Prince William seems to have the whole plan worked out for not only in the strategy in how he would rule but also some key details about his coronation ceremony.

The Prince of Wales, who dropped hints about what to expect from his upcoming reign, in secretly checking things off of his list with meaningful steps.

It is understood that King Charles has been getting William involved in more decision-making especially when it comes to major changes in the monarchy. William had been a quiet but a significant presence when Charles made the landmark decision for Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

Moreover, King Charles is helping William with the transition in it seems evident in the latest development. The heir to the throne will be attending the enthronement ceremony of the Archbishop of Canterbury next week.

Sources close to William have suggested that the reason why this is a significant move is because Dame Sarah Mullally is likely to officiate at his coronation and help to prepare him for his role as supreme governor, according to The Sunday Times.

William’s aide revealed that the royal had a “warm and substantive” conversation and reflected on his “genuine interest” not only in the Church’s work, but in its role as “a guardian of a distinctive and ancient English spiritual tradition that remains relevant in contemporary life”.

A royal source shared previously that William plans to make his coronation fee “more relevant” and that the ceremony has be “modern but also unifying”.

Meanwhile, a source close to the new archbishop described that Sarah is “really delighted” that Prince William and Princess Kate will be attending her installation and it would be a “turning of the page” between Kensington Palace and Lambeth Palace.

President Donald Trump ends the third week of the Iran war confronting a crisis that seems to be slipping out of his hands: Global energy prices are surging, the United States stands isolated from allies and more troops are preparing to deploy despite his promise the war would be only a “short excursion.”

A defensive Trump called other Nato countries “cowards” for refusing to help secure the Strait of Hormuz and insisted the campaign was ‌unfolding according to plan. But his declaration on Friday that the battle “was Militarily WON” clashed with the reality of a defiant Iran that is choking off Gulf oil and gas supplies while launching missile strikes across the region.

Trump, who took office promising to keep the US out of “stupid” military interventions, now appears to control neither the outcome nor the messaging of a conflict he helped to initiate. The lack of a clear exit strategy carries risks both for his presidential legacy and his party’s political prospects as Republicans scramble to defend narrow majorities in Congress in the November midterm elections.

“Trump has built himself a box called the Iran war, and he can’t figure out how to get out of it,” said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations. “That’s his biggest source of frustration.”

A White House official challenged that characterisation, with many of Iran’s top leaders eliminated in targeted killings, most of its navy sunk and its ballistic missile arsenal largely destroyed.

“This has been an undisputed military ⁠success,” the official said.

Limits of Trump’s powers

The limits of Trump’s power — diplomatically, militarily and politically — were thrown into sharp relief over the past week.

He was caught off-guard by the resistance of fellow Nato members and other foreign partners to deploying their navies to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, according to another White House official who, like other officials Reuters spoke to for this story, was granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

With the president not wanting to appear isolated, some White House aides have advised Trump to quickly find an “off-ramp” and set limits on the military operation’s scope, said one person close to the discussions. But it was unclear whether that argument was enough to sway Trump.

In the view of some analysts, allies’ unwillingness reflects not only their reluctance over entanglement in a war they were not consulted on, but a backlash against his belittling of traditional US alliances since his return to office 14 months ago.

Differences with Israel also have begun surfacing, with Trump insisting that he knew nothing in advance about the Israeli attack on Iran’s South Pars gas field, while Israeli officials said the strike had indeed been coordinated with the US.

Trump now finds himself at a crossroads in Operation Epic Fury with no clear sign of which path he might take, analysts say.

He could go all-in and intensify the US offensive, possibly even seizing Iran’s oil hub on Kharg Island or deploying troops along Iran’s coast to hunt for missile launchers. But that would risk a long-term military commitment that the American public would mostly oppose.

Or, with both sides rejecting negotiations for now, Trump could declare victory and ‌try to walk ⁠away, which could alienate Gulf allies who would be left with a wounded, hostile Iran – one that could still pursue a crude nuclear weapon and still exert control over shipping in the Gulf. Iran has denied it is seeking a nuclear weapon.

Reuters reported on Friday that the US military is deploying thousands of additional Marines and sailors to the Middle East, although no decision had been made to send troops into Iran itself.

The war has also shown Trump’s once-iron grip over his MAGA movement is weakening, with prominent influencers speaking out against the conflict. While his base has mostly stood with him so far, analysts say that Trump’s control could weaken in the coming weeks if gas prices keep rising and US troops are deployed.

“As the economics play themselves out,” Republican strategist Dave Wilson said, “people will start to say: ‘Why am I paying high gas prices again? … Why is the Strait ⁠of Hormuz now determining whether or not I can take a vacation next month?'”

As the economics play themselves out,” Republican strategist Dave Wilson said, “people will start to say: ‘Why am I paying high gas prices again? … Why is the Strait ⁠of Hormuz now determining whether or not I can take a vacation next month?'”

Miscalculations

Since the war’s start on February 28, there has been a growing realisation within the administration that the conflict and its consequences should have been better mapped out in advance, according to two sources familiar with White House thinking, although the first White House official countered that the campaign was extensively planned and well-equipped for any potential action.

Analysts say Trump’s biggest misjudgment was over how Iran would respond to a conflict that it considers existential.

Tehran has retaliated with its remaining missiles and a fleet of armed drones to ⁠offset its foes’ military superiority, striking neighboring Gulf states and mostly shutting down the Strait of Hormuz, the conduit for one-fifth of the world’s oil.

Whether or not Trump and his aides foresaw the dangers, they have been unable to counter them effectively.

“They failed to think through the contingencies around ways in which a conflict with Iran could go sideways, where it might not go according to the plan as they laid out,” said former US ambassador John Bass, who served in Afghanistan and Turkey.

As the conflict has dragged on, there have ⁠been increasing signs of Trump’s frustration with his inability to control the narrative. In recent days, he has torn into the news media, advancing unfounded allegations of “treason” for reporting that he sees as undermining the war effort.

“He’s finding it difficult to drive the news cycle, as he’s accustomed to, because he still can’t explain why he’s taken this country to war and what comes next,” said Brett Bruen, a former foreign policy adviser in the Obama administration who now heads the Situation Room strategic consultancy in Washington. “He seems to have lost his mojo on messaging.”

• Multiple patients, two female nurses, one male doctor among dead.
• 89 people, including eight health staff, wounded.
• Attack damages hospital’s paediatric, maternity, and emergency departments.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) said on Saturday ‌that a strike on a hospital in East Darfur, Sudan, killed ⁠at least 64 people, including children, medical staff and patients, Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a ‌post ⁠on X.

WHO said the Friday attack on Al Deain ⁠Teaching Hospital has rendered the facility non-functional, ⁠cutting off essential medical services ⁠in the city.

In a social media post, Ghebreyesus said that multiple patients, two female nurses and one male doctor were also among those killed in the attack on Al Deain Teaching Hospital in Al Deain, the capital of East Darfur state, on Friday night.

Another 89 people, including eight health staff, were wounded, he added.

The attack damaged the hospital’s paediatric, maternity, and emergency departments, rendering the facility non-functional and cutting off ‌essential medical services in the ‌city.

“As a result of this tragedy, the total number of fatalities linked to attacks on health facilities during Sudan’s war has now surpassed 2,000,” said Tedros, adding that over the nearly three-year conflict between Sudan’s army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), the WHO had confirmed the killing of 2,036 people in 213 attacks on healthcare.

There was no immediate information about who was behind the attack.

The war between the army and the RSF erupted in mid-April 2023, unleashing a wave of violence that has led to one of the world’s fastest-growing man-made humanitarian crises, with tens of thousands of people killed and more than 12 million forced from their homes.

Both sides have been accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity, while the RSF has been implicated in atrocities in Darfur that United Nations experts say bear the hallmarks of genocide.

“Enough blood has been spilled. Enough suffering has been inflicted,” Tedros said. “The time has come to de-escalate the conflict in Sudan and ensure the protection of civilians, health workers, and humanitarians.”