El asesinato de un hombre identificado por el Gobierno ecuatoriano como cabecilla de una organización criminal provocó conmoción en Guayaquil y abrió una serie de interrogantes sobre los controles de seguridad en uno de los principales puntos de ingreso al país. La tarde del 17 de junio, un ataque armado registrado en los exteriores del aeropuerto internacional José Joaquín de Olmedo dejó un fallecido y una persona herida, en un hecho que ocurrió frente a pasajeros, familiares y trabajadores que se encontraban en la terminal aérea.

Minutos después del atentado, el ministro del Interior, John Reimberg, confirmó que la víctima mortal era Carlos Alberto Suástegui Villanueva, de 39 años, a quien las autoridades identifican como cabecilla del grupo criminal Los Águilas, una estructura que opera principalmente en el cantón El Triunfo, en la provincia del Guayas. El funcionario aseguró además que se trataba de un objetivo criminal priorizado dentro de las investigaciones que mantiene el Estado contra organizaciones vinculadas a delitos violentos.

De acuerdo con la información preliminar proporcionada por la Policía Nacional, Suástegui acababa de arribar a Guayaquil cuando fue interceptado por varios sujetos armados en el área exterior de llegadas internacionales. Los atacantes abrieron fuego en repetidas ocasiones y huyeron del lugar. El hombre murió como consecuencia de las heridas, mientras que una mujer que lo acompañaba resultó lesionada y recibió atención médica.

La balacera generó momentos de pánico entre las personas que se encontraban en el aeropuerto. Videos grabados por testigos mostraron a pasajeros buscando refugio y a personal de seguridad acordonando la zona mientras llegaban agentes policiales y equipos de emergencia. Aunque el acceso al área donde ocurrió el crimen fue restringido durante varias horas para permitir el levantamiento de indicios, la concesionaria de la terminal informó que las operaciones aéreas continuaron con normalidad.

Poco después del ataque, las autoridades anunciaron la aprehensión de dos adolescentes, de 15 y 16 años, en el sector del parqueadero del aeropuerto. Según el Ministerio del Interior, ambos son investigados por su presunta participación en el atentado. La Policía indicó que las primeras diligencias permitieron ubicar a los sospechosos cuando intentaban abandonar el lugar.

La identificación de la víctima dio paso a un intenso debate público. Diversos usuarios en redes sociales, analistas de seguridad y actores políticos cuestionaron cómo una persona señalada por el propio Gobierno como líder de una organización criminal pudo transitar por el sistema migratorio y llegar hasta la zona pública de la terminal sin que se produjera una intervención de las autoridades.

Hasta el momento, el Ministerio del Interior y la Policía Nacional no han informado si Suástegui mantenía una orden de captura vigente al momento de su ingreso al país o si existía alguna alerta migratoria activa en su contra. Tampoco se ha precisado si era objeto de seguimiento por parte de organismos de inteligencia. La ausencia de esa información alimentó preguntas sobre la coordinación entre las instituciones encargadas del control fronterizo y los organismos de seguridad.

Otro de los aspectos que ha concentrado la atención es la aparente precisión con la que actuaron los atacantes. El hecho de que el crimen se produjera poco después de la llegada de la víctima llevó a que surgieran especulaciones sobre un posible seguimiento previo o sobre el conocimiento anticipado de su itinerario. Sin embargo, las autoridades no han presentado evidencias que respalden esas hipótesis y señalaron que la investigación continúa en curso.

Las dudas también alcanzan a los mecanismos de seguridad en el aeropuerto. Aunque el ataque ocurrió en una zona de acceso público y no dentro de las áreas restringidas de embarque o desembarque, el caso volvió a poner bajo escrutinio los protocolos de protección en infraestructuras consideradas estratégicas. Desde el inicio del conflicto armado interno declarado por el Gobierno en 2024, los aeropuertos del país han operado bajo medidas reforzadas de vigilancia debido a la expansión de la violencia vinculada al crimen organizado.

The Trump administration’s new framework with Iran grants Tehran immediate oil sanctions waivers while postponing the most consequential nuclear questions for future negotiations, a gamble officials acknowledge carries risks because they expect Iran may not comply. 

«We come in with the full expectation that they will lie and they will cheat,» one senior U.S. official said on a call with reporters Wednesday, arguing that any final agreement would require a verification and enforcement mechanism capable of detecting violations.

The agreement, which establishes a 60-day negotiating period, rests on a bet that Iran can be deterred from violating its commitments through monitoring and enforcement. Administration officials say any sanctions waivers can be clawed back if Iran fails to comply, while critics argue the U.S. is giving up leverage before the toughest nuclear issues have been resolved.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION UNVEILS SWEEPING TERMS OF PROPOSED IRAN AGREEMENT

The memorandum of understanding, unveiled by administration officials on a call with reporters Wednesday, says the Treasury Department will immediately issue waivers allowing Iran to export crude oil, petroleum products and derivatives, as well as access associated banking, insurance and transportation services. 

But the agreement does not immediately require Iran to dismantle its nuclear program, surrender its enriched uranium stockpile or end enrichment. Instead, the deal says the U.S. and Iran will negotiate the «disposition» of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, with down-blending on site under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision identified as the minimum methodology.

Administration officials defended that language as an early nuclear concession, saying the U.S. continues to push for more.

«Of course that’s a flaw and we will push for more than that. But the fact that they’re conceding to that is a major, major win for the United States of America,» one senior U.S. official said on the call. «They’re saying we will destroy the enriched stockpile, and this is how we’re going to do it at a minimum.»

Down-blending would reduce the enrichment level of the material, but would not remove it from Iran. 

Trump has defended the framework as necessary to avoid a prolonged conflict, closed shipping lanes and a market shock.

«If we didn’t do this deal, we could have dropped more bombs for another three weeks, two weeks, four weeks, two years,» Trump said Wednesday at the G7 summit in Évian, France. «You would never have the Hormuz Strait open … Your market would have, instead of going up, would go down at levels that nobody ever saw before, maybe except for 1929.» 

Trump has defended the framework as necessary to avoid a prolonged conflict, closed shipping lanes and a market shock. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)

TRUMP DEFENDS WAR DEAL IN MARATHON PRESSER, USING SEMANTICS ON WHY IRAN IS GETTING $300 BILLION

«I did not want to see economic catastrophe,» Trump added.

The framework drew support from Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a prominent Iran hawk who said after speaking with special envoy Steve Witkoff that he thought the 60-day agreement would be «beneficial.»

«Whether or not the United States can reach an acceptable, verifiable deal with Iran regarding its nuclear program and other issues is yet to be determined, but I see little downside to trying,» Graham said.

Others criticized the deal for offering sanctions relief before Iran had agreed to anything concrete on the nuclear front.

«How do you expect Iran to agree to anything in the future, let alone within 60 days, when you’ve given up all your leverage?» Blaise Misztal, vice president for policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, told Fox News Digital.

Broader sanctions relief, a withdrawal of U.S. forces and a $300 billion reconstruction fund are also contemplated as part of a final deal if both sides can reach one within 60 days.

Others criticized the deal for offering sanctions relief before Iran had agreed to anything concrete on the nuclear front. (Photo by IIPA via Getty Images)

Those who opposed the war now argue that the memorandum is the best deal the U.S. can get after the conflict and blockade.

«The U.S. bargaining position was hurt by the war, not helped by it,» Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East program at Defense Priorities, told Fox News Digital.

Kelanic said Trump is now «buying off Iran to return to something approaching the pre-war status quo» by offering immediate sanctions waivers and unfreezing assets tied to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

She argued that the immediate waivers are the price Trump has to pay to convince Iran he is serious about diplomacy after launching strikes during negotiations.

«This is like earnest money, right?» Kelanic said. «It’s like upfront cash that shows that he really means it. It’s a costly signal that Trump essentially forced himself to have to make by breaking off negotiations and bombing Iran in the middle of them.»

Iran has framed the memorandum as a test of whether Washington is prepared to act first, rather than simply offer assurances.

«Unfortunately, it must be acknowledged that Iran’s deep mistrust of the United States stems from a long history of wrongdoing by American leaders,» Iran foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said Monday in a press briefing. «The United States still has a long way to go before it can earn the trust of the Iranian people.»

The memorandum leaves the key nuclear mechanics to be worked out during the 60-day period, as well as key issues like ballistic missile production and proxy funding. 

«What we have in this deal already suggests that if there is a deal in 60 days on the nuclear issue, that deal is going to be weaker than the JCPOA,» Misztal said, referring to the Obama-era nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Under the JCPOA, Iran was required to sharply reduce its uranium stockpile, including by removing excess material from the country. Misztal said the new agreement’s minimum standard of down-blending on site suggests Iranian uranium may remain inside Iran.

«That means first of all, no uranium is leaving Iran, which happened under the JCPOA,» he said.

The agreement also guarantees toll-free commercial transit through the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days while Iran, Oman and Gulf states discuss a longer-term framework for administration and maritime services in the waterway.

Behnam Taleblu, senior director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, warned that the provision raises concerns that Iran could gain a role in regulating a critical international waterway after demonstrating its ability to disrupt global shipping.

«I mean, not just charge a toll, but regulate the crucial international waterway,» Taleblu said. «There can be no doubt over the fact that the Strait of Hormuz needs to be open and open to all, not just whomever Iran and Iran plus its friends can pressure others into.»

«If there is no guarantee of freedom of navigation, the Islamic Republic is going to salami slice the resolve of the Gulf countries and basically try to throw its weight around in this strait again,» he added.

The agreement also calls for the U.S. and regional partners to develop a reconstruction and economic development plan for Iran worth at least $300 billion. U.S. officials have stressed that the provision does not require American taxpayer money, but critics said any funding stream could free up regime resources for other priorities.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«It doesn’t matter if it’s Chinese money or American money or [United Arab Emirates] money,» Taleblu said. «The more they have access, the less they have to compete over resources and more they can fund what they want to fund.» 

If negotiations collapse during the 60 days, Trump has left resuming military pressure back on the table. «If we think that they’re just dragging us along and kind of bulls**ting us, then we’ll be very quick to pull the plug,» a senior administration official said. 

Ukraine launched one of its largest drone attacks on Moscow since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion, striking a major oil refinery in the Russian capital and sending thick black smoke over parts of the city, according to Russian officials and multiple reports.

The Moscow Oil Refinery in the Kapotnya district — one of the capital region’s key fuel facilities — was hit overnight Thursday, marking the second reported strike on the site in three days. Videos circulating online showed large flames and black smoke rising from the facility, while Russian officials said air defenses intercepted waves of incoming drones.

Kyiv says its strikes deep inside Russia are evidence that it is turning the tide of the war — a message President Volodymyr Zelenskyy took this week to President Donald Trump and other G7 leaders at a summit in France. 

The latest strikes underscore a new phase of the war, with Ukraine increasingly able to hit high-value targets deep inside Russia while Moscow struggles to prevent drones from reaching politically sensitive and economically important sites near the capital. 

‘A NEW KIND OF WAR’: INSIDE UKRAINE’S HIDDEN FACTORIES MASS-PRODUCING COMBAT DRONES

«This is pure hell, I’ve never felt such terror,» one Moscow resident said after the attack, according to East2West News. 

Another resident, according to the outlet, asked: «Why won’t this madman stop his crazy and pointless war and end the death and destruction?»

East2West news agency also reported that a heavy security presence was deployed around the Kremlin, with Red Square sealed off and machine-gunners positioned on towers, ramparts and near Bolsheviks’ founder Vladimir Lenin’s Mausoleum. 

Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin said air defenses shot down more than 130 drones approaching the city. Russia’s Defense Ministry claimed more than 550 Ukrainian drones were intercepted overnight across several regions, though battlefield claims from either side could not be independently verified.

PUTIN RESIDENCE ATTACK VIDEO SLAMMED AS US OFFICIALS SAY UKRAINE DID NOT TARGET LEADER

The Moscow Oil Refinery in Kapotnya burns after being hit during Ukraine’s June 18, 2026, drone attack on the Russian capital. (East2West)

The attack disrupted daily life across Moscow, forcing temporary flight suspensions at major airports and traffic restrictions near the refinery. Russian officials said debris also fell near the Sadovod shopping center, damaging a building. The Moscow region governor said 16 people were injured in the broader attack.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha mocked the confusion in Moscow, writing on X: «One of the most popular questions asked by Muscovites this morning is ‘What is going on?’ I can answer. Your country started a war of aggression against ours. For years, it has been killing our people. Now that you know what’s going on, ask Putin when he is planning to end it.»

The strike appeared to expose vulnerabilities in Moscow’s heavily promoted air defense network, bringing the war deeper into the Russian capital even as the Kremlin continues its long-range missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities.

RUSSIA SAYS UKRAINIAN DRONES HIT NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DURING INDEPENDENCE DAY STRIKES

Explosion seen over Moscow after Ukrainian drones struck the Russian capital, including the Kapotnya oil refinery, June 18, 2026. (East2West)

The Kapotnya refinery is a strategically significant target. A prior Ukrainian drone strike damaged part of the refinery in recent days, according to Reuters, and forced a halt in some operations. 

East2West reported that the refinery supplies 40% of Moscow’s fuel market and 70% of the surrounding region’s gasoline and aviation fuel needs.

Ukraine increasingly has targeted Russian energy infrastructure in an effort to undermine Moscow’s war machine and increase the domestic cost of the war inside Russia. Kyiv has described such strikes as part of its campaign of «long-range sanctions» against Russia’s oil and military infrastructure.

The Moscow attack came as President Vladimir Putin hosted leaders from the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations bloc in Kazan, Russia. Ukraine also reportedly struck targets linked to Russia’s supply routes to occupied Crimea, including road and rail infrastructure. Ukrainian officials have repeatedly said isolating Crimea is a key military objective as Kyiv seeks to weaken Russia’s hold on the peninsula, which Moscow illegally annexed in 2014.

Russia, meanwhile, continued its own strikes on Ukraine. Ukrainian officials reported Russian attacks on energy and oil facilities in the Poltava region and near Kyiv.

East2West reported that Russia was moving Tu-95MS strategic bombers across the country, raising concerns that Moscow could be preparing another major strike on Ukraine in the coming days.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Emergency services personnel work to extinguish a vehicle fire following a Russian drone attack in the Kyiv region, Ukraine, on May 5, 2026. (Ukrainian Emergency Service/AP)

Zelenskyy has said the war could end if Putin agrees to genuine peace talks, while accusing Moscow of prolonging the conflict and using negotiations as cover for continued attacks.

Reuters contributed to this report.