Sharjah authorities are responding to a ballistic missile strike on a building in the central region. The missile, originating from Iran, injured two Pakistani nationals, who are now hospitalised. Officials are urging the public to avoid spreading misinformation and to trust official updates on the ongoing response.
Authorities in the Emirate of Sharjah confirmed on Tuesday, April 7 that they are responding to an incident involving a ballistic missile strike on a building in the central region.
In a statement posted on X and translated from Arabic, the Sharjah Government Media Bureau said the missile originated from Iran and struck the facility earlier in the day.
The incident resulted in two individuals of Pakistani nationality sustaining moderate injuries. Both were transported to hospital to receive medical treatment, authorities confirmed.
No further details were provided.
Authorities urged the public to refrain from spreading rumours and to rely exclusively on official sources for updates, as response efforts continue.
Tehran has outlined a 10-point plan to end the war after rejecting a US-led 15-point proposal, linking any deal to sanctions relief and regional de-escalation as President Donald Trump issues a final ultimatum
Following rejection of a US peace framework, Iran offered a 10-point proposal for ending conflict, including conditions like guaranteed non-aggression, sanctions removal, and US troop withdrawal. Trump issued an ultimatum regarding the Strait of Hormuz, threatening military action before agreeing to a two-week ceasefire contingent on its opening.
UPDATE: This story has been updated to reflect the latest developments around the announcement of a ceasefire by US President Donald Trump as well as new details about the 10-point proposal.
Iran has tabled a 10-point peace proposal aimed at ending the conflict with the US and Israel, following its rejection of a US-led framework delivered through Pakistani mediation.
The US, through Pakistani intermediaries, put forward a 15-point framework aimed at rapidly de-escalating the conflict.
The US proposal reportedly included an immediate ceasefire, reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, talks toward a broader peace settlement within 15 to 20 days, and wider conditions tied to Iran’s regional activity and military posture
Tehran initially rejected the proposal, saying a ceasefire was insufficient without a permanent end to the war, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).
However, after US President Donald Trump agreed on Wednesday morning to a two-week ceasefire — conditional on the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — Nour News, an Iranian outlet affiliated with the country’s Supreme National Security Council, published a list cited by The Wall Street Journal.
1. The US must fundamentally commit to guaranteeing non-aggression.
2. Continuation of Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz.
3. Acceptance that Iran can enrich uranium for its nuclear program
4. Removal of all primary sanctions on Iran.
5. Removal of all secondary sanctions against foreign entities that do business with Iranian institutions).
6. End of all United Security Council resolutions targeting Iran.
7. End of all International Atomic Energy Agency resolutions on Iran’s nuclear program.
8. Compensation payment to Iran for war damage.
9. Withdrawal of US combat forces from the region.
10. Cease-fire on all fronts, including Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Trump ultimatum raises stakes
The proposal from Iran came amid US President Donald Trump earlier having issued a firm ultimatum for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz — a critical global energy route — or face potential military action.
Trump, had threatened to “rain hell” on Tehran if it failed to comply by 8 p.m. EDT Tuesday (midnight GMT), rejected Iran’s response and said the deadline was final.
Speaking at a news conference earlier this week, Trump warned Iran could be “taken out” in one night and vowed to target power plants and bridges, adding that without a deal “every bridge in Iran will be decimated” and “every power plant… will be out of business”.
Trump had warned that failure to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by the deadline would trigger large-scale strikes on Iranian infrastructure, significantly escalating the conflict.
Later, Trump shifted tone, announcing early on Wednesday a two-week ceasefire conditional on the Strait of Hormuz being reopened.
Officials in Iran also signalled an intention to de-escalate with Iran’s foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, taking to X on Wednesday morning saying his country would cease operations if attacks against it are halted.
Aerial view of LNG and Oil tankers/Image: Getty Images
TT
16
The disruption to global LNG flows has once again put force majeure clauses, contractual risk allocation, and energy security into sharp focus.
As geopolitical tensions ripple through critical trade routes, legal experts say the implications for long-term LNG contracts are significant, but not necessarily transformative. Instead, the current environment is reinforcing long-standing contractual principles while prompting more nuanced risk considerations in future agreements.
The clause has come into focus after a few energy operators in the Gulf moved to declare force majeure or similar emergency measures following attacks on infrastructure and disruptions to regional energy flows.
According to Chad Passlow, partner at Baker Botts, the legal threshold for invoking force majeure remains highly dependent on the specifics of each contract.
“While force majeure clauses vary from contract to contract, and those differences are material as to how they should be interpreted, many LNG SPAs provide an excuse to a contractual party that is ‘prevented, impeded, or delayed’ in performing… due to events or circumstances that are beyond the reasonable control of such party,” he says.
However, invoking such provisions is not straightforward. “The affected party must generally show that it is unable to perform… not merely that its performance has become more difficult, expensive, or commercially unattractive,” Passlow adds, noting that mitigation obligations and the ability to resume performance quickly remain central to any claim.
Chad Passlow
Limited scope for renegotiation, but long-term risks remain
While supply disruptions may place pressure on buyers—particularly in Europe and Asia—legal frameworks governing LNG contracts offer limited room for renegotiation.
Jason Bennett, another partner at the same firm, explains that most long-term LNG sale and purchase agreements (SPAs) are designed to withstand such shocks without reopening core commercial terms.
“Most of them do not include a renegotiation provision due to the existence of force majeure circumstances – the non-performing party is typically excused from performance during the existence and continuance of force majeure,” he says.
That said, prolonged disruptions could trigger more significant contractual consequences. “Many LNG SPAs contain termination rights for if force majeure events prevent performance for an extremely long period… [and] some… have provisions, such an extension of the base term of the agreement,” Bennett adds.
Despite the scale of recent events, both experts caution against expecting a fundamental shift in how force majeure is interpreted globally.
“This event is unlikely to redefine how force majeure is interpreted in global energy contracts, as war and conflicts are quintessential sources of force majeure relief,” says Passlow.
However, he points to a more subtle shift ahead. “We may see contractual parties propose new or different force majeure provisions for future agreements… that seek to define more clearly the relief that would be available in specific conflict scenarios.”
This mirrors the contractual evolution seen after the Covid-19 pandemic, where previously assumed risks became more explicitly defined.
Jason Bennett
Structural vulnerabilities exposed
Beyond legal frameworks, the current disruption has highlighted the structural fragility of global LNG supply chains—particularly their dependence on key chokepoints.
“With roughly one-fifth of global LNG supply passing through the Straits of Hormuz… the almost immediate result has been an increase in LNG prices,” Bennett says.
The ripple effects are already visible across markets. Buyers in Europe and Asia are competing for available cargoes, while some are resorting to fuel switching to manage costs. At the same time, seasonal dynamics add further pressure, as Europe rebuilds storage ahead of winter and Asia prepares for peak summer demand.
Despite short-term volatility, Bennett does not expect a long-term retreat from LNG as a core energy source.
“The world needs LNG, so we do not expect any long-term movement away from LNG as a source of energy,” he says.
Instead, the focus will shift toward diversification and resilience. “LNG importing countries… can be expected to analyse and evaluate their energy supply sources… [and] diversification… has always been and will remain a key goal.”
This includes reassessing exposure to geopolitical risks, supply routes, and alternative energy sources, without fundamentally altering the role of LNG in the global energy mix.
The current disruption has also reignited debates around pricing mechanisms, particularly the balance between spot markets and long-term contracts.
However, Bennett suggests that structural pricing changes are unlikely. “There is no global price for LNG… we do not think that any fundamental shift will occur in LNG pricing – the decisions will be made by buyers and sellers on a contract-by-contract basis.”
This reinforces the highly bespoke nature of LNG agreements, where pricing reflects individual risk appetites rather than market-wide standardisation.
Risk allocation: evolution, not overhaul
While geopolitical tensions are intensifying, both experts believe the fundamentals of risk allocation in LNG contracts will remain largely intact.
“We do not think the existence of conflicts will fundamentally alter risk allocation in contracts, as they have always been considered a possibility,” Passlow says.
Instead, the focus is likely to shift toward operational resilience and infrastructure strategy.
“The LNG market is incredibly resilient and will continue to adapt to such challenges,” Bennett adds. “We expect that GCC countries will explore more distributed infrastructure, regional gas grids, additional pipelines… to ensure even greater resiliency in the future.”
Ultimately, the current disruption is less about rewriting the rules of global LNG trade and more about stress-testing them.
Legal frameworks such as force majeure continue to function as designed, but the scale and frequency of geopolitical risks are pushing both buyers and sellers to reassess how those frameworks are applied in practice.
For the LNG industry, the lesson is clear: resilience is no longer just operational—it is contractual, structural, and increasingly strategic.
Apple is preparing to launch a foldable iPhone, blurring the lines between phone and tablet with an iPad-like interface. This device, expected later this year, aims to boost growth in the competitive foldable market. It will feature a large internal display, improved multitasking and a revamped iOS.
Apple Inc. is gearing up to enter the foldable smartphone market with a device designed to blur the line between phone and tablet, as it seeks to reinvigorate growth and compete more aggressively in a category dominated by rivals.
The company’s long-anticipated foldable iPhone, expected later this year, will introduce an iPad-like interface, marking a significant shift in how users interact with iOS on mobile devices, a Bloomberg report said.
The move comes as foldable smartphones gain traction globally, with improved hardware, stronger durability, and growing consumer demand signalling that the category may finally be ready for mainstream adoption. Apple’s entry, though delayed compared to competitors, could redefine expectations for both productivity and design in the premium smartphone segment.
According to people familiar with the development, Apple’s foldable iPhone will feature an internal display roughly the size of an iPad mini when opened, paired with a smaller external screen comparable to a compact iPhone. The device will introduce a wider aspect ratio than competing foldables, offering a more immersive viewing and multitasking experience.
Central to the device is a revamped version of iOS that supports iPad-style layouts, including side-by-side app usage and interface elements such as sidebars. These changes are expected to make multitasking more intuitive while allowing developers to more easily adapt existing apps to the new format.
“The design is intended to make the device more appealing for watching video and productivity tasks,” people familiar with the matter said, noting that the broader screen could become a key selling point.
Despite these enhancements, the foldable iPhone will continue to run standard iOS rather than iPadOS. This means it will retain a simpler multitasking system and won’t support full desktop-style workflows or run iPad apps natively, a decision that reflects Apple’s effort to balance usability with performance.
A spokesperson for the Cupertino, California-based company declined to comment.
Design challenges and technical trade-offs
Apple’s delayed entry into the foldable market reflects the company’s effort to address persistent challenges that have plagued earlier devices, particularly screen creases and durability concerns.
Engineers have reportedly adopted a new display technology that minimizes the visible crease when the device is unfolded, though it does not eliminate it entirely. While not a perfect solution, the improvement could offer Apple a competitive edge in marketing and user experience.
Durability has also been a major focus. Apple aims to increase the lifespan of the hinge and display, ensuring the device can withstand repeated folding over time—an area where early foldables faced criticism.
The external display introduces another notable change: a hole-punch camera cutout replacing Apple’s signature notch. This design shift is made possible by removing the Face ID system and integrating Touch ID into the side button, marking the first return of fingerprint authentication to a flagship iPhone since 2022.
The thinner design of the foldable device reportedly made it difficult to accommodate the full Face ID sensor array, forcing Apple to reconsider its biometric approach.
Camera and hardware decisions reflect trade-offs
Apple has also experimented with different camera technologies for the inner display, including an under-display camera system. However, testing revealed that this approach resulted in lower image quality, leading the company to favor a more conventional hole-punch design.
On the rear, the foldable iPhone will feature a dual-camera system, one fewer lens than current high-end models. Despite this, Apple is betting that the device’s large display, enhanced productivity features, and premium build will justify its expected price tag of around $2,000.
The company is positioning the foldable as a top-tier product aimed at both loyal iPhone users and customers who have already embraced foldable Android devices.
Foldable market matures ahead of Apple’s arrival
Apple’s entry comes seven years after Samsung launched its first foldable phone, giving competitors a significant head start in refining the technology.
Recent models from leading manufacturers highlight how far the category has evolved. Devices have become thinner, more durable, and increasingly capable, addressing many of the early shortcomings such as bulky designs and fragile screens.
For instance, Samsung’s latest foldable devices are now slim enough to resemble traditional smartphones when closed, while competitors have pushed advancements in battery capacity and camera performance. Some models even feature nearly crease-free displays, a milestone that Apple is still working to fully achieve.
According to a report from market research firm IDC, global foldable smartphone shipments are projected to grow by 10% in 2025 compared to the previous year, with an even stronger 30% year-on-year increase expected in 2026.
This growth underscores increasing consumer confidence in foldable devices, driven by meaningful improvements in usability and performance.
A CNET report noted that many of the early trade-offs, such as poor battery life, thick form factors, and visible creases, have largely been resolved, making foldables a more viable option for everyday use.
High stakes for Apple’s late entry
Apple’s foldable iPhone represents both an opportunity and a risk. Entering the market later allows the company to learn from competitors’ mistakes, but it also raises expectations for a more refined and differentiated product.
The company is under pressure to demonstrate that it can still define new product categories, rather than simply follow established trends. Its focus on a wider display, improved multitasking, and tighter integration between hardware and software suggests a strategy centered on productivity and premium user experience.
Whether that will be enough to disrupt an increasingly competitive market remains to be seen. But with foldables gaining momentum and consumer interest rising, Apple’s debut could mark a pivotal moment for the category.
Hormuz crisis ‘worse than 1973, 1979 and 2002 combined’, says IEA chief
The IEA warns the Hormuz blockade has triggered the most severe energy shock in history, sending prices higher and exposing developing economies to rising inflation and supply risks
Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency (IEA). (Credit: Getty Images)
TT
16
Article Summary
Fatih Birol (IEA) deems the Strait of Hormuz blockade a more severe energy crisis than previous ones combined. Developing nations are particularly vulnerable due to rising energy and food prices, accelerating inflation. IEA members are releasing strategic reserves to mitigate the disruption, caused by Iran's actions following strikes by Israel and the US.
The current oil and gas crisis triggered by the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz is “more serious than the ones in 1973, 1979 and 2002 together”, Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency (IEA), told Le Figaro newspaper.
“The world has never experienced a disruption to energy supply of such magnitude,” he said in an interview with the French newspaper released in its Tuesday edition.
He said the European countries, as well Japan, Australia and others will suffer, but the countries most at risk were developing nations which will suffer from higher oil and gas prices, higher food prices and a general acceleration of inflation.
The IEA member countries agreed last month to release part of their strategic reserves. Some of this had already been released and the process continues, said Birol.
In reaction to the strikes by Israel and the US, Iran has almost entirely blocked the traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20% of world oil and gas regularly flows, creating a surge in energy prices.
Vehicle traffic across the King Fahd Causeway has resumed following a brief precautionary suspension triggered by regional alerts, authorities confirmed.
In an update posted on X, the King Fahd Causeway Authority announced the reopening of the 25-km bridge linking Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, restoring cross-border movement between the two countries.
Earlier today, vehicle movement across the King Fahd Causeway was temporarily suspended as a precautionary measure following alerts issued by Saudi Arabia’s National Early Warning Platform in the Eastern Province.
In a statement posted on X, translated from Arabic to English, the King Fahd Causeway Authority said the suspension was implemented “in reference to the alerts issued by the National Early Warning Platform in the Eastern Region during the past hours.”
The King Fahd Causeway is a critical 25km economic and logistics corridor linking Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, facilitating the daily movement of thousands of commuters, tourists, and commercial traffic. Any disruption to the crossing has immediate implications for cross-border trade, supply chains, and business operations between the two countries.
