Iranian authorities have not said what caused the massive explosion at the port of Bandar Abbas on Saturday, killing at least 28 people, but video footage and unconfirmed reports point to the possible presence of a chemical used to make missile propellant.

Eyewitness accounts and video indicate chemicals in an area of shipping containers caught fire, setting off a much larger explosion. The death toll spiked sharply following the incident, with 800 others also reported injured.

One surveillance video distributed by the Fars news agency shows a small fire beginning among containers, with a number of workers moving away from the scene, before a huge explosion ends the video feed.

The state-run Islamic Republic News Agency quoted an official as saying the explosion was likely set off by containers of chemicals, but did not identify the chemicals. The agency said late Saturday that the Customs Administration of Iran blamed a “stockpile of hazardous goods and chemical materials stored in the port area” for the blast.

Iran’s national oil company said the explosion at the port was “not related to refineries, fuel tanks, or oil pipelines” in the area.

Iranian officials have denied that any military materiel was held at the port. The spokesman for the national security and foreign policy committee of the Iranian parliament, Ebrahim Rezaei, said in a post on X Sunday that according to initial reports the explosion had “nothing to do with Iran’s defense sector.”

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian arrived in Bandar Abbas on Sunday afternoon to investigate the situation and oversee relief efforts, according to state media. The president also met with those injured in yesterday’s blast.

The blast comes at a time of high tensions in the Middle East and ongoing talks between Iran and the United States over Tehran’s nuclear programme, but no senior figure in Iran has suggested the blast was an attack.

Fires at the port were still burning Sunday, although Iranian state media said they were 80% contained.

The New York Times reported Sunday that a person “with ties to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that what exploded was sodium perchlorate, a major ingredient in solid fuel for missiles. The person spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss security matters.”

Sodium perchlorate could allow for the production of sufficient propellant for some 260 solid rocket motors for Iran’s Kheibar Shekan missiles or 200 of the Haj Qasem ballistic missiles, according to the intelligence sources.

The Russian military is planning to increase the use of small squads on motorcycles and quadbikes on the frontlines in Ukraine as it plans fresh offensives, according to the Ukrainian military and analysts of the conflict.

The Russian Defense Ministry published video on Saturday showing units practising tactics in groups of two or three motorbikes, with a rider seen navigating a course to the sound of a pulsating electronic soundtrack.

Russian forces have used motorbikes and quads in several areas of the frontlines in an effort to evade Ukrainian drones for more than a year. But the Institute for the Study of War in Washington says the latest Russian video “indicates that the Russian military is likely developing a tactical doctrine for systematic offensive motorcycle usage and may be preparing to issue an increased number of motorcycles.”

Ukraine expects a major Russian offensive in the next few months as Moscow tries to capture more territory before any ceasefire agreement.

The Ukrainian military calls the motorbike assaults ‘banzai attacks.’ One Ukrainian commander, Andriy Otchenash, said earlier this month that the motorcycles are designed for a quick blitzkrieg. “They can advance very quickly, get behind the lines,” he said, but losses on the Russian side were very high.

“It indicates that the enemy does not have a large amount of military offensive equipment, but on the other hand, it is an adaptation to the conditions of war,” said the Ukrainian Center for Strategic Communication.

On Saturday, the Ukrainian military said it had repelled a Russian assault on the village of Bahatyr on the Donetsk frontlines, destroying 15 motorcycles and killing about 40 Russian soldiers. It distributed video of drones eliminating a number of motorbikes in open countryside.

The Ukrainian military reported in February the Russians were using more quadbikes around Chasiv Yar, also in Donetsk, where the frontlines have barely moved over the past year.

One Ukrainian military spokesman, Lt. Col. Pavlo Shamshyn, said the use of motorbikes was a mixed blessing for Russian troops. Their speed and manoeuvrability helped them to evade Ukrainian drones, but the noise of a bike prevented riders from hearing drones.

Russian state media has been promoting the advantages of motorbike units. Russia Today reported last week that motorcyclists were planting mines and interviewed a soldier with the 39th Guards Motorised Rifle Brigade, who is part of a new motorised group.

“Our main advantage is that we can drive directly into [the enemy’s position] and neutralise everyone,” he said. The enemy “hear the roar of the motorcycles, and it causes panic among them. They simply abandon their positions and run away.”

The Russian military is also using motorbikes to evacuate the wounded. The Telegram account of the Defense Ministry’s publication Zvezda reported last week that Russian marines fighting in the Kursk region were using all-terrain motorcycles to evacuate civilians and wounded soldiers. Video showed a soldier being put on the back of a bike in muddy fields.

Last year, the UK’s Defense Ministry said the Russians were increasingly using off-road bikes and all-terrain vehicles for night-time attacks. But it noted that Ukrainian FPV drones, which fly into their target, had already demonstrated how vulnerable such unprotected vehicles were.

Late in 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin inspected Chinese-made all-terrain vehicles being procured for the Russian army. At that point some 500 were already in service, and the Defense Ministry ordered around 1,500 more.

One victim had recently returned home after decades working abroad to enjoy a retirement filled with travel and family time; another hoped the trip into the beauty of Indian-administered Kashmir would cheer the spirits of his semi-paralyzed wife.

Both men were among 26 tourists shot dead by militants this week in a massacre that has ripped open old wounds between India and its neighbor Pakistan, tipping them a step closer to military escalation.

Both countries claim Kashmir in its entirety, but each control only part. They have fought three wars over the territory – which is famous for its dramatic mountains and lush meadows – since their independence from Britain in 1947.

A bloody, decades-long insurgency in India’s part of the region has killed tens of thousands, waged by militant groups demanding either independence or a merger with Pakistan.

India says those groups are supported by Pakistan, which Islamabad denies.

Tuesday’s attack – during which men were singled out and gunned down from close range, according to survivors’ testimony – was the latest in a list of bloody incidents to stain the region.

Balachandran Menonparambil feels as though he’s lost his “right hand,” after his friend of six decades Ramachandran Narayanamenon was killed in the attack.

Having spent decades working in Qatar, Narayanamenon “looked forward to a life of retirement,” according to his friend, who described him as “a happy man,” caring and reliable.

“He was on a trip with his wife Shiela, daughter Aarti, and two grandchildren and was looking forward to enjoying himself with his grandchildren,” said the 70-year-old.

He recalled how “excited” Narayanamenon, 69, sounded in their last call before he boarded the flight to Kashmir on Monday.

A day later, Menonparambil was told that his friend was dead.

“I was watching TV and they began to show what was happening in Kashmir… so I called him, but he did not pick up,” he said.

He then reached out to Narayanamenon’s son Arvind, who told him that “Dad is gone.”

He said people came up to offer condolences to him at the cremation. “Everybody was asking me what I will do, only half of me is working now. I told them he is there with me in my heart,” he said.

Other survivors speaking to local media said the gunmen accused some of the victims of supporting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

In 2019, Modi’s Hindu-nationalist government stripped Muslim-majority Kashmir of its previous autonomy, sparking protests.

After Tuesday’s massacre, New Delhi swiftly pointed the finger at Pakistan, downgrading ties and suspending its participation in a crucial water-sharing treaty. Pakistan has denied involvement and said any attempt to stop or divert water belonging to it would be considered an act of war.

All three men, described as “loving fathers” and family breadwinners, came from just outside the megacity of Mumbai. They had taken the trip to Pahalgam together, according to Kadam.

Sanjay and Hemant were both accountants working for small private firms, while Atul worked for the Indian Railways, he said.

For the Leles, Kadam said, the trip was long planned. His sister-in-law suffers from a form of paralysis on the left side of her body that means she walks with difficulty.

“They had been planning this trip for a while but because of her health issues… it had gotten postponed. Once her health was doing better, they finally all lined up their schedules and managed to go,” he said.

“Lele told his wife that if you won’t go, none of us will go. So she agreed and finally they all went,” said Kadam.

Kadam himself did not go on the trip, but later traveled to Kashmir to help bring the shell-shocked survivors from his family back home.

The holidaying family bought food from a stall not long before the attack. Unaccustomed to the realities of the restive region, they initially mistook the sound of gunfire for fireworks, Kadam said, but were warned to take shelter by locals who sensed danger.

All three men were shot shortly after, he said. A bullet grazed his 20-year-old nephew Harshal’s hand.

It took almost four hours for disabled Kavita to struggle down the hill to safety, he said.

He said the families have taken hope from protests in India demanding justice for the victims and their families.

Still, their lives have been changed forever.

“This is not something that can end,” he said.

“We have to now live with this.”

Russia has regained control of Kursk, the border region where Ukraine launched a surprise offensive last year, President Vladimir Putin said.

“The Kyiv regime’s adventure has completely failed,” Putin said.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky held crunch war talks in the heart of the Vatican minutes before the start of the funeral of Pope Francis on Saturday, as the White House mounts an increasingly urgent push to strike a peace deal in Ukraine.

Photographs released by the Ukrainian presidency showed the two leaders huddled in close discussion without aides in the ornate surroundings of St. Peter’s Basilica.

A White House spokesman accompanying Trump said that the two leaders “met privately today and had a very productive discussion.” A spokesman for Zelensky said the meeting lasted for about 15 minutes, and the leaders agreed to continue talks, possibly later Saturday.

It was the first face-to-face encounter between Trump and Zelensky since a disastrous White House meeting in February, when the President and other US officials publicly berated Zelensky for being insufficiently grateful for US support and briefly suspended arms shipments and intelligence sharing.

US involvement in talks

The US has been applying more pressure on Ukraine after threatening last week it could walk away from the talks “within days” if it becomes clear a deal cannot be reached.

Trump said Friday that Russia and Ukraine are “very close to a deal” that would end the conflict, which Russia launched in 2014 and escalated with its full-scale invasion of its neighbor in 2022.

“A good day in talks and meetings with Russia and Ukraine. They are very close to a deal, and the two sides should now meet, at very high levels, to ‘finish it off,’” Trump wrote on Truth Social after landing in Rome for the funeral of Pope Francis.

Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff met with Russian President Vladimir Putin for three hours on Friday, according to Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov, who said the talks were “constructive and very useful.”

Before leaving Kyiv for Rome on Friday, Zelensky suggested a number of compromises with the goal of advancing peace talks.

“In the coming days, very significant meetings may take place — meetings that should bring us closer to silence for Ukraine,” he said.

“We are ready for dialogue, I emphasize again, in any format with anyone,” he said, but “only after a real signal that Russia is ready to end the war. Such a signal is a complete and unconditional ceasefire.”

Kyiv and Moscow have not met directly since the early weeks of Moscow’s February 2022 invasion of its smaller neighbor. Any direct talks would likely require further discussion and add delay to the diplomacy the Trump administration has hoped will yield results in a matter of days.

Accepting that Ukraine would not join NATO in the foreseeable future, he said: “I think we have to be pragmatic. We have to understand what security guarantees Ukraine needs.”

Zelensky said those guarantees might include a military contingent from Europe and what he called a “backstop” from the United States.

“For us, the backstop does not necessarily have to be boots on the ground in Ukraine,” Zelensky said, but could include cyber defense “and above all Patriot air defense systems.”

On Thursday, Kyiv was hit by the largest wave of Russian missile strikes since July last year. Twelve people were killed.

‘Ukraine Deal Framework’ still faces hurdles

Zelensky also spoke Friday of what he called “constructive” proposals drawn up in London this week between Ukrainian and European officials.

A copy of those proposals was obtained by Reuters. Titled “Ukraine Deal Framework,” it proposes a full and unconditional ceasefire in the sky, on land and at sea, as Ukraine has previously agreed to.

The draft proposed Ukraine would receive “robust security guarantees including from the US … while there is no consensus among Allies on NATO membership.” Those would be similar to those in NATO’s Article 5, under which all members are obliged to assist an attacked nation.

One part of the draft that is likely to be opposed by Moscow says that “the guarantor states will be an ad hoc group of European countries and willing non-European countries.” There would be “no restrictions on the presence, weapons and operations of friendly foreign forces on the territory of Ukraine,” nor on the size of the Ukrainian military.

The draft says negotiations on territory would begin after the ceasefire comes into effect, and their starting point would be the current frontlines. But it adds that Ukraine would regain control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which has been occupied by Russian forces since March 2022.

On the proposed minerals agreement between the US and Ukraine, which would give the US access to billions of dollars-worth of rare metals, the draft says Ukraine will be fully compensated financially, including through Russian assets that will remain frozen until Russia compensates damage to Ukraine.

Moscow is also likely to oppose that.

The draft obtained by Reuters does not mention specifically mention Crimea. Witkoff’s plan proposed the US recognize Crimea as part of Russia, but did not suggest that Ukraine also had to. Recognizing Russian control of Crimea, which Moscow illegally annexed in 2014, would cross a major red line for Ukraine and its European allies, and would be in breach of established international law.

Zelensky rejected the idea, saying there was “nothing to talk about” as such a recognition would be against Ukraine’s constitution. He told reporters Friday: “I agree with President Trump that Ukraine does not have enough weapons to regain control of the Crimean peninsula by force of arms. But the world has sanctions opportunities, other economic pressure.”

During the Francis papacy, the role of women in the church emerged as a pressing priority, with Catholics across the globe calling for change.

The Argentine pontiff listened, breaking some important glass ceilings in the Vatican when it came to appointing female leaders to senior positions. He chose to make gradual changes that, to the outside may have seemed like small steps, but were huge leaps to those on the inside.

The pope appointed the first woman leader of a department in the church’s central administration and the first female president of the office governing the Vatican City State. Francis also chose the first women to sit at the board level in the church’s central administration, including at the influential department for choosing bishops.

By 2023, 10 years into his pontificate, the percentage of women in the Vatican workforce had risen from 19.2 to 23.4%. More broadly, Francis gave women the power to vote for the first time at a major global gathering of bishops, known as a synod, and formally opened up non-ordained ministry roles as he sought to increase participation.

On Holy Thursday last year he broke with tradition by travelling to a female prison in Rome to wash the feet of 12 women prisoners. It was the first time a pontiff had only washed the feet of women in the annual ceremony that emphasizes humility.

But while the pope made some landmark reforms, many will be hoping that his successor moves further, and faster, and there was sometimes sharp criticism of his stance on the role of women in society.

Kim Daniels, the director of Georgetown University’s Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life and a Vatican adviser on communication, said the pope had “made significant strides towards greater inclusion of women in church decision-making” and that his reforms to broaden participation would be key to his legacy.

The lack of opportunity for women in the church is likely to come into sharp focus during the forthcoming papal conclave: Only members of the all-male body which is the College of Cardinals will vote on who will become the next pope.

It highlights a wider concern that Catholics across the world have raised in recent years: That while women frequently make up a majority in the pews on Sunday, they are scarcely represented at the church’s decision-making levels. Although lay people are increasingly more involved in church administration, it is primarily bishops and priests who make final decisions.

The problem is exacerbated by the fact that women are on the front lines of the church’s work on the ground, with nuns providing healthcare and education in developing countries and plenty of women leading Catholic schools and universities.

On the question of female involvement in a conclave, some have argued that women could be made cardinals, given the role of a cardinal is primarily to advise a pope and elect his successor.

Ordination questions

Sister Christine Schenk, an American nun, author and founder of international reform-focused group “FutureChurch,” said it was time to give a “deliberative voice” to women and lay people at “every level of the church,” adding that if the same model of electing a pope remains in place, “we need as many female cardinals as male cardinals at the conclave.”

A more realistic possibility in the short term is allowing women to once again become deacons, an ordained ministry distinct from the priesthood. Deacons can witness marriages, perform baptisms and preach during Mass. Those in favor point to evidence for female deacons in scripture and their presence in the early church right up until the Middle Ages.

Women deacons could also bolster the church’s presence in schools, hospitals and prisons, along with providing leaders for Catholic communities. Church leaders in the Amazon, where priests are in short supply, raised the question at a 2019 synod, calling on the pope to “promote and confer ministries for men and women in an equitable manner.” A 2024 synod concluding document, approved by the pope, said that the question of ordaining women as deacons should remain an “open” question.

To that end, several Vatican commissions were set up study the question of female deacons were established by Francis, although no findings were never made public.

Francis maintained the ban on women’s ordination as priests and deacons, something which disappointed those keen to see women in more visible church leadership roles, but insisted that decision-making and leadership doesn’t depend on whether someone is ordained. He repeatedly stated that the church is female and asked for theologians to help in trying to “de-masculinize” it.

Centuries of misogyny

Significantly, a live debate in the church about the role of women is being allowed to take place. Schenk described it as the most impactful shift during the Francis pontificate, ending the marginalization of “Catholics who wish to discuss full inclusion of women in every aspect of church ministry and decision-making.”

“The question Francis looked at is how to get more people involved in the work of the church, in as many ways and places as possible. That is why he appointed women to senior roles in the Vatican,” said Hofstra University Professor Phyllis Zagano, a member of the first commission on female deacons.

“On the question of women deacons, Francis was trying to deal with centuries of misogyny that misunderstood the role of women in the church and society. The synod process he started tried to get the church away from a male-only perspective and to look at women, rather than as a problem to be solved, but as able to be fully involved in the church’s work. Restoring women to the ordained diaconate reinforces the trajectory the church has been on.”

Despite the various ways Francis initiated reforms and made appointments, there is still a long way to go until women are given greater roles and responsibility in the church. The next pope is likely to find this topic right at the top of his in-tray.

“Previously the Vatican – indeed many, if not most, prelates – were leery of even using the words ‘women’ and ‘ministry’ in the same sentence,” said Schenk. “Now such issues are being openly discussed – something long overdue and a sign of newfound strength and maturity in a church that no longer fears discerning (and) discussing changes in how we walk together as the People of God.”