 days after the embassy takeover, including 10 Black Americans and three white women.

The decision reflected a calculated effort by Iran’s revolutionary leadership to frame its conflict with Washington not as a dispute with the American people broadly, but as a struggle against U.S. imperialism and racial inequality. Iranian officials publicly argued at the time that Black Americans and women were themselves victims of oppression inside the United States and therefore should not be held responsible for American foreign policy.

Among those released was former U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. James Hughes, then a 30-year-old communications specialist stationed at the embassy. Hughes, now 76, recalled that the release was not voluntary and occurred under armed supervision after days of uncertainty inside the embassy compound.“I was handcuffed, under armed guard and taken out of the embassy to the airport,” Hughes said in remarks reflecting on the episode decades later.

“It wasn’t like I walked out of my own free will.”The embassy seizure began on Nov. 4, 1979, after Iranian students stormed the compound amid mounting anti-American sentiment following the Islamic Revolution that toppled Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi earlier that year.

The United States had long backed the Shah, whose rule was associated with political repression and close alignment with Western strategic and oil interests.The immediate trigger for the embassy occupation was Washington’s decision to admit the Shah into the United States for medical treatment after he fled Iran. Revolutionary supporters viewed the move as evidence that Washington was preparing to restore him to power.

Iran’s new leadership under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini quickly transformed the hostage crisis into a broader ideological confrontation with the United States, which revolutionary leaders described as an imperial power responsible for decades of political interference across the Middle East.

Within that framework, Iranian officials sought to distinguish between the U.S. government and minority groups inside America. State media and revolutionary leaders frequently highlighted racial discrimination in the United States, drawing parallels between anti-colonial struggles abroad and the civil rights movement inside America.

Hughes, who grew up in segregated New Orleans during the Jim Crow era, said his life experiences shaped how he understood the political messaging surrounding the release. Before joining the Air Force, Hughes attended segregated schools and experienced institutional racism firsthand in the American South.

The release of Black hostages aligned with broader efforts by the Iranian revolutionary government to cultivate symbolic ties with Black political movements and anti-imperialist activists globally. During the late 1970s and early 1980s, some African American activists viewed the Iranian Revolution as part of a wider challenge to Western dominance and authoritarian political systems backed by the United States.

Political scientist Benjamin R. Young said the Islamic Republic initially attracted support from diverse ideological currents, including anti-colonial and anti-imperialist movements.“The Islamic Republic in 1979 and even into the early 80s was kind of a Rorschach test,” Young said, describing how various activist groups projected their own political aspirations onto the revolution.

Iranian officials reinforced that messaging throughout the 1980s. In 1980, Iranian demonstrations were organized in solidarity with Black Americans after unrest erupted in Miami following the acquittal of police officers in the death of an unarmed Black man. In 1984, Iran issued a commemorative postage stamp honoring Malcolm X years before the United States issued its own official postal tribute.

Iran also attempted to position itself rhetorically as a defender of oppressed minorities globally. During overseas visits in the 1980s, future Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei promoted initiatives focused on racism and apartheid, although many such efforts remained largely symbolic.

Historians and analysts, however, note that Iran’s outreach to Black American causes often coincided with periods of intense geopolitical confrontation with Washington. Scholars argue that rival powers historically have used racial tensions inside the United States to counter American criticism of their own human rights records.

During the Cold War, both the Soviet Union and Communist China highlighted segregation and racial violence in the United States in propaganda campaigns aimed at undermining Washington’s international image. Analysts say Iran adopted a similar strategy after the 1979 revolution.

At the same time, reactions among Black Americans to Iran’s actions were far from uniform. Some activists and religious leaders expressed solidarity with aspects of Iran’s anti-Western rhetoric, while others rejected attempts to portray the Islamic Republic as a legitimate ally in racial justice struggles.

Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, became one of the most prominent Black American figures to publicly support the Iranian government during later decades. But mainstream civil rights organizations often took different positions.

During the hostage crisis itself, Vernon Jordan, then president of the National Urban League, argued that Black hostages should have remained in captivity until all Americans were released, saying separate treatment risked dividing Americans along racial lines.Some of the freed hostages later faced criticism inside the United States.

Hughes said he received hostile mail accusing him of abandoning fellow captives despite having no control over the decision.The remaining 52 Americans stayed in captivity for another 14 months until negotiations mediated by Algerian diplomats produced the 1981 Algiers Accords.

The final hostages were released on Jan. 20, 1981, coinciding with the inauguration of President Ronald Reagan.The differing treatment between the two hostage groups continued long after the crisis ended. Public celebrations and ticker-tape parades in Washington and New York focused largely on the 52 hostages held for the full 444 days.

Congress later approved compensation packages for the long-term hostages, with payments reaching millions of dollars per person under legislation passed decades later. Those released after 16 days, including Hughes, were excluded from those restitution measures.

Hughes also said recognition from the military arrived unevenly. Although Congress authorized prisoner-of-war medals for Iran hostages in 2003, Hughes said his own medal was delivered to his home years later without ceremony before state military officials later organized a formal recognition event.

Today, renewed tensions between Washington and Tehran have revived public discussion about the political symbolism of the early hostage release.

Analysts say the decision remains one of the clearest examples of how the Iranian revolutionary government attempted to exploit racial divisions inside the United States as part of a broader anti-American strategy during the opening years of the Islamic Republic.

According to state news agency WAM, the leaders described the attacks as violations of UAE sovereignty and threats to national stability, expressing solidarity with the country amid heightened regional tensions linked to the Iran conflict.

Among those who spoke with Sheikh Mohamed were Jordan’s King Abdullah II, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Masrour Barzani, prime minister of Iraq’s Kurdistan Region.The leaders affirmed their backing for the UAE’s efforts to safeguard its security and ensure the protection of civilians, underscoring a coordinated regional response to the escalation.

The calls come as geopolitical tensions continue to rise across the Middle East, with recent incidents involving Iranian-linked actions drawing strong reactions from regional governments.

Officials said Dabbour was arrested late Tuesday shortly after landing in Beirut and is being questioned by a judge at the prosecutor’s office in the Lebanese capital. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief the media.According to the officials, the detention was carried out based on a Red Notice issued by Interpol late last year following accusations linked to financial misconduct.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas removed Dabbour from his post as ambassador to Lebanon in 2025 after the Palestinian Authority accused him of corruption.Officials said the case involves allegations that Dabbour was involved in the sale of property in Lebanon owned by the Palestine Liberation Organization, which maintained a major presence in the country before Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon forced its leadership to relocate.

The properties were reportedly linked to assets held by the PLO during its years of political and military operations from Lebanon.No public statement has been issued by Dabbour or his legal representatives regarding the allegations.

The case comes amid broader anti-corruption efforts within Palestinian institutions and renewed scrutiny over financial management tied to overseas diplomatic and political assets.

The People’s Equality and Democracy Party, known as DEM, played a key role in facilitating renewed dialogue between the Turkish state and the PKK after jailed militant leader Abdullah Ocalan called in February 2025 for the group to lay down arms and pursue a political settlement.

Speaking to party lawmakers in parliament, DEM co-chair Tulay Hatimogullari said the government had failed to build on the momentum created by Ocalan’s appeal and was slowing progress toward a lasting resolution.

“While such a bright outlook lies ahead of us, and we should be moving at full speed toward the goal of peace, the government is acting in a hesitant, timid and stalling manner,” Hatimogullari said.

The PKK, designated a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union, halted attacks and announced in May 2025 that it had decided to disband and end its armed insurgency, which has killed more than 40,000 people since it began in 1984.

Ankara, however, has insisted that the group must take further concrete steps and that any disarmament must be independently verified before broader political or legal reforms can proceed.Government officials and Kurdish representatives have repeatedly traded blame over the pace of implementation, with tensions rising more than a year after expectations of a breakthrough first emerged.

In February, a Turkish parliamentary commission overwhelmingly approved a report outlining a roadmap for legal reforms to accompany the PKK’s disbandment, moving the peace process further into the legislative arena.

The conflict has destabilized Turkey’s predominantly Kurdish southeast for decades and has also spilled across borders into northern Iraq and Syria, where Kurdish militant networks remain active.Hatimogullari said prolonged hesitation risked weakening trust and damaging the broader political opening created by recent developments.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government has not publicly responded to her latest remarks.

Zaidi was formally tasked on Monday with forming a cabinet within 30 days, after Iraq’s dominant parliamentary bloc abandoned former prime minister Nouri Al-Maliki following reported U.S. opposition to his return.Five months after parliamentary elections, Iraq remains without a new administration as rival factions continue to compete over leadership positions and ministerial control in a system shaped by sectarian and political power-sharing.

The Coordination Framework, the largest bloc in parliament and an alliance of Shiite factions with varying ties to Iran, had initially backed Maliki, a two-time former premier known for his close relations with Tehran.His candidacy, however, collapsed after what officials described as strong pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, who reportedly issued an ultimatum opposing Maliki’s return to office.

The bloc has since shifted support to Zaidi and publicly thanked Maliki for stepping aside.Iraq’s state-run INA news agency reported that the Coordination Framework would meet Zaidi on Tuesday to begin talks over cabinet formation and the allocation of ministerial portfolios.Zaidi said he intended to work “with all political forces,” according to INA.

At 40, Zaidi is viewed as a compromise candidate with limited political baggage. He is a businessman, owner of a television channel and a former head of an Iraqi bank that had been barred from conducting U.S. dollar transactions under American anti-money laundering restrictions.He has never previously held a government post.

If he succeeds in forming a government, Zaidi will replace Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani, whose hopes of securing a second term weakened after he failed to prevent Iran-backed armed groups from targeting U.S. interests during the recent Middle East war.

A political source told AFP that the Coordination Framework endorsed Zaidi only after consulting U.S. representatives to gauge Washington’s acceptance.Victoria J. Taylor, director of the Iraq Initiative at the Atlantic Council and a former U.S. deputy assistant secretary for Iraq, said the bloc was unlikely to have advanced Zaidi’s nomination without some confidence that the United States would not object.

“The framework would not have nominated him without some sense that the U.S. would accept his nomination,” she wrote on X.She added that Trump’s public rejection of Maliki had been politically damaging and the alliance was keen to avoid another confrontation with Washington.

Zaidi’s nomination also came 10 days after a senior Iranian commander visited Iraq and held meetings with political leaders, underlining Baghdad’s continued balancing act between Tehran and Washington more than two decades after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

Al-Sharaa met Starmer at 10 Downing Street, marking the first visit by a Syrian head of state to London since former president Bashar Assad traveled to the UK in 2002.According to a Downing Street spokesperson, discussions covered migration returns, border security and efforts to combat people-smuggling networks.

Starmer also welcomed steps taken by Damascus against Daesh, citing progress in counter-terrorism cooperation between the two countries.The talks also addressed broader regional stability concerns alongside economic cooperation.

The visit comes as Syria seeks foreign investment to rebuild infrastructure damaged during years of civil war. Al-Sharaa is expected to hold further meetings with senior British officials during his stay.

He was accompanied by Foreign Affairs Minister Asaad Hassan Al-Shaibani and Economy Minister Nidal Al-Shaar.European outreach continuesAl-Sharaa arrived in London following a visit to Germany, where he met Chancellor Friedrich Merz, as part of a broader diplomatic push to re-engage European partners.

No specific agreements were announced following the London meeting.

The film, directed by Kaouther Ben Hania, recounts the death of five-year-old Hind Rajab during Israel’s war with Hamas. Manoj Nandwana of Jai Viratra Entertainment, the film’s Indian distributor, said a member of the Central Board of Film Certification told him the release would “hamper India’s relations with Israel,” though he added no formal written rejection had been issued.

Nandwana said that after screening the film for the board, it became clear it would not be cleared for theatrical release. He questioned the decision, noting the film had been screened internationally, including in Israel.

The film had earlier been shown at an international festival in Kolkata in November, according to the distributor.

India’s certification process requires approval from the Central Board of Film Certification for public exhibition, with decisions sometimes reflecting broader sensitivities tied to law and order or diplomatic considerations.

New Delhi has strengthened strategic ties with Israel in recent years across defence, agriculture, technology and cybersecurity, while continuing to support Palestinian statehood in line with its longstanding foreign policy.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Israel last month, his second trip since 2017, shortly before Israel and the United States launched airstrikes on Iran, underscoring the evolving geopolitical context.

Opposition lawmaker Shashi Tharoor criticised the move, calling it “disgraceful” and arguing that restricting films over potential diplomatic sensitivities undermines freedom of expression in a democracy.

“The Voice of Hind Rajab” was nominated for Best International Feature at this year’s Academy Awards but did not win. It received the Silver Lion grand jury prize at the Venice Film Festival, where it drew strong audience reactions at its premiere.

In the statement, Pezeshkian said Iran had attempted to avoid war through diplomatic engagement with neighbouring governments but that recent military actions by the United States and Israel had forced Tehran to act in self-defence. “We have strived alongside you and through diplomacy to avoid war, but the American-Zionist military aggression has left us no choice but to defend ourselves,” he wrote.

The Iranian president addressed the message to what he described as “friendly and neighboring states,” stressing that Tehran respects the sovereignty of countries across the Middle East. He added that regional security and stability should be achieved collectively by states in the region rather than through outside intervention.

Iranian officials have repeatedly framed their military posture in recent months as defensive, arguing that the country is responding to external threats. Pezeshkian’s remarks reflect Tehran’s long-standing position that regional security arrangements should be managed by Middle Eastern governments themselves.

The message appeared aimed at reassuring neighbouring governments that Iran’s response would not threaten their territorial sovereignty while also signalling that Tehran considers recent military actions against it to justify retaliation under self-defence.