The West Asia conflict is approaching its sixth month with no clear diplomatic or military exit in sight as US President Donald Trump dramatically escalates pressure on Iran. Trump has announced what he described as an unprecedented economic warfare and isolation campaign against Iran, warning that countries continuing to do business with Tehran could face “tremendous punishment.”

The latest escalation comes amid a growing dispute over the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important energy routes. Trump says the waterway remains open and that numerous vessels are passing through, while Iranian officials maintain that the strait remains closed until Washington meets Tehran’s conditions.

Iran has demanded an end to the blockade of its ports, the lifting of oil sanctions and the release of frozen Iranian assets. Meanwhile, US-Iran negotiations remain uncertain, with Trump saying talks could resume at some point but reiterating that Iran must not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons.


Trump Launches “Economic Warfare” Against Iran As Strait Of Hormuz Crisis Deepens

The Iran crisis has reshaped global energy markets, sending crude oil prices soaring and delivering massive profits to the world's biggest oil companies. As disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz pushed oil above $126 per barrel, energy giants including Saudi Aramco, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, and TotalEnergies reported record quarterly earnings.

Combined profits reached nearly $93 billion between April and June, while consumers worldwide struggled with soaring fuel and energy costs. The windfall has sparked political criticism and renewed calls for stronger taxes on excess profits and greater investment in clean energy.

Iran War Fuels Oil Profits: Energy Giants Earn $93 Billion in Just 3 Months

Global energy markets are facing renewed uncertainty as Brent crude oil prices surge above $94 per barrel amid rising US-Iran tensions. Analysts warn that crude prices could approach $100 per barrel soon, while a worst-case scenario could push Brent back toward $120 if oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz are severely disrupted.

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world's most important energy routes, carrying millions of barrels of oil every day. Any escalation in the Middle East could trigger a fresh oil shock, impacting fuel prices, inflation, and global economies.

Goldman warns: Brent could top $120 again | Wion News  | World Business Watch 

A conflict thousands of miles away has reached an unlikely consumer touchpoint: snack packaging. Japan’s leading snack producer, Calbee Inc., has announced it will temporarily shift 14 of its products to black-and-white packaging as disruptions linked to the Iran conflict strain supplies of key printing materials. The company said the change will begin from May 25 and is intended to conserve ink and maintain stable production, while leaving product quality unchanged.&nbsp;“This measure is intended to help maintain a stable supply of products,” Calbee said in a statement, stressing that what is inside the packs will remain unaffected.&nbsp;ALSO READ: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/xi-trump-summit-us-president-reaches-china-for-high-stakes-talks-date-venue-key-facts-and-what-s-at-stake-1778665281416">Xi-Trump summit: US president reaches China for high-stakes talks — Date, venue, key facts and what’s at stake</a>&nbsp;<h3>Ink Shortage and Oil-Linked Materials</h3><h3>&nbsp;</h3>The shift is tied to shortages of naphtha, an oil-derived chemical used in manufacturing printing ink and packaging materials. Japan relies on imports from the Middle East for about 40 per cent of its naphtha consumption. The ongoing war in Iran has disrupted global energy flows, particularly through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for oil exports. As a result, supplies of petroleum-based inputs have tightened, pushing companies to reduce non-essential usage such as coloured inks.&nbsp;Calbee said the adjustment reflects the need to respond “flexibly to changing geopolitical conditions,” limiting printing to just two ink colours for selected products. Industry reporting highlights that Japan relies heavily on imported naphtha from the Middle East, making its manufacturing sector particularly exposed to disruptions in the region.&nbsp;ALSO READ: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/why-does-china-hold-stronger-cards-as-trump-heads-to-beijing-for-high-stakes-summit-1778668449710">Xi-Trump summit: Why does China hold stronger cards as Trump heads to Beijing for high-stakes talks?</a>&nbsp;<h3>Industry Impact and Consumer Response</h3><h3>&nbsp;</h3>The packaging change affects some of ​this 77-year-old company's most recognisable products, including cereals, potato chips and shrimp snacks commonly sold in convenience stores across Japan and exported abroad. The company, founded in 1949 and employing more than 5,000 people, emphasised that the move is temporary, though no end date has been confirmed. According to reports, the decision reflects broader strain across Japanese manufacturing as firms adjust to rising input costs and volatile supply chains linked to the conflict. While government officials have said overall supplies remain stable, companies are increasingly adopting cost- and resource-saving measures.&nbsp;For consumers, the visual shift is stark: familiar brightly coloured snack packs are being replaced by monochrome designs, a quiet but visible reminder of how global conflict can reshape even the most ordinary aspects of daily life.

The shift is tied to shortages of naphtha, an oil-derived chemical used in manufacturing printing ink and packaging materials. Japan relies on imports from the Middle East for about 40 per cent of its naphtha consumption.

A conflict thousands of miles away has reached an unlikely consumer touchpoint: snack packaging. Japan’s leading snack producer, Calbee Inc., has announced it will temporarily shift 14 of its products to black-and-white packaging as disruptions linked to the Iran conflict strain supplies of key printing materials. The company said the change will begin from May 25 and is intended to conserve ink and maintain stable production, while leaving product quality unchanged. “This measure is intended to help maintain a stable supply of products,” Calbee said in a statement, stressing that what is inside the packs will remain unaffected. ALSO READ: Xi-Trump summit: US president reaches China for high-stakes talks — Date, venue, key facts and what’s at stake Ink Shortage and Oil-Linked Materials The shift is tied to shortages of naphtha, an oil-derived chemical used in manufacturing printing ink and packaging materials. Japan relies on imports from the Middle East for about 40 per cent of its naphtha consumption. The ongoing war in Iran has disrupted global energy flows, particularly through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for oil exports. As a result, supplies of petroleum-based inputs have tightened, pushing companies to reduce non-essential usage such as coloured inks. Calbee said the adjustment reflects the need to respond “flexibly to changing geopolitical conditions,” limiting printing to just two ink colours for selected products. Industry reporting highlights that Japan relies heavily on imported naphtha from the Middle East, making its manufacturing sector particularly exposed to disruptions in the region. ALSO READ: Xi-Trump summit: Why does China hold stronger cards as Trump heads to Beijing for high-stakes talks? Industry Impact and Consumer Response The packaging change affects some of this 77-year-old company's most recognisable products, including cereals, potato chips and shrimp snacks commonly sold in convenience stores across Japan and exported abroad. The company, founded in 1949 and employing more than 5,000 people, emphasised that the move is temporary, though no end date has been confirmed. According to reports, the decision reflects broader strain across Japanese manufacturing as firms adjust to rising input costs and volatile supply chains linked to the conflict. While government officials have said overall supplies remain stable, companies are increasingly adopting cost- and resource-saving measures. For consumers, the visual shift is stark: familiar brightly coloured snack packs are being replaced by monochrome designs, a quiet but visible reminder of how global conflict can reshape even the most ordinary aspects of daily life.

The shift is tied to shortages of naphtha, an oil-derived chemical used in manufacturing printing ink and packaging materials. Japan relies on imports from the Middle East for about 40 per cent of its naphtha consumption.

Iran conflict triggers ink shortage as Japanese snack giant switches to black-and-white packaging

Asia is facing what analysts are now calling a “plastic shock.” The crisis is being triggered by supply disruptions linked to the Iran oil conflict, which is now choking the flow of key petrochemical materials used to make plastics across the region. From food packaging to medical supplies and electronics, manufacturers are warning of shortages, rising costs, and delayed shipments.

Iran Crisis Disrupts Plastic Supply; Gulf Tensions Shake Asia Factories

At the core of&nbsp; US President Donald Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran lies the belief that Iran can be forced to negotiate terms for the lifting of harsh US economic sanctions even if it has no confidence in US intentions and adherence to agreements.

The Trump administration’s belief, despite the conviction of much of the international community that maximum pressure has failed and risks provoking a devastating all-out war in the Middle East, says much about the president’s transactional approach towards foreign policy that rests on the assumption that bluster, intimidation and the brute wielding of power can protect US interests and impose US will.

Richard Goldberg, an Iran-hawk who this month resigned as the official on the president’s national security council responsible for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction, signalled in an op-ed in The New York Times, entitled “Trump Has an Iran Strategy. This Is It,” that Trump attributes no importance to deep-seated Iranian concerns that he is gunning for regime change in Tehran and that building trust is not needed to resolve the Iran crisis.

“The Iranian regime doesn’t need to trust America or Trump to strike a deal; it just needs to act as a rational actor to avoid collapse,” said Goldberg, who backed by former national security advisor John Bolton, served for a year in the White House.

Goldberg appeared to ignore the fact that the US withdrawal 20 months ago from a 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program sparked doubts not only in Iran but across the globe about the value of a US signature on any agreement.

He also appeared oblivious to the fact that Iranian suspicions were reinforced by allegations that his salary, while at the White House, was paid by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a hardline Washington-based think tank that is believed to have close ties to Israel and the United Arab Emirates. So did anecdotes about how his hardline views provoked clashes with other administration officials.

In his op-ed, Goldberg suggested that any new agreement with Iran could be ratified by the US Senate.

The Trump administration and Goldberg’s misreading of what it would take to steer the United States and Iran off a road of more than 40 years of deep-seated mutual distrust and animosity and towards the turning of a new page in their relationship was evident in indirect responses to the former national security council official’s assertions.

”Even if one day we negotiate with the US, the talks will not be with Trump, won’t be strategic (no normalization of ties) and will be done only by conservatives, not reformists. We need to see changes in the (US) Congress; whether Democrats will pursue a fair policy by which Iran is not under pressure over its missile program,” said a regime insider.

The Trump administration has demanded among other things that Iran curb its ballistic missile program, a core element of the Islamic republic’s defence strategy given that its armed forces lack a credible air force and navy.

Hardliners, who rather than moderates have proven in other Middle Eastern conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to be the ones capable of cutting deals, are expected to win next month’s parliamentary elections in Iran. The likelihood of hardline advances was enhanced by the fact that scores of moderates have been barred from running for office.

Iranian reformists argue that the accidental downing of a Ukrainian airliner Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps demonstrates the risk of an Iranian strategy that is pre-empted on eternal hostility towards the United States.

Goldberg offered a rare indication that the Trump administration recognizes Iran’s strategy of gradual escalation that, based on the assumption that neither the United States nor Iran wants an all-out war, aims to bring the two countries to the brink of an armed conflict in the belief that this would break the logjam and force a return to the negotiating table on terms acceptable to Iran.

Noting that Trump had failed in the past nine months to respond to multiple Iranian provocations, including the downing of a US drone and attacks on tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates and on key Saudi oil facilities, Goldberg asserted that Trump “recognized those traps for what they were and exercised strategic patience.”

Trump’s patience ended in December when he responded to the death of an American contractor in an attack by Iranian-backed Iraqi militias and the militias’ siege of the US embassy in Baghdad by first authorizing airstrikes against militias bases in Iraq and Syria and then the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani

Goldberg would likely describe the president’s decision not to respond to a subsequent Iranian retaliatory attack on housing facilities for US military personnel in Iraq as a renewed act of strategic patience. 
&nbsp;Trump’s strategic patience is bolstered by his retention of options to further increase maximum pressure on Iran. “Many wrongly believe the United States has already reached full ‘maximum pressure on Iran,” Goldberg said.

Goldberg pointed to sanctions targeting Iranian state shipping lines that are set to take effect in June, the administration’s recent identification of Iran’s financial sector as a “primary jurisdiction of money-laundering concern,” this month’s imposition of sanctions on its construction, mining and manufacturing sectors, and Europe’s triggering of the nuclear accord’s dispute mechanism that could lead to the return of United Nations-mandated sanctions.

Goldberg and Trump’s belief that imminent economic collapse and international political isolation could prompt Iranian leaders to suddenly place a call to the White House turns Trump’s handling of the Iran crisis into a litmus test of the president’s approach to foreign relations.

There is little in the torturous history of relations between the United States and the Islamic republic that suggests that pressure will persuade Iran, convinced that Washington is gunning for the fall of the regime, to gamble on an unconditional return to the negotiating table.

Nor does North Korea’s failure to succumb to US pressure even if Trump, in contrast to his remarks about Iranian spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, professed his love for Kim Jong-un.

Trump’s policy towards Iran, rather than reinforcing Gulf confidence in the United States’ reliability as a guarantor of regional security, has sparked a wait-and-see attitude and nagging doubts about US reliability.

If anything, risky US and Iranian strategies are likely to prove that the crisis can only be defused if both sides garner an understanding of the others’ objectives and some degree of confidence that both parties would remain committed to any agreement they conclude.

So far, US and Iranian policies amount to a dialogue of the deaf that is likely to perpetuate the risk of hostility getting out of hand and incentivize regional players to think about alternative arrangements that ultimately could weaken US influence and reduce tensions with Iran by including it, despite US policy, in a more multilateral security architecture.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

At the core of US President Donald Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran lies the belief that Iran can be forced to negotiate terms for the lifting of harsh US economic sanctions even if it has no confidence in US intentions and adherence to agreements.

At the core of US President Donald Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran lies the belief that Iran can be forced to negotiate terms for the lifting of harsh US economic sanctions even if it has no confidence in US intentions and adherence to agreements. The Trump administration’s belief, despite the conviction of much of the international community that maximum pressure has failed and risks provoking a devastating all-out war in the Middle East, says much about the president’s transactional approach towards foreign policy that rests on the assumption that bluster, intimidation and the brute wielding of power can protect US interests and impose US will. Richard Goldberg, an Iran-hawk who this month resigned as the official on the president’s national security council responsible for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction, signalled in an op-ed in The New York Times, entitled “Trump Has an Iran Strategy. This Is It,” that Trump attributes no importance to deep-seated Iranian concerns that he is gunning for regime change in Tehran and that building trust is not needed to resolve the Iran crisis. “The Iranian regime doesn’t need to trust America or Trump to strike a deal; it just needs to act as a rational actor to avoid collapse,” said Goldberg, who backed by former national security advisor John Bolton, served for a year in the White House. Goldberg appeared to ignore the fact that the US withdrawal 20 months ago from a 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program sparked doubts not only in Iran but across the globe about the value of a US signature on any agreement. He also appeared oblivious to the fact that Iranian suspicions were reinforced by allegations that his salary, while at the White House, was paid by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a hardline Washington-based think tank that is believed to have close ties to Israel and the United Arab Emirates. So did anecdotes about how his hardline views provoked clashes with other administration officials. In his op-ed, Goldberg suggested that any new agreement with Iran could be ratified by the US Senate. The Trump administration and Goldberg’s misreading of what it would take to steer the United States and Iran off a road of more than 40 years of deep-seated mutual distrust and animosity and towards the turning of a new page in their relationship was evident in indirect responses to the former national security council official’s assertions. ”Even if one day we negotiate with the US, the talks will not be with Trump, won’t be strategic (no normalization of ties) and will be done only by conservatives, not reformists. We need to see changes in the (US) Congress; whether Democrats will pursue a fair policy by which Iran is not under pressure over its missile program,” said a regime insider. The Trump administration has demanded among other things that Iran curb its ballistic missile program, a core element of the Islamic republic’s defence strategy given that its armed forces lack a credible air force and navy. Hardliners, who rather than moderates have proven in other Middle Eastern conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to be the ones capable of cutting deals, are expected to win next month’s parliamentary elections in Iran. The likelihood of hardline advances was enhanced by the fact that scores of moderates have been barred from running for office. Iranian reformists argue that the accidental downing of a Ukrainian airliner Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps demonstrates the risk of an Iranian strategy that is pre-empted on eternal hostility towards the United States. Goldberg offered a rare indication that the Trump administration recognizes Iran’s strategy of gradual escalation that, based on the assumption that neither the United States nor Iran wants an all-out war, aims to bring the two countries to the brink of an armed conflict in the belief that this would break the logjam and force a return to the negotiating table on terms acceptable to Iran. Noting that Trump had failed in the past nine months to respond to multiple Iranian provocations, including the downing of a US drone and attacks on tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates and on key Saudi oil facilities, Goldberg asserted that Trump “recognized those traps for what they were and exercised strategic patience.” Trump’s patience ended in December when he responded to the death of an American contractor in an attack by Iranian-backed Iraqi militias and the militias’ siege of the US embassy in Baghdad by first authorizing airstrikes against militias bases in Iraq and Syria and then the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani Goldberg would likely describe the president’s decision not to respond to a subsequent Iranian retaliatory attack on housing facilities for US military personnel in Iraq as a renewed act of strategic patience. Trump’s strategic patience is bolstered by his retention of options to further increase maximum pressure on Iran. “Many wrongly believe the United States has already reached full ‘maximum pressure on Iran,” Goldberg said. Goldberg pointed to sanctions targeting Iranian state shipping lines that are set to take effect in June, the administration’s recent identification of Iran’s financial sector as a “primary jurisdiction of money-laundering concern,” this month’s imposition of sanctions on its construction, mining and manufacturing sectors, and Europe’s triggering of the nuclear accord’s dispute mechanism that could lead to the return of United Nations-mandated sanctions. Goldberg and Trump’s belief that imminent economic collapse and international political isolation could prompt Iranian leaders to suddenly place a call to the White House turns Trump’s handling of the Iran crisis into a litmus test of the president’s approach to foreign relations. There is little in the torturous history of relations between the United States and the Islamic republic that suggests that pressure will persuade Iran, convinced that Washington is gunning for the fall of the regime, to gamble on an unconditional return to the negotiating table. Nor does North Korea’s failure to succumb to US pressure even if Trump, in contrast to his remarks about Iranian spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, professed his love for Kim Jong-un. Trump’s policy towards Iran, rather than reinforcing Gulf confidence in the United States’ reliability as a guarantor of regional security, has sparked a wait-and-see attitude and nagging doubts about US reliability. If anything, risky US and Iranian strategies are likely to prove that the crisis can only be defused if both sides garner an understanding of the others’ objectives and some degree of confidence that both parties would remain committed to any agreement they conclude. So far, US and Iranian policies amount to a dialogue of the deaf that is likely to perpetuate the risk of hostility getting out of hand and incentivize regional players to think about alternative arrangements that ultimately could weaken US influence and reduce tensions with Iran by including it, despite US policy, in a more multilateral security architecture. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-makes-unscheduled-appearance-at-united-nations-climate-summit-251577">Donald Trump</a> will try selling his tough Iran policy in a speech to the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg-asks-world-leaders-at-un-251559">United Nations</a> on Tuesday, but the bid for international leadership will be overshadowed by the growing political scandal at home.

"We'll be talking about Iran," Trump told reporters about his speech at the UN General Assembly in New York.

Saying his administration had already put "a lot of pressure" on Tehran, he hinted at new measures in the US campaign to end Iran's nuclear technology programs and, more generally, to curb the country's power in the Middle East.

"A lot of things are going to happen," he said. "A lot more than you would know. A lot more than the media knows."

Watch: Modi-Trump joint appearance a sign of strong ties

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-us-edition-modi-trump-joint-appearance-a-sign-of-strong-ties-251586/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

For all the tough talk, speculation persisted that Trump might somehow still meet with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani at the UN, something that appeared to have been ruled out in the wake of an attack on oil facilities in US ally Saudi Arabia.

"I never rule anything out," Trump said Monday.

The US president's speech to the UN General Assembly is always one of the highlights of the world body's annual get-together.

But Trump is an awkward fit at an organization designed to collaborate over the planet's problems.

That's all the more so as his 2020 reelection battle intensifies and the former real estate businessman strengthens his nationalist, "America First" message.

Trump, who opposes any attempt to cut carbon emissions, largely snubbed the chief event of the opening day Monday, a summit called by the UN secretary-general on global warming.

Although he did attend, having previously indicated he wouldn't come at all, Trump left after less than 15 minutes and did not speak, before hosting his own conference on religious freedom.

Alleged dirty tricks

Adding to the turmoil around the lightning rod US leader, he faces new threats of impeachment from Democrats over claims that he pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to dig up dirt on his possible 2020 election opponent Joe Biden.

Everywhere Trump went at UN headquarters on Monday, he faced questions from reporters about the controversy.

Trump says he did nothing wrong, although he admits talking to Zelensky about what he says was corruption by Biden's family. 
A meeting scheduled with Zelensky on Wednesday will come under scrutiny.

The mounting furore back in Washington clearly wore on Trump, who is under pressure to release transcripts of his phone calls with the Ukrainian leader.

Trump angrily called journalists "crooked as hell," Biden "corrupt" and claimed that members of his Republican party would get "the electric chair" if they were as bad as he claimed Biden was.

Airing another grudge, he complained about not having been awarded a Nobel peace prize, saying he would have, many times over, "if they give it out fairly."

Economy boasts, worries

What the world is sure to get from Trump's speech is a rundown of his successes with the powerful US economy.

"We'll say the United States is the greatest country in the world. It's never been stronger and it's never been better," he said ahead of the UN bash.

Last year, Trump boasted that he had "accomplished more than almost any administration" in US history. Diplomats laughed.

This time, Trump will have his work cut out justifying his high-stakes trade war with China and reassuring partners.

The two top economic superpowers' exchange of massive tariffs has spooked markets around the world.

Trump insists that his all-or-nothing approach is needed to break decades of unfair trade practices by China. And he says that US tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese exports have forced Beijing to come to the negotiating table.

"China wants to make a deal. They have a lot of people that don't have jobs now because their supply chain is broken," he said.

US President Donald Trump will try selling his tough Iran policy in a speech to the United Nations on Tuesday, but the bid for international leadership will be overshadowed by the growing political scandal at home.

US President Donald Trump will try selling his tough Iran policy in a speech to the United Nations on Tuesday, but the bid for international leadership will be overshadowed by the growing political scandal at home. "We'll be talking about Iran," Trump told reporters about his speech at the UN General Assembly in New York. Saying his administration had already put "a lot of pressure" on Tehran, he hinted at new measures in the US campaign to end Iran's nuclear technology programs and, more generally, to curb the country's power in the Middle East. "A lot of things are going to happen," he said. "A lot more than you would know. A lot more than the media knows." Watch: Modi-Trump joint appearance a sign of strong ties For all the tough talk, speculation persisted that Trump might somehow still meet with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani at the UN, something that appeared to have been ruled out in the wake of an attack on oil facilities in US ally Saudi Arabia. "I never rule anything out," Trump said Monday. The US president's speech to the UN General Assembly is always one of the highlights of the world body's annual get-together. But Trump is an awkward fit at an organization designed to collaborate over the planet's problems. That's all the more so as his 2020 reelection battle intensifies and the former real estate businessman strengthens his nationalist, "America First" message. Trump, who opposes any attempt to cut carbon emissions, largely snubbed the chief event of the opening day Monday, a summit called by the UN secretary-general on global warming. Although he did attend, having previously indicated he wouldn't come at all, Trump left after less than 15 minutes and did not speak, before hosting his own conference on religious freedom. Alleged dirty tricks Adding to the turmoil around the lightning rod US leader, he faces new threats of impeachment from Democrats over claims that he pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to dig up dirt on his possible 2020 election opponent Joe Biden. Everywhere Trump went at UN headquarters on Monday, he faced questions from reporters about the controversy. Trump says he did nothing wrong, although he admits talking to Zelensky about what he says was corruption by Biden's family. A meeting scheduled with Zelensky on Wednesday will come under scrutiny. The mounting furore back in Washington clearly wore on Trump, who is under pressure to release transcripts of his phone calls with the Ukrainian leader. Trump angrily called journalists "crooked as hell," Biden "corrupt" and claimed that members of his Republican party would get "the electric chair" if they were as bad as he claimed Biden was. Airing another grudge, he complained about not having been awarded a Nobel peace prize, saying he would have, many times over, "if they give it out fairly." Economy boasts, worries What the world is sure to get from Trump's speech is a rundown of his successes with the powerful US economy. "We'll say the United States is the greatest country in the world. It's never been stronger and it's never been better," he said ahead of the UN bash. Last year, Trump boasted that he had "accomplished more than almost any administration" in US history. Diplomats laughed. This time, Trump will have his work cut out justifying his high-stakes trade war with China and reassuring partners. The two top economic superpowers' exchange of massive tariffs has spooked markets around the world. Trump insists that his all-or-nothing approach is needed to break decades of unfair trade practices by China. And he says that US tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese exports have forced Beijing to come to the negotiating table. "China wants to make a deal. They have a lot of people that don't have jobs now because their supply chain is broken," he said.

Trump addresses United Nations in shadow of Iran crisis, domestic scandal

U.S. Uses A Mix Of Sanctions & Blacklisting To Target Iran. Here's How The U.S. Has Targetted Iran This Year Palki summarises the timeline of the U.S.-Iran Standoff. U.S. has maintained the pressure on Iran while Iran has threatened to scale bank its commitment to 2015 Nuclear deal

Gravitas: U.S-Iran standoff: the sequence of events

iran-crisis

Iran Crisis, News on Iran Crisis, stories on Iran Crisis, articles on Iran Crisis, Iran Crisis stories at Wion, Iran Crisis news, Iran Crisis latest news

iran crisis

Trump Launches “Economic Warfare” Against Iran As Strait Of Hormuz Crisis Deepens

Iran War Fuels Oil Profits: Energy Giants Earn $93 Billion in Just 3 Months

Goldman warns: Brent could top $120 again | Wion News | World Business Watch

Japanese snack giant switches to black-and-white packaging amid Iran war crisis

Iran Crisis Disrupts Plastic Supply; Gulf Tensions Shake Asia Factories

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

Trump addresses United Nations in shadow of Iran crisis, domestic scandal

Gravitas: U.S-Iran standoff: the sequence of events