← The Global Intelligence Brief
10 sources
Morning Edition · Sunday, October 25, 2026BREAKINGPublished at 5:16 PM EDT · New York
US pulls non-essential staff from seven Middle East posts as Trump says an Iran strike could come "maybe tomorrow"
Two Iranian officials, one of them from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), told The New York Times that American diplomats are "fair game," while US and Israeli strike plans reportedly point to a date after the Nov. 3 midterm elections.
The State Department has ordered non-emergency staff and their families to leave US missions in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Lebanon, Qatar, Jordan, Bahrain and Kuwait, according to The Week and other outlets. The order followed an unclassified memo dated Oct. 23 from Jay Clayton, the Director of National Intelligence, to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In it Clayton wrote that Iranian "lethal plotting efforts against U.S. citizens have reached advanced stages in both the Middle East and certain other countries," NBC News reported. Axios first reported the memo. The embassy in Riyadh went on ordered departure first, on Oct. 21, and at that point the State Department cited attacks by Yemen's Houthi movement, not Iranian plotting.
Reporters asked President Donald Trump on Saturday whether the US would strike Iran again. "We're thinking about doing it, and maybe tomorrow," he said. He would not say whether he had decided. He said Tehran could still avoid an attack by agreeing to a "big, beautiful" deal, but asked, "will they hold the deal?" He also said the earlier operation with B-2 bombers had not been enough to stop Iran from building a nuclear weapon: "I've got to make it permanent."
In Tehran, two officials, one of them an IRGC member, told The New York Times that American diplomats and government staff are "fair game," according to The Times of Israel. They gave as the reason US and Israeli strikes that killed Iranian officials and some of their relatives. The same report said it is unclear whether Iran can carry out such attacks. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Washington's threats would not change Tehran's course. On Oct. 23 Esmaeil Baghaei, the foreign ministry spokesman, told the state broadcaster Press TV that Iran had passed its demands to Washington through Qatar. Those demands are an end to the war on all fronts, the release of frozen funds and an end to the US naval blockade.
Trump's "tomorrow" does not match the timetable in other reporting. The New York Times reported that US and Israeli planners have drafted a "short but intensive" operation against nuclear and energy sites and missile and drone systems for after the Nov. 3 midterms. The full force, including three aircraft carriers, is expected to be ready in early November. Trump has not authorized the operation. Iranian officials have said they would answer new strikes by adding data centers and undersea internet cables to a target list that already includes commercial shipping and energy infrastructure.
Oil prices already reflect much of this. Brent crude settled at $116.72 on Friday, up more than 6% for the week, after the IRGC said two supertankers had hit mines near the Strait of Hormuz (The Hill). No maritime authority has confirmed that claim. Analysts linked the week's gain partly to expectations of renewed strikes after the US vote.
What this means
The drawdowns work through two channels. They raise the cost of doing business in the Gulf states that sell themselves as safe hubs, and they suggest a strike is close. The UAE and Qatar are now on ordered departure, and Iran has named data centers and undersea cables as targets. That puts the region's large compute buildout, its insurers and its expatriate business base at risk for the first time, beyond tanker routes alone. There is a precedent. In June 2025 Washington cut embassy staff in Baghdad and around the Gulf days before it bombed Iran's nuclear sites. Iran's answer then was a missile strike on Al Udeid air base that it announced in advance, and oil prices fell back. The consensus may be wrong to expect the same thing now. This war is eight months old, Hormuz traffic is already disrupted, and Tehran says it will target diplomats, so a token response is less likely. The consensus may also be wrong in the other direction. Trump's "tomorrow" fits a pattern of using threats as leverage while talks run through Qatar. A deal that dealt with frozen funds and the blockade would remove part of the premium that oil traders have already built into the price. The desk's read is that a large US operation is unlikely before Nov. 3, the force is ready, and if the Qatar channel does not produce a framework, renewed US and Israeli strikes within weeks of the vote are the likelier outcome. In that case Brent would likely stay above its current level, and Gulf and Asian importers would take the cost. Three things would prove this wrong: a strike before the election, a deal announced through Doha, or the State Department reversing the ordered departures.
What to watch
- Brent's opening move when futures trading resumes Sunday evening, and whether Trump's "tomorrow" remark adds to Friday's 6% weekly gain
- Whether the State Department raises its travel advisories for the UAE and Qatar, which would affect expatriate residents and regional headquarters in Dubai and Doha
- Any public response from Washington to the demands Iran says it sent through Qatar on frozen funds and the naval blockade
Synthesized from: NBC News · Axios · Al Jazeera · The Business Standard · The Times of Israel ·
Townsquare
Start a discussion in Townsquare.
More from this edition
- Iran says mines disabled two supertankers near Hormuz as Brent settles at $116.72
- Gold falls below $4,000 as oil-driven inflation revives bets on a Federal Reserve rate increase
- France's 10-year borrowing cost tops 5.1% as cost-of-living protests return for a second weekend
- Brazil votes in a presidential runoff between Lula and Flávio Bolsonaro with polls showing a tie
- Chinese stocks have lost $3.5 trillion since May as corporate earnings miss forecasts
- Sanctioned Russian gas producer Novatek secretly financed an Alaska LNG project discussed in US-Russia talks, New York Times reports
- Japan's opposition demands Takaichi state the payments and funding in her consumption-tax cut bill
Comments
0No comments yet.