US orders partial evacuation of Iraq Embassy, says dependents of troops can leave locations across Middle East
US missions in Baghdad and Erbil started evacuating most of their diplomats in response to unspecified security threats Wednesday, reports claimed. 'President Trump is committed to keeping Americans safe, both at home and abroad.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
In keeping with that commitment, we are constantly assessing the appropriate personnel posture at all our embassies. Based on our latest analysis, we decided to reduce the footprint of our mission in Iraq,' the State Department said in an emailed statement.
Defense secretary Pete Hegseth authorized the voluntary departure of US military dependents across the Middle East, Politico reported.
The sudden move came after Iran's defense minister threatened to strike American based in the region if negotiations over Iran's nuclear program fail.
Iran has repeatedly said its nuclear ambitions are focused on peaceful purposes like energy production. But Nasirzadeh said on Wednesday that "if a conflict is imposed on us...all US bases are within our reach."
The Baghdad embassy has already been on limited staffing, and the order will not affect a large number of personnel, according to the AP. The State Department is also authorizing the departure of nonessential personnel and their family members from Bahrain and Kuwait, giving them the option to leave the country.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
I like Tesla: Trump softens tone after Musk backtracks in ugly feud
US President Donald Trump said he still likes Tesla, even after a public spat with its CEO, Elon Musk. Speaking at a White House event on Thursday, Trump said, "I like Tesla," and added, "A lot of people love the electric. They like Tesla. So do I. In all fairness, I like Tesla and I like others too, but I also like combustion engines."advertisementHe had threatened to move his red Tesla to the White House. Trump made these comments during an event where he officially ended California's strict electric vehicle (EV) rules. While signing documents to cancel the state's EV mandates, Trump joked, "Now we know why Elon doesn't like me so much, which he does, actually. He does."The joke was a nod to the recent argument between the two. Musk lashed out at Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' calling it a "disgusting abomination." He even said the president should be impeached, to which, Trump responded by saying he was "disappointed" in Musk. BREAKING: President Trump says "I like Tesla." DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) June 12, 2025MUSK SAYS HE WENT TOO FAR Elon Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has since admitted he went too far with his online posts about Trump. On Wednesday, Musk wrote on his social media platform X, "I regret some of my posts about President Donald Trump last week. They went too far."advertisementHe deleted several posts related to Trump -- including the post where he supported the idea of Trump being impeached. However, he still believes the Trump tax bill will only increase the country's financial tension between the two all-weather friends escalated to an extent that Musk even talked about starting his new political party. But things calmed down after close aides to both men stepped President JD Vance, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and David Sacks -- a friend of Musk and a senior Trump advisor on crypto -- all worked behind the scenes to bring Musk and Trump back on good to reporters at the Kennedy Centre, Vance confirmed he had spoken to both Trump and Musk. "We're trying to ensure that Elon is publicly supporting and privately supporting the president's agenda," Vance said. He also mentioned that Trump was "rightfully very frustrated" by Musk's comments but didn't want to continue fighting with InMust Watch
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
‘You're unfit to lead': Hegseth grilled over Signal chats, Greenland invasion plan; House hearing erupts over Pentagon chief's evasive responses
Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth faced intense scrutiny at a combative House Armed Services Committee hearing on Thursday, after appearing to confirm that the Pentagon has contingency plans to invade Greenland and Panama if necessary. He also refused to provide direct answers about his use of encrypted Signal chats to discuss military operations — a move that triggered bipartisan concern over potential breaches of protocol. 'Our job at the Defense Department is to have plans for any contingency,' Hegseth said in response to Rep. Adam Smith's (D-Wash.) pointed question about whether the Pentagon had invasion plans for Greenland or Panama. While it's standard for the Pentagon to prepare contingency strategies, Hegseth's vague responses prompted a sharp rebuke from Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio): 'I sure as hell hope that is not your testimony.' Hegseth attempted to defuse the moment by saying, 'We look forward to working with Greenland to ensure that it is secured from any potential threats.' The session grew heated as Hegseth evaded repeated questions about his alleged disclosure of operational details — including strike times and munitions — during U.S. attacks on Houthi rebels in Yemen, shared via Signal with both military officials and family members. Lawmakers pressed him on whether he had revealed classified material, but he avoided directly answering. 'What's not classified is that it was an incredible, successful mission,' Hegseth said, sparking more backlash. Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), a Marine veteran, challenged Hegseth on his accountability: 'Would you hold yourself accountable if the Inspector General finds that you leaked classified information?' Hegseth only replied that he serves 'at the pleasure of the president.' In one of the most charged moments of the hearing, Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.) told Hegseth, 'You're an embarrassment to this country. You're unfit to lead. You should just get the hell out.' Republican lawmakers defended Hegseth, criticising what they called 'flagrant disrespect,' while Hegseth responded, 'I'm happy to take the arrows' in pursuit of what he called difficult decisions. Lawmakers also questioned the politicisation of the military following a recent campaign-style speech by former President Donald Trump at Fort Bragg, where uniformed troops were seen cheering and booing political opponents, with MAGA merchandise sold nearby. Gen. Dan Caine, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the committee he was unaware of any violations, reaffirming that service members must remain apolitical. Hegseth was further grilled on his stance regarding women and transgender troops. He defended cutting diversity programs and asserted he wants the 'most capable troops,' but avoided clear answers on gender equality in combat roles. 'It depends on the context,' he said, arguing that women 'carry a rucksack differently.'
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Client services for client state: Trump's reset with Pak is marked by a transactional, short-horizon foreign policy
ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Our forefathers believed that we were different from Hindus in every possible aspect of life. Our religion is different. Our customs are different. Our traditions are different. Our thoughts are different. Our ambitions are different.… That was the foundation of the Two-Nation Theory. It was laid on the belief that we are two nations, not one.'That was Pakistan Army chief Gen — now Field Marshal — Asim Munir speaking at the Convention for Overseas Pakistanis in Islamabad on April 17. Less than a week later in Pahalgam , Pakistani terrorists killed 1 Christian and 24 Hindu tourists, as well as a local Muslim who resisted the assailants, after the killers established their victims' religious identities.A link between Munir's rant and the Pahalgam massacre is a possibility. But the rage in India in response to the attack went far beyond what Pakistan had expected. Perhaps it had assessed that India would do what it had done after the 2016 Uri attack when 18 Indian soldiers were killed. Or, in response to the 2019 Pulwama suicide bombing, which killed 41 Indian paramilitary soldiers. On both earlier occasions, India had reacted with one-off counterattacks in POK and Balakot. Rawalpindi probably expected a similar reaction time, the storyline changed. India's counter, launched on May 7, forced the Pakistani DGMO to speak to his Indian counterpart on May 10, and seek a ceasefire. The world is now aware of what transpired between May 7 and 10, although many would not want to talk about it. Suppliers of military equipment to Pakistan — the US, China, and Turkey — will probably be reevaluating their equipment that succumbed to Indian, Russian and French the Americans got into the act, mostly to save their major non-Nato ally. The resounding success of the Indian response had taken them aback. One wondered about the urgency of Trump 's self-described 'intervention' to stop matters escalating on the India-Pak front when the Ukraine war and IsraelHamas conflict — or even the Houthi battles in Yemen — have been allowed to last for years. Indian denials about US intervention have been ignored by the Americans. The Pakistanis, of course, eagerly accepted this anxiety seems to centre around India's destruction of Pakistan's Nur Khan airbase. Remember, according to Pakistani journalist and security expert Imtiaz Gul, the base is 'under American control', where even senior Pakistan Army officers are not allowed to has been extremely useful to the US. Its defence minister Khawaja Asif asserted that they had been fighting America's dirty wars for 30-odd years. From a strategic perspective, it's well-known that the US has been helping Pakistan to keep India 'occupied', while they get a geographic toehold near Iran and China. Both China and the US would like to have total control over Pakistan, to have a base looking at their interests to the east and economic rise, its decisions to choose its sourcing and look after its own interests, cause concern to the US. India tends to get under its skin, as its commerce secretary Howard Lutnick grumbled recently. Which is why the restart of the old game of hyphenating India and Pakistan, ignoring Indian sensitivities, while propping up these decisions may have been made earlier, announcements of $1 bn to Pakistan by IMF, $40 bn by World Bank, and another $800 mn during Operation Sindoor were bad optics. The latest signallings include inviting Munir to attend the 250th US Army Day celebrations in Washington on June 14 — which also happens to be Trump's 79th birthday. Undoubtedly, Munir will meet officials from the State Department and Pentagon, and get promises for military Central Command commander Michael E Kurilla, testifying before the House Armed Services Committee in Washington earlier this week, described Pakistan as a 'phenomenal partner' in anti-terrorism operations. He emphasised the need for the US to maintain relationships with both India and Pakistan, stating that he didn't 'believe it is a binary switch that we can't have one with Pakistan if we have a relationship with India'. In that case, the US shouldn't have a problem with India's relations with Russia and the a matter of conjecture if this US-Pak partnership is about Iran, Central Asia or even India. Pakistan is looking at buying 40 more Chinese J-35A stealth fighter aircraft, a rival of the US F-35, with a listed price of $9 bn, but on offer at 50% the value. This will mean that 80% of Pakistan's military purchases will be from China. Pakistan's debt to China, including CPEC, already amounts to nearly $70 April 26, World Liberty Financial (WLF) agreed to help build Pakistan's blockchain infrastructure, promote stablecoin-based remittances, and tokenise real-world assets. The agreement seeks to position Pakistan as a crypto-forward nation. Eric Trump, the president's son, is associated with WLF, whose executives met Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif as well as Munir. Enough such conditions, India should be prepared for Pahalgam-style attacks in the future, while expecting no assistance from China, and ambivalence from the US.
