Denmark will head to the polls March 24 after Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called a snap parliamentary election, a move widely viewed as an attempt to consolidate rising public support tied to her handling of tensions with President Donald Trump over Greenland.

Frederiksen announced the early vote Wednesday, arguing Denmark needs political clarity at a time of mounting geopolitical pressure. According to Reuters, she said the country faces ‘a serious foreign policy situation,’ adding voters should have a say in how Denmark navigates it.

Her center-left Social Democratic government has seen a lift in opinion polls in recent weeks after taking a firm stance that Greenland is not for sale and that Danish sovereignty is non-negotiable. 

The dispute with Washington has reshaped the domestic political conversation, pushing Arctic security and national sovereignty to the forefront of Danish politics.

Frederiksen, who has led Denmark since mid-2019, has spent much of the past year managing the fallout from Trump’s renewed push to acquire Greenland, the vast Arctic island that is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. Tensions escalated sharply last month when Trump threatened to impose new tariffs on Denmark and several other European Union countries.

Trump has argued that the United States needs control of the North Atlantic island for national security reasons, citing increased activity by Russia and China in the Arctic. The region has grown in strategic importance as melting ice opens shipping routes and access to natural resources, intensifying competition among major powers.

The standoff appeared to ease after Trump announced that a framework agreement to strengthen Arctic security had been reached in talks with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos. After that announcement, U.S., Danish and Greenlandic officials began technical discussions on implementing the arrangement, focusing on security coordination rather than any change in sovereignty.

Throughout the crisis, Frederiksen and other senior Danish officials repeatedly emphasized that Greenland’s status is not up for negotiation. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference earlier in February, Frederiksen cautioned that she did not believe the crisis had fully passed and suggested Washington could still harbor ambitions to annex the island.

According to The Guardian, Danish commentators have described the prime minister’s polling boost as a ‘Greenland bounce,’ reflecting growing domestic approval of her firm posture toward Washington.

Frederiksen’s decision to call early elections appears aimed at converting that surge into a renewed mandate. Denmark’s next general election had not been scheduled until later this year, but the prime minister argued that the current security climate justifies seeking fresh voter backing.

Greenland, home to roughly 56,000 people, has long been strategically significant due to its location between North America and Europe. The United States maintains a military presence there at Pituffik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base. Any suggestion of U.S. acquisition has historically been sensitive in both Copenhagen and Nuuk, Greenland’s capital.

Euronews reported that Frederiksen’s government has stressed cooperation with allies while firmly rejecting any negotiations over Greenland’s sovereignty. European leaders have signaled support for Denmark, reinforcing the view that Arctic stability is increasingly central to NATO and EU planning.

Opposition parties have criticized the timing of the snap election, arguing that Frederiksen is seeking a political advantage during a moment of heightened nationalism. Others, however, have largely backed the government’s line on Greenland, suggesting that the sovereignty issue may transcend traditional party divides.

The March 24 vote will determine whether Frederiksen can strengthen her coalition or voters shift the parliamentary balance. It will also serve as a broader test of how Danes believe their country should manage its relationship with Washington as Arctic security becomes a defining issue of global competition.

Afghanistan and Pakistan exchanged significant cross-border fire Thursday in an escalation of hostilities along their shared border, according to multiple reports.

The clashes came after the Taliban said it launched retaliatory strikes on Pakistani military positions, while Islamabad said it was responding to unprovoked fire in the area.

Reuters reported that both forces clashed for more than two hours along their roughly 2,600-kilometer (1,615-mile) border, threatening a ceasefire that had been agreed to in 2025 after fighting.

Thursday’s flare-up came after Pakistani forces carried out airstrikes inside Afghanistan earlier this week, with Taliban officials saying the strikes killed at least 18 people, Reuters reported Feb. 24.

Pakistan said it targeted militant hideouts and rejected claims that civilians were targeted.

The Taliban described an ‘extensive’ military operation against Pakistani army positions in response to the strikes.

‘In response to repeated provocations, extensive preemptive operations have been launched against Pakistani military positions along the Durand Line,’ Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid wrote on X.

 In a separate statement, he said ‘specialized laser units’ were operating at night.

Taliban military spokesman Mawlawi Wahidullah Mohammadi also said in a video shared with Reuters that the ‘retaliatory operation’ began Thursday evening.

Mujahid said ‘numerous’ Pakistani soldiers had been killed and some were also captured. Reuters said it could not independently verify those claims.

In another post on X, Mujahid said, ‘The cowardly Pakistani army has bombed some places in Kabul, Kandahar, and Paktia. Praise be to God, no one was harmed.’  

Pakistan has since rejected the Taliban’s account. 

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting said on X that the Afghanistan Taliban’s ‘unprovoked action along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border’ was given an ‘immediate and effective response.’

The ministry said Taliban forces had ‘miscalculated and opened unprovoked fire on multiple locations’ along the border in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

The post said the fire was being met with an ‘immediate and effective response by Pakistan’s security forces.’

‘Early reports confirm heavy casualties on the Afghan side with multiple posts and equipment destroyed,’ the ministry said. 

‘Pakistan will take all necessary measures to ensure its territorial integrity and the safety and security of its citizens.’

Pakistani security sources also told Reuters that 22 Taliban personnel had been killed, and several quadcopters were shot down.

The fighting follows Pakistan’s accusations that the Taliban is sheltering TTP militants behind a surge in violence and suicide attacks. 

The Afghan Taliban denies the claim. A day before February’s strikes, Pakistani officials said they had ‘irrefutable evidence’ that militants were launching attacks from Afghan soil, Reuters reported.

A Senate Republican warned Thursday that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s primary focus is shedding American blood as U.S.-Iran relations continue to simmer. 

‘The ayatollah not only thinks that I’m going to hell because I don’t agree with his religion — he wants to kill me,’ Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said on the Senate floor Thursday.

‘He wants to kill Americans and the Israelis and anybody who does not believe in his jihad and drink our blood out of a boot,’ Kennedy continued. ‘And he’s acted on that, and that’s not acceptable.’

Kennedy’s message comes as tensions with Iran are escalating. At the core of the issue is Iran’s capability and Khamenei’s desire to build a nuclear weapon.

President Donald Trump gave the country’s leadership roughly 10 to 15 days to reach a nuclear agreement and warned that the inability to strike a deal could lead to U.S. military action in the region.

He renewed that edict during his State of the Union address earlier this week.

‘I will never allow the world’s number one sponsor of terror … to have a nuclear weapon,’ Trump said.

Kennedy cautioned that if the Trump administration were to broker a deal, it would need to have guardrails.

‘If we make a deal with Iran, let’s make sure we have a protocol to enforce it because, in my experience in watching the Ayatollah through the years, I wouldn’t trust this man if he was three days dead,’ he said.

Lawmakers are wrestling with the exact nature of what a strike could look like and whether Congress should weigh in before Trump makes a decision.

Senators Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., expect that their Iran war powers resolution will hit the Senate floor next week, which would curb Trump’s ability to strike the country without Congress’ approval.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the most important aspect of the Iran negotiations was ‘to prevent them from having nuclear capability.’

‘But there are also other threats that they represent in the region, and we have a big presence in that region, as you know. So, I think they’re looking at and working through what the options might be,’ Thune said. 

‘In my view, if you’re going to do something there, you better well make it about getting new leadership and regime change.’

Pakistan’s defense minister declared an ‘open war’ with Afghanistan on Friday after the two sides exchanged heavy fire along their shared border on Thursday, according to multiple reports.

Defense Minister Khawaja Mohammad Asif said in a post on X that Pakistan had hoped the Taliban would bring stability after NATO’s withdrawal, but instead accused the group of turning Afghanistan ‘into a colony of India’ and ‘exporting terrorism.’

‘Our patience has now run out. Now it is open war between us,’ he said.

The clashes came after the Taliban said it launched retaliatory strikes on Pakistani military positions, while Islamabad said it was responding to unprovoked fire in the area.

Reuters reported that both forces clashed for more than two hours along their roughly 2,600-kilometer (1,615-mile) border, threatening a ceasefire that had been agreed to in 2025 after fighting.

Thursday’s flare-up came after Pakistani forces carried out airstrikes inside Afghanistan earlier this week, with Taliban officials saying the strikes killed at least 18 people, Reuters reported Feb. 24.

Pakistan said it targeted militant hideouts and rejected claims that civilians were targeted.

The Taliban described an ‘extensive’ military operation against Pakistani army positions in response to the strikes.

‘In response to repeated provocations, extensive preemptive operations have been launched against Pakistani military positions along the Durand Line,’ Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid wrote on X.

 In a separate statement, he said ‘specialized laser units’ were operating at night.

Taliban military spokesman Mawlawi Wahidullah Mohammadi also said in a video shared with Reuters that the ‘retaliatory operation’ began Thursday evening.

Mujahid said ‘numerous’ Pakistani soldiers had been killed and some were also captured. Reuters said it could not independently verify those claims.

In another post on X, Mujahid said, ‘The cowardly Pakistani army has bombed some places in Kabul, Kandahar, and Paktia. Praise be to God, no one was harmed.’  

Pakistan has since rejected the Taliban’s account. 

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting said on X that the Afghanistan Taliban’s ‘unprovoked action along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border’ was given an ‘immediate and effective response.’

The ministry said Taliban forces had ‘miscalculated and opened unprovoked fire on multiple locations’ along the border in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

The post said the fire was being met with an ‘immediate and effective response by Pakistan’s security forces.’

‘Early reports confirm heavy casualties on the Afghan side with multiple posts and equipment destroyed,’ the ministry said. 

‘Pakistan will take all necessary measures to ensure its territorial integrity and the safety and security of its citizens.’

Pakistani security sources also told Reuters that 22 Taliban personnel had been killed, and several quadcopters were shot down.

The fighting follows Pakistan’s accusations that the Taliban is sheltering TTP militants behind a surge in violence and suicide attacks. 

The Afghan Taliban denies the claim. A day before February’s strikes, Pakistani officials said they had ‘irrefutable evidence’ that militants were launching attacks from Afghan soil, Reuters reported.

As President Donald Trump pressures Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions amid rising tensions, Vice President JD Vance told The Washington Post there is ‘no chance’ the U.S. will enter a yearslong war in the Middle East.

‘The idea that we’re going to be in a Middle Eastern war for years with no end in sight — there is no chance that will happen,’ Vance said on Thursday, according to the outlet.

‘I think we all prefer the diplomatic option,’ he said, according to the Post. ‘But it really depends on what the Iranians do and what they say.’

‘I do think we have to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. I also think that we have to avoid overlearning the lessons of the past. Just because one president screwed up a military conflict doesn’t mean we can never engage in military conflict again. We’ve got to be careful about it, but I think the president is being careful,’ Vance told the outlet.

Fox News Digital reached out to Vance’s office and the White House on Friday morning.

Trump said during his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, ‘My preference is to solve this problem through diplomacy. But one thing is certain: I will never allow the world’s number-one sponsor of terror — which they are by far — to have a nuclear weapon.’

In a Truth Social post regarding Iran on Monday, the president said that he ‘would rather have a Deal than not but, if we don’t make a Deal, it will be a very bad day for that Country and, very sadly, its people, because they are great and wonderful, and something like this should never have happened to them.’

Former President Bill Clinton will testify to the House Oversight Committee in a high-stakes deposition for the committee’s probe into Jeffrey Epstein on Friday.

The closed-door meeting is expected to take place at 11 a.m. at the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center in Westchester County, N.Y.

Chappaqua has been the Clintons’ primary residence since they left the White House at the end of the former president’s tenure.

Republicans have been eager to question Bill Clinton about his ties to Epstein for months as the committee has gone back and forth with his lawyers about terms of the interview.

Both Democrats and Republicans are expected to grill Clinton, as well as committee staff on both sides.

His sitdown comes a day after his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, appeared before the panel for her own lengthy deposition in the Epstein probe.

However, House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., told reporters on Thursday that he anticipated Bill Clinton’s deposition would be ‘even longer’ than his wife’s.

He also stressed Thursday that neither of the Clintons are being accused of wrongdoing tied to Epstein.

‘No one’s accusing, at this moment, the Clintons of any wrongdoing. They’re going to have due process,’ Comer said. ‘But we have a lot of questions, and the purpose of the whole investigation is to try to understand many things about Epstein.’

Both depositions will be released on video sometime later.

Hillary Clinton told lawmakers in her opening statement that she could not recall any contact with Epstein, nor did she have any more information for the committee past what she sent in a Jan. 13 statement.

She also criticized the probe’s attention on her as a ‘fishing expedition’ and accused Republicans of trying to use her to pull attention from Trump.

‘A committee endeavoring to stop human trafficking would seek to understand what specific steps are needed to fix a system that allowed Epstein to get away with his crimes in 2008,’ she told the panel, according to her opening remarks.

‘But that’s not happening. Instead, you have compelled me to testify, fully aware that I have no knowledge that would assist your investigation, in order to distract attention from President Trump’s actions and to cover them up despite legitimate calls for answers.’

Unlike his wife, however, Bill Clinton had a well-documented relationship with Epstein before his federal probes related to prostitution of minors and sex trafficking.

Bill Clinton’s name and photo appear numerous times in documents released by the federal government on Epstein, and flight records show he did ride Epstein’s plane.

But neither he nor Hillary Clinton have been implicated in Epstein’s crimes.

The committee has also interviewed two former Trump administration officials, ex-Attorney General Bill Barr and ex-Labor Secretary Alex Acosta.

Their testimonies come weeks after the House nearly voted on holding both Clintons in contempt of Congress for defying Comer’s subpoena. House leaders dropped the effort after the Clintons said they would comply.

As the Trump administration appoints Vice President JD Vance to lead a nationwide ‘War on Fraud,’ a coalition of conservative state financial officers says it has already uncovered and stopped billions in taxpayer waste and is pledging to partner with the White House to root out corruption nationwide.

In a Thursday letter to the White House, the State Financial Officers Foundation (SFOF) praised President Donald Trump’s focus on what he called fraud scandals that have ‘resulted in tens of billions of dollars being stolen from American taxpayers,’ writing that such corruption ‘shreds the fabric of a nation’ 

SFOF CEO OJ Oleka told Vance that the group’s 40 conservative state treasurers, auditors and comptrollers across 28 states stand ready to support the administration’s anti-fraud mission, noting they collectively oversee more than $3 trillion in state funds.

The letter accompanied SFOF’s inaugural 2025 Oversight Report, which claims that affiliated state financial officers safeguarded more than $28 billion of waste, fraud, and abuse in 2025 alone.

The report highlights some of the most egregious examples within that $28 billion including in Florida, where Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia just under $2 billion in excessive spending and in Kentucky, where Auditor Allison Ball found more than $836 million in improper Medicaid payments.

Medicaid fraud has been of particular interest to the Trump administration given the massive fraud scandal that has unfolded in Minnesota and Vance said on Wednesday the administration has ‘decided to temporarily halt certain amounts of Medicaid funding that are going to the state of Minnesota in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligations seriously to be good stewards of the American people’s tax money.’

The report also highlights North Carolina, where it says State Auditor Dave Boliek discovered more than $1 billion in lapsed salaries from long term vacancies in the state. Additionally, Utah auditor Tina Cannon identified more than $518 million in fraud, waste and abuse across agencies and nonprofits receiving state and federal funds.

In his letter, Oleka told Vance that SFOF’s members are ‘allies already on the battlefield’ and stand ready to assist the administration in protecting taxpayer dollars.

‘The American people deserve nothing less,’ he wrote.

SFOF argues that state-level financial watchdogs, often elected independently of governors and legislatures, are uniquely positioned to expose mismanagement and enforce fiscal discipline.

With billions already identified at the state level, the group says a coordinated federal-state approach could dramatically expand the scope of fraud detection nationwide, potentially reshaping how taxpayer dollars are safeguarded across the country.

‘By working together, we can protect our nation’s treasure to the fullest extent against every foe and every plot to endanger it,’ Oleka wrote.

The Department of Justice on Thursday sued five additional states, requesting that their election data be shared with the Trump administration amid its push for access to voter rolls from states across the country.

Four states President Donald Trump carried in the last three presidential elections — Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky and West Virginia — were slapped with the latest legal action, along with New Jersey.

The DOJ has now sued more than two dozen states in efforts to access election records, with most of the states being controlled by Democrats.

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon suggested that state election officials were ‘choosing to fight us in court rather than show their work’ with voter roll access.

‘We will not be deterred, regardless of party affiliation, from carrying out critical election integrity legal duties,’ she said in a statement on Thursday.

‘The Justice Department will continue to fulfill its oversight role dutifully, neutrally, and transparently wherever Americans vote in federal elections,’ Dhillon said.

The Trump administration has intensified its efforts to take over elections in recent months even though the U.S. Constitution gives states, not federal officials, the authority to run elections. Most states have their secretary of state oversee elections.

Access to election information varies by state, but election officials generally release redacted versions of their voter rolls to the public and government agencies, according to Politico. However, the DOJ has demanded that states give the federal government unredacted files, including voters’ private data such as their driver’s license numbers and the last four digits of their Social Security numbers.

‘Accurate, well-maintained voter rolls are a requisite for the election integrity that the American people deserve,’ Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. ‘This latest series of litigation underscores that this Department of Justice is fulfilling its duty to ensure transparency, voter roll maintenance, and secure elections across the country.’

The DOJ has argued the states are in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which affirms that the attorney general can request voter records from election officials, but state officials contend that the department is seeking an escalation of the administration’s wider attempts to become involved in state election proceedings.

‘Neither state nor federal law entitles the Department of Justice to collect private information on law-abiding American citizens. Utahns can be assured that my office will always follow the Constitution and the law, protect voters’ rights, and administer free and fair elections,’ Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson said in a statement to Politico.

Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams also criticized the lawsuit, saying the state’s elections were ‘a national success story.’

‘Kentucky law protects voters’ personal information, and I will not voluntarily commit a data breach by providing Kentuckians’ personal data to the federal bureaucracy unless a court order tells me to,’ he said in a statement to the outlet.

West Virginia Secretary of State Kris Warner’s office said it had not yet been served with a lawsuit.

‘Regardless, I think Secretary Warner’s comments to the DOJ were pretty clear. Bring it on! The federal government is not going to get any personal information on West Virginia voters as long as Kris Warner is Secretary of State,’ spokesperson Mike Queen said in a statement to Politico.

Earlier this month, the FBI executed a search warrant at an election office in Fulton County, Georgia, seizing ballots and other voting records from 2020, according to local officials. The Peach State went to former President Joe Biden in 2020, but Trump carried the state in 2024.

In efforts to ensure only American citizens are voting, Trump has also urged Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, which would require voters in federal elections to prove citizenship by providing a photo ID and other documentation, such as a passport or birth certificate.

President Donald Trump warned that Iran is working to build missiles that could ‘soon reach the United States of America,’ elevating concerns about a weapons program that already places U.S. forces across the Middle East within range.

Iran does not currently possess a missile capable of striking the U.S. homeland, officials say. But its existing ballistic missile arsenal can target major American military installations in the Gulf, and U.S. officials say the issue has emerged as a key sticking point in ongoing nuclear negotiations.

Here’s what Iran can hit now — and how close it is to reaching the U.S.

What Iran can hit right now

Iran is widely assessed by Western defense analysts to operate the largest ballistic missile force in the Middle East. Its arsenal consists primarily of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles with ranges of up to roughly 2,000 kilometers — about 1,200 miles.

That range places a broad network of U.S. military infrastructure across the Gulf within reach.

Among the installations inside that envelope:

• Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, forward headquarters for U.S. Central Command.
• Naval Support Activity Bahrain, home to the U.S. 5th Fleet.
• Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, a major Army logistics and command hub.
• Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, used by U.S. Air Force units.
• Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia.
• Al Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates.
• Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan, which hosts U.S. aircraft.

U.S. forces have drawn down from some regional positions in recent months, including the transfer of Al Asad Air Base in Iraq back to Iraqi control earlier in 2026. But major Gulf installations remain within the range envelope of Iran’s current missile inventory.

Multiple U.S. officials told Fox News that staffing at the Navy’s 5th Fleet headquarters in Bahrain has been reduced to ‘mission critical’ levels amid heightened tensions. A separate U.S. official disputed that characterization, saying no ordered departure of personnel or dependents has been issued.

At the same time, the U.S. has surged significant naval and air assets into and around the region in recent days. 

The USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group is operating in the Arabian Sea alongside multiple destroyers, while additional destroyers are positioned in the eastern Mediterranean, Red Sea and Persian Gulf. 

The USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group is also headed toward the region. U.S. Air Force fighter aircraft — including F-15s, F-16s, F-35s and A-10s — are based across Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, supported by aerial refueling tankers, early warning aircraft and surveillance platforms, according to a recent Fox News military briefing.

Iran has demonstrated its willingness to use ballistic missiles against U.S. targets before.

In January 2020, following the U.S. strike that killed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles at U.S. positions in Iraq. Dozens of American service members were later diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries.

That episode underscored the vulnerability of forward-deployed forces within reach of Iran’s missile arsenal.

 Can Iran reach Europe?

Most publicly known Iranian missile systems are assessed to have maximum ranges of around 2,000 kilometers. 

Depending on launch location, that could place parts of southeastern Europe — including Greece, Bulgaria and Romania — within potential reach. The U.S. has some 80,000 troops stationed across Europe, including in all three of these countries.

Reaching deeper into Europe would require longer-range systems than Iran has publicly demonstrated as operational.

Can Iran hit the US?

Iran does not currently field an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of striking the U.S. homeland.

To reach the U.S. East Coast, a missile would need a range of roughly 10,000 kilometers — far beyond Iran’s known operational capability.

However, U.S. intelligence agencies have warned that Iran’s space launch vehicle program could provide the technological foundation for a future long-range missile.

In a recent threat overview, the Defense Intelligence Agency stated that Iran ‘has space launch vehicles it could use to develop a militarily-viable ICBM by 2035 should Tehran decide to pursue the capability.’

That assessment places any potential Iranian intercontinental missile capability roughly a decade away — and contingent on a political decision by Tehran.

U.S. officials and defense analysts have pointed in particular to Iran’s recent space launches, including rockets such as the Zuljanah, which use solid-fuel propulsion. Solid-fuel motors can be stored and launched more quickly than liquid-fueled rockets — a feature that is also important for military ballistic missiles.

Space launch vehicles and long-range ballistic missiles rely on similar multi-stage rocket technology. Analysts say advances in Iran’s space program could shorten the pathway to an intercontinental-range missile if Tehran chose to adapt that technology for military use.

For now, however, Iran has not deployed an operational ICBM, and the U.S. homeland remains outside the reach of its current ballistic missile arsenal.

US missile defenses — capable but finite

The U.S. relies on layered missile defense systems — including Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Patriot and ship-based interceptors — to protect forces and allies from ballistic missile threats across the Middle East.

These systems are technically capable, but interceptor inventories are finite.

During the June 2025 Iran-Israel missile exchange, U.S. forces reportedly fired more than 150 THAAD interceptors — roughly a quarter of the total the Pentagon had funded to date, according to defense analysts.

The economics also highlight the imbalance: open-source estimates suggest Iranian short-range ballistic missiles can cost in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece, while advanced U.S. interceptors such as THAAD run roughly $12 million or more per missile.

Precise inventory levels are classified. But experts who track Pentagon procurement data warn that replenishing advanced interceptors can take years, meaning a prolonged, high-intensity missile exchange could strain stockpiles even if U.S. defenses remain effective.

Missile program complicates negotiations

The ballistic missile issue has also emerged as a key fault line in ongoing diplomatic efforts between Washington and Tehran.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Iran’s refusal to negotiate limits on its ballistic missile program is ‘a big problem,’ signaling that the administration views the arsenal as central to long-term regional security.

While current negotiations are focused primarily on Iran’s nuclear program and uranium enrichment activities, U.S. officials have argued that delivery systems — including ballistic missiles — cannot be separated from concerns about a potential nuclear weapon.

Iranian officials, however, have insisted their missile program is defensive in nature and not subject to negotiation as part of nuclear-focused talks.

As diplomacy continues, the strategic reality remains clear: Iran cannot currently strike the U.S. homeland with a ballistic missile. But U.S. forces across the Middle East remain within range of Tehran’s existing arsenal — and future capabilities remain a subject of intelligence concern.

Rep. Eric Swalwell’s, D-Calif., gubernatorial campaign continues to be bankrolled by Keliang ‘Clay’ Zhu despite concerns over his ties to China and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). 

Zhu donated another $25,000 to Swalwell’s campaign earlier this month after he had already donated $5,000 to Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign in November and previously donated over $10,000 to his House campaigns. 

Zhu is a partner at DeHeng Law Offices PC, a top Beijing law firm that has deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party, and has also donated thousands to Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign. The law firm’s website shows their lone ‘Silicon Valley Office,’ located in Pleasanton, Calif., appears to only have a single lawyer who works there – Zhu, who has a history of fighting for Chinese interests in the U.S.  

‘Once again, Congressman Swalwell got caught with his hand in the CCP cookie jar,’ lamented Michael Lucci, a top China expert and the founder and CEO of State Armor Action. ‘It’s simply outrageous that Congressman Swallwell would take even more money from Keliang Zhu after Zhu’s connections to the CCP were made public.’

A Fox News Digital review in January revealed that the law firm Zhu is a partner in was founded as the China Law Office, which was a subsidiary firm established by the CCP’s Ministry of Justice in the early 1990s before being renamed the DeHeng Law Offices in 1995. 

While the firm, which has over two dozen offices in China, portrays itself as independent, the firm and its lawyers continue to have longstanding cooperation with the Chinese government’s departments and major state-owned enterprises. Many of the firm’s China-based attorneys also have a history of working in Chinese politics.

Zhu, who is originally from China, touts several examples of how he has helped Chinese state-owned enterprises and other Chinese companies get a foothold in the United States, according to his bio on the law firm’s website. 

For example, he touts representing an ‘investment fund of a major state-owned enterprise in acquiring majority shares in one data analytics software company in the Silicon Valley,’ which he valued at $100 million. Another bio for Zhu touts how he ‘has assisted Chinese companies and funds to complete more than $9 billion investments in the fields of chips, unmanned vehicles, new energy, artificial intelligence, industrial automation, and biopharmaceuticals in the United States.’

‘On behalf of Chinese enterprises, he has negotiated with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of Treasury and other organizations for many times and achieved compliance plans, which greatly reduced the compliance risks for Chinese clients in the United States,’ the bio continued.

The bios also indicate Zhu helped advise ‘a governmental investment fund from Shenzhen for its compliance with CFIUS regulations in the U.S.’ and represented ‘WeChat users in a historic lawsuit that sued President Trump and successfully stopped his WeChat ban in 2020.’ 

At the time, Trump’s first administration sounded the alarm over WeChat and said the ‘data collection threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans’ personal and proprietary information’ and was concerned that the CCP would use data to stalk dissenters or control messaging inside the United States, such as launching disinformation campaigns. Similar efforts to restrict WeChat have occurred in countries like Australia and India, according to the White House.

Meanwhile, after a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit intended to stop a Texas law banning Chinese nationals from owning or leasing land in the state, Zhu described the legislation as ‘unfair, unconstitutional and un-American,’ according to AsAmNews, a daily news site focused on Asian-American and Pacific-Islander communities. Zhu similarly expressed disfavor with a Florida law meant to prevent individuals from countries that are foreign adversaries to the United States, such as China, from buying up land.

DeHeng Law Office’s other China-based attorneys have a history of working in Chinese politics as well. This has largely been through the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), which is a ‘key mechanism for multi-party cooperation and political consultation’ under the leadership of the CCP, according to the CPPCC website, and is a crucial tool of the United Front strategy to influence U.S. policy.

For example, Zhixu Wu, who is a ‘Director and Senior Partner’ of the Kunming, China-based office of DeHeng Law Offices, is a member of the ‘Standing Committee of the 13th Kunming Committee of the CPPCC’ and a member ‘of the 12th Yunnan Committee of the CPPCC.’ His bio also says he was previously awarded in 2017 with ‘the title of ‘Excellent League Member’ for the second assistance event of the National Lawyers Service Group,’ which was approved by the ‘Eight Bureau of United Front Work Department of CPC Central Committee, Guidance Department of Lawyer’s Notarization Work of the Ministry of Justice.’

Swalwell’s ties to China have come under scrutiny before, particularly after Chinese national, Christine Fang, also known as ‘Fang Fang,’ gained special access to him and his campaign. She was deemed by U.S. officials to be part of a counterintelligence effort linked to China meant to influence and get close to U.S. political figures.

Swalwell has repeatedly claimed he cut off ties as soon as U.S. intelligence officials warned him of the threat and a congressional ethics investigation into the matter eventually found no wrongdoing on Swalwell’s behalf. However, he was ultimately removed by Republicans from his post on the House Intelligence Committee, with then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy citing Swalwell’s past run-in with a suspected Chinese spy.

Fox News Digital uncovered a previously unreported 2013 Facebook post by China’s San Francisco consulate last month showing Swalwell touting ‘great potential’ for U.S.-China cooperation during a meeting with a senior CCP diplomat early in his career, which came during the same time period when Swalwell was allegedly targeted by Chinese espionage efforts.

The Facebook post was also ‘liked’ by Fang Fang, Fox News Digital’s review found.

‘First, Swalwell had a fiery romance with Fang Fang, a CCP honeypot. Then he was caught taking campaign money from China’s favorite big law firm. Congressman Swalwell is either totally oblivious to the dangers of flirting with CCP operatives, or he doesn’t care and would take a check from Xi Jinping himself,’ Lucci told Fox News Digital. ‘Congress should pass a law to prohibit campaign cash from Communist China before Swalwell’s sweet tooth has him hunting for another CCP honey pot or cookie jar.’

The Swalwell campaign did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.