Trump administration officials say the ceasefire between Israel and Iran after U.S. bombers hit the Islamic republic’s nuclear facilities has created momentum for peace in the Middle East, including a potential end to the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt says “a new era” is afoot that could attract more Gulf and Arab states to sign onto the Abraham Accords normalizing relations with Israel. Mr. Trump and special envoy Steve Witkoff are pushing behind the scenes for a broader regional agreement.

Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom reports that Mr. Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Mr. Netanyahu and Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer agreed during a phone call on an outline of a plan to end hostilities between Israel and Hamas “within two weeks” and to expand the Abraham Accords to include Syria, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. Mr. Trump has not commented publicly on the call and there is uncertainty over regional appetites for a renewed Abraham Accords push.

The anticipated inking on Friday of a historic peace agreement to end the nearly 30-year Second Congo War, which has resulted in the deaths of more than 5 million people, could be one of the Trump administration’s more momentous diplomatic achievements.

A June 18 State Department memo explained the contours of the deal, brokered by the U.S. and Qatar, that also has serious geopolitical implications. China dominates Congo’s rare earth minerals mining sector. Congo signed the Sicomines Agreement with Beijing in 2008, allowing Chinese companies to extract the nation’s natural resources in exchange for infrastructure investment.

China’s large share of the market has worried Congolese, who have made moves toward diversifying. The U.S. and Europe nations are backing a major infrastructure project called the Lobito Corridor that aims to revitalize a cargo railway connecting southern regions of Congo and Zambia to the Angolan port of Lobito on the Atlantic. Chinese and U.S. interests may align on desires for stability, even if it means increased great power competition over development policy and precious metals extraction.

For many Ukrainians, the deadliest war on European soil since World War II feels like it’s becoming a footnote to the global news cycle, fueling fears that Western attention is increasingly focused elsewhere as Russia ramps up its attacks on the country.

Threat Status Special Correspondent Guillaume Ptak writes in a dispatch from Kyiv that Ukraine’s expectations were low heading into this week’s NATO summit. While the final communique reaffirmed NATO’s commitment to Article 5 and identified Russia as a long-term threat, any mention of Ukraine’s membership path was conspicuously absent, and so was a direct condemnation of the Russian invasion.

European Union leaders did call for greater efforts to help meet Ukraine’s pressing military needs, saying it was important to deliver more “air defense and anti-drone systems, and large-caliber ammunition, to help Ukraine, as it exercises its inherent right to self-defense, to protect its citizens and territory against Russia’s intensified daily attacks.”

A “central tenet” of Iran’s national security strategy has always been to avoid drawing the U.S. into a war, which would “risk the end of the Islamic republic’s unpopular, dictatorial regime,” writes Daniel N. Hoffman, a retired CIA officer and opinion contributor to Threat Status.

“Rather than take on the U.S. directly, Iran has been more than willing to fight to the last Palestinian, Yemeni, Lebanese or Iraqi proxy, resulting in thousands of U.S. casualties, both civilians and soldiers,” writes Mr. Hoffman. “That’s why it’s so important, especially at this time, for the U.S. intelligence community to track Iran’s long-standing relationship with al Qaeda.”

He adds that “while war rages in the Middle East and the U.S. intelligence community focuses on other high priorities, such as China, Russia and North Korea, terrorism remains the national security threat with the shortest fuse.”

Mile Yu, also a Threat Status opinion contributor, has a simple message to those who believe America must avoid regime change to preserve peace: “The war has already begun, and it is being waged on us.

“The only question is whether we will fight back intelligently, strategically and morally,” writes Mr. Yu, who heads the China Center at the Hudson Institute. “Regime change is not a relic of Cold War dogma. It is a necessity in the face of 21st-century threats. It is a tool of deterrence, a strategy of liberation and a declaration that freedom will not be extinguished by fear or fatigue.

“If we do not endeavor to change the regimes that seek to destroy us, then we will be changed silently, slowly and irreversibly. The time for hesitation is over,” he writes. “The time for strategic courage has arrived.”

• June 27 — Strategic Landpower Dialogue: A Conversation with Gen. Ronald Clark, Center for Strategic & International Studies

• June 30 — What Do Strikes on Iran Mean for China, Russia and North Korea? Center for Strategic & International Studies

• June 30 — Bolstering the Transatlantic Partnership at a Global Inflection Point, Atlantic Council

• July 11 — The Han Kuang Exercise and the Taiwanese Military’s Road to Readiness, Hudson Institute

• July 13-17 — GenAI Summit, GenAI Week

• July 15-18 — Aspen Security Forum, Aspen Institute