Thousands mourn top Iranian military commanders and scientists killed in Israeli strikes
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Thousands of mourners lined the streets of downtown Tehran on Saturday for the funeral of the head of the Revolutionary Guard and other top commanders and nuclear scientists killed during a 12-day war with Israel.
The caskets of Guard's chief Gen. Hossein Salami, the head of the Guard's ballistic missile program, Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh and others were driven on trucks along the capital's Azadi Street as people in the crowds chanted: 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel.'
Salami and Hajizadeh were both killed on the first day of the war, June 13, as Israel launched a war it said meant to destroy Iran's nuclear program, specifically targeting military commanders, scientists and nuclear facilities.
There was no immediate sign of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in the state broadcast of the funeral. Khamenei, who has not made a public appearance since before the outbreak of the war, has in past funerals held prayers for fallen commanders over their caskets before the open ceremonies, later aired on state television.
Over 12 days before a ceasefire was declared on Tuesday, Israel claimed it killed around 30 Iranian commanders and 11 nuclear scientists, while hitting eight nuclear-related facilities and more than 720 military infrastructure sites. More than 1,000 people were killed, including at least 417 civilians, according to the Washington-based Human Rights Activists group.
Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted, but those that got through caused damage in many areas and killed 28 people.
Saturday's ceremonies were the first public funerals for top commanders since the ceasefire, and Iranian state television reported that they were for 60 people in total, including four women and four children.
Iran has always insisted its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes. But Israel views it as an existential threat and said its military campaign was necessary to prevent Iran from building an atomic weapon.
Khamenei's last public appearance was June 11, two days before hostilities with Israel broke out, when he met with Iranian parliamentarians.
On Thursday, however, he released a pre-recorded video, in his first message since the end of the war, filled with warnings and threats directed toward the United States and Israel, the Islamic Republic's longtime adversaries.
The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, Rafael Grossi, has characterized the damage done by American bunker-buster bombs to Iran's Fordo nuclear site, which was built into a mountain, as 'very, very, very considerable.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Few thought airstrikes could ‘obliterate' Iran's nuclear program. Then Trump said they did.
Experts long argued that airstrikes alone would not be capable of permanently ending Iran's nuclear program absent negotiations. WASHINGTON — A highly politicized debate is unfolding over the impact of June 21 U.S. airstrikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, raising questions over the attack's goal and projected impact. President Donald Trump quickly claimed total victory in the strikes' wake, claiming that Iran's 'key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' Subsequent scrutiny of that claim amid early assessments from intelligence agencies has led Trump and his allies to double down on and even expand on his declarations of success. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed to CNN that the strikes 'obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons.' Iran itself has acknowledged the impact of the U.S. and Israeli attacks. But in the years since Washington's withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, experts and analysts have emphasized that airstrikes alone would merely delay Iran's nuclear ambitions rather than permanently derail them. Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Illinois, reiterated that long-held understanding in a June 26 interview. 'The targets are hard targets, deep targets, mobile targets. So it was never meant to eliminate the program,' Quigley told USA TODAY. 'It was never meant to do anything but slow the program.' The congressman, who is on the House's intelligence committee and has regularly received briefings on Iran, added, 'We've always been told . . . the only way to end this (nuclear) program is with a lot of troops on the ground for a long time. A war.' The former head of the National Nuclear Security Agency's nonproliferation programs, Corey Hinderstein, struck a similar tone. 'The conventional wisdom that you can't destroy the Iranian (nuclear) program through air attack alone has actually held,' said Hinderstein, now a vice president at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'While some are saying that the airstrikes were tactically and strategically successful, I think that the jury is still out on that, and we don't actually have the information that we need to believe that this program is gone.' Third nuclear site, hidden centrifuges, missing uranium Iran may have another nuclear site that, if equipped with enrichment centrifuges and conversion equipment, could continue the process of preparing uranium for use in a nuclear bomb, if the regime wishes to pursue one. Shortly before Israel began its air campaign against Iran, the regime told the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had a third nuclear enrichment site but did not reveal details. Analysts believe an undisclosed underground facility at Pickaxe Mountain near the Natanz nuclear plant may be even deeper under the surface than the Fordow enrichment plant that was severely damaged in the U.S. strikes. The Pickaxe Mountain facility was first publicly revealed in 2023 by experts who spoke with the Associated Press. And it's unclear how much of Tehran's approximately 880 pounds of highly enriched uranium was destroyed or buried during the strikes — satellite images show cargo trucks parked outside the Fordow enrichment plant in the days before the U.S. attack. U.S. lawmakers briefed June 26 and June 27 on intelligence assessments of the strikes acknowledged the missing uranium and called for a full accounting of the material, according to CNN. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told the news agency that the question of the uranium's whereabouts underscores the importance of Iran negotiating 'directly with us, so the (IAEA) can account for every ounce of enriched uranium that's there.' More: Where is Iran's enriched uranium? Questions loom after Trump claims victory. But whether Iran wants to negotiate is another question. Despite the country's obligations as a member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran's Guardian Council approved a law June 25 halting the country's cooperation with the IAEA and its inspections of Tehran's nuclear sites 'until the safety and security of our nuclear activities can be guaranteed,' the country's foreign minister said on social media. Contributing: Tom Vanden Brook and Cybele Mayes-Osterman, USA TODAY Davis Winkie's role covering nuclear threats and national security at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Gen. Wesley Clark: This is the moment for American leadership in Middle East. We can't miss it.
Iran's long-standing quest for nuclear weapons was at least set back for many months, and probably several years. This is the moment for American leadership. After 12 days of Israeli air strikes, Iran's air defenses were largely disabled, above-ground nuclear facilities destroyed, and much of its ballistic missile production and launch capacity wrecked. Nevertheless, Iranian retaliation caused destruction and loss of life in Israel. Then the U.S. entered the fight on the evening of June 21. Iran's three principal, known nuclear enrichment sites, were pounded and penetrated with 14 of the 30,000 Massive Ordnance Penetrators and more than two dozen sea-launched cruise missiles. By the early morning of June 24, Iran and Israel had agreed a ceasefire in the destructive campaign each was waging against the other. It was a triumphant moment for President Donald J. Trump, under whose direction the U.S. armed forces had launched the largest, most complex stealth bomber and TLAM strikes ever undertaken. Iran's long-standing quest for nuclear weapons was at least set back for many months, and probably several years. Many parties had much to gain from the ceasefire: Crown prince of Iran: Israel weakened Iran regime. World must help finish the job | Opinion What happens now for Iran and the rest of the world? But now what? Israel has been highly successful in the use of military force over many decades in the region – from the 1948 war of independence, through the 1956 war in Sinai, the 1967 preemptive war against Egypt, Jordan and Syria, the 1973 war, the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, strikes against the PLO in Tunisia in 1985, and later operations in Lebanon and Gaza. U.S. military action in the Gulf War in 1991 and the invasion of Iraq in 2003 were also highly successful. At this time, Israel, with U.S. help, has stripped Iran of its protective shields of Hezbollah and Hamas, and Iran, without effective air defenses, is laid bare. But outstanding military operations are not sufficient – they must be followed by successful work to end the roots of the conflict. Not once has this happened in the Middle East. Hatred, resentment, anger, terrorism and war have become endemic to the region. This is the moment to end the pattern of continuing conflict. But that requires new appreciation among the leaders in the region of the realities underscored by this latest bout of conflict. Iran, you're not going to have a nuclear bomb, no matter what. And if you continue to seek it, your regime will be defeated along with the destruction of your country. Israel, you cannot continue to use force with impunity – even with the best technology, your own people are vulnerable. To others in the region: Israel and the Palestinians are both permanently in the region; and with all due respect to the different religion, sects, and ethnicities at play, and the pain of history, both must be accommodated, accepted, and, ultimately, embraced as part of a thriving and prosperous Middle East. If there was ever a moment for fundamental change within the region, this is it. The world has come face to face with the potential of a spiraling conflict. Many of the Gulf States have achieved unprecedented wealth and are on the path to world-leading economic, social and technical advances. The region is still and will likely remain the center of global energy production, distribution and investment. There is everything to gain from seizing this moment. Gen. Wesley Clark: Trump needs to push Putin hard to end war in Ukraine – now | Opinion This is the moment for American leadership But how to proceed? Based on the model followed by President Clinton in dealing with the Balkans in the 1990's, it is best to start with a set of principles agreed upon objectively, by those outside the conflict but with the influence and will to deal with the respective parties. The principles must be fair and practicable. It required many weeks of shuttle diplomacy for the much simpler issues in the Balkans, and then, ultimately a 78-day air campaign by NATO in parallel with Presidential-level mediation by outside parties. In all, it entailed more than five years of continuous effort by the United States. In this region, the issues are deeper and more complex, but certainly among the principles, Iran must renounce its efforts, overt and covert, to destroy the state of Israel, and Israel must respect the rights of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to govern and develop their own self-governing state. Terrorism against Israel must be halted. Countries in the region must participate in rebuilding the Palestinian homeland in the West Bank and Gaza. Sanctions against Iran will be lifted, and Iran will be provided the materials it needs for peaceful nuclear energy. Progress must be phased and accompanied by confidence-building measures. Perhaps the Abraham Accords will be fully implemented, and the U.S. will provide a security umbrella for all in the region. International organizations will no doubt remain part of the solution. Perhaps Russia and China, and other interested parties will be invited as observers. Iran today is a wounded tiger. Maybe 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium is still available, maybe some other country will provide nuclear weapons or materials. Revenge will be sought. We cannot permit the next conflict – it could well go 'nuclear.' So neglect or failure are not options. This is the moment for American leadership. It is the moment for President Trump to exercise his broader vision for strategic realignment of the region, and in so doing, to end the Middle East as a cockpit for continuing conflict. Wesley K. Clark is a retired four-star general who served as commander of U.S. Southern Command and then as commander of U.S. European Command/Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
Fast Company
36 minutes ago
- Fast Company
WhatsApp just got banned on Capitol Hill. Here's how you can make the Meta messaging platform more secure
The U.S. House of Representatives' Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), Catherine Szpindor, informed congressional staffers this week that WhatsApp is now banned from government phones. The move came after the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity deemed the Meta-owned app to be 'high-risk to users'—a claim that WhatsApp quickly rebutted. But the CAO is correct. While WhatsApp is one of the more secure messaging apps out there, it does have some privacy and security risks. Users can mitigate some of these risks, but others are beyond their control. Here's why WhatsApp is now banned in the U.S. House of Representatives and how you can make the app more secure on your phone. What the Office of Cybersecurity said, exactly The news that the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity had announced a ban on WhatsApp this week came from Axios. On Tuesday, the publication published parts of an internal CAO memo it received, which was sent to congressional staffers on Monday, announcing that WhatsApp was now verboten on government phones. The memo stipulated that 'House staff are NOT allowed to download or keep the WhatsApp application on any House device, including any mobile, desktop, or web browser versions of its products.' It went on to add: 'If you have a WhatsApp application on your House-managed device, you will be contacted to remove it.' The reason? According to the memo, 'The Office of Cybersecurity has deemed WhatsApp a high-risk to users due to the lack of transparency in how it protects user data, absence of stored data encryption, and potential security risks involved with its use.' The CAO didn't provide further details in the memo regarding the above risks. Still, it's easy to interpret some of the things that may have made the CAO leery about the continued use of WhatsApp by Congressional staffers. WhatsApp's transparency issue WhatsApp, like competing secure messaging apps including Apple's iMessages and Signal, is end-to-end encrypted, meaning that no parties other than the ones in the chat, even including Meta, can read the chat messages. But WhatsApp collects a lot more metadata from each chat than other secure messaging apps do, and it sends this info to Meta A chat's metadata includes information such as the identities of the chat participants, IP addresses, phone numbers, and the timestamps of messages. No one knows exactly what Meta does with this metadata. Still, it is shared with Meta's other platforms, including Instagram and Facebook. It is likely used to help the company build social graphs of users, leveraged for advertising purposes, and analyzed by the company to understand who is using their apps, and when and where. This opaqueness is likely some of the 'lack of transparency' risk that the CAO was referring to. As for the 'absence of stored data encryption,' the CAO may have been referring to the default method by which WhatsApp backs up a user's chats. While WhatsApp chats are end-to-end encrypted, if a user backs up those chats to the cloud, the backup itself is not end-to-end encrypted by default. This means that if a bad actor gains access to a WhatsApp user's cloud backup, they could read all of that user's messages. It's no wonder the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity finds this worrying. WhatsApp also doesn't have other privacy and security features on by default, including the ability to lock the app behind biometrics and requiring two-step verification when a WhatsApp account is installed on another phone. If you don't work in the House of Representatives, you can still keep WhatsApp on your phone. But you might want to mitigate its privacy and security risks. Here's how. How to make WhatsApp more secure on your phone Unfortunately, there's nothing you can do about WhatsApp's metadata problem. Meta designs WhatsApp so that the metadata of your chats is sent directly to the company. There's no way you can turn this data collection off. But you can make the app more secure on your phone by following some simple steps, including: End-to-end encrypt your WhatsApp backups: In WhatsApp, go to Settings>Chats>Chat Backup>End-to-End Encrypted Backup and turn this option on. Now your chat backups saved in the cloud will be end-to-end encrypted. Lock WhatsApp: You can set WhatsApp to refuse to open without further authentication by locking the app. This means that even if someone has access to your unlocked phone, they won't be able to open WhatsApp unless they know your phone's PIN, or have your face or fingerprint. To lock WhatsApp, go to WhatsApp's Settings>Privacy>App Lock and toggle the feature on. Enable two-step verification: If someone logs into your WhatsApp account on their phone, they'll be able to see your messages. That's why you should set up two-step verification for your account. This will require a PIN that you set to be entered whenever an attempt is made to log into your WhatsApp account on a new device. If the PIN isn't entered correctly, the new device won't have access to your account. To enable two-step verification, go to WhatsApp's Settings>Account>Two-Step Verification and toggle the feature on. Apps the CAO suggests using instead When reached for comment on the CAO's decision to ban WhatsApp, the organization's chief administrative officer, Catherine Szpindor, told Fast Company, 'Protecting the People's House is our topmost priority, and we are always monitoring and analyzing for potential cybersecurity risks that could endanger the data of House Members and staff. We routinely review the list of House-authorized apps and will amend the list as deemed appropriate.' In the past, the CAO has banned or imposed partial bans on various foreign apps, including those from ByteDance, such as TikTok. But the CAO has also previously announced bans or restrictions on apps made by American companies, including Microsoft Copilot and the free versions of ChatGPT. As for Meta, a company spokesperson told Fast Company that it disagrees with the CAO's characterization of WhatsApp 'in the strongest possible terms.' The spokesperson also asserted that, when it comes to end-to-end encryption, WhatsApp offers 'a higher level of security than most of the apps on the CAO's approved list that do not offer that protection.' In the Office of Cybersecurity's memo, the agency provided guidance on alternative secure messaging apps that House staffers could use now that WhatsApp had been banned. According to Axios, those apps include Apple's iMessage and FaceTime, Microsoft Teams, Wickr, and Signal.
