04-09 08:09 · 国际,新闻,BBC,国际
The US president says Nato "wasn't there when we needed them" during the Iran war.
Trump criticises Nato as alliance chief describes meeting as 'very frank'
Donald Trump has again attacked Nato for not supporting the US in the Iran war, following a private meeting with its Secretary General Mark Rutte at the White House.
In a post shared to Truth Social after the meeting, the US President said: "NATO WASN'T THERE WHEN WE NEEDED THEM, AND THEY WON'T BE THERE IF WE NEED THEM AGAIN."
Ahead of the talks on Wednesday, Trump had toyed with the idea of quitting the trans-Atlantic military alliance after several Nato countries resisted his calls to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz to ease rising global oil prices.
The White House did not disclose details of the talk.
The Secretary General was at the White House for over two hours on Wednesday, although it is unknown how long the meeting with Trump was.
What is clear, however, is that Trump still has deep misgivings about the alliance and the member countries that he believes did not help the US enough before and during Operation Epic Fury.
In recent weeks, Trump has threatened to withdraw from the 32-member transatlantic alliance.
Asked about Nato's role in the ongoing conflict with Iran, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Wednesday said in a direct quote from the president that Nato was "tested and they failed".
Leavitt said Nato countries had "turned their backs on the American people," who fund their nations' defense, and that Trump would have a "very frank and candid conversation" with the Nato chief.
Meanwhile, much of Rutte's message to Trump appears to be that many European countries did not stand in the way.
The Secretary General told CNN that he pointed out that "the large majority of European nations has been helpful with basing, with logistics, with overflights".
"It's therefore a nuanced picture," Rutte said.
Whether or not that point - and the Secretary General's own warm relationship with Trump - are enough for the US president remains to be seen.
Asked if the world was safer now than it was before the war, Rutte said "absolutely" and credited that to Trump's "leadership" in degrading Iran's nuclear threats.
He added Nato members do not see the war in Iran as illegal, and most agreed it was important to degrade Iran's nuclear capabilities.
At the end of 2023, the US Congress did vote to prohibit any US president from unilaterally withdrawing from Nato without the approval of a two-thirds Senate majority or an act of Congress.
The relationship between the administration and the Nato alliance was already in a difficult place before the war with Iran, largely as a result of disagreements over Trump's plans for Greenland.
Trump included his frustrations over Greenland in his Truth social post after the meeting with Rutte, by saying: "REMEMBER GREENLAND, THAT BIG, POORLY RUN, PIECE OF ICE!!!"
The conflict in Iran, however, has taken Trump's grievances with Nato to new heights and created what is perhaps the greatest challenge the alliance has faced in its history.
Follow the twists and turns of Trump's second term with North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher's weekly US Politics Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.
▸ 展开全文
04-09 08:08 · AI代理,流程自动化,开源技术,开发者社区,工具发布
Process Manager for Autonomous AI Agents
Manage persistent AI bots with a terminal dashboard, web UI, and declarative configuration.
BOT.md
and the next run picks up changes. No restarts, no deploys, no downtime.Download the latest binary with checksum verification. Supports macOS, Linux, and Windows on AMD64 and ARM64.
Interactive creation via Claude. Generates a BOT.md config file with your bot's name, schedule, and system prompt.
Open the TUI dashboard to monitor and control all your bots. Or use the web UI for browser-based access.
Start, stop, message, and resume bots from the CLI or either dashboard. Bots run as background processes.
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:01 · 中东,局势,AlJazeera,中东
Israeli attacks have killed at least 254 people and wounded 1,165 others, according to Lebanon’s Civil Defence.
Israeli forces have carried out a devastating bombardment across Lebanon, killing hundreds of people, hours after a two-week ceasefire was announced in the United States-Israeli war on Iran.
Lebanon’s Civil Defence said at least 254 people were killed and 1,165 others were wounded in air strikes that targeted areas in Beirut, the Bekaa Valley, Mount Lebanon, Sidon, and several villages in southern Lebanon.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 items- list 1 of 3Trump says Lebanon not included in US-Iran ceasefire amid Israeli assault
- list 2 of 3Israel launches 100 air strikes in 10 minutes across Lebanon
- list 3 of 3Vance warns Iran ceasefire hinges on good faith talks
The Israeli military said that the attack was its largest coordinated assault on Lebanon since it started a new military operation in the country on March 2, “targeting more than 100 Hezbollah command centres and military sites”.
In a written statement, the head of Lebanon’s syndicate of doctors, Elias Chlela, urgently called for “all physicians from all specialities” to head to any hospital they could to offer help, with one of Beirut’s biggest hospitals saying it needed donations of all blood types.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Lebanon was not part of the US-Iran truce, but mediator Pakistan said that the ceasefire included the country. US President Donald Trump said Lebanon was “separate” and not part of the agreement.
Here’s how the world has reacted to the attacks:
Lebanon
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri called the attacks on densely populated areas a “full-fledged war crime.”
“Today’s crime, coinciding with the ceasefire agreement declared in the region — an agreement that Israel and its political and security apparatus have failed to uphold — is a serious test for the international community and a blatant challenge to all international laws, norms, and conventions, which Israel violates daily through its unprecedented campaign of human assassination in modern history,” Berri said.
“It is also a test for all Lebanese — political, religious, and civil leaders — to unite in solidarity with the martyrs. May God have mercy on the martyrs, grant a speedy recovery to the wounded, and protect Lebanon,” he added.
Hezbollah
The Lebanese armed group said it had a “right” to respond to the attacks.
“We affirm that the blood of the martyrs and the wounded will not be shed in vain, and that today’s massacres, like all acts of aggression and savage crimes, confirm our natural and legal right to resist the occupation and respond to its aggression,” Hezbollah said in a statement.
Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah told the news agency Reuters that the Israeli strikes were “a grave violation of the ceasefire”, adding there would be “repercussions for the entire agreement” if they continued.
Israel
Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israel “insisted on separating the war with Iran with the fighting in Lebanon in order to change the reality in Lebanon”.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also told a news conference that Israel would “continue to strike” Lebanon as the US-Iran ceasefire did not apply to Hezbollah.
Iran
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) warned that it will respond to the attacks on Lebanon if Israel does not stop the assault.
“We issue a firm warning to the United States, which violates treaties, and to its Zionist ally, its executioner: if the aggression against beloved Lebanon does not cease immediately, we will fulfil our duty and deliver a response,” the IRGC said in a statement carried on Iran’s state-owned TV channel, using a reference to Israel.
In a post on X, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the terms of the ceasefire were “clear and explicit: the US must choose — ceasefire or continued war via Israel. It cannot have both.”
“The world sees the massacres in Lebanon. The ball is in the US court, and the world is watching whether it will act on its commitments,” he added.
US
President Donald Trump told the US public broadcaster PBS that Lebanon was not part of the ceasefire deal with Iran due to Hezbollah.
“That’ll get taken care of too,” he reportedly said, adding: “That’s a separate skirmish.”
Vice President JD Vance told reporters that there was a “legitimate misunderstanding” regarding Iran’s position on Lebanon’s inclusion in the ceasefire deal; however, contradicting Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, the key intermediary in the US-Iran ceasefire talks, who had said the truce would include Lebanon.
“The Israelis, as I understand it … have actually offered to, frankly, to check themselves a little bit in Lebanon, because they want to make sure that our negotiation is successful,” Vance said, without elaborating.
Qatar
The foreign ministry condemned the “brutal series” of Israeli attacks on Lebanon that had killed hundreds of people, calling the attacks a “dangerous escalation and a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the sister Lebanese Republic, the rules of international humanitarian la
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:01 · 中东,局势,AlJazeera,中东
Israel carries out 100 strikes across Lebanon in 10 minutes, health minister says hospitals overwhelmed with victims.
Israel has bombed locations across Lebanon, including the capital Beirut, in devastating attacks that authorities say have killed at least 254 people and wounded more than 1,165.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had earlier said that Lebanon would not be included in the ceasefire.
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:01 · 中东,局势,BBC,中东
The Israeli prime minister's response to the ceasefire has been muted, in contrast to the triumphal statements from the US and Iran.
Israel backs US-Iran ceasefire but Netanyahu's war goals remain unfulfilled
When Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the start of the Israeli-US military campaign against Iran at the end of February, he was bullish.
But the tone of the statement from his office acknowledging the ceasefire announced overnight was far more muted and made clear the decision was made by President Donald Trump.
There was also a marked contrast with the triumphal statements from the US and Iran, both of which claimed major victories after five weeks of war.
In remarks broadcast on Wednesday night, Netanyahu characterised the operation as a success, but said the ceasefire was not the end and that Israel had more goals to achieve, either by agreement or renewing the fighting.
Where does the war leave Israel and its prime minister?
At the start of the war, Netanyahu said the "goal of the operation is to put an end to the threat from the Ayatollah regime in Iran" and that "this operation will continue as long as necessary".
But these goals have not been achieved: Iran's armed forces have still been fighting and the governing clerical establishment remains in place, although Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior figures have been killed in US-Israeli strikes.
The status of Iran's nuclear programme and stockpile of enriched uranium also remain unresolved. And while Iran's arsenal of ballistic missiles has been degraded, it has continued to launch barrages of them towards Israel throughout the war.
There were missile alerts and the sound of explosions here in Jerusalem overnight, even after Trump announced the deal, with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) saying multiple missiles were fired from Iran.
Netanyahu appears to have overestimated the ability of Israel and the US to defeat Iran's forces and bring about a change of its ruling system.
Anshel Pfeffer, a veteran Israeli journalist and biographer of Netanyahu, said the prime minister had only referred to a "suspension" of hostilities, ahead of talks between the US and Iran, but that he had not publicly accepted the war was over.
He said Netanyahu's failure to achieve his stated objectives was "not good" for him, and that another issue could be "some kind of rift opening up with the Americans" if the ceasefire was being agreed without Israel having much of a say.
Until now, there were public displays of unity between Netanyahu and Trump, but their goals might not now fully align.
A full end to the war, if it is based on the "10-point proposal from Iran" that Trump has referenced, will be widely seen as a strategic success for Tehran, given that is constitutes a list of demands by its leadership.
Yair Lapid, leader of the opposition in Israel, said there had "never been such a political disaster in our entire history" and that "Israel was not even at the table when decisions were made concerning the core of our national security".
He added: "The army did everything they asked of it, the public displayed incredible resilience, but Netanyahu failed politically, failed strategically, and did not meet any of the goals he himself set."
It is an election year in Israel, meaning Netanyahu could potentially lose power within months.
Shira Efron, the Israel policy chair at the US-based RAND corporation, said that Netanyahu "promised Israelis that this campaign would lead to the end of the Islamic regime, that by cutting the head of the snake, this war would remove an existential threat from Israel."
"Yet, the snake turned into a hydra."
She said the war was a "hard" sell to the Israeli public because there had been no regime change in Iran, the Iranians still had enriched uranium, and the Iranian missile threat remained.
"The missile programme still exists and, for Israelis, whether 70 or 80 per cent of capabilities have been degraded, there hasn't been a discernible difference for those sheltering [from missiles] over the last five weeks."
But Yossi Kuperwasser, who worked in Israeli military intelligence and is now director of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS), said Israelis should differentiate between "practical achievable goals" and "all kinds of wishful goals that we all wanted to see happening, but we couldn't guarantee".
He said the "achievable goals were all completely achieved" because Iran's nuclear and ballistic missiles production facilities were hit, and its military capabilities and leadership were "decimated".
He said the "wishful goals", which had not occurred, were causing regime change by triggering a popular uprising, removing highly enriched uranium from Iran by military force, and putting an end to Iran's capacity to launch missiles.
It is possible that far-right members of Netanyahu's coalition government will reject any ceasefire agreement or an end to the war, creating a political challenge for him.
A stark conflict over whether the ceasefire deal covers Lebanon has also emerged, which is putting the entire ceasefi
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:01 · 国际,新闻,BBC,国际
Attacks hit the southern suburbs of Beirut, southern Lebanon and the eastern Bekaa Valley, hours after a US-Iran ceasefire was announced.
At least 182 killed across Lebanon in large wave of Israeli strikes
Israel has carried out a large wave of air strikes across Lebanon, which killed and wounded hundreds of people, while officials say the war against the Lebanese armed group Hezbollah continues despite a ceasefire in Iran.
Israel described it as the largest wave of air strikes in this conflict, hitting more than 100 of what it called Hezbollah command centres and military sites in 10 minutes.
The southern suburbs of Beirut, southern Lebanon and the eastern Bekaa Valley were all targeted.
The Lebanese health ministry said at least 182 people had been killed, a number that is likely to rise, and 890 wounded.
At the site of the largest air strike on Beirut, hours later, emergency workers were still searching the damaged buildings. Found amid the rubble, glimpses of interrupted lives: pictures of smiling families, pieces of clothing, school homework that was left unfinished.
Abdelkader Mahfouz was visiting his brother who had been wounded.
"There was a lot of body parts here. Only people are getting harmed. What should the people do. We can't do anything," he told the BBC.
The attacks happened after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office denied the assertion by Pakistan, which had mediated the deal between the US and Iran, that the ceasefire covered the conflict in Lebanon.
In Washington, US President Donald Trump's press secretary Karoline Leavitt also said Lebanon was not part of the deal.
Hezbollah, which has not claimed any attack since the deal was announced, said the group had the right to respond and warned displaced families to wait for a formal ceasefire announcement before trying to return home.
The Lebanese presidency said it would continue "efforts to include Lebanon in regional peace".
The latest escalation in the decades-long conflict between Hezbollah and Israel erupted when the group fired rockets into Israel in retaliation for the killing of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the opening stages of the war, and in response to the near-daily Israeli attacks on Lebanon that have continued despite a ceasefire, which was agreed in November 2024.
More than 1,700 people have been killed, including at least 130 children, so far as a result of the war, the Lebanese health ministry says, without distinguishing combatants from civilians.
Israel says it has killed around 1,100 Hezbollah fighters.
Over 1.2 million people have been displaced, or one in five of the population, most of them from Shia Muslim communities.
Villages near the border have been destroyed, as invading Israeli troops aim to create what the Israeli authorities call a security buffer zone, to destroy Hezbollah's infrastructure and push its fighters away. This has raised concerns that some areas may be occupied even after the end of the war, and that many residents may never be able to return.
Israeli officials had indicated their intention to continue with their campaign in Lebanon even if there was a deal with Iran. But in recent days military sources quoted by Israeli media suggested the army had no intention to advance further in their invasion, and acknowledged that they would not be able to disarm Hezbollah by force.
Observers have expressed surprise with Hezbollah's military capabilities in this conflict, as it was widely believed the group had been severely weakened in their last war. The group has frequently launched rockets and drones into northern Israel but confronted Israeli troops on the ground in southern Lebanon.
In Lebanon, however, Hezbollah has faced strong criticism as many blame it for dragging the country into an unwanted war and of defending the interests of its Iranian patron. But the group still enjoys significant support among Lebanese Shia.
The displacement crisis triggered by the war has put further pressure on the crisis-hit country. Schools that have been turned into shelters are full, and many are sleeping in improvised tents in public spaces and even in cars. The arrival of families to other communities has led to a rise in sectarian tensions, with people fearing that they too could become the target of Israeli attacks.
After the ceasefire deal in 2024, the Lebanese government announced a plan to disarm Hezbollah, which was created in the 1980s in response to Israel's occupation of Lebanon during the 15-year Lebanese civil war. But, so far, the group has refused to discuss the future of its weapons.
President Joseph Aoun, a former army chief, had ruled out using force, warning that this could exacerbate divisions and lead to violence. Reacting to the latest escalation, his government made the historic announcement that it was open to negotiate directly with Israel – the countries do not have diplomatic relations. But, Israel, so far, has ignored the offer.
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:01 · 国际,新闻,BBC,国际
The provisional truce comes more than a month after the US and Israel launched coordinated attacks on Iran.
What we know about the two-week ceasefire between the US and Iran
Iran and the US have agreed to a conditional two-week ceasefire, during which shipping traffic will be allowed through the Strait of Hormuz.
This comes more than a month after the US and Israel launched coordinated attacks on Iran, and hours after US President Donald Trump threatened "a whole civilisation will die tonight" if Iran did not reopen the Strait.
Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who has been mediating negotiations, said early on Wednesday that the ceasefire was effective immediately.
Here's what we know so far about the deal.
What have the US and Iran said?
Trump said he had agreed to "suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks" if Tehran agrees to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping route for oil and other exports from the Gulf.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he agreed to the provisional ceasefire because "we have already met and exceeded all military objectives".
This comes after he earlier warned the US could take Iran out "in one night" and that a "whole civilisation will die tonight, never to be brought back again" - threats that drew condemnation from UN Secretary General António Guterres and Pope Leo XIV.
Later on Wednesday, Trump said that the US will be working closely with Iran and "talking tariff and sanctions relief".
On his Truth Social platform he added in a separate post that "a country supplying military weapons to Iran will be immediately tariffed, on any and all goods sold to the United States of America, 50%, effective immediately. There will be no exclusions or exemptions."
US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said the US military would be making sure Iran complies with the ceasefire and comes to the table for a deal.
Troops will "stay put, stay ready, stay vigilant" and be "ready to re-start at a moment's notice", he added.
Iran has agreed to allow vessels through the Hormuz Strait for two weeks, with their passage coordinated by the Iranian military.
The country has also issued a 10-point plan, which includes, among other things, the complete cessation of war in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen; "full commitment" to lifting sanctions on Iran; the release of Iranian funds and frozen assets held by the US; and a "full payment of compensation for reconstruction costs" to Iran.
It also says, "Iran fully commits to not seeking possession of any nuclear weapons".
"Iran's victory in the field would also be consolidated in political negotiations," Tehran's Supreme National Security Council said in a statement.
According to Sharif, the ceasefire will also take effect in Lebanon, where Israel has been fighting the Iranian-backed armed group Hezbollah.
Israel has backed the deal but says it "does not include Lebanon", renewing strikes on Wednesday in the Tyre and Nabatieh areas in the south of the country. Trump's press secretary Karoline Leavitt later also said that Lebanon was not included in the deal.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) promised a "regret-inducing response" if strikes on Lebanon continue.
What has Israel said?
Sirens sounded in Israel shortly after Trump's announcement, with the Israel Defense Forces saying they were intercepting missiles launched from Iran.
Several loud booms were heard in Jerusalem late on Tuesday night.
A few hours after the ceasefire was confirmed, Netanyahu said: "Israel supports President Trump's decision to suspend strikes against Iran for two weeks subject to Iran immediately opening the straits and stopping all attacks on the US, Israel and countries in the region."
The statement added that the "ceasefire does not include Lebanon", where Israel has ground troops.
It is unclear how involved Netanyahu was in Trump's decision-making but at a news conference later on Wednesday, the Israeli leader said the ceasefire came into effect "in full coordination with Israel".
He added: "We have more goals to complete - and we will achieve them either by an agreement or by renewing the fighting. We are prepared to return to fighting at any moment necessary. Our finger is on the trigger."
What is next?
Pakistan, which has been mediating the negotiations, has invited the delegations to meet in Islamabad on Friday "to further negotiate for a conclusive agreement to settle all disputes".
Leavitt acknowledged ongoing discussions about in-person talks, but said "nothing is final until announced by the President or the White House".
She later announced that the US Vice President JD Vance would attend the talks, along with the president's enovy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner.
Strikes appeared to be continuing after the ceasefire, as Kuwait on Wednesday morning reported Iranian attacks which damaged power and desalination plants as well as oil facilities.
"Kuwait air defences have been engaging an intense wave of hostile Iranian attacks, dealing with 28 drones targeting the State of Kuwait," the country's military said in a statemen
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:01 · 国际,新闻,BBC,国际
The path to the two-week ceasefire with Iran may have fundamentally altered the way the rest of the world views the US.
Iran ceasefire deal gives Trump a way out of war - but at a high cost
In the end, cooler heads prevailed – at least for now.
At 18:32 Washington time, President Donald Trump posted on his social media website that the US and Iran were "very far along" with a "definitive" peace agreement and that he had agreed to a two-week ceasefire to allow negotiations to proceed.
It wasn't exactly the last minute, but with Trump's looming 20:00 EDT (00:00 GMT on Wednesday) deadline to reach a deal or the US would launch massive strikes against Iranian energy and transportation infrastructure, it came pretty close.
All of this is contingent on Iran also suspending hostilities and fully opening the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping traffic, which the regime says it will do, while insisting it still exerts "dominion" over the waterway.
The deal allowed Trump to extricate himself from what was shaping up to be a treacherous choice – either escalating with his promise that a "whole civilisation will die tonight" or backing down and undermining his credibility. The US president may have only bought himself a temporary reprieve, however.
The US and Iranians now will engage in negotiations over the next two weeks, buying some time to try to reach a permanent settlement. It is likely to be a bumpy ride, but in after-hours trading, the price of a barrel of oil dropped below the $100 mark for the first time in days and US stock futures soared. There appears to be a sense of optimism that the worst is over.
Even this kind of progress was far from certain as recently as Tuesday morning, when Trump threatened the death of Iranian civilisation, "never to be brought back again".
Whether such a jaw-dropping threat from an American president pressured Iran to agree to the kind of ceasefire they had previously rejected is uncertain. What is clear is that Trump's astounding, inflammatory declaration – just two days after a similar obscenity-laced Truth Social demand – is unlike anything a modern US president has ever levelled or hinted at.
And even if the two-week ceasefire does result in a permanent peace, the Iran war – and Trump's recent words – may have fundamentally altered the way the rest of the world views the US.
A nation that once styled itself as a force for stability around the globe is now shaking the foundations of the international order. A president who has seemingly relished shattering norms and traditions in domestic politics is now doing the same on the world stage.
Democrats were quick to condemn Trump's words on Tuesday, with some going so far as to call for his removal.
"It is clear that the president has continued to decline and is not fit to lead," wrote Congressman Joaquin Castro on X.
Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the US Senate, said any Republican who did not join in voting to end the Iran war "owns every consequence of whatever the hell this is".
While many in Trump's own party stood by their president, it was far from the near-universal support he often enjoys.
Austin Scott, Republican congressman from Georgia and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, strongly criticised Trump's threats about a civilisation dying.
"The president's comments are counter-productive," he told the BBC, "and I do not agree with them."
Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson, usually a Trump loyalist, said it would be a "huge mistake" if Trump followed through with his bombing campaign. Congressman Nathaniel Moran of Texas wrote on social media that he did not support "the destruction of a 'whole civilisation'".
"This is not who we are," he wrote, "and it is not consistent with the principles that have long guided America."
Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who has frequently broken with the president, was equally direct, writing that the president's threat "cannot be excused away as an attempt to gain leverage in negotiations with Iran".
The White House is likely to counter that the leverage worked, however. And for a president who has faced declining poll numbers, a growing number of critics within his own party and an economy that is struggling over higher energy prices, any off-ramp in the conflict is likely to come as a relief.
In his Truth Social post announcing the ceasefire, Trump said that the US had "met and exceeded" all its military objectives.
Iran's military has been significantly degraded. Although its Islamic fundamentalist regime is still in power, many of its top leaders have been killed in bombing strikes.
At the moment, however, many of the stated American objectives are still in doubt. The disposition of Iran's enriched uranium – the foundation of its nuclear weapons programme – is unknown. The nation still has influence over regional proxies, such as the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
And even if Iran does fully open Hormuz – without conditioning passage on tolls or other payments – its ability to control the key geopolitical chokepoint is more clear now than ever.
In a statement after Trump's ceasefire m
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:00 · 技术选代,开发效率,前端工程,开源,性能优化
We moved Railway's frontend off Next.js. Builds went from 10+ mins to under 2
Railway's entire production frontend no longer runs on Next.js. The dashboard, the canvas, railway.com, all of it now runs on Vite + TanStack Router, and we shipped the migration in two PRs with zero downtime.
Next.js got railway.com from zero to a production app serving millions of users monthly. It's an excellent framework, but it stopped being the right one for our product.
Frontend builds had crept past 10 minutes. Six of those minutes were Next.js alone, half of it stuck on "finalizing page optimization." For a team that ships multiple times a day, that kind of build time isn't a minor annoyance. It's like a very expensive tax on every single iteration.
Railway’s app is overwhelmingly client-side. The dashboard is a rich, stateful interface. The canvas is real-time. Websockets are everywhere. The server-first primitives in Next.js weren't something we used, and we'd ended up building our own abstractions on top of the Pages Router just to support layouts and routing concerns that the framework didn't handle the way we needed.
We were still on the Pages Router, which made shared layouts hacky. Every layout pattern was a bolted-on workaround rather than a first-class framework primitive. The App Router would have solved some of these problems, but it leans heavily into server-first patterns, and our product is intentionally client-driven. Adopting it would have meant rebuilding around a paradigm we don't need.
We wanted a stack that matches how we actually build: explicit, client-first, and fast to iterate on. It also helps that we genuinely enjoy working with it.
For the Product team, we wanted a few niceties that help us avoid thinking about how we needed to implement our front-end and found the following to really convince us.
- Type-safe routing out of the box. Route params and search params are inferred, autocomplete works across the entire route tree, and the routes themselves are generated from the file system.
- First-class layouts. Pathless layout routes replaced all of our previous hacks with something composable and predictable.
- A dev loop fast enough that you stop thinking about it. Instant HMR, near-zero startup time. The feedback cycle between changing code and seeing the result effectively disappears.
- SSR where it actually matters. Marketing pages, the changelog, careers. Pure client-side everywhere else, because we're not going to force server rendering on screens that don't benefit from it. (Ed: This Blog, ironically isn’t on Tanstack yet.)
- An explicit model. Meaning, we found TanStack to lean less on framework magic, more control over how things actually work under the hood.
Several of us tried TanStack Start over the holidays and the reaction was unanimous. We like building with it, and for a product like Railway's dashboard, that matters as much as any benchmark.
Once we made the choice, I got to work. Pre-squash before merge, I must have made 100s of commits.
Migrating a production frontend that serves millions of users across 200+ routes is the kind of thing that usually takes months of parallel running and incremental cutover. We were on a deadline, so I did it in two pull requests.
PR 1 replaced everything Next.js-specific: next/image
, next/head
, next/router
. Each was swapped for either a native browser API or a framework-agnostic alternative. This PR changed nothing about the framework itself. It just removed every dependency on it, so that PR 2 could be a clean swap.
PR 2 swapped the framework. 200+ routes migrated. We systematically extracted everything non-routing-related from page files into individual React components first, then generated all routes from the original page tree.
We then added Nitro as the server layer and replaced next.config.js
with Nitro config, consolidating redirects (500+), security headers, and caching rules into one place. We also replaced Node.js APIs that Next.js had provided polyfills for (Buffer, url.parse
, and others) with browser-native alternatives, which left us with cleaner code as a side effect.
Merged on an early Sunday morning. The team dogfooded immediately with a live war room in Discord, and a stream of fixes landed same day. No downtime.
Sure we gained a faster, more explicit stack, but not without trade-offs.
- Built-in image optimization. We replaced
next/image
with<img>
tags and Fastly image optimization at the edge. - Parts of the ecosystem. We replaced tools like
next-seo
andnext-sitemap
with small in-house equivalents. Straightforward to build, no extra dependencies. - Maturity. TanStack Start is new, and rougher edges can be expected. We're comfortable with that because the direction is right, the maintainers are responsive, and we sponsor both Vite and TanStack because we believe in where they're going.
We run our production frontend the same way our users run theirs: preview deploys per PR, health checks, zero-downtime rollouts. When we swapped the entire build system and framework, we didn't touch infrastructure. We
▸ 展开全文
04-09 00:00 · AI服务风险,客户支持,供应链依赖,企业运维,API生态
I've been waiting over a month for Anthropic to respond to my billing issue
In early March, I noticed approximately $180 in unexpected charges to my Anthropic account. I’m a Claude Max subscriber, and between March 3-5, I received 16 separate “Extra Usage” invoices ranging from $10-$13 each, all in quick succession of one another. However, I wasn’t using Claude. I was away from my laptop entirely and was out sailing with my parents back home in San Diego.
When I checked my usage dashboard, it showed my session at 100% despite no activity. My Claude Code session history showed two tiny sessions from March 5 totaling under 7KB (no sessions on March 3 or March 4.) Nothing that would explain $180 in Extra Usage charges.
This isn’t just me. Other Max plan users have reported the same issue. There are numerous GitHub issues about it (e.g. claude-code#29289 and claude-code#24727), and posts on r/ClaudeCode describing the exact same behavior: usage meters showing incorrect values and Extra Usage charges piling up erroneously.
The support experience
On March 7, I sent a detailed email to Anthropic support laying out the situation with all the evidence above. Within two minutes, I received a response… from “Fin AI Agent, Anthropic’s AI Agent.” The AI agent told me to go through an in-app refund request flow. Sadly, this refund pipeline is only applicable for subscriptions, and not for Extra Usage charges. I also wanted to confirm with a human on exactly what went wrong rather than just getting a refund and calling it a day.
So, naturally, I replied asking to speak to a human. The response:
Thank you for reaching out to Anthropic Support. We’ve received your request for assistance.
While we review your request, you can visit our Help Center and API documentation for self-service troubleshooting. A member of our team will be with you as soon as we can.
That was March 7. I followed up on March 17. No response. I followed up again on March 25. No response. I followed up again today, April 8, over a month later. Still nothing.
The irony
Anthropic is an AI company that builds one of the most capable AI assistants in the world. Their support system is a Fin AI chatbot that can’t actually help you, and there is seemingly no human behind it. I don’t have a problem with AI-assisted support, though I do have a problem with AI-only support that serves as a wall between customers and anyone who can actually resolve their issue.
▸ 展开全文