SITREP
Evacuations from High-Risk Locations Call +44 (0)1202 308810 or Contact Us →
Strait of Hormuz Crisis Deepens as Gulf Conflict Escalates
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 10 July 2026 – 14 July 2026
- US President Donald Trump again declared on 10 July that the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and its ceasefire with Iran were “over”. Subsequently, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) attacked further vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) and declared that the SoH is closed, and the Trump administration announced the reimposition of the naval blockade against Iran to go into effect on 14 July.
- Between 11 and 14 July, US forces conducted daily strikes against targets in Iran. In retaliation, the IRGC launched attacks against primarily US military targets in Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Oman. Air defences were also activated in the UAE, although officials later claimed this was for Iranian projectiles outside of “UAE borders”.
- The MoU has almost certainly ended as a functioning de-escalation framework, even if it has not been formally abrogated by either party. The conflict has likely now entered a new, higher-intensity phase characterised by regular US strike packages and subsequent Iranian retaliatory salvos against targets in the Gulf states and Jordan.
- Following strikes against Sanaa International Airport in Houthi-controlled Yemen on 13 July, the Houthis launched an unspecified number of ballistic missiles and attack drones against southern Saudi Arabia, with Abha International Airport and King Khalid Air Base being targeted.
- As of 14 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open. However, on 14 July, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) issued a Conflict Zone Information Bulletin (CZIB) which recommended that air operators should not operate within the airspace of Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, and over the waters of the Gulf of Oman within Omani airspace.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: US-Iran Conflict Enters New High-Intensity Phase
US President Donald Trump again declared on 10 July that the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and its ceasefire with Iran were “over”. The Trump administration reportedly gave demands to Iran to publicly acknowledge that the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) is open and pledge to cease conducting attacks against commercial vessels.
On 11 July, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) attacked the Cyprus-flagged container ship M/V GFS Galaxy transiting the SoH. The IRGC stated it had fired a warning shot at a vessel attempting to use an “unauthorised route” and declared the SoH closed “until further notice”. The US responded with strikes against approximately 140 Iranian targets, which US Central Command (CENTCOM) stated included missile and drone sites, naval capabilities, ammunition storage facilities, communication networks and coastal surveillance radars.
On 12 July, Iran launched retaliatory strikes across the region. Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Oman all reported attempted Iranian attacks. Air defences were also activated in the UAE, although officials later claimed this was for Iranian projectiles outside of “UAE borders”.
The US conducted a further wave of strikes overnight 12-13 July, with CENTCOM stating it hit “dozens of targets”. In the Khuzestan province of Iran, a local official claimed that a US strike hit an agricultural water pumping station, according to Iranian media. However, this has not been confirmed. On 13 July, the IRGC conducted a further round of retaliation strikes against targets in Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain.
On 13 July, President Trump announced that the US would reimpose a naval blockade on Iranian ports and levy a 20 per cent charge on all cargo transiting the SoH, to go into effect on 14 July. Also on 13 July, the UAE’s Defence Ministry reported that Iranian missiles hit two UAE tankers in the SoH. The IRGC claimed it had “struck and disabled” two “rogue supertankers” that had ignored warnings and attempted to pass through an unauthorised route.
Overnight 13-14 July, the US conducted a third consecutive night of strikes in a five-hour mission against targets including Bushehr, Chah Bahar, Jask, Konarak, Abu Musa and Bandar Abbas, according to CENTCOM, with Iran then launching further waves of retaliation strikes against targets in Bahrain and Kuwait.
As of 14 July, the US Department of State maintains Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman at “Level 3: Reconsider Travel”.
As of 14 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
However, on 14 July, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) issued a Conflict Zone Information Bulletin (CZIB) which recommended that air operators should: “Not operate within the airspace of Bahrain (Bahrain FIR – OBBB), Kuwait (Kuwait FIR – OKAC), Qatar (Doha FIR – OTDF), the United Arab Emirates (Emirates FIR – OMAE), and the airspace over the waters of the Gulf of Oman within the FIR Muscat (OOMM)”.
Following an attempted Houthi attack against Abha International Airport, Saudi authorities issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) which closed Abha, Jizan and Najran airports until 18:00 local time, 14 July.
Saudi Arabia
On 13 July, strikes were conducted against Sanaa International Airport in Houthi-controlled Yemen. The Yemeni Armed Forces of the Saudi-backed internationally recognised government (IRG) have claimed that they conducted the strikes to prevent an Iranian aircraft from landing on Yemeni soil, while the Houthis have claimed that the strikes were conducted by Saudi Arabia. The attack was highly likely to have been conducted by Saudi Arabia, with Storm Shadow cruise missile (used by Saudi Arabia) fragments being reportedly found at the airport. Moreover, two US officials briefed the media that the Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, asked US President Donald Trump for his backing for military action against the Houthis and had secured his support.
Later on 13 July, the Houthis launched an unspecified number of ballistic missiles and attack drones against Saudi Arabia. A statement by the Houthis claimed that the attempted strikes were targeting Abha International Airport (AHB), with Iranian media reporting that King Khalid Air Base (KKAB) was also targeted. KKAB is located in Khamis Mushait, close to Abha. A spokesman for the Saudi-led coalition against the Houthis stated that the ballistic missile threat was successfully intercepted. However, unverified footage shows smoke rising from KKAB, which could indicate that at least one Houthi projectile successfully penetrated Saudi air defences and struck KKAB.
The Houthi statement said that they “warn all airlines against flying through Saudi Arabian airspace and urge them to take our warnings seriously until the blockade on Sana’a International Airport is lifted.” This highly likely indicates the current main target priority for Houthi strikes is airports, with the Houthi attack having followed the strikes against Houthi-controlled Sanaa International Airport.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 14 July, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open. However, following the attempted Houthi attack against Abha International Airport, Saudi authorities issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) which closed Abha, Jizan and Najran airports until 18:00 local time, 14 July.
Kuwait
On 12 July, Kuwait’s Ministry of Defence issued a statement saying that three land border posts in the north of the country and one offshore drilling platform belonging to the Kuwait Oil Company (KOC) were attacked, resulting in material damage. Based on prior attacks, it is highly likely that the northern border posts were attacked by Iran-backed Shia militias in Iraq. Furthermore, the attack against an offshore platform likely indicates an expansion of Iranian targeting beyond US military targets to include energy infrastructure targets.
On 13 July, air defences were again activated in Kuwait with the IRGC claiming that it struck US military infrastructure at Ahmad al-Jaber and Ali Al Salem air bases, which are both close to Kuwait City.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 14 July, Kuwait’s airspace is open. However, on 14 July, the EASA issued a CZIB which recommended that air operators should not operate in Kuwait’s airspace.
Bahrain
On 12 July, air defences were activated multiple times in Bahrain. Unconfirmed reports indicate that the US Navy’s 5th Fleet Headquarters in Manama was struck during an Iranian attack.
Early on 13 July, the IRGC claimed to have struck US military infrastructure at the Isa Air Base in southern Bahrain, and air raid sirens were again activated multiple times throughout the day. Bahrain’s military claimed that an unspecified number of Iranian missiles and attack drones were intercepted.
On 14 July, air raid sirens were again activated multiple times, with Iranian state media claiming that several US military targets in the Jaffair area of Manama (where the US Navy’s 5th Fleet Headquarters is located) were struck.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 14 July, Bahrain’s airspace is open. However, on 14 July, the EASA issued a CZIB which recommended that air operators should not operate in Bahrain’s airspace.
Qatar
On 12 July, air defences were activated in Qatar, with explosions heard overhead in Doha. The IRGC claimed that it had targeted Al Udeid Air Base southwest of Doha, with Qatar’s Ministry of Defence claiming that the missile attack was intercepted. Qatar’s Ministry of Interior stated that three people, including a child, were injured by debris due to interception operations.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 14 July, Qatar’s airspace is open. However, on 14 July, the EASA issued a CZIB which recommended that air operators should not operate in Qatar’s airspace.
UAE
Excluding attacks in the maritime domain, no confirmed attacks have been reported in the UAE between 10 and 14 July. However, on 12 July, the UAE’s National Emergency Crisis and Disaster Management Authority (NCEMA) announced that air defence systems were responding to a missile threat. The NCEMA later stated that the “missile threats detected this morning were outside UAE borders”.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 14 July, the UAE’s airspace is open. However, on 14 July, the EASA issued a CZIB which recommended that air operators should not operate in the UAE’s airspace.
Oman
On 12 July, Iranian attack drones were launched at targets in the Musandam and Al Batinah Central Governorates, Oman. The IRGC claimed that an air radar and a vessel detection radar were targeted and destroyed in Oman. This is the first occasion the IRGC has publicly claimed to have conducted an attack against Omani territory since the start of the conflict on 28 February. Previously, Iranian officials either formally denied having conducted attacks or left them unattributed. The IRGC’s public acknowledgement of attacks in Oman likely indicates that Iran is increasingly willing to treat Omani territory as a legitimate target and is less constrained by the political costs of openly conducting strikes in Oman.
The IRGC also claimed to have attacked US-linked logistics and refuelling facilities at Duqm Port, Oman, on 12 July. The port is dual-purpose and is sometimes used to sustain US naval operations. However, the claim has not been independently verified, and Omani authorities have not publicly confirmed that any projectile reached or damaged the port.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 14 July, Oman’s airspace is open. However, on 14 July, the EASA issued a CZIB which recommended that air operators should not operate in the Gulf of Oman in Oman’s airspace.
Regional Advisory
The MoU has almost certainly ended as a functioning de-escalation framework, even if it has not been formally abrogated by either party. The reimposition of the US naval blockade, effective 14 July, reverses the second of the two principal immediate US concessions implemented under the agreement signed on 17 June, following the revocation of the Iranian oil-sales waiver on 7 July. Collectively, these measures have effectively removed the principal economic and maritime benefits provided to Tehran under the MoU.
The IRGC’s formal declaration of the SoH’s closure on 11 July, sustained attacks on commercial vessels attempting to transit the SoH outside of Iran’s approved corridor, and expanded attacks against targets across the region, almost certainly indicate that Tehran no longer considers itself bound by the MoU’s provisions.
The conflict has likely now entered a new, higher-intensity phase characterised by regular US strike packages and subsequent Iranian retaliatory strikes against targets in the Gulf states and Jordan. However, this phase currently remains less intense than the pre-8 April ceasefire implementation period. The IRGC likely retains substantial capacity for escalation and is likely currently calibrating strikes to impose costs on US strikes while attempting to maintain an off-ramp for a return to full-scale regional conflict.
In earlier phases of the conflict, Iran conducted strikes against energy infrastructure, airports and other civilian infrastructure across the region in response to US attacks on analogous targets inside Iran. This pattern of calibrated, reciprocal targeting is likely to resume following further US strikes. The 12 July attack against a Kuwaiti offshore rig likely reflected this approach and marked the first reported strike against Gulf-state energy infrastructure since the 8 April ceasefire.
The potential involvement of Iranian-backed Iraqi militias in the attacks on Kuwait’s northern border posts may indicate that Tehran is willing to activate proxy forces to broaden the scope of retaliation and threaten further escalation. It is also likely that the Houthis would not have challenged the Saudi blockade of Yemen or conducted attacks on Saudi Arabia without support from Tehran.
The attempted Houthi strikes on Saudi Arabia almost certainly represent the most serious rupture in the Saudi-Houthi truce since 2022. A failure to de-escalate could increasingly draw the Houthis into the conflict and open a second attack vector against Saudi Arabia from Yemen. Escalation pathways include renewed Houthi ballistic missile and drone campaigns against Saudi airports, desalination plants and energy infrastructure, as well as military assets. IRGC-affiliated media have also repeatedly issued threats that the Bab al-Mandeb Strait could be closed, an action which would almost certainly require the support of the Houthis.
Key triggers for further escalation between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis include retaliatory strikes by Saudi Arabia in Houthi-controlled Yemen, an intensification of fighting between the Houthis and the Saudi-backed internationally recognised government (IRG) of Yemen, and the potential direct involvement of the US against the Houthis.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Elevated Unrest Risk During Bastille Day and France’s World Cup Semi-final
SITUATION SUMMARY | Intelligence cut off: 14:00 UTC 13 July 2026
The semi-final of the 2026 FIFA World Cup will be played in Arlington, Texas, on 14 July, starting at 15:00 local time (19:00 UTC). The game will be contested by the French and Spanish national teams, and the winner will play in the final on 19 July.
In France, the game will coincide with Bastille Day. The commemoration, observed every year on 14 July, marks the beginning of the French Revolution and is the most important political anniversary in France. Bastille Day frequently results in large-scale protests and rallies.
French authorities have planned large-scale security deployments and other measures to increase security during the Bastille Day events and the semi-final. The Interior Ministry announced that up to 70,000 extra police officers would be deployed throughout the country during the day.
In Paris, at least 7,000 police officers and 2,000 firefighters will be deployed. The Champs-Élysées, which will host a military parade for Bastille Day starting at 15:00 local time, will largely be closed to traffic, with a security perimeter that will only be accessible subject to prior registration. Several metro stations will be closed throughout the day, including Charles de Gaulle – Étoile, George V, Argentine, Tuileries, Concorde, Franklin Roosevelt, Champs-Élysées – Clemenceau, Kléber, and Boissière.
Other cities will also have security measures enhanced to minimise the threat of unrest. In Marseille, Lyon, and Lille, authorities have stated that no dedicated fan zones will be allowed. In Strasbourg, a dedicated fan zone will be established in the Jardin des Deux-Rives, while in Toulouse, the fan zone will be located near the stadium.
Several political demonstrations are scheduled to occur on 14 July alongside the official celebrations for Bastille Day. In Paris, several left-wing groups have planned a demonstration in the Bastille area, starting at 15:00 local time.
INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS
Crowd Convergence Raises Unrest Risks Across France
The convergence of France’s World Cup semi-final appearance and Bastille Day is likely to generate large crowds and widespread celebrations. This will likely increase the risk of disorder, violence and vandalism across Paris and other major French cities. Crowds will likely begin forming early for Bastille Day events and remain in public spaces to watch the World Cup semi-final. This is likely to result in high crowd densities throughout the day and well into the evening.
Past notable club- and national-level football games have resulted in large-scale and often violent disorder in major French cities. In 2026, several Champions League games involving Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) were followed by dispersed clashes and vandalism throughout central Paris and suburban areas. On 9-10 July, the World Cup quarterfinal game between France and Morocco also resulted in some isolated clashes; however, the deployment of a large police presence likely limited the scale of the disorder.
Cases of unrest could begin in the late afternoon but are likely to intensify during the night, peaking after the game’s conclusion. If the police intervene to counter disorder, there is a realistic possibility of escalation.
Previous clashes were marked by the widespread use of fireworks to attack police, posing a risk to bystanders, and by indiscriminate attacks on transiting private vehicles, with passengers also occasionally being harassed or attacked.
In Paris, unrest is likeliest to take place on the Champs-Élysées and in the Champ de Mars, with other high-risk areas including Trocadéro and Concorde. While most of the higher-risk areas for unrest are in northwest Paris, incidents in other parts of the city, such as the Marais area, République, Canal St. Martin, and Bastille, cannot be ruled out.
Travel and Safety Guidance for France
- Reconsider non-essential travel to South Africa on 30 June.
- Avoid the central business districts in major cities around 30 June.
- Closely monitor announcements from local authorities and trusted media sources for any developments that may severely impact the local security environment.
- Avoid all areas of unrest due to incidental risks to bystanders. If caught in the unrest, travellers should move with the crowd until they find the nearest opportunity to escape. If in a vehicle, look to turn down the nearest road. If driving away is not an option, lock the vehicle and escape on foot.
- Always follow all instructions and orders from security forces. Where possible, avoid areas of active unrest and remain in secure accommodation.
- Prolonged civil unrest can disrupt travel, especially if protesters begin targeting airports. Travellers should have contingency measures in place, including evacuation plans and reliable access to food, water and medication.
- Have emergency contact numbers saved on your phone. These should include the local authorities, medical facilities and any consular support. Ensure that mobile phones are charged in case of any loss of electricity.
- Keep emergency contact numbers saved on your phone, including those for local authorities, medical services, and consular assistance. Ensure mobile devices are fully charged in case of potential power outages.
- Closely monitor alerts from a security provider if available, trusted local news reports and government alerts.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Strait of Hormuz Tensions Keep Gulf Security Risks Elevated
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 7 July 2026 – 10 July 2026
- Following the earlier reported Iranian strikes against vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) overnight 6-7 July, the US conducted strikes against Iran, which were followed by Iran launching attacks against targets in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and Jordan.
- The 7-9 July exchanges almost certainly represent the most severe escalation since the implementation of the MoU, exceeding the 26-28 June cycle in scale, duration and target selection.
- Speaking at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, on 8 July, US President Trump stated that he believed the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Iran was “over”. However, a US official briefed after a meeting between President Trump and his national security team on 9 July that the US is “still committed to finding a resolution, and technical-level talks continue”.
- Iran almost certainly retains the capabilities to further escalate in response to US attacks. Escalation options publicly outlined on 8 July included Iran closing the Bab al-Mandeb Strait (BaM) and expanding strikes “to other American bases in the region”. Furthermore, a senior Iranian official stated on 10 July that attacks against infrastructure would be met with retaliation.
- A closure of the BaM would almost certainly require Houthi participation, and a recent deterioration in Houthi-Saudi relations almost certainly increases the credibility of this threat. On 7 July, the Houthis issued an ultimatum to Saudi Arabia threatening to close the BaM and the Red Sea to Saudi shipping if the naval and aerial blockades of the Houthis are not lifted.
- As of 10 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Remain Vulnerable to Renewed Retaliatory Strikes
Following the earlier reported Iranian strikes against vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) overnight 6-7 July, the US conducted strikes against Iran, which were followed by Iran launching attacks against targets in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Jordan.
Overnight on 7-8 July, US Central Command (CENTCOM) conducted strikes against Iran, stating that it hit more than 80 targets, including Iranian air defence systems, command and control networks (C2), coastal radar sites, anti-ship missile capabilities, and more than 60 Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) fast attack craft in and near the Strait of Hormuz (SoH). Iranian media reported explosions in the southern port city of Sirik, on Qeshm Island and in areas near Bandar Abbas. A US official described the strikes as larger than previous US retaliatory strike packages against Iran. Concurrently, the US Treasury revoked the sanctions waiver that had permitted the open sale of Iranian oil on international markets under the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). In retaliation, Iran conducted strikes against targets in Bahrain and Kuwait on 8 July.
Speaking at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, on 8 July, US President Donald Trump stated that he believed the MoU with Iran was “over” and that, while he might allow peace talks to continue, he considered them a “waste of time”, referring to the Iranian leadership as “scum”.
Overnight on 8-9 July, the US conducted a larger round of strikes. CENTCOM stated it hit approximately 90 targets across Iran. Preliminary reports indicate that US strikes also targeted Iranian bridges, with state media reporting a strike on a railway bridge in Golestan province, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) reporting two bridges struck on the route to Mashhad. Other reported targets in Iran have included Iranshahr Airport (IHR / OIZI) in the Sistan‑Baluchestan province and Iranian port infrastructure, including the Shahid Beheshti Port, Kalantari Port, and the maritime traffic control tower maritime traffic control tower at Chabahar, Iran’s only deepwater port and the most important port outside of the Persian Gulf. Iran responded on 9 July by conducting strikes against targets in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and Jordan.
Later on 9 July, Iranian media outlets claimed that further strikes were being conducted in southern Iran, including reported explosions heard in Bushehr, Bandar Abbas, and Sirik. However, US officials have stated that no further strikes were conducted on 9 July, with one official claiming this was the result of de-escalation efforts. Following a meeting by President Trump with his national security team on 9 July, a US official briefed that the US is “still committed to finding a resolution, and technical-level talks continue”.
On 10 July, the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, stated that attacks on infrastructure will be met with retaliation and that Israel would not be excluded from potential retaliation strikes. IRGC-affiliated media also argued on 8 July that Iran should respond to US aggression by disrupting Gulf oil exports and damaging regional energy infrastructure.
As of 10 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 7 and 10 July.
Following the recent escalation in tensions between Saudi Arabia and the Yemen-based Houthis, further threats have been issued. On 7 July, the Houthi political bureau member Abdullah al-Nuaimi issued an ultimatum to Saudi Arabia. The ultimatum threatened to close the Bab al-Mandeb Strait (BaM) and the Red Sea to Saudi shipping if the naval and aerial blockades of the Houthis are not lifted. Al-Nuaimi added that Saudi Arabia “may decide to enter a new war against Yemen, but it will not be able to stop it, and the situation will spiral out of control.”
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 10 July, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
Following escalation in the maritime domain and US strikes against Iran, air raid sirens sounded in Kuwait on 8 July. The IRGC claimed a joint missile and drone operation against Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, with Kuwaiti authorities stating that two ballistic missiles and 13 drones were intercepted. Authorities initially reported no material damage or injuries from the attack. However, the Ministry of Electricity, Water, and Renewable Energy announced that a number of overhead power transmission lines went out of service due to debris from interceptions.
Following further US strikes against Iran, air raid sirens sounded multiple times in Kuwait on 9 July. The Iranian military claimed that it conducted attacks against a “Patriot missile interceptor system”, Ali Al Salem Air Base, and Camp Arifjan in Kuwait. Kuwaiti authorities stated that three ballistic missiles, one cruise missile, and ten attack drones were detected in Kuwaiti airspace, and that all of the projectiles were successfully intercepted. Authorities stated that debris resulted in material damage in several locations and one injury.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 10 July, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
Following escalation in the maritime domain and US strikes against Iran, air raid sirens sounded multiple times in Bahrain on 8 July. The IRGC claimed a joint missile and drone operation against the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Manama, Bahrain, and Iranian state media claimed attack drones targeted the Isa Air Base in southern Bahrain. Bahraini authorities stated that air defence systems intercepted an unspecified number of projectiles.
Following further US strikes against Iran, air raid sirens sounded multiple times in Bahrain on 9 July. The IRGC claimed to have launched joint missile and drone operations targeting the US Fifth Fleet headquarters and Isa Air Base. Bahraini authorities stated that air defence systems intercepted an unspecified number of projectiles. Explosions were audible in Manama, and unverified footage indicates that at least one Iranian projectile may have directly hit the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Manama, Bahrain.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 10 July, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
In the early morning of 9 July, Qatar’s Interior Ministry issued an urgent security alert stating that the “[S]ecurity threat level is high and everyone must adhere to staying in homes and safe places.” This is the first time in nearly three months that Qatar residents have received an elevated security threat message. Less than an hour later, the Interior Ministry announced an end to the security threat and stated that the situation had returned to normal. The Iranian military claimed to have targeted an “early warning system” in Qatar with attack drones, following US strikes against Iran.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 10 July, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 7 and 10 July.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 10 July, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
Excluding attacks in Omani waters in the Strait of Hormuz, no attacks have been reported in Oman between 7 and 10 July.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 10 July, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
The 7-9 July exchanges almost certainly represent the most severe escalation since the implementation of the MoU, exceeding the 26-28 June cycle in scale, duration and target selection. The US strike packages were larger in scale and reportedly were also conducted against Iranian civilian or dual-purpose infrastructure, which would be the first such strikes by the US since the implementation of a ceasefire on 8 April.
In the earlier stages of the conflict, before the 8 April ceasefire implementation, Iranian retaliation extended beyond direct attacks on US military assets to targets in the Gulf States and Jordan. Iranian retaliation has so far remained largely confined to US military assets. However, recent US strikes have also targeted Iranian energy, port, transport and logistics infrastructure. There is a realistic possibility that Iranian retaliation will extend to strikes on analogous targets in the region. Threats issued by IRGC-affiliated media on 8 July and by the Secretary of Iran’s SNSC on 10 July likely further indicate that sustained attacks on Iranian infrastructure could result in a broader retaliatory campaign against regional critical infrastructure.
While the majority of targets struck by US CENTCOM remained focused on degrading Iran’s military capabilities and denying Iranian freedom of access in the SoH (air defences, coastal radars, anti-ship missile launch sites and IRGCN fast attack craft), the inclusion of civilian and dual-purpose infrastructure indicates a likely shift from calibrated sub-threshold and limited strikes towards a broader cost-imposition campaign. The concurrent revocation of the oil sales waiver also likely removes the principal economic incentive Tehran derived from the MoU.
The combination of expanded strikes and economic pressure likely indicates an assessment from the Trump administration that Iran will only be deterred from further attacks on shipping through military escalation, rather than through the negotiation track alone. It is also likely a strategy aimed at increasing pressure on the IRGC, which has increasingly operated outside of the agreed parameters of the de-escalation framework, which is being negotiated with Iran’s civilian government. However, this approach likely increases the risk of a total collapse of the MoU and a return to full-scale regional conflict.
Iran almost certainly retains the capabilities to further escalate in response to US attacks. Iran continues to demonstrate the capacity to launch multi-axis missile and attack drone salvos against Gulf targets, and its principal form of leverage, disrupting SoH transits, almost certainly remains intact. Some escalation options were publicly outlined by a spokesman for the Iranian parliament’s National Security Commission on 8 July, including withdrawal from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), changing Iran’s nuclear doctrine and closing the Bab al-Mandeb Strait (BaM). Moreover, the IRGC statement on 9 July, following its retaliation strikes, stated that if US aggression is repeated, strikes will be “expanded to other American bases in the region”. A closure of the BaM would almost certainly require Houthi participation, and a recent deterioration in Houthi-Saudi relations almost certainly increases the credibility of this threat.
The current escalation in Saudi-Houthi tensions is likely driven by a Houthi attempt to challenge the Saudi naval and air blockade of Houthi-controlled Yemen, which has been enforced since 2015. The Houthis have likely been emboldened by an increasingly IRGC-dominated regime in Tehran, which is less risk-averse and likely seeking to weaponise the threat of a BaM closure to increase its leverage on the US and on its allies in the Gulf.
Senior Houthi leaders likely calculate that threats against the BaM are now significantly more likely to compel compliance from Saudi Arabia to limit or lift its blockade. Saudi Arabia’s economy is increasingly vulnerable to disruption due to the disruption of transit through the SoH and increasing reliance instead on the East-West crude pipeline to Yanbu and Red Sea export routes. This has likely placed Riyadh in an increasingly challenging position, characterised by managing the immediate risk in the BaM, while simultaneously avoiding concessions that would strengthen Iran and the Houthis in the long-term.
Riyadh is likely to prioritise containing the current escalation and avoiding a resumption of large-scale conflict in Yemen. A major escalation between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia would likely result in resumed attacks on critical infrastructure and military facilities in Saudi Arabia (potentially in addition to other Gulf States involved in the coalition against the Houthis), as observed during the previous conflict before the implementation of a ceasefire in 2022. Despite the strikes conducted against the Houthis in 2025 by the US, UK and Israel, the Houthis likely maintain greater capabilities to conduct long-range attacks in 2026 than in 2022.
In addition to threatening the broader MoU, cycles of escalation originating in the maritime domain since the implementation of the first ceasefire on 8 April have repeatedly led to renewed Iranian strikes against terrestrial targets in the Gulf and Jordan. This pattern was first observed with Iranian attacks on the UAE and more recently, against Jordan, Kuwait. Bahrain, and now, Qatar.
The targeting of Qatar on 9 July, if confirmed, would represent the first direct Iranian targeting of Qatari territory since the 8 April ceasefire and a significant departure from the target prioritisation pattern observed since June, under which Iranian retaliation was confined to Bahrain and Kuwait. However, early indications are that the strikes conducted against Qatar were limited. Such a strike would likely be intended to demonstrate the IRGC’s will and capability to expand attacks across the Gulf beyond just Bahrain, Kuwait, and Jordan, against targets in a state with which Tehran maintains close contact and calculates is unlikely to respond significantly.
Currently, Iranian retaliation strikes are less likely to directly target Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Oman, although direct strikes against these countries cannot be ruled out in the event of a return to full-scale regional conflict. Senior Iranian officials and the IRGC have repeatedly threatened that strikes will be conducted against US military assets across the region in response to continued “aggression”.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Strait of Hormuz Attacks and Houthi-Saudi Tensions Raise Escalation Risk
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 30 June 2026 – 07 July 2026
- Overnight 6-7 July, at least two vessels were attacked in the Strait of Hormuz (SoH). These attacks have taken place just over a week after the US and Iran agreed to halt tit-for-tat strikes that were exchanged 26-28 June, which also followed attacks against vessels in the SoH.
- There is a realistic possibility of a similar cycle of escalation occurring in the coming days, with limited US strikes against Iranian territory highly likely to be followed by limited Iranian strikes targeting US regional bases, particularly in Kuwait and Bahrain, given recently established target prioritisation.
- On 3 July, a spokesman for Yemen’s Houthis announced that Saudi Arabian “warplanes” had been confronted by Houthi air defence, and that repeated airspace violations would be retaliated against with strikes on Saudi Arabia’s airports and other “vital interests”. A spokesman for the Saudi Arabia-led coalition supporting Yemen’s internationally recognised government (IRG) issued threats in response.
- The exchange of threats marks what is likely the most significant escalation in rhetoric between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia in years, and was followed by clashes between Houthi and Yemeni IRG forces. While the risk of a full resumption of the Yemeni civil war and a return to full-scale conflict between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia is unlikely in the immediate term, the risk has risen significantly in the last few days.
- As of 7 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Iran Funeral Period Pauses US Talks as Strait of Hormuz Vessel Attacks Raise Regional Risk
The funeral of Iran’s former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who was killed in the early stages of the conflict, began on 4 July and is set to conclude on 9 July, with ceremonies hosted in Tehran, Qom, and Mashhad. Qatar’s foreign ministry had earlier said that US-Iran negotiations will be paused during the funeral and will resume after 9 July. International media reported that as many as 12 million people have attended the processions, with some mourners recorded chanting “death to the compromiser” in reference to President Masoud Pezeshkian for engaging in negotiations with the US.
Overnight 6-7 July, the UK Maritime Trade Operations stated that a tanker had been hit by an “unknown projectile” close to the coast of Oman. The tanker was later identified as the Marshall Islands-flagged Qatari LNG tanker AL REKAYYAT (IMO: 9397339). Further reports indicate that another vessel, the Saudi Arabia-flagged crude oil tanker WEDYAN (IMO:9524970), was also struck overnight. US officials have briefed that Iran’s military fired at least two missiles at commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz (SoH), and that both vessels suffered significant damage but no casualties.
As of 7 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Jordan
No attacks have been reported in Jordan between 3 and 7 July.
At least 29 people have been injured in Jordan, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 7 July, Jordan’s airspace is open.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 3 and 7 July.
On 3 July, the Houthis’ military spokesman, Yahya Saree, announced that Houthi forces had confronted Saudi Arabian “warplanes” that allegedly attempted to prevent an Iranian civilian aircraft from landing at Sanaa International Airport in Houthi-controlled Yemen. The Houthi spokesman threatened that any allegedly repeated airspace violations would be retaliated against with strikes on Saudi Arabian airports and other “vital interests on land and sea”.
On 4 July, the spokesman of the Saudi Arabia-led coalition supporting Yemen’s internationally recognised government (IRG), Major-General Turki al-Maliki, pledged a response of “unprecedented determination and force” to any attempts to target Saudi Arabia or violate Yemeni sovereignty, dismissed the Houthi threats, and noted that the group’s posture had exposed civilian infrastructure in Houthi-controlled Yemen to potential targeting.
On 4-5 July, clashes between the Houthis and Saudi-backed Yemeni government forces were reported south of Hodeidah, likely marking the most serious fighting between the two sides since 2024. On 5 July, a bulk carrier transiting the Red Sea reported being attacked by unknown armed assailants on a skiff, around 13 nm off the Yemen coast near Al-Durayhimi, a Houthi-controlled area. If confirmed as the Houthis, this would mark a further escalation, with the Houthis having suspended attacks against merchant vessels in recent months.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 7 July, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
No attacks have been reported in Kuwait between 3 and 7 July.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 7 July, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
No attacks have been reported in Bahrain between 3 and 7 July.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 7 July, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 3 and 7 July.
In response to the attack against the Qatari LNG tanker in the SoH overnight 6-7 July, Qatar’s foreign ministry stated that Tehran bore full legal responsibility for the attack. Qatar has been acting as a mediator, alongside Pakistan, between the US and Iran, with no Iranian attacks recorded against Qatar since the implementation of a ceasefire on 8 April.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 7 July, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 3 and 7 July.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 7 July, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
Excluding attacks in Omani waters in the Strait of Hormuz, no attacks have been reported in Oman between 3 and 7 July.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 7 July, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
The attacks against commercial vessels transiting the SoH have taken place just over a week after the US and Iran agreed to suspend tit-for-tat strikes that were exchanged 26-28 June. The agreement followed a cycle of military escalation in the SoH, beginning with Iranian attacks on commercial shipping, followed by US Central Command (CENTCOM) strikes against Iranian military infrastructure and subsequent Iranian retaliatory strikes on US military facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed to have targeted the Ali Al Salem airbase in Kuwait and the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain in these strikes, which were likely calibrated to remain sub-threshold while signalling capability.
In addition to threatening the broader MoU, cycles of escalation originating in the maritime domain since the implementation of the first ceasefire on 8 April have repeatedly led to renewed Iranian strikes against terrestrial targets in the Gulf and Jordan. This pattern was first observed with Iranian attacks on the UAE and more recently against Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. During the 26-28 June escalation, Iranian retaliation was limited to Bahrain and Kuwait, likely reflecting this emerging pattern of target prioritisation. There is a realistic possibility of a similar cycle of escalation occurring in the coming days, characterised by limited US strikes against Iranian military targets followed by limited Iranian strikes targeting US regional bases, particularly in Kuwait and Bahrain, if recently established target prioritisation is sustained.
Currently, Iranian retaliation strikes are less likely to directly target Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Oman, although direct strikes against these countries cannot be ruled out in the event of a significant escalation and/or breakdown in the MoU. Senior Iranian officials and the IRGC have repeatedly threatened that strikes will be conducted against US military assets across the region in response to continued “aggression”.
Iran has avoided directly targeting Saudi Arabia and Qatar since the implementation of a ceasefire 8 April. Saudi Arabia highly likely exerts the greatest level of deterrence against Iran and has maintained regular diplomatic communication with Tehran, while Qatar is currently actively serving as a mediator in the US-Iran talks. However, it is notable that the vessels attacked by Iran in the SoH were Saudi Arabia and Qatar-owned. The vessels were reportedly transiting with AIS turned off and were conducting an outbound transit of the SoH via the Omani route and not Iran’s approved transit corridor. According to Iranian state television, the AL REKAYYAT had also reportedly ignored IRGC warnings. It currently remains unclear if the vessels were targeted due to their ownership links to Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The attacks likely indicate that the IRGC is prioritising Iranian control of the SoH and assesses that limited attacks on shipping will not trigger a major escalation.
The MoU almost certainly remains fragile and is functioning primarily as an extension of the 8 April ceasefire, rather than as a substantive or durable peace agreement. The previous ceasefire was marked by sporadic exchanges of strikes between the US and Iran following continued confrontations in the maritime domain. There remains a high risk of a tactical miscalculation and/or escalation in the SoH, with retaliatory strikes unlikely to be confined to the immediate area of engagement.
Iranian adherence to the ceasefire is likely to be undermined by the IRGC, which has increasingly consolidated power in Tehran, acted independently of the civilian government, and signalled total opposition to US demands. The funeral procession for Iran’s former Supreme Leader is ongoing, with the sentiments of anti-negotiation hardliners likely empowered by the proceedings. The lack of a fully coherent regime in Tehran with a unified negotiating position almost certainly complicates the negotiation process and increases the likelihood that elements within the IRGC could fail to comply with any agreements made by Tehran’s civilian government and negotiating team.
The recent exchange of threats between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis likely represents the most significant escalation in rhetoric between the two sides in years, ending a period of relative calm that persisted despite the wider regional conflict involving Iran, the Houthis’ primary sponsor. While the risk of a full resumption of the Yemeni civil war and a return to full-scale conflict between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia is unlikely in the immediate term, the risk has likely increased significantly in the last few days. There is a realistic possibility of further clashes in Yemen and further exchanges of hostile rhetoric between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis in the coming days, and miscalculation threatens to undermine the ceasefire in place since 2022.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Explosions opposite Four Seasons Hotel in Damascus, Syria
SITUATION SUMMARY | Intelligence cut off: 11:15 UTC 07 Jul 2026
At approximately 0720 UTC, two separate explosions in very close proximity occurred outside the Ministry of Tourism in Damascus. At least 18 people were injured in the blasts, including four police officers, according to Syrian state media. A Ministry of Interior source has said that one of the bombs was placed in a vehicle and another in a dumpster. The first explosion was followed seconds later by a second, more powerful explosion. Security forces have deployed to the scene and have closed the surrounding streets. No group has so far claimed responsibility for the attack.
The Ministry of Tourism is located just opposite the Four Seasons Hotel, where French President Emmanuel Macron was reported to have stayed overnight for a state visit. President Macron was unharmed, but had left the hotel in a motorcade to the presidential palace for a meeting with Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa shortly before the explosions. The office of the French President, the Élysée Palace, has said that President Macron did not hear the explosions from the motorcade.
The attack at the Ministry of Tourism comes days after the 2 July bombing of a café on Al-Nasr Street in the Al-Marjah district of central Damascus, in the immediate vicinity of the Palace of Justice. This bombing resulted in at least ten deaths and 21 injuries, with no group having yet claimed responsibility for this attack.
INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS
Damascus IED Attacks Highlight Ongoing Terrorism Risk in Post-Assad Syria
The attacks on both 2 and 7 July share multiple characteristics. Both attacks occurred in central Damascus, both attacks were in close proximity to a government ministry, and both attacks relied on planted explosive devices rather than firearms. Moreover, available footage of the second explosion (reportedly the more powerful blast) at the site does not suggest it was particularly large. The improvised explosive device (IED) detonated at the 2 July café bombing was a “crude [IED] weighing approximately one kilogram equipped with metal shrapnel”, according to the Ministry of Interior. These characteristics indicate that the attacks are likely connected, coordinated, and conducted by the same threat actor.
The attacks also follow another attack against a government ministry on 19 May, when a vehicle-borne IED (VBIED) was detonated outside a Defence Ministry building in the Bab Sharqi district of Damascus, killing one soldier and injuring at least 21 people. Just before the explosion, soldiers had identified and defused a separate vehicle rigged with explosives in the same part of the city.
Overall, the attacks highlight that despite a gradually improving security environment in Damascus for foreign travellers since the fall of the Assad regime, the risk of terrorism remains high and regime forces are unable to fully secure central Damascus.
Potential perpetrators of the attack include Salafi jihadist terrorist groups such as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and Saraya Ansar al-Sunnah, or Assad-regime remnant forces.
ISIS remains the most active terrorist group in Syria. Despite the Islamic State (IS) globally having shifted in strength towards sub-Saharan Africa, the group’s weekly newsletter al-Naba maintains a key focus on Syria and regularly calls for attacks against the Syrian transitional government (STG), which it classifies as “apostate”. Earlier this year in February, the ISIS spokesman Abu Hudhayfa al-Ansari released a statement announcing a new phase of operations targeting the STG.
Moreover, ISIS channels have previously been observed as calling on supporters to kill foreigners travelling to Syria, with foreign travel to Syria having considerably increased since the fall of the Assad regime. This would align directly with the 7 July attack being conducted close to the Four Seasons Hotel, which hosts foreign diplomats, business travellers, and UN staff, and the attack occurring shortly after President Macron had left the area. Macron’s visit to Syria is notably the first visit by a Western leader to Syria under the STG, and an attack during his visit is likely calculated to undermine President al-Sharaa and Western involvement in Syria.
Saraya Ansar al Sunnah was formed in 2025 as a splinter of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the al-Sharaa-led Islamist rebel group which spearheaded the offensive that brought down the Assad regime in late 2024, by radicals who are disillusioned with the more moderate approach pursued by the government. The group shares much of its ideology with IS, and uses a similar communications style, although links between the two groups are unconfirmed. On 22 June 2025, Saraya Ansar al-Sunnah militants carried out a suicide bombing in the Mar Elisa Greek Orthodox Church in Douailah, Damascus, during mass. The attack killed 30 people and injured more than 50, and remains the most deadly terrorist attack to have been conducted in Damascus since the fall of the Assad regime.
Damascus Bombings: Assessing the Most Likely Threat Actors
Since the HTS-led takeover of Syria, the new al-Sharaa-led STG has cracked down on foreign jihadist fighters who were in the ranks of HTS, particularly Central Asian and North Caucasian militant factions. On 5 May, for example, Syrian security forces arrested over 24 Uzbek militants in Idlib, following an armed standoff between Uzbek fighters and security forces after a raid. In issue 547 of al-Naba published in May, ISIS called on former foreign fighters to join its ranks.
Assad-regime remnants also likely have incentives to have conducted the attacks, and previous unverified sources have suggested the initial investigations of the 2 July café have pointed away from ISIS; however, investigations remain in the early stages. In March 2025, major clashes broke out between STG forces and Assadist insurgents from Syria’s Alawite minority in Latakia and Tartus governorates. The 2 July café bombing, which killed six lawyers, occurred next to the Ministry of Justice, with trials ongoing for former regime figures such as Bashar al-Assad’s cousin, Atef Najib, and Syria’s former grand mufti, Ahmed Hassoun. Surviving Assad-regime networks could be attempting to disrupt the trials and discredit the STG, with the “primitive” nature of the IED on 2 July potentially pointing towards a smaller and less organised actor.
Other potential perpetrators include Druze and Kurdish militants, and Hezbollah. However, initial indications suggest that these actors are less likely to have conducted the attacks.
Druze militant violence has so far been localised in the south of Syria, with no established practice of conducting similar terrorist bombings. While some Kurdish hardliners in the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) maintained opposition to integration into the STG following their effective defeat by STG forces in early 2026, such a campaign of bombings in Damascus would almost certainly undermine their legitimacy for little operational gain.
Finally, while US pressure has been applied against the STG to intervene in Lebanon against Hezbollah in recent days, Syria’s Foreign Minister, Asaad al-Shaibani, has stated that Damascus has no intention of intervening in the country militarily. A regional expert briefing the media stated after the 2 July attack that there were no indications from Hezbollah’s supporters that pointed to Damascus as a target in recent days.
Security forces are highly likely to maintain a higher threat posture than usual in Damascus in the coming weeks, which will likely materialise with greater numbers of checkpoints and vehicle checks. Authorities may additionally conduct raids against suspected cells, which could lead to localised firefights in the vicinity of the raids. If the attack/s are attributed to Assad-regime remnants, there is a realistic possibility of a crackdown being launched in Latakia and Tartus governorates.
Travel and Safety Guidance for Damascus, Syria
- Closely monitor alerts from a security provider if available, trusted local news reports and government alerts. Unverified claims and disinformation will likely be propagated on social media and unvetted sources.
- If not in-country, reconsider non-essential travel to Syria.
- Adhere to all instructions issued by authorities.
- Avoid all travel to the vicinity of government offices, military facilities, and police stations in Damascus.
- Delays and increased traffic are likely to persist in Damascus. Allocate additional time for all road movements.
- Heed any evacuation orders and travel to government-issued meeting points if ordered to do so.
- Ensure you are carrying the necessary documents.
- Prepare an emergency ‘go bag’ with essentials such as bottled water, batteries, important documents, and medications.
- Keep emergency contact numbers saved on your phone, including those for local authorities, medical services, and consular assistance.
- Ensure mobile devices are fully charged. Electricity provision is inconsistent in parts of Syria, including in Damascus.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Strait of Hormuz Tensions Keep Gulf Security Risks Elevated
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 30 June 2026 – 3 July 2026
- US and Iranian officials held indirect talks in Doha on 30 June and 1 July. Officials reported that the talks were focused solely on the technical issues of maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) and the unfreezing of Iranian funds.
- Qatar’s Foreign Ministry stated that the next meetings are scheduled to take place after the funeral processions for Iran’s now deceased former Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is scheduled to be buried on 9 July.
- Iranian channels have continued to claim sovereignty over the SoH, and have threatened to resume strikes on vessels that do not abide by Iranian instructions.
- US media reported on 1 July that US President Donald Trump had considered the possibility of carrying out a new wave of strikes on Iran, but eventually decided against it.
- Israeli and Hezbollah forces have continued to engage in clashes in southern Lebanon. Ongoing conflict in Lebanon is likely to be a key trigger for destabilising the broader ceasefire.
- There remains a high risk of a tactical miscalculation and/or escalation in the SoH, with retaliatory strikes unlikely to be confined to the immediate area of engagement. These cycles of escalation have repeatedly led to strikes against regional countries, with targets in Bahrain and Kuwait being more recently prioritised by Iran.
- As of 3 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Remain Vulnerable to Renewed Retaliatory Strikes
Following the announcement of a renewed truce on 28 June, US and Iranian officials held indirect talks in Doha, Qatar, on 30 June and 1 July. Mediated by Pakistani and Qatari officials, the indirect talks were reportedly focused solely on technical issues related to maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) and the unfreezing of Iranian funds. Qatar’s Foreign Ministry has stated that the next meetings are scheduled to take place after the funeral processions for Iran’s now deceased former Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is scheduled to be buried on 9 July.
Iran’s chief negotiator and parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, gave an interview on 30 June in which he said that Iran will not enter further negotiations until conditions in the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) are met, notably an end to conflict in Lebanon and the unfreezing of Iranian assets. Furthermore, Ghalibaf reiterated that Iran has sovereignty over the SoH with Oman and that fee-free transit through the SoH will be in place for only 60 days, as per the MoU. Ghalibaf stated that if “the dialogue is not implemented, we are also prepared for war”.
On 30 June, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz stated that he had instructed the IDF to prepare plans for an independent strike against Iran, and that Israel would be ready to go to war “tomorrow”. This was echoed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who stated that Israel would strike Iran to counter the “existential threat” posed by its nuclear programme. Netanyahu also reiterated that Israeli forces would remain in Lebanon as long as Hezbollah constitutes a threat.
On 1 July, a US Navy MH-60S Sea Hawk helicopter conducted an emergency landing in the Arabian Sea. US officials stated that “[t]here is no indication the emergency was caused by hostile action.” Three of the helicopter’s four-man crew were recovered, while one is missing as of 3 July.
On 2 July, official channels of Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, the country’s top operational military headquarters, stated that Iran would respond to any attempt by the US to challenge its control over the SoH, likely indicating its willingness to strike more vessels in the waterway.
On 3 July, US President Donald Trump stated that Iran had “agreed to just about everything” the US demanded during negotiations. On 1 July, US media had reported that the White House had considered options for a return to war but ultimately decided to focus on diplomatic efforts.
As of 3 July, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 30 June and 3 July.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 3 July, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
No attacks have been reported in Kuwait between 30 June and 3 July.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 3 July, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
No attacks have been reported in Bahrain between 30 June and 3 July.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 3 July, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 30 June and 3 July.
Qatar hosted the latest round of indirect US-Iran talks on 30 June and 1 July. Qatari officials reported “progress” in the talks and stated that the next round will occur after 9 July.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 3 July, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 30 June and 3 July.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 3 July, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
No attacks have been reported in Oman between 30 June and 3 July.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 3 July, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
As exemplified by the 30 June interview given by Ghalibaf, the Iranian regime has consistently reiterated that it will maintain longer-term control over the SoH despite the MoU. The military headquarters’ statement further demonstrates Iran’s willingness to use force against vessels for perceived violations of its established “sovereignty” over the strait.
Almost certainly a long-term objective for the regime, greater control over the SoH not only gives the regime a potential source of funds by extracting fees but also bolsters deterrence, with Iran’s closures of the SoH having been a critical source of leverage. However, it is unlikely that continued Iranian control will be acceptable to the US and the international community. Further Iranian attempts to forcefully exert its stated control of the SoH, such as the two attacks against merchant vessels which did not abide by Iranian conditions and were followed by US strikes, will likely lead to further confrontation.
In addition to endangering the broader MoU, cycles of escalation from the maritime domain since the implementation of the first ceasefire on 8 April have repeatedly led to renewed Iranian strikes against regional countries, first with the UAE and more recently against Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. During the 26-28 June escalation, Bahrain and Kuwait were targeted, in a likely continuation of this recently observed target prioritisation. However, these attempted strikes on US forces in the Gulf were also likely calibrated to be sub-threshold and were limited in salvo size, largely intercepted by US and allied air defences, and aimed at signalling capability and intent without provoking a wider US response.
Currently, Iranian retaliation strikes are less likely to directly target Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Oman, although direct strikes against these countries cannot be ruled out in the event of a significant escalation and/or breakdown in the MoU. Senior Iranian officials and the IRGC have repeatedly threatened that strikes will be conducted against US military assets across the region in response to continued “aggression”.
Ghalibaf’s 30 June interview was likely part of an effort to assuage the concerns of IRGC hardliners, who have consistently advocated against negotiations with the US. The lack of a fully coherent regime in Tehran with a unified negotiating position almost certainly complicates the negotiation process and increases the likelihood that elements within the IRGC could fail to comply with any agreements made by Tehran’s civilian government and negotiating team. Agreements made in the diplomatic track are almost certainly vulnerable to spoiling by more hardline elements in the regime, which have indicated opposition to even minor perceived concessions to the US.
Continued IDF operations in Lebanon are likely to pose a significant threat to the MoU and have previously resulted in Iranian military claims of closing the SoH during the post-MoU period. While Iranian attacks against Israel are unlikely if operations are limited and contained to southern Lebanon, IDF strikes on Beirut could trigger a direct Iranian response against Israel. This, in turn, would likely lead to an escalation cycle with high risks of a broader ceasefire collapse. Opposition to the MoU from senior Israeli politicians almost certainly reflects concerns that the agreement does not satisfy Israel’s key objectives, with Iran’s ballistic missile programme and support for proxy forces omitted from negotiations. Israeli opposition and/or unilateral military action are likely to complicate the MoU’s implementation and undermine the agreement.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Gulf Security Remains Volatile Despite Ceasefire
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 26 June 2026 – 30 June 2026
- Since 26 June, the fragile ceasefire formalised in the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed by the US and Iran on 17 June has come under serious strain, with the US and Iran trading direct fire for the first time since the MoU’s signing.
- On both 26 and 27 June, the US conducted strikes in Iran. These strikes followed Iranian attacks against two vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz (SoH).
- In retaliation, Iran launched attack drones and ballistic missiles against targets in Bahrain and Kuwait on 27 and 28 June, with the IRGC claiming to have targeted the Ali Al Salem airbase in Kuwait and the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain.
- During the 28 June attacks against Bahrain, a residential building near Bahrain International Airport (BAH / OBBI) was damaged, with no fatalities reported.
- Despite the first direct kinetic engagement between the US and Iran since the signing of the MoU, the strikes conducted by both Iran and the US were likely calibrated to remain sub-threshold for a return to full-scale conflict.
- Delegations from Iran and the US are in Qatar on 30 June, but it remains unconfirmed whether negotiations will go ahead and in what format.
- There remains a high risk of a tactical miscalculation and/or escalation in the SoH, with retaliatory strikes unlikely to be confined to the immediate area of engagement. These cycles of escalation have repeatedly led to strikes against regional countries, with targets in Bahrain and Kuwait being more recently prioritised by Iran.
- As of 30 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Navigate Fragile Ceasefire and Ongoing Disruption
On 26 June, the US launched strikes against targets in Iran. US Central Command (CENTCOM) stated that airstrikes were conducted against Iranian missile and drone storage locations, in addition to coastal radar sites, around the Strait of Hormuz (SoH), as a “powerful response” to “unwarranted aggression” by Iran. The strikes followed the earlier Iranian attack against the Singapore-flagged EVER LOVELY (IMO: 9629110) on 26 June, after the vessel exited the SoH along the Omani coast. US Vice President JD Vance said following the US strikes that “violence will be met with violence”.
On 27 June, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched an attack drone which hit the Panama-flagged oil tanker KIKU (IMO: 9329796) transiting the SoH. Subsequently, the US conducted further strikes with CENTCOM stating that ten Iranian military targets were struck in sites including Sirik, Bandar-e Lengeh and Qeshm. This was followed by Iranian attack drone and ballistic missile launches against targets in Bahrain and Kuwait on 27 and 28 June, with the IRGC claiming to have targeted the Ali Al Salem airbase in Kuwait and the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. During the 28 June attacks against Bahrain, a residential building near Bahrain International Airport (BAH / OBBI) was damaged, with no fatalities reported.
On 28 June, a US official stated that the US and Iran had agreed to halt attacks and renew talks. US President Donald Trump claimed on 29 June that Iran had “requested a meeting” to take place in Doha, Qatar, on 30 June. An Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson stated that while Iran is sending its technical delegation to Qatar this week, this has no relation to a concurrent visit by US envoys and no US-Iran talks are scheduled. However, a separate senior Iranian official has claimed there will be a meeting in Doha with a focus on managing the SoH and de-escalating tensions, while another official briefed that technical teams will meet separately with Qatari and Pakistani mediators on 30 June. Delegations from Iran and the US are in Qatar as of 30 June, but it remains unconfirmed whether any negotiations will go ahead and in what format.
In Lebanon, on 26 June, US officials announced that the Israeli and Lebanese sides had signed a new “framework agreement”. The new agreement allows the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) to replace the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) in two areas in southern Lebanon, commits Israel to withdraw from southern Lebanon, and calls for the disarmament of all non-state groups in Lebanon. However, Israel’s Defence Minister, Israel Katz, later stated that Israel would maintain the security zone in southern Lebanon. Hezbollah rejected the agreement, and indicated that it would respond to any LAF disarmament attempts.
As of 30 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 26 and 30 June.
On 28 June, a helicopter belonging to the Saudi Arabian state-owned oil company Aramco crashed in Ras Tanura, resulting in the death of 14 people on board who were all Saudi citizens. Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Energy stated that “authorities have launched a full investigation to determine the cause of the crash”. The helicopter crash coincided with elevated tensions following the first kinetic strikes by the US against Iran since the signing of the MoU, and the Ras Tanura terminal has been previously targeted by Iranian strikes in the earlier full-scale regional conflict phase of the war. However, there is currently no available evidence that indicates the crash resulted from hostile action.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 30 June, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
On 28 June, the Kuwaiti Ministry of Defence stated that two “hostile ballistic missiles” were detected and intercepted inside Kuwaiti airspace, with no material damage or casualties. The IRGC claimed that it launched an attack against “key US military installations” which included the “Ali Al Salem Airbase in Kuwait”, in retaliation for US strikes on Iranian territory.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 30 June, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
On 27 June, Bahraini authorities stated that an unspecified “number of Iranian drones” targeted Bahraini territory. This followed the first US strikes conducted against Iranian territory since the signing of the MoU. A US official anonymously briefed that this attack consisted of two attack drones, with one being shot down and the other landing harmlessly in a remote airfield area.
On 28 June, another attack took place, with Bahrain’s Interior Ministry announcing the interception of an unspecified number of projectiles. During this attack, a residential building near Bahrain International Airport (BAH / OBBI) was damaged, with no fatalities reported. The IRGC claimed that it launched an attack against “key US military installations”, which included the “US Fifth Fleet headquarters at Salman Port in Bahrain”, in retaliation for US strikes on Iranian territory.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 30 June, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 26 and 30 June, excluding an incident involving a marine vessel which resulted in the death of one Qatari national. After a vessel with two individuals on board failed to return as scheduled on 27 June, search operations were conducted, which located the missing vessel. The Qatari national on board was killed by “shrapnel resulting from the military operations in the area”, and an “Arab resident was also injured” and transferred to hospital for medical treatment, according to the Qatari Ministry of Interior. It is likely that the incident resulted from the interception of Iranian attack drones during the attacks against targets Bahrain and Kuwait. Qatar’s Ministry of Transport subsequently announced a temporary suspension of marine activities involving recreational boats, fishing vessels, jet skis and other similar watercraft until further notice.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 30 June, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 26 and 30 June. On 26 June, phone alerts were issued in the UAE warning of potential missile threats. However, authorities have stated that this resulted from a technical malfunction in the early warning system.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 30 June, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
No attacks have been reported in Oman between 26 and 30 June, excluding attacks against vessels within Omani territorial waters in the Strait of Hormuz.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 30 June, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
Despite the first direct kinetic engagement between the US and Iran since the signing of the MoU, the strikes conducted by both Iran and the US were likely calibrated to remain sub-threshold for a return to full-scale conflict. However, the escalation almost certainly highlights how the MoU is functioning primarily as an extension of the ceasefire, rather than as a substantive or durable peace agreement. The previous ceasefire was also marked by sporadic exchanges of strikes between the US and Iran following continued confrontation in the maritime domain, and there remains a high risk of a tactical miscalculation and/or escalation in the SoH, with retaliatory strikes unlikely to be confined to the immediate area of engagement.
In addition to endangering the broader MoU, cycles of escalation from the maritime domain since the implementation of the first ceasefire on 8 April have repeatedly led to renewed Iranian strikes against regional countries, first with the UAE and more recently against Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. During the 26-28 June escalation, Bahrain and Kuwait were targeted, in a likely continuation of this recently observed target prioritisation.
Currently, Iranian retaliation strikes are less likely to directly target Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Oman, although direct strikes against these countries cannot be ruled out in the event of a significant escalation and/or breakdown in the MoU. Senior Iranian officials and the IRGC have repeatedly threatened that strikes will be conducted against US military assets across the region in response to continued “aggression”.
Of the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia highly likely exerts the greatest deterrence against Iran, reinforced by the deployment of Pakistani forces to Saudi Arabia, and regular diplomatic engagement between Tehran and Riyadh continues. The UAE has notably not been attacked since mid-May, having previously been likely the highest priority target for Iranian strikes in the Gulf. This is likely related to increased diplomatic engagement between the UAE and Iran, which may have involved agreement by the UAE to unlock billions of dollars for Iran, although Emirati authorities have denied these reports.
Qatar and Oman were directly attacked the least of these countries during the full-scale phase of the conflict, and Qatar is actively serving as a mediator in the currently ongoing talks. Oman previously served as the mediator in the pre-28 February talks between the US and Iran, and Tehran has repeatedly indicated a desire to engage with Oman to set up a long-term framework for managing the SoH.
Continued IDF operations in Lebanon are likely to pose a significant threat to the MoU and have previously resulted in Iranian military claims of closing the SoH during the post-MoU period. While Iranian attacks against Israel are unlikely if operations are limited and contained to southern Lebanon, IDF strikes on Beirut could trigger a direct Iranian response against Israel. This, in turn, would likely lead to an escalation cycle with high risks of a broader ceasefire collapse. Opposition to the MoU from senior Israeli politicians almost certainly reflects concerns that the agreement does not satisfy Israel’s key objectives, with Iran’s ballistic missile programme and support for proxy forces omitted from negotiations. Israeli opposition and/or unilateral military action are likely to complicate the MoU’s implementation and undermine the agreement.
Iranian adherence to the ceasefire is likely to be undermined by the IRGC, which has increasingly consolidated power in Tehran, acted independently of the civilian government, and signalled total opposition to US demands. The lack of a fully coherent regime in Tehran with a unified negotiating position almost certainly complicates the negotiation process and increases the likelihood that elements within the IRGC could fail to comply with any agreements made by Tehran’s civilian government and negotiating team. Agreements made in the diplomatic track are almost certainly vulnerable to spoiling by more hardline elements in the regime, which have repeatedly indicated opposition to even minor perceived concessions to the US.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Escalating Anti-Migrant Protests Raise Security Concerns in South Africa
SITUATION SUMMARY | Intelligence cut off: 13:00 UTC 30 June 2026
Coordinated anti-migrant protests are scheduled to take place on 30 June across all nine of South Africa’s provinces, with rallies scheduled in major cities including Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town, and Durban, as well as smaller towns. The protests coincide with an unofficial deadline set by anti-migration campaigners for undocumented foreign nationals to leave the country.
The protests have been primarily organised by the anti-migrant March and March movement. They have been supported by a coalition of approximately 27 anti-migrant and civil society groups, including Operation Dudula, United South Africa, and the Progressive Forces of South Africa.
South African authorities and local officials have increased security measures ahead of the planned protests, with police officers deployed across the country and widespread road closures implemented due to fears that the protests could turn violent. Workers have stayed home, and shops have closed in anticipation of the large-scale marches.
In Johannesburg, three marches have been approved: from Beyers Naudé Square to Constitution Hill (08:00-14:00); a Hillbrow leg running from the Kotze/Hospital streets intersection to the Department of Home Affairs on Plein Street (08:00-12:00); and a Midrand leg from the Dale/Modderfontein roads intersection to the Sandton Plant Hire office (09:00-13:00). In Durban, marchers are gathering at King Dinuzulu Park before proceeding along Dr Pixley KaSeme Street, although the endpoint is subject to confirmation, while in Pretoria the march runs from Church Square to Sunnyside police station (10:00-15:00).
Multiple businesses have reportedly been vandalised by protesters along KaBokweni Road in Ngodini. Officials have also reported looting in Delft, Cape Town, while a flash-bang grenade was deployed against demonstrators in Kraaifontein.
Thousands of migrants have awaited processing in temporary camps for several weeks out of fears of being subjected to violence. Nigeria, Ghana, and Mozambique have initiated the repatriation of citizens, while Zimbabwe’s embassy has issued a warning for nationals to avoid protest areas and limit movement.
President Cyril Ramaphosa has repeatedly called on protesters to act peacefully and responsibly, writing, “[t]he right to protest and freedom of expression does not allow people to threaten or intimidate others, or to engage in acts of vandalism or violence.”
INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS
Longstanding Grievances Continue to Fuel Anti-Migrant Mobilisation in South Africa
The preparations followed weeks of violence and disruption tied to anti-immigration unrest. On 28 June, the Ugandan government said one of its nationals was killed in a suspected anti-immigrant attack in KwaZulu-Natal and said 746 Ugandans had voluntarily registered for evacuation ahead of the 30 June protests. On 20 June, one person was killed during anti-immigrant rioting in central Pietermaritzburg, and local media said at least 1,000 Malawian nationals had fled to nearby Durban. By 17 June, local media reported that more than 600 Malawians had been repatriated from South Africa, with humanitarian services set up in Blantyre. According to South African police, at least 25,000 people, most of whom are from other African countries, have been repatriated.
The unrest also included attacks on foreign-owned businesses and properties, leading to cases of displacement. On 18 June, police stated that seven people were arrested near Vrede, Free State, after more than 15 foreign-owned shops were looted. On 15 June, South African media reported that at least 120 foreign nationals were camping outside a Home Affairs office in central Durban after being displaced by recent anti-migration rioting. On 8 June, residents in George reportedly attacked foreign-owned businesses before police dispersed them.
The rise of dedicated anti-migrant groups likely reflects the increasing organisation of anti-migrant movements in South Africa in recent years. Since 2022, Operation Dudula, meaning “to push”, has reportedly harassed migrant traders in Soweto and Johannesburg. The Dudula Movement concurrently emerged, acting as a vigilante organisation targeting foreign nationals believed to be undocumented. March and March, a self-described “grassroots citizen movement addressing growing concerns about undocumented immigration in South Africa”, is a newer movement aiming to mobilise citizens through “peaceful demonstrations and rallies”.
Migrants make up just under four per cent of South Africa’s population, equivalent to approximately 2.4 million people. Most originate from neighbouring countries, including Lesotho, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique. Anti-migrant groups claim that there are also between three and five million undocumented migrants, although these figures are contested. A primary driver of anti-migrant sentiment is South Africa’s high unemployment rate, which remains above 30 per cent. Anti-migrant groups have mobilised this to frame migrants as direct competitors for jobs, housing, informal trading space, and state resources, amid rising economic instability triggered by the Strait of Hormuz closure.
This is the latest of a series of waves of unrest targeting foreign nationals and foreign-owned businesses, with major waves in 2008, 2015, and 2019. In 2008, at least 62 foreign nationals were killed, while in 2015, a wave of anti-foreigner violence that began in Durban and spread to Johannesburg left at least seven people dead and saw the widespread looting and burning of foreign-owned shops. In September 2019, renewed rioting concentrated in Johannesburg and Pretoria again targeted foreign-owned businesses and left roughly 12 people dead.
The 30 June protests are highly likely to be accompanied by incidents of vandalism and looting targeting foreign-owned businesses, as well as isolated violence. There is a realistic possibility that the protests will escalate into widespread clashes with security forces into the evening, particularly if they attempt to disperse protesters with measures perceived as excessive, such as tear gas, water cannon, rubber bullets, and mass arrests.
Travel and Safety Guidance for South Africa
- Reconsider non-essential travel to South Africa on 30 June.
- Avoid the central business districts in major cities around 30 June.
- Closely monitor announcements from local authorities and trusted media sources for any developments that may severely impact the local security environment.
- Avoid all areas of unrest due to incidental risks to bystanders. If caught in the unrest, travellers should move with the crowd until they find the nearest opportunity to escape. If in a vehicle, look to turn down the nearest road. If driving away is not an option, lock the vehicle and escape on foot.
- Always follow all instructions and orders from security forces. Where possible, avoid areas of active unrest and remain in secure accommodation.
- Prolonged civil unrest can disrupt travel, especially if protesters begin targeting airports. Travellers should have contingency measures in place, including evacuation plans and reliable access to food, water and medication.
- Have emergency contact numbers saved on your phone. These should include the local authorities, medical facilities and any consular support. Ensure that mobile phones are charged in case of any loss of electricity.
- Keep emergency contact numbers saved on your phone, including those for local authorities, medical services, and consular assistance. Ensure mobile devices are fully charged in case of potential power outages.
- Closely monitor alerts from a security provider if available, trusted local news reports and government alerts.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Gulf Security Remains Volatile Despite Ceasefire
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 23 June 2026 – 26 June 2026
- Despite the ceasefire remaining formally in place, Israel and Hezbollah continue to engage in clashes in southern Lebanon.
- Iran reportedly carried out a strike on a vessel trying to exit the Strait of Hormuz. The strike followed the announcement of a UN-led effort to evacuate the personnel of vessels that have remained in the area. Following the strike, the evacuation effort was halted.
- On 25 June, the US and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) released a joint statement following a ministerial meeting in Bahrain, which reiterated US-GCC partnership commitments. Iran criticised the statement as “interventionist”.
- US Vice-President J.D. Vance stated on 25 June, that the United States and Iran had established a direct channel of communication in Doha to support deconfliction and reduce the chance of the conflict resuming.
- As of 26 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Navigate Fragile Ceasefire and Ongoing Disruption
The ceasefires between the US, Israel, and Iran, and between Israel and Lebanon, remain extant. However, the agreements remain unstable. US Vice-President J.D. Vance stated on 25 June, that the United States and Iran had established a direct channel of communication in Doha to favour deconfliction and reduce the chance of the conflict resuming.
On 23 June, US President Donald Trump stated that US forces would halt their blockade of the Strait of Hormuz (SoH). On the same day, the UN’s International Maritime Organisation (IMO) announced that it would, alongside Oman, begin coordinating the evacuation of approximately 11,000 personnel on board vessels that have remained within the SoH due to the conflict. On 25 June, the Islamic Security Guard Corps (IRGC) struck a vessel approximately 7.5 nautical miles southeast of Dahit, Oman. The attack followed IRGC statements that attempts to cross the SoH via the route designated by IMO would be “unacceptable”, and that all crossings would need to be coordinated with the newly-established Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), an Iranian government agency that is responsible for regulating traffic in the SoH. Following the strike, UN channels stated that they would pause evacuation efforts and noted that several vessels had already exited the waterway.
On 25 June, the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that it would hold talks with Oman to “define future administration and maritime services” in the SoH. US officials have reiterated their opposition to Iran’s plan to charge vessels transiting through the SoH.
On 24 June, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stated that its inspectors would visit Iranian enrichment sites under the framework of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). On the following day, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi rejected the IAEA statement, claiming that there is “no plan” for future visits to Iranian nuclear sites.
On 25 June, the US and the Gulf Cooperation Council released a joint statement following a ministerial meeting in Bahrain. The statement reiterated “the enduring U.S. commitment to GCC security” and the “importance of reopening the Strait of Hormuz, noting that free, unconditional, and unrestricted navigation, including the right of transit passage as guaranteed under international law, remains essential to regional and global security”. The statement also condemned regional attacks by Iran and it proxies. On 26 June, Iranian diplomatic channels called the statement “provocative” and “interventionist”.
As of 26 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 23 and 26 June.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 26 June, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
No attacks have been reported in Kuwait between 23 and 26 June.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 26 June, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
No attacks have been reported in Bahrain between 23 and 26 June.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 26 June, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 23 and 26 June.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 26 June, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 23 and 26 June.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 26 June, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
On 25 June, IRGC forces carried out a strike that damaged a cargo vessel approximately 7.5 nautical miles from the coast of Dahit. MV EVER LOVELY (IMO: 9629110), a Singapore-flagged vessel, was reportedly struck by a projectile while transiting on the route designated by the IMO, with the impact causing limited damage to the bridge,
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 26 June, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
The MoU and the holding of direct talks in Switzerland have likely reduced the immediate risk of a return to full-scale US-Iran conflict and strikes on the Gulf States. However, the MoU is highly likely functioning primarily as an extension of the ceasefire, rather than as a substantive or durable peace agreement. The agreement is likely vulnerable to multiple key triggers for ceasefire breakdown. The conflict in Lebanon, Iran’s nuclear programme and the long-term status of the SoH remain unresolved.
Continued IDF operations in Lebanon are likely the most immediate threat to the MoU and have resulted in Iranian claims of closing the SoH. The IRGC is likely to leverage tactical actions in the SoH to apply pressure on the US during negotiations, as evidenced by the recent attack on a vessel in Omani waters. As of 26 June, it appears this attack did not cross the threshold for US retaliation; however, sustained attacks on international shipping could trigger a kinetic response from the US. As during previous escalation cycles, incidents in the SoH are unlikely to be contained to the maritime domain and could result in Iranian attacks on terrestrial targets in the region, although sustained direct attacks on Gulf States remain unlikely outside of a major escalation and complete collapse of the negotiation process.
President Trump’s multiple stated threats since the MoU’s signing have likely challenged terms within the MoU which preclude the issuance of threats of military force, and the announcement by Iran’s military headquarters that it would close the SoH directly contravened key terms of the MoU. While neither side has acted in a manner that has likely crossed a threshold warranting renewed hostilities, these reciprocal violations almost certainly underscore the fragility of the MoU.
Iranian adherence to a ceasefire is likely to be undermined by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which has increasingly consolidated power in Tehran, acted independently of the civilian government, and signalled total opposition to US demands. The lack of a fully coherent regime in Tehran with a unified negotiating position almost certainly complicates the negotiation process and increases the likelihood that elements within the IRGC could fail to comply with any agreements made by Tehran’s civilian government and negotiating team.
Iranian Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has also made statements aimed at characterising Tehran’s agreement to the MoU as the responsibility of Iran’s civilian President, Masoud Pezeshkian. This is likely intended to limit domestic criticism of any shift from the maximalist objectives of hardliners, but it also likely highlights the lack of a fully unified negotiating position in Iran. It should not be assumed that diplomatic breakthroughs in Switzerland will be uniformly accepted or implemented across Iran’s political and security establishment.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Aligning protection with modern travel risk management and corporate travel security
7 Signs Your Corporate Travel Security Programme Needs to Scale
The sign: Your organisation subscribes to threat intelligence and receives alerts. But when a major incident occurs, there is no pre-agreed plan, no confirmed resource, and no provider with a contractual obligation to act. Intelligence without response capability Without a response capability in place, organisations may find themselves making critical decisions and sourcing support at the same time.
Why it matters: The geopolitical volatility of 2026 has exposed this gap at scale. When Operation Epic Fury, the US-led military campaign against Iran, triggered rapid airspace closures, Iranian retaliatory strikes, and mass displacement across the Middle East, organisations with fragmented security arrangements were left scrambling. Traveller tracking, close protection, and emergency response sat with different vendors who had no shared protocol and no obligation to coordinate. Employees were stranded. Evacuation costs surged. Those without pre-negotiated crisis evacuation plans faced significantly higher fees – and significantly longer exposure windows – than those with an integrated response structure already in place. When mass numbers attempt to evacuate simultaneously, the market for seats, logistics, and ground support dries up fast.
Ask yourself: Do you have a provider with a confirmed commitment to respond, not just report, in a crisis? Have you tested that commitment against a worst-case scenario?
The sign: When a crisis hits, whether from a natural disaster, civil unrest, or a security incident, your team spends critical minutes establishing who is where, rather than responding. And that problem is no longer limited to international travel. With hybrid working now standard, the same visibility gap exists domestically: do you know, at any given moment, who is in the office and who is working remotely?
Why it matters: Real-time visibility across your entire workforce – travelling executives, employees on international assignments, and staff working from home or third-party locations – is an important part of duty of care. A travel risk management app that provides live tracking, journey monitoring, and two-way communication tools can build the full picture of where your people are, not just those on booked itineraries.
Ask yourself: If an incident occurred right now, could you accurately account for every employee – those abroad, those travelling domestically, and those working remotely?
3. Your Duty of Care Framework Has Not Been Updated for Current Threat Levels
The sign: Your duty of care policies were written for a different risk environment. They may not account for geopolitical tensions (a concern for 46% of organisations), regional conflicts (43%), or the growing expectation from employees that their employer will actively protect them – not just have a policy on file.
Why it matters: Employee expectations have never been higher. Employers deemed in breach of their duty of care face not only legal liability but reputational damage that can affect their ability to attract and retain talent. The potential cost of failure far exceeds the cost of building a robust programme.
Ask yourself: How do you define duty of care for your employees? Has that definition kept pace with today’s threat landscape?
4. Your Emergency Response Plan Has Never Been Tested
The sign: You have a plan. But it hasn’t been validated recently against a realistic worst-case scenario – a terrorist attack, a natural disaster, or civil unrest in a market where your senior leaders are present.
Why it matters: Many emergency response policies contain restrictions that organisations are unaware of. Insurance providers may not cover war zones, terrorist attacks, or natural disasters – gaps that only become apparent under pressure. A 24/7 Global Security Operations Centre (GSOC) that has been tested and validated provides the continuity and confidence that a paper plan cannot.
Ask yourself: Have you tested your emergency response plan with your current provider to validate they have the resources to respond in a worst-case scenario?
5. Intelligence Is Not Informing Pre-Travel Planning
The sign: Your security briefings are generic. Travellers receive country-level advisories rather than contextual, event-specific intelligence that shapes routing, accommodation choices, and on-the-ground protocols.
Why it matters: An intelligence-led approach to executive protection is what separates organisations that prevent incidents from those that merely respond to them. Today’s threats rarely occur in isolation – one major event triggers a cascade of others. Pre-travel planning grounded in current threat intelligence significantly reduces exposure.
Ask yourself: Where have your executives or travelling employees felt most vulnerable in the past 12 months? What intelligence would have changed their behaviour?
6. Your Corporate Brand Is Increasing Exposure
The sign: Your organisation’s profile, whether through public-facing leadership, high-value contracts, or geopolitical associations, is raising the risk level for your executives. But your protection programme has not evolved to reflect this.
Why it matters: Corporations increasingly recognise that their brand and reputation can expose employees to risk both domestically and internationally. High-profile leadership, media attention, or operations in sensitive regions all alter the threat calculus. Executive protection must be calibrated to the organisation’s specific risk profile.
Ask yourself: Could your company’s brand or the public profile of your senior leaders make them a target? Has your protection programme been assessed against that reality?
7. Your Programme Structure Slows Response When Speed Is Critical
The sign: During your last significant incident, your team spent time establishing who was in charge, which provider to call, and what the escalation path was – before any response could begin. Ownership was unclear. Handoffs were delayed. The programme itself became an obstacle.
Why it matters: Unclear escalation paths and multiple points of contact have a direct operational cost during a crisis. When close protection, travel risk management software, and GSOC support operate within a single coordinated model under one point of contact, organisations move from insight to action without delay. Where that structure does not exist, the gap shows, particularly in fast-moving, large-scale incidents where every hour of indecision carries consequences.
Ask yourself: In your last significant incident, how much time elapsed between the alert and the first coordinated response? Where did that time go?
Scaling Executive Protection: The Integrated Model
Scaling effectively requires bringing the right elements together into a structure with clear ownership and tested capability.
- Intelligence ensures threats and changing conditions are understood in context, supporting pre-travel planning and measured incident response
- Technology – through a travel risk management app or travel risk management software – provides tracking, communication, and real-time reporting across all journeys
- Operational capability through an outsourced Global Security Operations Centre provides 24/7 monitoring, coordination, and a single point of control
Together, these create a resilient model where executive protection supports both routine business travel and complex, high-risk environments – with one point of contact, clear accountability, and continuity from planning through to response.
Reviewing Your Corporate Travel Security Programme
Solace Global Risk supports organisations in developing and scaling executive protection programmes aligned with modern travel risk management requirements.
If any of the signs above reflect your current position, we can help you assess your programme and identify practical next steps – before an incident makes the decision for you.
THE GLOBAL RISK PODCAST
Listen: Is It Time to Scale Your Executive Protection Programme?
Executive protection is no longer reserved for a small number of high-risk journeys. In this episode, Amy Stone explores seven indicators that your executive protection and travel security programme may need to evolve, and what a modern, integrated approach looks like in practice.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Executive protection is the organised security provision designed to protect senior personnel — and in some cases their families — from threats arising from their position, profile, or operational environment. It typically encompasses advance planning and security surveys, close protection officers, secure transportation, intelligence briefings, and 24/7 GSOC monitoring. Under ISO 31030:2021, executive protection is a component of a broader travel risk management programme, calibrated to the specific risk profile of the individual and the environment in which they are operating.
ISO 31030:2021 is the international standard for travel risk management. It provides the framework within which executive protection programmes should sit: from risk identification and pre-travel authorisation through journey management, incident response, and post-travel review. The standard identifies personnel risk — including assault, detention, and kidnap — as a core risk category (Section 6.2), and requires that protective measures are proportionate to the traveller’s profile and risk exposure. Organisations with programmes aligned to ISO 31030 are better positioned to demonstrate duty of care compliance and to respond proportionately when conditions change.
Close protection services refer specifically to the provision of trained protective personnel — commonly close protection officers — deployed alongside an individual or group. Executive protection is the broader programme: it encompasses close protection as one operational element, alongside intelligence, advance work, secure transportation, route planning, GSOC monitoring, and crisis management coordination. A close protection officer on the ground operates most effectively within a programme that has structured intelligence support and clear escalation protocols behind it.
ISO 31030:2021 recommends regular review of travel risk management arrangements to reflect changes in the risk environment, the organisation’s risk appetite, or the profile of the travelling population (Annex A, Stage 4). In practice, a programme review is warranted after any significant incident, following a change in the organisation’s operational footprint, when the seniority or public profile of key personnel has changed materially, or if the current provider’s capability has not been tested against realistic scenarios. Organisations that review programmes proactively — rather than in response to an incident — typically encounter lower costs and shorter resolution windows.
A Global Security Operations Centre (GSOC) provides the monitoring, intelligence, and coordination layer that connects the individual elements of an executive protection programme into a functioning response capability. It tracks traveller locations, monitors threat intelligence feeds, issues alerts, and acts as the central point of coordination between on-the-ground protective personnel, intelligence analysts, and the organisation’s own security teams. Within the ISO 31030 framework, the GSOC fulfils the requirement for proactive monitoring, clear escalation procedures, and integrated incident management (Annex A, Stage 3).
The highest-rated concerns among corporate security teams currently include geopolitical instability — including rapid escalation events, airspace closures, and sanctions-driven access restrictions — rising levels of crime in major business hubs, kidnap and extortion risk in certain regions, and targeted threats arising from an organisation’s public positioning or senior leadership profile. ISO 31030:2021 lists personnel risk categories as injury, assault, detention, kidnap, theft, robbery, and death (Section 5.5), alongside legal, reputational, and financial risk categories that may arise where travel risk management arrangements are inadequate.

Contact Solace Global Risk to arrange a programme assessment
Major Earthquakes Cause Widespread Damage in Venezuela
SITUATION SUMMARY | Intelligence cut off: 9:00 UTC 25 June 2026
At 18:04 local time (22:04 UTC) on 24 June, a magnitude 7.2 earthquake was detected 23 kilometres southeast of Yumare, Venezuela, at a depth of 20.3 kilometres. The first tremor was followed by a magnitude 7.5 earthquake at 18:05 local time, 39 seconds after the initial foreshock, at a depth of 23 kilometres. Shortly after the earthquakes, the National Weather Service (NWS) issued a tsunami advisory for Venezuela, Curaçao, Aruba, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. A separate notice stated that there was no tsunami risk for the US East Coast, Gulf Coast, or eastern Canada. The tsunami threat remained focused on coastal areas closer to the epicentre, particularly parts of the southern Caribbean. The National Weather Service subsequently updated its tsunami advisory for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, stating that tsunami waves of less than one foot were expected.
Damage and disruption were widespread across Venezuela, specifically in Caracas. Local media sources reported dozens of building collapses, road closures, and utility outages reported across the capital region, including in Catia La Mar, Los Teques, La Pastora, Chacao, Altamira, Los Palos Grandes, Lídice, El Paraíso, Ciudad Universitaria, and San Bernardino. Water and power supplies were affected in Caracas and several northern states, while authorities shut off gas services in impacted areas as a precaution.
Social media footage showed shaking in downtown Caracas, damage inside apartments in La Tahona and significant structural damage in Altamira. A building collapse in the Los Palos Grandes area of Caracas reportedly caused at least two deaths. In Las Minas de Baruta, at least three people were killed in two building collapses. Beyond Caracas, significant damage was reported in La Guaira, Catia La Mar, Tucacas, Turmero, Morón, and San Antonio de los Altos. Reports also indicated multiple collapsed homes on fire in La Guaira, cracks in a highway in Morón, and possible damage or leaks at a chemical plant in Morón. Local media have also reported widespread gas outages and telecommunications service disruptions in Venezuela following the earthquake.
Tremors from the earthquakes were also felt in parts of Brazil’s Amazonas and Pará states, although local media have not reported any structural damage or casualties in those regions.
Video footage showed major damage inside Simón Bolívar International Airport in Maiquetía. Reports indicated that all flights at Simón Bolívar International Airport were cancelled. The Caracas Metro was also evacuated.
Acting President Delcy Rodríguez said at least 32 people had been killed and around 700 others injured by the earthquakes, and subsequently announced a nationwide state of emergency. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has made an initial estimate that the death toll could range from 10,000 to 100,000.
Argentina and Colombia indicated readiness to support response efforts, while Ecuador announced plans to send humanitarian aid. El Salvador said it had prepared more than 300 rescuers and 50 tonnes of equipment, supplies, and medicines for deployment. The Dominican Republic said specialised search-and-rescue teams would depart for Venezuela on the morning of 25 June, and US President Donald Trump has pledged to deploy US resources to Venezuela.
INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS
Economic and Political Grievances Continue to Shape Unrest Risks in Kenya
Venezuela is highly exposed to seismic activity. The country is near the boundary between the Caribbean and South American tectonic plates, where plate motion is largely accommodated by major strike-slip fault systems across northern Venezuela, including the Boconó fault system. The 24 June earthquake southeast of Yumare occurred at a shallow depth and was associated with strike-slip faulting along this boundary.
Northern Venezuela has a history of significant seismic activity, though large earthquakes near the June 2026 epicentre have been relatively infrequent over the past century. On 21 August 2018, a 7.3 magnitude earthquake struck Venezuela’s northern coast, damaging dozens of buildings and causing multiple injuries across the country. More recently, in September 2025, magnitude 6.2 and 6.3 tremors near Mene Grande caused at least one death, injured more than 110 people, damaged homes and infrastructure, and were felt across several Venezuelan states and parts of Colombia.
Notable historical earthquakes include a 6.4 magnitude earthquake near Morón in 2009, which injured 18 people and damaged buildings, and a 6.0 magnitude event near Valencia in 1989 that caused minor damage. The most destructive modern earthquake in the wider region was the 1967 Caracas earthquake, which caused around 240 deaths, hundreds of injuries, collapsed several high-rise apartment buildings, and led to widespread destruction. Since 1900, at least five magnitude 7 or larger earthquakes have occurred in northern Venezuela or near its coast. However, it is highly likely that the damage, casualties and impact of the 24 June doublet earthquakes will be the worst in Venezuela in a century.
It is likely that aftershocks will be recorded near the epicentre in the short term. On 25 June, USGS assessed that there is a 94 per cent chance of at least one aftershock of magnitude 5 or above within the next week, and a 29 per cent chance of an aftershock of magnitude 6 or above. Even if lower-magnitude compared to the 24 June earthquake, aftershocks can still result in significant damage, causing critical failures in structures damaged during the initial shocks.
The death toll from the 24 June earthquakes will almost certainly considerably exceed the early estimates provided by the Venezuelan government. The impact of the tremors is highly likely to be compounded by the country’s poor disaster preparedness and emergency response infrastructure. Possible failures in government responses to the earthquakes could rapidly become catalysts for civil unrest in Venezuela, particularly as the country’s leadership has likely been destabilised by the US intervention that captured former President Maduro in January 2026. Previously a staunch geopolitical adversary of the US, Venezuela is now increasingly close to Washington as a result of the US intervention.
The economic impact will highly likely be severe and will fall on a state with minimal fiscal and institutional capacity to absorb it. Venezuela’s economy was already critically degraded prior to the earthquake, and the earthquake has had a severe impact on major economic hubs like the Caracas capital region. Acute humanitarian crisis, pre-existing economic crisis, destroyed utilities, and a transitional government which has contested legitimacy are all factors which could quickly materialise into an anti-government movement and violent civil unrest in the coming months.
Travel and Safety Guidance for Venezuela
- Closely monitor local news reports and government alerts.
- Expect aftershocks. Be prepared to Drop, Cover, Hold On in case of further tremors.
- During a tremor, if outside, do not enter buildings and move away from buildings, trees, streetlights and overhead lines.
- If inside, pick a safe place (under a sturdy table or desk, or against an interior wall and away from windows and heavy furniture). Do not leave until the shaking stops.
- If evacuating a building, always use the stairs. Look out for fires and falling debris.
- Adhere to all instructions issued by authorities.
- Heed evacuation orders and travel to government-issued shelters if safe to do so.
- Avoid coastal areas covered by tsunami warnings.
- Ensure important documents and medications are appropriately stored.
- Prepare an emergency ‘go bag’ with essentials such as bottled water, batteries, important documents, and medications.
- Confirm booked flights are running prior to checking out of hotels or travelling to the airport.
- Prepare for power outages, communication disruptions, and travel delays.
- Stay away from damaged buildings and affected areas until authorities deem them safe.
- Management should maintain communication with individuals affected until the event is concluded.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Large-Scale Protests Planned Across Kenya
SITUATION SUMMARY | Intelligence cut off: 15:00 UTC 24 June 2026
Nationwide demonstrations are planned for 25 June, marking the second anniversary of the 25 June 2024 anti-Finance Bill protests and commemorating those who were killed during the unrest in 2024 and 2025.
Victims’ families have called on Kenyans to march to parliament in Nairobi at 10:00 local time (07:00 UTC) to demand justice and lay flowers where their relatives were killed. Activists have urged participants outside Nairobi to hold peaceful vigils near police stations with flowers and flags, and to document events on mobile phones, livestreams, and hidden cameras to capture any incidents.
Opposition figures, including former Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka, have called for a large turnout. A group including Siaya Governor James Orengo, activist Boniface Mwangi, and families of protest victims marched to parliament on 18 June and formally notified the police of a nationwide march. Organisers have stated that the demonstrations will remain peaceful and constitutional. Orengo added on social media that “June 25th remains a public holiday of remembrance and resistance.”
The government has ruled out a public holiday, with Government Spokesperson Isaac Mwaura insisting that 25 June remains a normal working day. President William Ruto additionally warned against attempts to “shut down the country”. Police maintain they have not received formal notification authorising demonstrations in Nairobi and have warned that they will respond “firmly” to any attempts to disrupt public order.
INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS
Economic and Political Grievances Continue to Shape Unrest Risks in Kenya
Widespread youth-led protests have taken place in Kenya in both 2024 and 2025. In June and July 2024, a series of mass protests erupted in response to proposed tax increases in the government’s Finance Bill 2024. The unrest started in Nairobi, quickly spreading to other parts of the country. On 25 June, thousands of protesters stormed the parliamentary complex, setting fire to the Kenyan Parliament Building. Overall, at least 50 people were killed, and several hundred were injured as protesters clashed with security forces, who used live ammunition and conducted mass arrests.
Widespread protests were also staged in June and early July 2025, after a blogger was killed in police custody, with protesters demanding an end to police brutality. Security forces again responded with force, including live ammunition, tear gas, water cannon, and mass arrests. At least 65 people were killed, and over 550 people were injured. No significant concessions were made following the protests, and police brutality almost certainly remains a core grievance in Kenya.
The planned demonstrations are set to take place amid increased pressure on living costs, as well as frustrations over government plans to allow a US Ebola quarantine facility on its territory. Kenya’s fuel imports are heavily tied to Gulf suppliers, and the price of fuel has spiked due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Although President Ruto has moved to cushion consumers by cutting fuel VAT, using stabilisation funds, and pushing through a diesel price reduction, fuel prices remain elevated and continue to feed wider cost-of-living pressures. This almost certainly increases the risk that the planned protests could escalate into broader anti-government unrest.
Kenyan police forces have a precedent of responding forcefully to demonstrations, deploying live ammunition in both 2024 and 2025 unrest and being accused of abducting, torturing, and killing civilians believed to be leaders of anti-government protests. The apparent lack of authorisation for the demonstrations almost certainly raises the risk of crackdowns being imposed. If security forces are perceived as using disproportionate force against protesters, this will highly likely exacerbate demonstrations. This risk almost certainly elevates with calls for protesters to capture footage, with videos of perceived brutality by security forces highly likely to spread quickly through social media, increase anti-government sentiment and provoke larger demonstrations.
Nairobi’s parliament is located within the Central Business District (CBD), and most protesters will highly likely be gathered there. If protests spread, other hotspots in Nairobi include Kangemi, Ngong, Kamukunji, Thika Road, and Kitengela. During the 2025 protests, security forces blocked off major roads into Nairobi, including Waiyaki Way, Mombasa Road, Thika Road, Ngong Road, Valley Road, Juja Road, and Lang’ata Road. Other cities that may see large-scale gatherings and potential clashes include Mombasa, Kisumu, and Nakuru.
In the lead-up to and during the potential protests, there is a realistic possibility that the government will impose internet outages to prevent the spread of calls for anti-government protests. There will highly likely be a heightened security presence in Nairobi and other major cities on 25 June.
Travel and Safety Guidance for Kenya
- Reconsider non-essential travel to Kenya, particularly Nairobi, Mombasa, and other major cities on 25 June.
- Avoid the central business district in Nairobi around 25 June, particularly around Kenyatta Avenue, Haile Selassie Avenue, City Hall, and any other wide roads conducive to the staging of protests, as well as all major government buildings such as the Kenyan Parliament or the Governor’s Office.
- Closely monitor announcements from local authorities and trusted media sources for any developments that may severely impact the local security environment.
- Avoid all areas of unrest due to incidental risks to bystanders. If caught in the unrest, travellers should move with the crowd until they find the nearest opportunity to escape. If in a vehicle, look to turn down the nearest road. If driving away is not an option, lock the vehicle and escape on foot.
- Always follow all instructions and orders from security forces. Where possible, avoid areas of active unrest and remain in secure accommodation.
- Prolonged civil unrest can disrupt travel, especially if protesters begin targeting airports. Travellers should have contingency measures in place, including evacuation plans and reliable access to food, water and medication.
- Have emergency contact numbers saved on your phone. These should include the local authorities, medical facilities and any consular support. Ensure that mobile phones are charged in case of any loss of electricity.
- Keep emergency contact numbers saved on your phone, including those for local authorities, medical services, and consular assistance. Ensure mobile devices are fully charged in case of potential power outages.
- Closely monitor alerts from a security provider if available, trusted local news reports and government alerts.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Gulf Security Remains Volatile Despite Ceasefire
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 19 June 2026 – 23 June 2026
- On 19 June, within an hour of a renewed Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire coming into effect, Israel conducted further strikes in southern Lebanon, and Hezbollah launched drones towards northern Israel.
- On 20 June, Iran’s military headquarters announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, citing continued conflict in Lebanon. US Central Command (CENTCOM) said it had tracked no Iranian movements to close the Strait and that traffic continued to flow, while Iran’s own foreign ministry told Iranian media that shipping was operating normally.
- On 21 June, the first round of Qatar and Pakistan-mediated direct US-Iran talks began at Lake Lucerne, Switzerland. Threats from US President Donald Trump to strike Iran again led to the Iranian delegation reportedly threatening to walk out.
- The second day of the Lucerne Summit went ahead on 22 June, with mediators announcing a 60-day roadmap and several working groups on the key issues. Subsequent statements from both parties contradicted each other on agreements made regarding an invitation for International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors and the release of some frozen Iranian assets.
- On 22 June, an Israeli statement was issued, which said that Israel Defence Forces (IDF) operations will continue in southern Lebanon. Israeli and Lebanese diplomats are scheduled to hold another round of direct talks on 23 June.
- As of 23 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Navigate Fragile Ceasefire and Ongoing Disruption
On 20 June, Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya central military headquarters announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, just three days after it had been reopened as part of the MoU. Khatam al-Anbiya cited Israel’s alleged ceasefire violations in Lebanon and the US failure to implement the first clause of the MoU, the article requiring an immediate end to military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon. US Central Command (CENTCOM) said it had tracked no Iranian movements to close the Strait and that traffic continued to flow, while Iran’s own foreign ministry told Iranian media that shipping was operating normally. In response, US President Donald Trump threatened on social media to impose American tolls in the Strait of Hormuz if a deal is not reached in 60-days.
On 21 June, the first round of Qatar and Pakistan-mediated direct US-Iran talks began at the Bürgenstock resort on Lake Lucerne, Switzerland, having been postponed from 20 June due to the aforementioned developments. US Vice President JD Vance led the US delegation, which included President Trump’s envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff. Iran’s parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who has become increasingly powerful in Tehran since the outbreak of war on 28 February, led the Iranian delegation, which also included the foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi.
During this first day of talks, President Trump threatened on social media to “hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!!” if Iran did not stop Hezbollah from “causing trouble”. The Iranian delegation lodged a protest and reportedly threatened to walk out, but Vance later said that the Iranians never left the talks.
The second day of the Lucerne Summit went ahead on 22 June, with mediators announcing: a 60-day roadmap, a high-level oversight committee, a US-Iran communication line on the Strait of Hormuz, and a “de-confliction cell” to support adherence to the cessation of operations in Lebanon. Working groups will also be established regarding the nuclear file, sanctions, and monitoring and dispute resolution. Vice President Vance claimed that Iran had agreed to invite International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors, possibly within the week. However, Iran’s foreign ministry denied this and stated they had made no such commitment. Furthermore, Araghchi stated that an agreement was reached on the release of some frozen Iranian assets, while Vance said this has not yet happened.
Also on 22 June, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a joint statement with Israel’s Defence Minister and the IDF chief of staff, which said that the IDF will continue “to act decisively to neutralise threats to our soldiers and citizens, destroy terrorist infrastructure, and maintain the security zone in southern Lebanon.” On 23 June, Israeli and Lebanese diplomats are scheduled to hold a round of direct talks, mediated by the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 19 and 23 June.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 23 June, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
No attacks have been reported in Kuwait between 19 and 23 June.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 23 June, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
No attacks have been reported in Bahrain between 19 and 23 June.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 23 June, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 19 and 23 June. On 21 June, a large explosion occurred at the Barzan LNG plant in Ras Laffan Industrial City, with authorities stating that at least 13 people were killed and 66 others injured. Due to the high regional tensions, there has been speculation that the explosion was related to Iran. However, Qatari authorities have announced that sabotage has been ruled out, and Qatar Energy has said that the explosion was caused by an operational incident during start-up of operations.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 23 June, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 19 and 23 June.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 23 June, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
No attacks have been reported in Oman between 19 and 23 June.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 23 June, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
The MoU has likely reduced the immediate risk of a return to full-scale US-Iran conflict. However, the MoU is highly likely functioning primarily as an extension of the ceasefire, rather than as a substantive or durable peace agreement. The agreement is likely vulnerable to multiple key triggers for ceasefire breakdown, including conflict in Lebanon, disagreements over the nuclear file during negotiations, and continued Iranian efforts to maintain control over the Strait of Hormuz.
Continued conflict in Lebanon was the trigger for the first significant challenge to the MoU since its signing on 17 June, with the Iranian military claiming to have again closed the Strait of Hormuz. However, the announced closure has yet to materialise into reduced traffic. There is a realistic possibility that the announcement was used to provide Iran with further leverage just prior to the start of direct negotiations.
The announced continuation of IDF operations in southern Lebanon, if sustained following further Israel-Lebanon talks today on 23 June, is likely to cause further issues for the broader ceasefire. Moreover, President Trump’s multiple stated threats since the MoU’s signing have likely challenged terms within the MoU which preclude the issuance of threats of military force, and the announcement by Iran’s military headquarters of the Strait’s closure directly contravened key terms of the MoU, although this has so far failed to materialise in practice.
It is notable that Iran’s foreign ministry quickly rebuffed the claims from Iran’s military headquarters of the Strait’s closure. Iranian adherence to a ceasefire is likely to be undermined by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which has increasingly consolidated power in Tehran, acted independently of the civilian government, and signalled total opposition to US demands. The lack of a fully coherent regime in Tehran with a unified negotiating position almost certainly complicates the negotiation process and increases the likelihood that elements within the IRGC could fail to comply with any agreements made by Tehran’s civilian government and negotiating team.
Furthermore, statements from Iran’s new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, have highly likely made distinct efforts to characterise Iran’s agreement to the MoU as the responsibility of Iran’s civilian President, Masoud Pezeshkian. This is likely intended to limit domestic criticism of any shift from the maximalist objectives of hardliners, but it also likely highlights the lack of a fully unified negotiating position in Iran.
Travel to the Middle East is likely to remain at a high risk profile until there are clear indications of durable de-escalation, such as a major US force withdrawal or reduction. As long as the current US in-region force posture is maintained, and with multiple triggers for ceasefire breakdown remaining extant, renewed escalation could break out with minimal indicators or warnings.
Confrontations between US and Iranian forces in the maritime domain have been accompanied by continued attacks against some Gulf states since the implementation of a ceasefire on 8 April, demonstrating that the ceasefire framework does not preclude further hostilities. Post-ceasefire Iranian retaliation strikes initially primarily targeted the UAE, but later focused on Jordan, Kuwait, and Bahrain. These post-ceasefire strikes notably escalated in early June, with increased scale and the repeated targeting of Kuwait’s international airport.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Gulf Security Remains Volatile Despite Ceasefire
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 16 June 2026 – 19 June 2026
- On 17 June, US and Iranian officials electronically signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) agreed by both countries. The 14-point document extends the ceasefire and entails several provisions to resume shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.
- The immediate risk of a return to full-scale US-Iran conflict has likely decreased with the MoU’s implementation. However, it is likely to be only a ceasefire extension, not yet a substantive and lasting peace agreement.
- The reported agreement is likely vulnerable to continuing conflict in Lebanon, disagreements on the nuclear file in a 60-day negotiating period, and issues regarding the Strait of Hormuz.
- The planned formal signing ceremony between US and Iranian officials in Switzerland on 19 June has been postponed, highly likely due to Israel’s continued attacks in Lebanon.
- A US force withdrawal from the region is reportedly tied to progress on further negotiations. As long as the US force posture is maintained, renewed escalation could rapidly break out with minimal indicators and warnings.
- As of 19 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Navigate Fragile Ceasefire and Ongoing Disruption
The MoU comprises 14 points, including the immediate reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, the cessation of hostilities on all fronts, the lifting of the US blockade on Iran, and sanctions relief for Tehran. The signing of the MoU resulted in the de facto suspension of the US naval blockade on Iranian ports, with several Iranian tankers crossing the US blockade line on 17 June. On 19 June, a 60-day period of negotiations on some unresolved triggers of the conflict, such as Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, began.
Both Israeli and Hezbollah forces carried out reciprocal attacks during the 14-19 June period in southern Lebanon. Iranian officials have continued to describe Israeli military operations as violating the ceasefire and have called on Israel to withdraw from southern Lebanon.
The planned formal signing ceremony between US and Iranian officials in Switzerland on 19 June has been postponed. The talks were intended to address the technical terms of the ceasefire agreement, but Iran has reportedly delayed the process by holding back its delegation. Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, stated that any talks would remain bound by Tehran’s “red lines”, highly likely referring to a halt to Israel’s attacks on Lebanon.
Following the signing of the MoU, the United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) reduced its travel security alert levels for Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 16 and 19 June.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 19 June, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
No attacks have been reported in Kuwait between 16 and 19 June. On 19 June, Kuwait’s oil minister stated that all force majeure declarations will be lifted following the US-Iran agreement. He added that pre-war production levels are possible within a week. An earlier statement on 18 June declared that repairs of war-related damages have advanced faster than projected.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 19 June, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
No attacks have been reported in Bahrain between 16 and 19 June. On 17 June, clashes took place between police and protesters in Abu Saiba after security forces attempted to remove the Husseini flags that had been erected, according to local media.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 19 June, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 16 and 19 June.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 19 June, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 16 and 19 June.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 19 June, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
No attacks have been reported in Oman between 16 and 19 June.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 19 June, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
The announcement of the MoU’s agreement is almost certainly the biggest diplomatic breakthrough since the implementation of the 8 April two-week ceasefire. With its signing, the immediate risk of a return to full-scale US-Iran conflict has likely decreased. However, the MoU is likely to function primarily as an extension of the ceasefire, rather than as a substantive or durable peace agreement. The agreement is likely vulnerable to multiple friction points, including conflict in Lebanon, disagreements over the nuclear file, and issues regarding the Strait of Hormuz.
While the US has allowed Iranian tankers to bypass its naval forces, the US’s regional force posture remains largely unchanged, with two carrier strike groups (CSGs) within the Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR), combined with multiple surface platforms and dozens of additional combat aircraft forward-deployed to regional bases. A US force withdrawal or reduction is likely to be a clearer indication of de-escalation. It is likely to be tied to tangible progress on unresolved issues, principally the nuclear file. As long as the current US force posture is maintained, renewed escalation could break out with minimal indicators or warnings.
If the MoU collapses, there is a realistic possibility of renewed Iranian strikes against targets in Jordan and the Gulf States. If recent Iranian targeting patterns are sustained, Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain are likely to be more exposed in the event of a ceasefire breakdown.
Lebanon
The MoU reportedly includes an end to the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, which is likely to be the immediate test for the agreement. Israel’s defence minister, Israel Katz, has stated that the IDF will indefinitely remain in the security zone in Lebanon, with IDF operations in southern Lebanon continuing as recently as 19 June. Moreover, senior Israeli officials and politicians have largely reacted negatively to the MoU’s announcement, with Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir stating that Israel is not bound to the deal “in any way”.
Israeli opposition to the MoU almost certainly reflects concerns that the agreement does not satisfy Israel’s key objectives, with Iran’s ballistic missile programme omitted from negotiations. Israeli opposition or unilateral military action is likely to complicate the MoU’s implementation or undermine the agreement at a later stage. Furthermore, Hezbollah is likely to sustain attacks against the IDF and northern Israel in response to continued IDF operations in Lebanon, with senior Hezbollah leadership stating that its position would be linked to Israel’s adherence to a ceasefire.
Tehran is likely to continue leveraging the threat of force in response to Israeli operations in Lebanon to both support Hezbollah and extract concessions from the US during the negotiation phase. The postponement of the formal signing ceremony on 19 June almost certainly increases pressure on the US to push for a halt to Israeli attacks in Lebanon.
The Nuclear File
The primary issue that impeded progress in the Oman-mediated US-Iran talks, which preceded the outbreak of conflict on 28 February, was the nuclear file. The MoU reportedly only involves a reiteration of Iran’s past commitment to never acquire or procure a nuclear weapon, with technical talks on the nuclear file deferred to a post-MoU 60-day negotiation window.
The most difficult issues to resolve will almost certainly be Iran’s buried stockpile of approximately 440.9kg of 60 per cent highly enriched uranium (HEU), enough to produce approximately ten nuclear weapons if enriched further, and whether Iran will be permitted to retain any domestic enrichment capability. There is no credible civilian requirement for uranium enriched to that level, and Iran’s possession of HEU has served as Tehran’s primary source of leverage, which hardliners within the regime are likely to be reluctant to surrender.
The Trump administration’s pre-war position was that Iran suspend all enrichment and physically surrender the HEU stockpile to the US, with Tehran consistently stating that the HEU must remain in Iran. However, Washington’s position has reportedly softened on both fronts. Reports indicate that Washington may be willing to accept Iran domestically down-blending the HEU under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as well as accepting limited low-level domestic enrichment.
While the specifics of the MoU remain undisclosed, senior US officials and leaders (including Vice President JD Vance) have stated that key incentives such as sanctions relief, regional investment funds, and access to frozen assets will be tied to the resolution of the nuclear file in the 60-day window. There is a realistic possibility that these incentives, in combination with the observed softening of the US position on nuclear demands, could lead to a nuclear agreement. However, recent CIA assessments have raised “serious doubts about Iran’s willingness” to make desired nuclear concessions.
The Strait of Hormuz
The future status of the Strait of Hormuz is also likely to be a major source of friction. While the MoU reportedly provides for the toll-free reopening of the Strait and aims towards a gradual return to pre-war shipping volumes, issues regarding the Strait’s long-term remains unresolved and will likely provide Iran with another major source of leverage. Tehran has continued to signal that transit fees may ultimately be imposed under alternative mechanisms, including service or environmental charges. However, such an arrangement is likely to be unacceptable to the US and the international community, as it would almost certainly be inconsistent with international maritime law and the principle of freedom of navigation. If naval blockades are lifted and commercial transits increase, mine-clearance operations and continued sub-threshold disruptions, including GPS jamming, Automatic Identification System (AIS) spoofing, and the harassment of vessels by the IRGC, are likely to pose risks to maritime traffic.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Gulf Security Remains Volatile Despite Ceasefire
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 12 June 2026 – 16 June 2026
- On 14 June, an agreed memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Iran and the US was announced. The MoU is reportedly scheduled to be formally signed on 19 June, with the opening of the Strait of Hormuz to follow.
- Almost certainly the biggest diplomatic breakthrough since the implementation of the 8 April ceasefire, the immediate risk of a return to full-scale US-Iran conflict would likely decrease with the MoU’s implementation. However, it is likely to only be effectively a ceasefire extension and not yet a substantive and lasting peace agreement.
- The announcement of the MoU’s agreement was preceded by further conflict in Lebanon on 14 June, which reportedly almost derailed the deal. Sustained Israeli operations in Lebanon are likely to represent the first major test of the MoU’s implementation. Israeli operations in southern Lebanon have continued as recently as 16 June.
- The reported agreement is likely vulnerable to continuing conflict in Lebanon, disagreements on the nuclear file in a 60-day negotiating period, and issues pertaining to the Strait of Hormuz.
- A US force withdrawal from the region is reportedly tied to progress on further negotiations. As long as the US force posture is maintained, renewed escalation could rapidly break out with minimal indicators and warnings.
- As of 16 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Navigate Fragile Ceasefire and Ongoing Disruption
On 14 June, a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Iran and the US was announced as agreed by Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. US President Donald Trump announced that the deal includes the “toll-free opening of the Strait of Hormuz” and ordered “the immediate removal of the [US blockade].” Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, confirmed the agreement of the deal on state television. The MoU is reportedly scheduled to be formally signed on 19 June in Switzerland, with the opening of the Strait of Hormuz to follow its signing.
The exact terms of the MoU remain publicly undisclosed as of 16 June, with contradictory reporting of specific terms, particularly from Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-affiliated media. Most reporting indicates that the MoU includes: the toll-free opening of the Strait of Hormuz, an immediate end to the US naval blockade, a ceasefire “on all fronts” (which extends to Lebanon), and a 60-day negotiating period for technical talks on the nuclear file and potential Iranian sanctions relief.
The announcement of the MoU’s agreement was preceded by further conflict in Lebanon on 14 June, which reportedly almost derailed the deal. On the morning of 14 June, Hezbollah launched several drones at northern Israel, with the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) then conducting strikes in Beirut’s southern suburbs (Dahieh). Several senior Iranian military and political figures subsequently warned that the attack on Beirut “will not go unanswered” and that a “strong response is coming”.
US negotiators reportedly “scrambled to avoid an Iranian attack on Israel”. No Iranian attack was conducted, with Gharibabadi claiming that Iran’s threats “helped facilitate progress in the negotiations” with requested Iranian amendments to the MoU being granted. IRGC-affiliated media reported that the attack was called off due to “last-minute concessions” offered by the US, including guarantees on Lebanon’s territorial integrity, Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, and the US blockade being lifted immediately rather than gradually.
As of 16 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 12 and 16 June.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 16 June, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
No attacks have been reported in Kuwait between 12 and 16 June.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 16 June, Kuwait’s airspace is open.
Bahrain
No attacks have been reported in Bahrain between 12 and 16 June.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 16 June, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 12 and 16 June.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 16 June, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 12 and 16 June.
Citing four sources, international media reported on 12 June that the UAE agreed “to unlock billions of dollars for Iran”. The report claims that the UAE has agreed to release a total of USD 10 or 20 billion, with over USD 3 billion having already been delivered. The Emirati Ministry of Foreign Affairs categorically denied the reports.
It is notable that Iranian retaliation strikes following US-Iran confrontations in the maritime domain have not been directly conducted against the UAE since early May. It is likely that this is related to increased backchannel diplomatic contacts between the UAE and Iran seeking to de-escalate, which is alleged to have included the payment of funds, in a marked shift from the UAE’s earlier hawkishness against Iran.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 16 June, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
No attacks have been reported in Oman between 12 and 16 June, excluding US attacks in Omani waters against Iran-linked vessels as part of efforts to enforce the blockade.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 16 June, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
The announcement of the MoU’s agreement is almost certainly the biggest diplomatic breakthrough since the implementation of the 8 April two-week ceasefire. Although reportedly already signed remotely, the MoU has not yet been formally signed, with its signing ceremony scheduled for 19 June. With its signing, the immediate risk of a return to full-scale US-Iran conflict would likely decrease. However, the MoU is likely only to be an effective ceasefire extension and not a substantive and lasting peace agreement. The reported agreement is likely vulnerable to continuing conflict in Lebanon, disagreements on the nuclear file, and issues pertaining to the Strait of Hormuz.
A US force withdrawal from the region is reportedly tied to progress on further negotiations. As long as the current US force posture is maintained, renewed escalation could rapidly break out with minimal indicators and warnings.
If the MoU collapses, there is a realistic possibility of renewed Iranian strikes against targets in Jordan and the Gulf States. Iranian strikes post-8 April ceasefire have recently escalated in both scale and targeting profile. If recent Iranian targeting patterns are to be sustained, Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain are likely to be more exposed in the event of a ceasefire breakdown.
Lebanon
The first significant test for the MoU is likely to be the continuation of Israeli operations in Lebanon. The MoU reportedly includes an end to the war on all fronts, including Lebanon. However, Israel’s defence minister, Israel Katz, has stated that the IDF will indefinitely remain in the security zone in Lebanon, with IDF operations in southern Lebanon continuing as recently as 16 June.
Senior Israeli officials and politicians have largely reacted negatively to the MoU’s announcement. Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has stated that the MoU is “bad for Israel” and “the entire free world”, and the National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has stated that Israel is not bound to the deal “in any way”. Israeli opposition to the MoU is almost certainly reflective of concerns that the agreement does not satisfy Israel’s key objectives. Israeli opposition or unilateral military action could complicate the MoU’s implementation or undermine the agreement at a later stage.
Moreover, Hezbollah is likely to sustain attacks against the IDF and northern Israel in response to continued IDF operations. A Hezbollah official told international media that the group has not carried out operations since the MoU was announced, but that its position would be linked to Israel’s adherence to a ceasefire. Additionally, Tehran is likely to continue leveraging the threat of force in response to Israeli operations in Lebanon, not only to provide support for Hezbollah, but also to pressure concessions from the US in negotiations, as regime officials have claimed to have done so on 14 June.
The Nuclear File
The primary issue that impeded progress in the Oman-mediated US-Iran talks, which preceded the outbreak of conflict on 28 February, was the nuclear file. The MoU reportedly only involves a reiteration of Iran’s past commitment to never acquire or procure a nuclear weapon, with technical talks on the nuclear file deferred to a post-MoU 60-day negotiation window.
The main disputes during the pre-28 February negotiations are likely to continue to complicate talks. The most difficult issues to resolve will almost certainly be Iran’s buried stockpile of approximately 440.9kg of 60 per cent highly enriched uranium (HEU), enough to produce approximately ten nuclear weapons if enriched further, and whether Iran will be permitted to retain any domestic enrichment capability.
The Trump administration’s pre-war position was that Iran suspend all enrichment and physically surrender the HEU stockpile to the US, with Tehran consistently stating that the HEU must remain in Iran. However, Washington’s position has reportedly softened on both fronts. Reports indicate that Washington may be willing to accept Iran domestically down-blending the HEU under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as well as accepting limited low-level domestic enrichment.
While the specifics of the MoU remain undisclosed, senior US officials and leaders (including Vice President JD Vance) have stated that key incentives such as sanctions relief, regional investment funds, and access to frozen assets will be tied to the resolution of the nuclear file in the 60-day window. There is a realistic possibility that these incentives, in combination with the observed softening of the US position on nuclear demands, could lead to a nuclear agreement. However, assessments by the US intelligence community, as reportedly briefed to President Trump by the CIA Director John Ratcliffe, are reported to have raised “serious doubts about Iran’s willingness” to make desired nuclear concessions.
Much of the MoU is reportedly contingent on future nuclear negotiations, with US sanctions and the current regional force posture set to remain in place until a final nuclear agreement is reached. The 60-day negotiation period is likely to remain highly vulnerable as it centres on the same nuclear issues that have repeatedly obstructed diplomatic progress. Any breakdown in these talks would likely place the ceasefire under immediate strain.
The Strait of Hormuz
The reported initial steps in the deal primarily revolve around efforts to open the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump has stated that the Strait’s opening and concurrent end of the US blockade will take place upon the MoU’s formal signing on 19 June. However, it is highly unlikely that if the MoU is implemented, the Strait will immediately return to its pre-war status. Mine-clearance operations will still need to be conducted, while continued messaging from Tehran over its future management of the Strait is likely to sustain uncertainty over maritime security and freedom of navigation. GPS-jamming, AIS spoofing, the harassment of vessels and other forms of sub-threshold disruption are likely to remain common.
The MoU reportedly involves the Strait of Hormuz being reopened without tolls, with an objective to return to pre-war shipping volumes within 30 days. While Iranian regime sources have softened the language from “tolls”, regime and IRGC-linked media have repeatedly indicated that payments could still be imposed for transit under the guise of “environmental protection” or “service charges”. IRGC-affiliated media have reported that Tehran has only agreed to allow free passage for vessels for 60 days, with plans to collect revenues from various fees following this period. Moreover, a spokesman for Iran’s foreign ministry directly stated that Iran will charge for services in the Strait of Hormuz.
A conclusive resolution on the future management of the Strait of Hormuz also appears to have been deferred, leaving a key source of leverage and potential escalation unresolved. It is highly likely that Tehran will seek to preserve leverage over the strategic chokepoint while gradually normalising a greater long-term role in its administration. Such a development is unlikely to be accepted by the US and the international community, as it would directly challenge maritime law and the principles of freedom of navigation.
While an end to the US blockade and gradual opening of the Strait would likely reduce the primary tactical trigger for US-Iranian escalation in the short-term, which has repeatedly led to Iranian strikes against several Gulf States and Jordan, continued Iranian efforts to maintain greater control over the Strait are highly likely to lead to continued high tensions, challenge any implemented ceasefire and undermine future negotiations.
Travellers and expatriates are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.
Gulf Security Remains Volatile Despite Ceasefire
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | INTELLIGENCE WINDOW: 9 June 2026 – 12 June 2026
- Following the announced end of the Israel-Iran confrontation on 8 June, a US Apache helicopter crashed in the Strait of Hormuz following an incident with an Iranian attack drone. US forces subsequently conducted strikes against southern Iran on 10 and 11 June, with Iranian forces then launching retaliatory strikes against US military targets in Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain.
- These mark the first Iranian attacks against targets in Jordan since the implementation of the ceasefire on 8 April, and almost certainly indicate an expansion of targeting patterns to include Muwaffaq Salti Air Base for retaliatory strikes following continued US operations against Iran.
- During the 11 June attack against Kuwait, authorities said that radar facilities and equipment linked to air traffic management were seriously damaged at Kuwait International Airport.
- Israeli operations have continued in southern Lebanon. There is a realistic possibility of this triggering further Iranian strikes against Israel, which could lead to further exchanges of tit-for-tat strikes and endanger the broader ceasefire.
- On 11 June, President Trump threatened on social media that the US “will be hitting Iran VERY HARD TONIGHT”. However, later on 11 June, President Trump announced that he had cancelled planned strikes against Iran and claimed that Iranian leadership had “approved” a draft memorandum of understanding (MOU). Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-affiliated media denied that Iran has confirmed the agreement yet, but there was a “possibility” it will be approved as the US has accepted “Iran’s proposed text”.
- As of 12 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open. Early 11 June, Kuwait announced the temporary closure of its airspace, which was reopened shortly afterwards.
Middle East Conflict: Latest Intelligence & Travel Advice
To support planning, we are updating our Middle East travel advice daily with guidance from our intelligence team on airspace openings and closures, flight operations, and escalating risks impacting movement.
Situation Update: Gulf States Navigate Fragile Ceasefire and Ongoing Disruption
Following the announced end of the Israel-Iran confrontation on 8 June, a US AH-64 Apache helicopter crashed in the Strait of Hormuz following an incident with an Iranian attack drone, with two crew members being subsequently rescued. CENTCOM stated that the crash is under investigation, and some US officials have stated that it remains unclear whether the collision was intentional, but US President Donald Trump has stated that it was an intentional attack, with the attack drone failing to detonate.
US forces subsequently conducted strikes against around 20 targets in southern Iran, with Iranian forces then launching strikes against US military targets in Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. On 10 June, US forces conducted further strikes against southern Iran, which were reportedly “calibrated to avoid casualties and leave open the possibility of a deal”. Iranian forces then again conducted strikes against US military targets in Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain.
On 11 June, President Trump threatened on social media that the US “will be hitting Iran VERY HARD TONIGHT”, and that “[a]t some point in the not too distant future, we will be taking Kharg Island”. However, later on 11 June, President Trump announced that he had cancelled planned strikes against Iran and claimed that Iranian leadership had “approved” a draft memorandum of understanding (MOU). Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-affiliated media denied that Iran has confirmed the agreement yet, but there was a “possibility” it will be approved as the US has accepted “Iran’s proposed text”.
On 11 June, Israeli military officials stated that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) had moved armour and troops into position in southern Lebanon in preparation for a potential offensive on Nabatieh. Nabatieh is one of the largest urban centres in southern Lebanon and a known Hezbollah stronghold.
As of 12 June, the airspaces of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman are open. Early 11 June, Kuwait announced the temporary closure of its airspace, which was reopened shortly afterwards.
Saudi Arabia
No attacks have been reported in Saudi Arabia between 9 and 12 June.
At least three people have been killed and 29 injured in Saudi Arabia, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 12 June, Saudi Arabia’s airspace is open.
Kuwait
On 10 June, Kuwait’s armed forces stated that air defence systems were “intercepting hostile aerial targets”. The IRGC stated that the attack was conducted in retaliation for the US strikes against southern Iran, targeting the Ali Al Salem and Ahmad Al-Jaber airbases. On 11 June, Kuwait’s air defences were again activated due to another Iranian attack. During this attack, Kuwait’s civil aviation authority said that radar facilities and equipment linked to air traffic management were seriously damaged at Kuwait International Airport, with injuries reported. Kuwait’s armed forces later announced on 11 June that in the previous 48 hours, 24 attack drones had been intercepted.
At least seven people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Kuwait, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 11 June, Kuwait’s airspace is open. During the 11 June attack, which involved an attack against Kuwait International Airport, Kuwait’s civil aviation authority announced the temporary closure of Kuwait’s airspace starting 04:50 local time. Around two hours later, authorities announced” the return of air traffic in Kuwaiti airspace to normal.”
Bahrain
On 10 June, the Bahraini air defences were activated due to incoming Iranian attacks. The IRGC stated that the attack was conducted in retaliation for the US strikes against southern Iran, targeting Sheikh Isa airbase. Bahrain’s Ministry of the Interior stated that the attacks resulted in a minor injury and damage to homes and vehicles in Hamad City and Manama due to debris from intercepted Iranian drones. On 11 June, Bahrain was attacked again, with the foreign minister stating that Bahrain was targeted by 36 attack drones. IRGC-affiliated media claimed to have struck the AR-327 early warning radar site located in Bahrain’s Mount Dukhan.
At least three people have been killed, and dozens have been injured in Bahrain, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 12 June, Bahrain’s airspace is open.
Qatar
No attacks have been reported in Qatar between 9 and 12 June.
At least 20 people have been injured in Qatar, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 9 June, Qatar’s airspace is open.
UAE
No attacks have been reported in the UAE between 9 and 12 June.
Notably, Iranian retaliation strikes have not recently been conducted against the UAE, which is likely related to reportedly increasing backchannel diplomatic contacts between the UAE and Iran seeking to de-escalate.
At least 12 people have been killed and 224 injured in the UAE, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 12 June, the UAE’s airspace is open.
Oman
No attacks have been reported in Oman between 9 and 12 June, excluding US attacks in Omani waters against Iran-linked vessels as part of efforts to enforce the blockade.
At least three people have been killed and 16 injured in Oman, as of 09:00 UTC on 10 June.
As of 12 June, Oman’s airspace is open.
Regional Advisory
Overall, the ‘ceasefire’ has almost certainly come closer to collapse in the past week than at any point since its implementation on 8 April. Tehran has expanded its stated criteria for renewed attacks against Israel in response to continued conflict in Lebanon, with expanded IDF operations in southern Lebanon likely to be exploited by Iran to undermine the ceasefire. In addition, escalation cycles linked to US-Iran confrontation in the maritime domain have intensified to their highest level yet, reflected in the scale of Iranian retaliatory strikes targeting Kuwait and Bahrain, and the resumption of strikes on Jordan, which had not been attacked since the 8 April ceasefire.
The exchange of strikes between the US and Iran following the loss of an Apache helicopter is almost certainly the most significant resulting from confrontation in the maritime domain since 8 April. As long as the competing blockades are maintained, there remains a high risk of a tactical miscalculation and/or escalation in the Strait of Hormuz, with retaliatory strikes unlikely to be confined to the immediate area of engagement. In addition to endangering the broader negotiation process, the cycles of escalation have repeatedly led to renewed Iranian strikes against regional countries, first with the UAE and more recently against Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. The UAE has notably not been attacked since mid-May, which is likely related to the increased diplomatic engagement between the UAE and Iran.
Since 3 June, Iranian retaliatory attacks have likely shifted from sporadic post-ceasefire engagements to larger and more complex attacks. The targeting of Kuwait International Airport on 3 June was a notable escalation in the target profile of Iranian strikes since 8 April. This pattern has likely continued, evidenced by the 10-11 June attacks, whereby Kuwait International Airport was attacked again, and Iranian strikes expanded to Jordan.
Should an MOU be imminently reached, which President Trump claims could be as soon as this weekend, the immediate risk of a return to full-scale US-Iran conflict would likely decrease. However, such a framework would likely only be an effective ceasefire extension and not a substantive and lasting peace agreement. Major issues like control of the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s nuclear programme are unlikely to be fully resolved. Moreover, reported provisions within the MOU, such as the US blockade being lifted in proportion to the restoration of commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, provide multiple triggers for the potential MOU to break down. Finally, if the MOU only delays detailed nuclear talks for another 60 days, the main disputes during the pre-28 February negotiations would likely continue to complicate talks.
If an MOU/framework agreement is not agreed, there is a realistic possibility of Iranian retaliation strikes against targets in Jordan and the Gulf States further escalating as a result of continued US and/or Israeli strikes on Iran. On 10 June, President Trump stated in an interview that he is considering ordering new strikes targeting Iran’s power plants and bridges if Tehran does not sign an agreement, and also threatened the seizure of Kharg Island on 11 June. Previous similar threats issued by President Trump led to IRGC-affiliated media publishing lists of desalination and power plants across the Gulf States as potential targets for retaliation. Furthermore, Iran’s chief negotiator and parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, threatened that the Israeli strikes against Iran, in addition to the ongoing US naval blockade, have made US bases and assets in the region “legitimate targets”. The IRGC-affiliated media outlet, Fars, citing a senior Iranian official, directly reported that if Iranian energy infrastructure is attacked again, Iran will carry out analogous attacks against oil and gas facilities in the region.
The MOU reportedly involves the Strait of Hormuz being reopened immediately without tolls, with a return to pre-war shipping volumes within 30 days. Iranian state-owned media reported on 12 June that the MOU will not make a commitment regarding any transfer of management of the strait. While softening the language from “tolls”, regime and IRGC-linked media have repeatedly indicated that payments could still be imposed for transit under the guise of “environmental protection” or “service charges”. These actions likely indicate that Tehran is seeking to preserve leverage over the strategic chokepoint while gradually normalising a greater long-term role in its administration; a development unlikely to be accepted by the US and the international community, as they directly challenge maritime law and the principles of freedom of navigation.
Travellers are strongly advised not to film or distribute footage of strikes, damage, or military activity:
- Jordanian authorities have warned against publishing videos or information regarding Jordan’s defensive operations without authorisation.
- Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has stated that “[p]hotographing or publishing or circulating information related to countering missiles and drones and the locations of their falls exposes you to legal accountability.”
- In the UAE, authorities have warned that publishing or circulating “rumours, false news, or news from unknown sources through social media platforms or other information technology” is illegal. Reports indicate that Dubai Police have used “electronic monitoring operations” to detect a photo shared within a private WhatsApp group.
- In Bahrain, several people have been confirmed as arrested for “filming, live streaming, clipping, and publishing events in a manner constituting a legal violation”.
- Qatar’s Ministry of Interior warned that gathering at incident sites or photographing and sharing content related to field developments may result in legal accountability and has arrested hundreds of people of various nationalities for “producing and sharing misleading information”.
- Omani authorities have stated: “Beware of sharing or publishing any captured photos or videos. They should be shared only with the competent authorities”.

Request Evacuation Assistance
If you need secure, coordinated support to move personnel out of a high-risk location, our team is ready to help – quickly, calmly, and with care.

