President Donald Trump said the ceasefire with Iran is on «massive life support,» as retired U.S. commanders and national security experts are increasingly split whether Washington should resume military operations against Tehran or avoid what critics warn could become another prolonged Middle East conflict.

«I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support,» Trump told reporters Monday. «Where the doctor walks in and says, ‘Sir, your loved one has approximately a 1% chance of living.’»

Trump also dismissed Iran’s latest response to a proposed agreement as «a piece of garbage,» amid reports the White House is reviewing military options should negotiations collapse.

Retired Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, former national security adviser under Trump, said he believes Iran’s leadership is unlikely to make the concessions Trump considers necessary for a deal.

WHITE HOUSE WARNS IRAN AGAINST BALKING AT DEAL: TRUMP READY TO ‘UNLEASH HELL’

«I think the Iranian leadership and IRGC are unwilling to make the kind of concessions that President Trump thinks are at the minimum,» McMaster told Fox News Digital, referring to Iran’s hardline Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. 

«President Trump always wants a deal,» he added. «But he’s not going to sign up for a bad deal.»

The emerging debate now centers on a core question facing Washington: whether additional military pressure could force Iran to abandon its nuclear and missile ambitions, or whether renewed strikes would deepen a regional conflict without producing decisive results.

Retired Vice Adm. Mark Fox, former deputy commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), said he believes the current ceasefire and diplomatic track are unlikely to force Iran to back down.

«I really cannot envision anything other than a full return to combat operations,» Fox told Fox News Digital. «The only thing that they will respond to, I think ultimately, is force.»

Fox argued the U.S. military remains capable of reopening and securing commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz despite ongoing Iranian threats against vessels transiting the waterway.

HORMUZ CHOKE POINT PERSISTS AS IRAN HALTS OIL TRAFFIC DESPITE TRUMP CEASEFIRE

Supporters of renewed military action argue Iran is weaker than it has been in decades and that stopping now risks allowing Tehran to regroup, rebuild its missile arsenal and preserve leverage over one of the world’s most important energy choke points. (AP Photo)

«This is a militarily obtainable objective,» he said, outlining a strategy involving guided missile destroyers, attack helicopters, drones and expanded aerial surveillance to create a protected maritime corridor through the Strait.

Fox acknowledged the U.S. Navy is smaller than it was during the 1980s tanker wars, but argued American forces still possess the capability to secure the chokepoint if Washington commits enough naval assets and persistent monitoring operations.

«It’s not easy,» Fox said. «But the geography is fixed.»

He described a possible strategy that would rely on destroyers, drones and attack aircraft to create what he called an «unblinking eye» over the strait, allowing U.S. forces to identify and neutralize Iranian speedboats, drones and anti-shipping threats before they can strike commercial vessels.

Fox also warned against allowing Iran to preserve leverage over Hormuz while continuing to advance its missile and nuclear programs.

«If not now, when?» he said. «If they had a nuclear weapon, they would use it.»

EXPERTS WARN IRAN’S NUCLEAR DOUBLE-TALK DESIGNED TO BUY TIME, UNDERMINE US PRESSURE

But not everyone agrees that renewed military action would produce a better outcome. (Contributor/Getty Images)

Fox, who also signed onto a recent policy paper by the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, echoed the report’s argument that Iran is using negotiations to buy time while preserving its military capabilities.

The paper was authored by several retired senior U.S. military officials and national security experts, including retired Gen. Chuck Wald, former deputy commander of U.S. European Command and retired Vice Adm. Robert Harward, former deputy commander of CENTCOM, argued the current ceasefire and diplomatic track «cannot reliably compel Iran» to meet U.S. demands and warned Tehran was seeking to «drag out talks, erode U.S. resolve, and use the time to strengthen itself.»

The report called for expanded military operations targeting Iran’s maritime capabilities, missile infrastructure and internal coercive apparatus while avoiding broad attacks on civilian infrastructure that could trigger wider regional escalation.

But not everyone agrees that renewed military action would produce a better outcome.

Retired Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and longtime critic of expanded U.S. military interventions, warned that calls to «finish the job» ignore the realities exposed during the recent fighting.

«To ‘finish the job,’ as they say, is irrational,» Davis told Fox News Digital. «It’s illogical, and it violates any kind of military principle.»

KEITH KELLOGG URGES US TO ‘FINISH THE JOB’ AGAINST IRAN BY SEIZING ISLANDS, STRANGLING ECONOMY

A screengrab from a video released by U.S. Central Command shows smoke and dust rising after an explosion at an unknown location during the operation dubbed Epic Fury, an attack by the United States and Israel on Iran, released Feb. 28, 2026. (CENTCOM/Reuters)

Davis argued that despite thousands of strikes and weeks of fighting, Iran retained significant missile and maritime capabilities.

«We couldn’t knock them out with 14,000 targets hit,» he said. «Why does anybody think that going back another time is going to have a different result?»

He described Iran’s geography, dispersed missile infrastructure and asymmetric naval tactics as creating what he called «a militarily unsolvable problem.»

«The only thing left is a diplomatic outcome,» Davis said.

The disagreement reflects a broader divide emerging in Washington as officials weigh what comes next if negotiations fail.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Supporters of renewed military action argue Iran is weaker than it has been in decades and that stopping now risks allowing Tehran to regroup, rebuild its missile arsenal and preserve leverage over one of the world’s most important energy choke points.

Critics counter that even extensive U.S. and Israeli strikes failed to fundamentally break the regime’s control or eliminate its military capabilities, raising the risk that further escalation could drag the United States into another drawn-out regional conflict with uncertain results.

El rey Carlos III presentará el miércoles a los legisladores el programa legislativo del gobierno para el próximo año con toda la pompa y los elementos históricos que acompañan la ceremonia de apertura del Parlamento británico.

La cuestión es si el primer ministro Keir Starmer estará presente para implementarlo y, aun si sobrevive a la última crisis de gobierno, si tendrá la autoridad para impulsar sus propuestas en el Parlamento.

El discurso del rey será el segundo intento de Starmer por salvar su mandato, después de que su Partido Laborista sufriera enormes pérdidas en las elecciones locales y regionales de la semana pasada. Esto debilitó aún más su ya precaria posición en el poder y avivó las peticiones de dimisión por parte de miembros de su propio partido, quienes consideran que Starmer ha sido demasiado tibio a la hora de abordar el creciente coste de la vida, la desigualdad económica y el deterioro de los servicios públicos del país.

La presión sobre Starmer no ha hecho más que aumentar desde su discurso del lunes ante simpatizantes del partido, presentado como el primer paso de su contraataque. Sin embargo, fue criticado por su falta de sensibilidad y por carecer de las políticas audaces necesarias para abordar los problemas de Gran Bretaña. La ex ministra de Protección Infantil, Jess Phillips, dimitió del Gabinete el martes, afirmando que el gobierno necesitaba «discutir, contraatacar, argumentar y convencer a la gente».

El discurso del rey será un momento en el que el poder histórico y la grandeza de Gran Bretaña chocarán con la realidad del Reino Unido moderno, un país de tamaño medio con un ejército con fondos insuficientes, una deuda creciente y una influencia internacional menguante. Es un país que lucha por controlar la inmigración y financiar servicios públicos como la sanidad y la educación.

El discurso es solo uno de los elementos de la apertura oficial del Parlamento, un evento tradicional del calendario político que utiliza una puesta en escena cuidadosamente coreografiada para mostrar la evolución de Gran Bretaña desde una monarquía absoluta a una democracia parlamentaria donde el poder real reside en la Cámara de los Comunes, cuyos miembros son elegidos democráticamente.

La edición de este año será seguida de cerca debido a la precaria situación de Starmer.

Se espera que el discurso incluya propuestas para abordar la crisis del costo de vida, crear un fondo nacional de riqueza para estimular la inversión privada en infraestructura pública y endurecer las normas para los solicitantes de asilo. También podría incluir la controvertida propuesta del gobierno de abolir los juicios con jurado en algunos casos en Inglaterra y Gales, reducir la edad para votar a 16 años e introducir un “deber de honestidad” para los funcionarios públicos, que les obligaría a decir la verdad y cooperar con las investigaciones.

El problema para Starmer es que muchas de las propuestas que se espera que aparezcan en su discurso ya se han anunciado con anterioridad. Esto plantea la duda de si logrará convencer a sus detractores.

Aun así, el discurso es el punto central de una jornada de ceremonia y tradición que se sigue desde 1852, con elementos del programa que datan del siglo XVI.

Tradicionalmente, el monarca se desplaza desde el Palacio de Buckingham hasta el Parlamento, una distancia de menos de un kilómetro y medio, en un carruaje tirado por caballos. Allí se coloca la Corona Imperial y la túnica de Estado antes de encabezar una procesión hacia la Cámara de los Lores, cuyos miembros no son elegidos.

Un funcionario de la Cámara de los Lores, conocido como Vara Negra por la vara de ébano que porta, se dirige a la Cámara de los Comunes para convocar a sus miembros a una sesión conjunta del Parlamento. Las puertas de la Cámara de los Comunes se cierran de golpe en la cara de Vara Negra para simbolizar la independencia de la Cámara respecto a la monarquía, y no se abren hasta que Vara Negra las golpea tres veces.

Una vez que los miembros de la Cámara de los Comunes se han congregado en la cámara de los Lores, el rey pronuncia un discurso redactado por el gobierno en el que expone su programa legislativo para la próxima sesión del Parlamento.

Tras la lectura del discurso y la partida del rey, las dos cámaras del Parlamento inician varios días de debate sobre su contenido.

(con información de AP)

As President Donald Trump and hundreds of aides, security personnel and officials prepare to travel to China, many will leave behind one of the most basic tools of modern government: their everyday cellphones.

Instead, officials entering China often travel with stripped-down «clean» devices, temporary laptops and tightly controlled communications systems designed to minimize the risk of surveillance, hacking or data collection in what U.S. officials consider one of the world’s most aggressive cyber environments.

The precautions can transform even routine tasks into logistical headaches. Messages that would normally travel instantly through encrypted apps or synced devices are instead routed through controlled channels, temporary accounts or relayed in person. 

CHINA-LINKED HACKING GROUP TARGETS PHONES BELONGING TO TRUMP FAMILY, BIDEN AIDES: REPORT

Contacts disappear. Cloud access is limited. Some officials operate for days without their normal digital footprint.

Current and former officials say the measures reflect a longstanding assumption inside the U.S. government: anything brought into China — phones, laptops, tablets or even hotel Wi-Fi connections — should be treated as potentially compromised.

«China is a mass surveillance state,» said Bill Gage, a former Secret Service special agent and now director of executive protection for Safehaven Security Group. «Briefings for U.S. officials begin well before the president arrives, and they make clear that everything is monitored.»

«We always tell people to assume everything you say and do — both in person and digitally — could be monitored,» said Theresa Payton, former White House chief information officer and CEO of cybersecurity firm Fortalice Solutions. «And to conduct themselves accordingly.»

Ahead of Trump’s high-stakes meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the digital precautions underscore the broader mistrust shaping the relationship between Washington and Beijing, where cybersecurity, espionage and surveillance concerns now permeate nearly every aspect of official engagement.

TRUMP TO CONFRONT XI AT HIGH-STAKES SUMMIT OVER CHINA BACKING FOR IRAN, RUSSIA

The precautions will extend beyond government officials. The delegation traveling with Trump also is expected to include executives from major American firms, including Apple, Boeing, Qualcomm and BlackRock — companies operating at the center of the U.S.–China economic and technological relationship.

In Washington, officials are often told to leave their phones behind when entering places like the Chinese Embassy. Those same concerns are amplified when traveling to China itself, where U.S. officials operate under the assumption that devices, networks and even hotel rooms could be monitored.

Even charging a phone can become a security concern.

Federal cybersecurity guidance has long warned travelers to avoid plugging devices into unknown USB ports or untrusted charging systems because compromised hardware can potentially be used to extract data or install malicious software — a tactic commonly referred to as «juice jacking.»

As a result, officials traveling to high-risk countries often carry preapproved charging equipment, external battery packs and government-issued accessories rather than relying on local infrastructure.

«There are no safe electronic communications in China,» Gage said, noting officials are advised to limit digital activity to only what is necessary for the mission.

The Chinese government has rejected claims that it engages in improper surveillance.

«In China, personal privacy is protected by law,» Chinese Embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu told Fox News Digital. «The Chinese government places a high priority on protecting data privacy and security in accordance with the law. It has never required—and will never require—enterprises or individuals to collect or store data in violation of the law.»

«China is a mass surveillance state,» said Bill Gage, a former Secret Service special agent and now director of executive protection for Safehaven Security Group. «Briefings for U.S. officials begin well before the president arrives, and they make clear that everything is monitored.» (iStock)

Payton said officials may also be issued temporary devices configured with known «golden images,» allowing security teams to detect whether a device has been altered or accessed during the trip.

«You may see executives issued loaner phones with a known ‘golden image,’ meaning security teams can compare the device before and after use to see if it’s been tampered with,» she said.

«There may be controlled ‘safe zones’ set up where officials can communicate back to the U.S., but everything is tightly managed,» Payton added.

When sensitive conversations need to happen, the logistics become even more complex.

U.S. officials traveling overseas frequently rely on temporary sensitive compartmented information facilities, or SCIFs — secure spaces designed to prevent electronic surveillance and eavesdropping. Those facilities can be established inside hotels or other controlled locations during major diplomatic trips.

«The White House Military Office and communications teams create controlled spaces where they can monitor both physical and digital access to ensure sensitive conversations remain secure,» Payton said.

The precautions can create a surprisingly analog environment for a modern presidential delegation. Paper documents become more common, digital access is restricted and aides accustomed to constant communication often operate through tightly controlled channels.

Officials entering China often travel with stripped-down «clean» devices, temporary laptops and tightly controlled communications systems designed to minimize the risk of surveillance, hacking or data collection in what U.S. officials consider one of the world’s most aggressive cyber environments. (iStock)

The White House could not immediately be reached for comment. 

U.S. officials have spent years warning about Chinese cyber espionage campaigns targeting American government agencies, critical infrastructure, defense contractors and telecommunications networks. 

Intelligence officials have accused Beijing-linked hackers of infiltrating everything from federal systems to power grids and water utilities, while repeatedly attempting to collect information on senior American officials and policymakers.

«China will conduct extensive research on every member of the U.S. delegation — from senior officials down to junior personnel,» Gage said, describing the level of intelligence targeting officials are warned about before traveling.

Payton said the high-profile nature of a presidential visit only increases the risk.

«This is a well-publicized event, so you have to assume everything from nation states to opportunistic actors may be trying to listen in,» she said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The issue exploded into public view in 2023, when a suspected Chinese surveillance balloon crossed the continental United States before being shot down by the U.S. military after traversing sensitive military sites. U.S. officials later said the balloon was part of a broader surveillance effort linked to Beijing.

More recently, federal officials have warned about sophisticated China-linked cyber groups such as Volt Typhoon and Salt Typhoon, which U.S. authorities say targeted critical infrastructure and telecommunications systems in ways that could support espionage or disruption during a future conflict.