The meeting at the Permanent Joint Headquarters in northwest London is intended to advance operational planning for reopening the strategic waterway when conditions permit, following what officials described as progress at international discussions held in Paris last week.

“The task today and tomorrow is to translate diplomatic consensus into a joint plan to safeguard freedom of navigation in the Strait and support a lasting ceasefire,” Defense Minister John Healey said in a statement.

The London conference follows talks co-chaired in Paris by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron that brought together representatives from more than 40 countries to address security in the strait, a critical global shipping route.

British and French officials have emphasized that the proposed multinational force would be defensive in nature and deployed only after a durable peace agreement is reached in the region.The United States and Iran, the principal parties to the ongoing conflict, did not participate in the Paris discussions.

A two-week ceasefire between the two countries was due to expire at midnight GMT on Tuesday, but US President Donald Trump said shortly before the deadline that it would be extended to allow further negotiations.

Both Washington and Tehran have accused each other of violating the truce, while the United States has maintained a blockade of Iranian ports.Downing Street had earlier indicated that a military planning summit would take place this week without providing further details

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Washington from Phoenix, Arizona, Trump said the naval blockade on Iranian ports would remain in place regardless of whether the truce is extended. “Maybe I won’t extend it,” he said, adding that without a deal, military operations could resume.

At the same time, Trump struck an optimistic tone about ongoing diplomacy, telling reporters that developments in the Middle East were “going very well” and suggesting a resolution was close. “I think it’s going to happen,” he said, referring to a prospective agreement.

In separate remarks, Trump said there were “no sticking points” remaining in negotiations, describing a deal as “very close,” though he did not provide details on the substance of the talks.The ceasefire, which has paused hostilities between U.S. and Iranian forces, remains fragile amid continued military pressure, including the blockade targeting Iranian ports.

The outcome of negotiations in the coming days is expected to determine whether the truce evolves into a longer-term settlement or collapses, potentially triggering renewed escalation.

In a social media post, Trump said the pope should “stop catering to the Radical Left,” adding that Leo was “weak on crime” and “terrible for foreign policy.” Speaking to reporters later at Joint Base Andrews after arriving on Air Force One, Trump reiterated his criticism, saying, “I’m not a fan of Pope Leo.”

The remarks followed comments by Pope Leo over the weekend condemning what he described as the “delusion of omnipotence” driving the U.S.-Israel war in Iran, and calling on political leaders to pursue negotiations to end the conflict.

The pope delivered his message during an evening prayer service at St. Peter’s Basilica, coinciding with the start of direct talks between the United States and Iran in Pakistan under a fragile ceasefire arrangement.

While Leo did not explicitly mention Trump or the United States, his remarks were widely interpreted as directed at U.S. leadership, which has defended military actions and emphasized American strategic strength in the region.

The exchange marks a rare public dispute between a U.S. president and a sitting pope, and underscores broader divisions over foreign policy and the role of military force in resolving international conflicts.

The report said any action would likely fall short of a full-scale invasion, instead involving special operations forces and conventional infantry targeting locations such as Kharg Island and coastal areas near the Strait of Hormuz, a critical corridor for global oil shipments.

Washington has already moved thousands of Marines to the Middle East amid the month-long conflict. The first of two contingents arrived on an amphibious assault ship on Friday, according to the U.S. military.

Additional deployments under consideration include forces from the 82nd Airborne Division, alongside approximately 5,000 Marines being repositioned to the region. These reinforcements would add to an estimated 50,000 U.S. troops already stationed across the Middle East, according to media reports.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington could achieve its objectives without deploying ground troops but noted that forces were being positioned to give policymakers “maximum” flexibility.

Defense analysts cited in reports said limited operations could aim to secure maritime routes or seize key infrastructure such as Kharg Island, a major hub for Iran’s oil exports.

Military experts have cautioned that even limited ground incursions could lead to prolonged engagement, raising the risk of a broader conflict and increased casualties.

Concerns also persist over the economic implications of instability around the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant share of global energy supplies passes.

No final decision on ground operations has been announced, and U.S. officials have not publicly confirmed the scope or timing of any potential action.

Speaking at the Saudi-backed Future Investment Initiative summit in Miami, Trump said, “We’re negotiating now but they have to open it up,” referring to the vital maritime route that has been largely disrupted during the war.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly one-fifth of global oil supply typically passes, has seen sharply reduced traffic since the conflict began, contributing to rising energy prices and global market uncertainty.

Trump said Iran was “on the run” and repeated claims that its military and nuclear capabilities had been significantly weakened, despite Tehran’s denials.U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier warned that Iran could seek to impose a “tolling system” on vessels transiting the strait, raising concerns over long-term disruptions to global shipping.

Trump praised Mohammed bin Salman and other Gulf leaders from the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain for what he described as efforts to promote regional stability.Calling the Saudi crown prince a “close friend,” Trump said Riyadh had played a constructive role in ongoing diplomatic outreach.

The U.S. president also questioned Washington’s commitment to NATO, suggesting the United States might reconsider its obligations if European allies continued to withhold support in the Iran conflict.

“We would have always been there for them but now I guess we don’t have to be,” Trump said, framing the issue as one of burden-sharing within the alliance.

The conflict, now entering its fourth week, has disrupted shipping through the Hormuz corridor, with only limited vessel movement reported amid heightened security risks and ongoing military activity in the region.

The UK government has said expanding oil and gas drilling in the North Sea would increase exposure to volatile global energy markets, as political divisions intensify over the country’s long-term energy strategy.

Energy secretary Ed Miliband told Labour MPs that continued reliance on fossil fuels leaves the UK vulnerable to external price shocks. He argued that recent geopolitical tensions, including the ongoing conflict involving the United States and Iran, have reinforced the risks associated with global gas markets.

Miliband said the central lesson from recent crises was that countries dependent on fossil fuel imports remain “price takers not price makers,” and therefore exposed to fluctuations beyond their control. He added that accelerating the transition to domestically generated clean power is essential for achieving what he described as “energy sovereignty” and strengthening national security.

Energy minister Michael Shanks echoed this position, stating that the UK must reduce its exposure to fossil fuels to prevent households from bearing the cost of international disruptions. He said previous price shocks had already demonstrated the economic risks tied to dependence on gas markets.

The government’s stance has been challenged by opposition parties and some Labour MPs, who argue that domestic oil and gas production remains critical for energy security and economic growth.

The Conservative Party is expected to use a parliamentary debate to call for the removal of restrictions on new North Sea drilling. Its proposals include scrapping the windfall tax on oil and gas companies, lifting the ban on new exploration licences, and approving projects such as the Rosebank oil field and the Jackdaw gas field.

Shadow energy secretary Claire Coutinho said increasing domestic gas production would help meet national demand and reduce reliance on imports. She argued that failing to develop available resources during a period of supply instability would undermine energy security.Within the Labour Party, dissent has also emerged.

MP Henry Tufnell called for a reassessment of the current policy, suggesting that renewed drilling could support economic activity, reduce unemployment in industrial regions and limit the offshoring of carbon emissions. However, other Labour MPs indicated that there was limited support for reversing the party’s existing commitments.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to outline measures aimed at mitigating the impact of rising energy costs linked to geopolitical tensions. These include proposals to protect consumers from higher bills driven by disruptions in global oil and gas markets.

Reeves is also expected to introduce a framework to address potential profiteering, particularly in the retail fuel sector. The measures are intended to prevent excessive price increases in response to international events, including recent military activity involving Iran and its regional counterparts.

Miliband defended the continuation of the windfall tax on energy companies, stating that it has generated approximately £12 billion in revenue since the onset of the Russia-Ukraine war. He argued that removing the levy would primarily benefit corporate profits while reducing the government’s capacity to support households facing higher energy costs.

The government has positioned investment in clean and nuclear energy as a central component of its long-term strategy. Officials say reducing reliance on fossil fuels will help stabilise energy prices and insulate the economy from external shocks.

Reeves is expected to confirm that recommendations from the Fingleton review, aimed at accelerating nuclear power development, will be implemented through legislation. These reforms are intended to streamline project approvals and reduce delays linked to legal challenges.

The government is also considering mechanisms to provide indemnities for critical energy infrastructure projects, allowing them to proceed more quickly in the face of litigation. This approach is designed to address longstanding barriers to large-scale energy development.

According to a government spokesperson, the strategy includes £120 billion in public investment across energy infrastructure, including support for the Sizewell C nuclear plant and the development of small modular reactors in north Wales. These projects are intended to expand domestic energy capacity and reduce exposure to imported fuels.

Ministers argue that prioritising domestically controlled energy sources will enhance resilience against future crises while supporting economic stability.

The debate over North Sea drilling highlights a broader policy divide between short-term supply measures and long-term structural transition within the UK’s energy system.

The benchmark Nifty 50 climbed 1.6% to 23,277.50, while the BSE Sensex gained 1.53% to 75,212.07 as of 9:50 a.m. IST, putting markets on track for a second straight day of advances.

Market sentiment improved after reports that Washington has proposed a month-long ceasefire and presented Tehran with a 15-point framework aimed at de-escalating the conflict.

The development raised expectations of reduced geopolitical risk, particularly around global energy supply disruptions.The conflict has unsettled financial markets in recent weeks, with concerns over oil supply routes and inflationary pressures weighing on investor confidence.

Markets track global cuesIndian equities, which are sensitive to global risk sentiment and crude price movements, reacted positively to signs of potential diplomatic progress.

A de-escalation could help stabilise energy prices, a key factor for India as a major oil importer.

Gains in domestic markets reflect broader optimism that easing tensions may reduce volatility across emerging markets, which have been under pressure amid the ongoing conflict.

Trading in the UAE resumed on Wednesday after authorities suspended market activity for two days in response to Iran’s weekend barrage targeting the Emirates. The halt paused trading in listed assets worth billions of dollars while investors awaited clearer information on the extent of the damage caused by the strikes.Markets reopen after emergency trading haltThe attacks hit airports, ports and residential neighbourhoods across both emirates, prompting authorities to suspend trading temporarily across the country’s exchanges.Following the reopening, both exchanges said they would impose a temporary 5% lower price limit on securities in an effort to stabilise trading and contain sharp market swings.

Early Thursday trading showed continued selling pressure, extending declines seen after markets resumed activity.Escalation in regional conflictRegional tensions intensified further on Wednesday after a U.S. submarine sank an Iranian naval vessel off Sri Lanka, killing at least 80 people, while NATO air defences intercepted an Iranian ballistic missile headed toward Turkey.The developments have heightened investor caution across Gulf markets as the conflict between the United States and Iran broadens, raising concerns about potential economic and security implications for the region.

Speaking in Moscow, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated that diplomatic options had not yet been fully explored in the standoff involving Iran and the United States. He urged all parties to avoid military action and instead focus on dialogue to prevent further escalation.

Peskov stressed that the situation requires careful handling, noting that any resort to force could have serious and far-reaching consequences. According to him, military action would not resolve disputes but instead create chaos and increase instability across the Middle East.

The comments come after renewed warnings from US President Donald Trump, who said Washington was prepared to launch military strikes against Iran if it deemed them necessary. Such statements have heightened tensions at a time when regional security remains under strain due to multiple ongoing conflicts.

Russia, which maintains close ties with Tehran, has consistently called for diplomatic solutions to disputes involving Iran. Moscow views dialogue as the most effective way to address disagreements over security, sanctions, and regional influence.

The Kremlin’s position reflects broader concerns about the potential fallout of military confrontation in the region. Officials fear that any escalation could trigger a chain reaction involving multiple countries and armed groups.

Iran, for its part, has issued strong warnings in response to US threats. Tehran’s leadership has made it clear that it would respond forcefully to any attack on its territory or interests.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the country’s forces were on high alert and prepared to react decisively. His remarks underscore the seriousness with which Tehran views the possibility of military action by Washington.

The current standoff also takes place against the backdrop of Iran’s internal unrest and international criticism of its domestic policies. Rights organizations have accused Iranian security forces of using excessive force during crackdowns on protests, resulting in thousands of deaths.

These allegations have further strained Iran’s relations with Western countries and added another layer of complexity to diplomatic efforts. The United States has cited human rights concerns as part of its broader criticism of Tehran.

Russia has emerged as one of Iran’s key allies in recent years, particularly during the conflict in Ukraine. Tehran’s support has strengthened bilateral ties and deepened strategic cooperation between the two countries.

Moscow’s call for restraint reflects its interest in preventing a wider regional conflict that could affect its own strategic priorities. Stability in the Middle East remains important for Russia’s diplomatic, economic, and security interests.

Analysts say Russia is likely to continue positioning itself as a mediator, advocating negotiations while opposing unilateral military action. Such a role allows Moscow to maintain influence in regional affairs while reinforcing its image as a proponent of diplomacy.

The Kremlin’s remarks suggest that Russia believes there is still time for talks to de-escalate tensions. Officials argue that diplomatic channels should remain open, even amid harsh rhetoric and mutual threats.

As the situation evolves, international attention remains focused on whether dialogue can prevail over confrontation. The coming weeks may prove critical in determining whether negotiations can ease tensions or whether the crisis will deepen.