Watch: Iran fires missiles at US Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar
Iran launched missiles on Monday targeting Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar — the largest American military installation in the Middle East — in what is believed to be its first direct response to recent US airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites.
Qatar confirmed that its air defense systems successfully intercepted the missiles before they could cause any damage. 'We reassure that Qatar's air defenses successfully thwarted the attack and intercepted the Iranian missiles. A detailed statement regarding the circumstances of the attack will be issued later by the Ministry of Defense,' said government spokesperson Dr. Majed Al Ansari.
Videos circulating on social media captured the scenes of missiles being intercepted mid-air, with air defense systems visibly engaging the incoming projectiles over Qatari skies.
pic.twitter.com/muDnnkzAIf
— Anas Alhajji (@anasalhajji) June 23, 2025
Explosions were heard over Doha, the capital, shortly after the missile launches, according to eyewitnesses cited by Reuters. In the immediate aftermath, Qatar temporarily closed its airspace. Both the US and British embassies in Doha issued emergency advisories, urging citizens to shelter in place due to a 'heightened security threat.'
Several commercial aircraft appeared to abruptly change course and circle over the Persian Gulf on Tuesday evening, amid reports that Iran launched missiles targeting Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, a key installation used by US forces.
Live flight tracking data shows multiple planes from airlines including flydubai, Jazeera Airways, and SriLankan Airlines altering their flight paths and avoiding Qatari airspace. At least four aircraft — including flights FDB628, FDB175, JZR1409, and FAD513 — were seen holding patterns over the Gulf, suggesting a temporary airspace disruption.
The rerouting comes as explosions were reported over Doha, and Qatar reportedly closed its airspace following a warning from the US embassy for American citizens to shelter in place. A source cited by Axios stated that six Iranian missiles were fired at US military installations in Qatar, escalating fears of regional conflict.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
Iran Fires at US Bases in Qatar, Iraq
Iran launched missile attacks Monday on US military bases in Qatar and Iraq, retaliating for the American bombing of its nuclear sites and escalating tensions in the volatile region. Iran announced on state television that it attacked American forces stationed at Qatar's Al Udeid Air Base , the largest US military installation in West Asia. Tehran said its missile attack matched the number of bombs dropped by the US on Iranian nuclear sites this weekend, signalling Iran's likely desire to de-escalate. The Iranian military said the attack was 'devastating and powerful' but Qatar said it successfully intercepted the missiles, and the attack caused no injuries while stressing it reserved the right to respond. Iran is also said to have targeted the Ain al-Assad base housing US troops in western Iraq. The attacks came shortly after Qatar closed its airspace as a precaution amid threats from Iran. The main US base in Iraq's western neighbour Syria was also on full alert for possible attack by Iran or Iran-aligned militia groups, a Syrian security source said. Bahrain, Kuwait and UAE also closed their airspace following the attack. Iran, which had been warned by Washington not to retaliate or face massive US military action, had informed the US via two diplomatic channels hours ahead of the attack, as well as Qatari authorities, a senior regional source told Reuters. Iran's Supreme National Security Council in a statement said: 'This action posed no danger to our friendly and brotherly nation of Qatar and its honourable people. The Islamic Republic of Iran remains committed to preserving and continuing its warm and historic relations with Qatar.' Just before the explosions, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on X: 'We neither initiated the war nor seeking it. But we will not leave invasion to the great Iran without answer.' In the past, Iran has threatened American forces at Al Udeid Air Base, which hosts the forward headquarters of the US military's Central Command. Qatar, across the Persian Gulf from Iran, maintains diplomatic relations with Iran and shares a massive offshore natural gas field with Tehran. Earlier in the day, Israel expanded its war against Iran to include targets associated with the country's theocracy. As plumes of thick smoke rose over Tehran, Israel was attacked with yet another barrage of Iranian missiles and drones. The latest strikes unfolded only hours after President Donald Trump openly raised the possibility of a regime change in Iran. 'If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change???' he asked on his Truth Social website. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later described Trump as 'simply raising a question.' A key area of focus for global markets is the Strait of Hormuz, a major artery for the world's oil and gas. Iran's parliament called for the closure of the strait, according to state-run TV on Sunday. Naval forces in the region warned that ships, especially US-linked ones, could be at heightened risk. Greece, home to more oil-tanker capacity than any other nation, cautioned its vessels owners to think again if they're considering entering the Persian Gulf. Two supertankers, each capable of hauling about 2 million barrels of crude, performed U-turns in the strait. They entered the waterway and abruptly changed course, according to vessel tracking data. After a pause, both headed back through Hormuz. The two vessels' movements come as shipbrokers and others in the oil tanker market report a cautious willingness to enter the stretch of water that's pivotal to the global oil trade.
Hindustan Times
16 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
India caught in crosshairs of US bill against Russia
India's economic ties with Russia are in the spotlight again after influential US Senator Lindsey Graham publicly pushed for a new sanctions bill that will also target countries that do business with Moscow. 'I've got 84 co-sponsors for a Russian sanctions bill that is an economic bunker buster against China, India, and Russia for Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine. I think that bill's going to pass,' Graham said in a television interview on Sunday. US Senator Lindsey Graham looks on in Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 5, 2025. (Reuters) Graham was referring to the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025, which was introduced in US Senate in April this year. The bill proposes steep American tariffs on goods and services exports from countries that purchase Russian-origin oil, natural gas, uranium and petroleum products. It also pushes for expanded sanctions against Russian businesses, government institutions and top policymakers. Also Read | India welcomes Russian Prez Putin's offer of direct talks with Ukraine's Zelensky India was the second largest buyer of Russian fossil fuels in May 2025, according to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air. It estimated that India purchased fossil fuels worth €4.2 billion from Russia in May, with crude oil amounting to 72% of the total. However, the proposed bill also allows the President of the United States to issue a one-time waiver of 180 days to a particular country in case 'if the President determines that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States'. The bill is intended to put economic pressure on Russia and force it to the negotiating table to end the Ukraine war. Graham , a close political ally of President Trump , has called on India to cut economic ties with Russia in the past. 'To China and India: if you continue to prop up Putin's war machine, you'll have nobody to blame but yourself,' he wrote on X, a social media website, on June 13. Also Read | Navigating India-Russia relations in the Trump era So far, the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 has been read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. It will subsequently have to be passed by the Senate, the House of Representatives and then signed by President Donald Trump before it becomes law. During an interview on Sunday, Senator Graham — who is the main sponsor of the bill — pushed for the Sanctioning Russia Act to be passed quickly. 'Trying to push Russian oil out of the market could cause a price shock. Exports from major suppliers like Iran and Venezuela have already been restricted by sanctions. If India and other countries are forced to stop buying Russian oil, then prices would rise,' explains Prashant Vashisht, Senior Vice President at ICRA, an investment information and credit ratings agency. 'India does face a risk of disruption to energy supplies. For example, we have been seeing increasing tensions in West Asia involving countries like Iran. While the situation is still uncertain, disruption of energy exports from major oil producers in the region due to an escalation would be disruptive. If you add to this by taking Russian oil out of the market, then that would create a challenging situation for India,' adds Vashisht.
India Today
19 minutes ago
- India Today
Supreme Court backs Trump plan to deport migrants to nations not their own
The US Supreme Court cleared the way on Monday for President Donald Trump's administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face, handing him another victory in his aggressive pursuit of mass an action that prompted a sharp dissent from its three liberal justices, the court granted the administration's request to lift a judicial order requiring that migrants set for deportation to so-called "third countries" get a "meaningful opportunity" to tell US officials they are at risk of torture at their new destination, while a legal challenge plays US District Judge Brian Murphy issued the order on April 18. The Supreme Court's brief order was unsigned and offered no reasoning, as is common when it decides emergency requests. The court has a 6-3 conservative Sonia Sotomayor, joined by the two other liberal justices, called the decision a "gross abuse" of the court's power."Apparently, the court finds the idea that thousands will suffer violence in far-flung locales more palatable than the remote possibility that a district court exceeded its remedial powers when it ordered the government to provide notice and process to which the plaintiffs are constitutionally and statutorily entitled," Sotomayor called the court's action "as incomprehensible as it is inexcusable."Murphy had found that the administration's policy of "executing third-country removals without providing notice and a meaningful opportunity to present fear-based claims" likely violates the US Constitution's due process protections. Due process generally requires the government to provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking certain adverse the Department of Homeland Security moved in February to step up rapid deportations to third countries, immigrant rights groups filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of a group of migrants seeking to prevent their removal to such places without notice and a chance to assert the harms they could on May 21 found that Trump's administration had violated his order mandating further procedures in trying to send a group of migrants to politically unstable South Sudan, a country that the US State Department has warned against any travel "due to crime, kidnapping and armed conflict."The judge's intervention prompted the US government to keep the migrants at a military base in Djibouti, although American officials later said one of the deportees, a man from Myanmar, would instead be deported to his home country. Of the other passengers who were on the flight, one is South Sudanese, while the others are from Cuba, Mexico, Laos and Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, which helps represent the plaintiffs, called the ramifications of the court's action "horrifying," stripping away "critical due process protections that have been protecting our class members from torture and death."The administration told the Supreme Court that its third-country policy has already complied with due process and is critical for removing migrants who commit crimes because their countries of origin are often unwilling to take them back. It said that all the South Sudan-destined migrants had committed "heinous crimes" in the United States, including murder, arson and armed Supreme Court's stay of a left-wing district judge's injunction reaffirms the president's authority to remove criminal illegal aliens from our country and Make America Safe Again," White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said after Monday's decision."Fire up the deportation planes," said Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.A FLOOD OF CASESThe dispute is one of many legal challenges to Trump policies to have reached the nation's highest judicial body since he returned to office in Supreme Court in May let Trump end humanitarian programs for hundreds of thousands of migrants to live and work in the United States temporarily. The justices, however, faulted the administration's treatment of some migrants who Trump targeted for removal under the Alien Enemies Act - a 1798 law that historically has been employed only in wartime - as inadequate under constitutional due process said that in sending migrants to South Sudan, and in another instance four others to the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and on to El Salvador, the administration "openly flouted two court orders" issued by Murphy. Sotomayor also pointed to the separate Alien Enemies Act litigation in which questions were raised about the administration's compliance with an order issued by a judge in that case."This is not the first time the court closes its eyes to noncompliance, nor, I fear, will it be the last," Sotomayor wrote. "Yet each time this court rewards noncompliance with discretionary relief, it further erodes respect for courts and for the rule of law."The administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene after the Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals on May 16 declined to put Murphy's decision on hold.- EndsMust Watch
