Classified data leaked to the press regarding the depletion of US military ammunition stockpiles has triggered a comprehensive inspection within the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

According to a report by The New York Times citing officials familiar with the matter, investigators questioned approximately 50 personnel serving at the headquarters of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff by subjecting them to lie detector examinations.

The inquiries under the investigation were not limited to commissioned officers; civilian personnel at the headquarters were also subjected to the test.

Staff were asked whether they had leaked classified information to journalists and whether they had provided the press with details concerning dwindling ammunition stockpiles.

Sources speaking to the newspaper stated that this measure was aimed not only at identifying the source of the leak, but also served as an act of intimidation designed to deter other employees who might consider passing similar information to the media in the future.

The New York Times emphasised that such mass polygraph testing within the senior echelons of the US military has not been witnessed in modern military history and that the scale reached by the investigation is unprecedented.

Initial reports indicating that the American military was experiencing an ammunition deficit began surfacing in the media in August. A report by CNN television, citing sources familiar with internal Pentagon assessments, stated that throughout the five-month war conducted with Iran, the US had consumed nearly 80% of its THAAD air defence system interceptor missiles and approximately half of its Patriot missiles.

In another report based on its own sources, the Reuters news agency reported that the US military had expended “almost all” of its stockpiles of long-range, precision-guided ATACMS missiles and next-generation Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM).

According to information reported by The Washington Post, US President Donald Trump demanded an explanation regarding the ammunition deficit from Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth.

Trump voiced the view that the secretary had misled him regarding the existing quantity of ammunition. NBC television noted that Trump experienced disappointment because the ammunition shortage emerged as an obstacle to plans for expanding the military operation in Iran.

Adopting a different posture in public despite these leaks, Trump repeatedly reiterated that the US possesses “far more ammunition than any other country in the world.”

The US president also threatened that “the individuals who leaked these treasonous disclosures to the press” would face prison sentences.

Argentine President Javier Milei has said he will tighten sanctions on companies involved in oil projects around the Falkland/Malvinas Islands.

Milei also said he would increase defence resources in the south of the country and submit a bill to Congress aimed at strengthening Argentina’s response to what he described as violations of sovereignty.

In a televised address, Milei said he would sign a decree to accelerate sanctions under Argentine law against companies participating in oil and gas extraction activities in the territory, which Argentina considers its own but which remains under British control.

Speaking in an address to the nation early on Friday morning, Milei said the United Kingdom was facing a migration and economic crisis, adding that this meant Argentina would prevail in its claim over the Falkland Islands:

“If we look at the structural crisis in the United Kingdom, it is clear that the country is facing multiple crises on many fronts, including migration, demographics, and a difficult economic situation. It is clear that Argentina’s future is extremely promising and that Argentina will prevail.”

Milei said Argentina would intensify efforts to sanction not only the companies involved, but also their shareholders, executives, and suppliers.

“We will continue to prevent companies that are directly or indirectly involved in projects (on the islands) without Argentina’s permission from operating on Argentine territory,” the Argentine leader said.

He also stated that the government would issue an emergency decree to expand defence resources, under which a naval base would be built in the nearby province of Tierra del Fuego and telecommunications capabilities would be strengthened.

Milei added that he would submit an urgent “national defence of sovereignty” bill to Congress in order to stiffen penalties for unauthorised activities around the islands, extend sanctions to suppliers, and broaden the legal framework to cover other activities affecting Argentina’s natural resources.

Milei noted that Argentina had determined that the Sea Lion offshore project, operated by Navitas Petroleum and Rockhopper Exploration, could begin oil exploration work in the coming months, presenting an imminent threat to Argentine interests.

The remarks mark a harder line from Milei, who had previously called for the Falkland Islands dispute to be resolved through diplomacy even while seeking warmer ties with Britain.

A British overseas territory located roughly 500 km east of the Argentine mainland, the Falkland Islands have long been claimed by Argentina.

Britain has controlled the islands since 1833, and the two countries fought a brief war over them in 1982.

London maintains that residents of the Falkland Islands voted on their political status and right to self-determination in a referendum held in March 2013. An overwhelming majority of 99.8% voted to remain an overseas territory of the United Kingdom.

In his speech, Milei stated that residents of the Falkland Islands do not possess the right to self-determination and called on the country to unite around its claim to the islands.

Arguing that the global wind is currently “blowing in favour of Argentina’s demands”, Milei said: “A short time ago, President [Donald] Trump announced that the US is reconsidering its historic stance on the Malvinas islands.”

The British conservative newspaper The Telegraph wrote that the move would appease the US president, who intervened in the dispute and implied he would not assist the United Kingdom in fighting off an invasion of the Falkland Islands.

Asked whether the US would “come to the aid” of Britain, Trump referred to his confrontation with Iran, saying: “Your country was not there to help me.”

Trump then questioned whether Britain would have the capacity to defend the islands, telling GB News:

“Look, I was there when the first war broke out. That was a very long time ago, and I watched it very closely. You handled yourselves very well. You took the islands back quite decisively, but it is very far away.”

Speculation is mounting that Buenos Aires and Washington are discussing an agreement granting the US access to oil extracted off the Malvinas.

On the eve of Milei’s speech, Argentine Minister of Energy and Mining Daniel Gonzalez Casartelli was in Washington to discuss energy investments with American oil companies and members of the Trump administration.

Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu’s son Yair clashed with the British right by demanding that the Falkland Islands be placed under Argentine sovereignty.

According to Bloomberg, Argentina is currently in the midst of an oil boom. Drilling activity is accelerating in the Vaca Muerta shale formation in Patagonia, which already produces more than 1 million barrels of oil and gas per day.

The country also has some offshore production operations, and exploration activities have been carried out in South Atlantic waters in recent years.

Meanwhile, Milei met Sarah Rogers, a senior US State Department official, at a conservative political forum held in Chile.

Reiterating Argentina’s claim to the islands, Milei said: “We must take back these islands, which are negligible in national terms. There is no other way forward. This is the best way to pay tribute to those who sacrificed their lives for this cause.”

The US House of Representatives has passed a controversial bill to strip federal financial aid from colleges and universities that participate in boycotts against Israel.

The Republican-led measure targets calls for accountability directed at the Tel Aviv government over its military campaign in the Gaza Strip, as well as expressions of solidarity with Palestine on university campuses.

Entitled the “Protecting Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2026”, the legislation was approved on Thursday in a 237–169 vote.

Only two Republican lawmakers voted against the measure, while 33 Democrats broke party lines to vote in favour. The bill will now proceed to the Senate.

Designated as H.R. 4795, the proposal bars colleges and universities that benefit from federal student aid programmes from engaging in commercial boycotts against Israel.

Institutions receiving Title VI funding for international studies and foreign language programmes are also required to certify that they do not prevent students or faculty from participating in academic programmes in the occupied territories, nor restrict Israeli students and academics from accessing their campuses.

The bill was co-sponsored by Representative Virginia Foxx, a North Carolina Republican, and Representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat.

Representative Tim Walberg, chairman of the House Education Committee, argued that taxpayer money should under no circumstances flow to institutions that “discriminate against Israel”.

Gottheimer, a staunch supporter of the Israeli government, stated that the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement is a campaign “targeting a single country and a single religion”.

Opponents of the bill emphasised that the measure seeks to solve a non-existent problem and constitutes an attack on constitutionally protected free speech.

The ranking Democrat on the committee, Representative Bobby Scott, pointed out that not a single US college or university has actually joined the global BDS movement. Scott recalled that while student and faculty bodies have announced support for BDS, university administrations have refused to implement those demands.

During the floor debate, Scott said: “We must fight antisemitism wherever it appears, but we should not do so by penalising protected free speech or conflating a student’s view with university policy.”

Representative Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat who opposes the BDS movement, also voted against the bill. Nadler noted that the only way to protect opinions one agrees with is to defend the right to express opinions one does not agree with.

The liberal Jewish organisation J Street was also among the actors opposing the bill. The group warned that the measure conflates boycotts of the Israeli government with those directed at companies linked to illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

J Street stated that the bill places Israel in an exceptional position, does nothing to protect Jewish students, and risks inflaming antisemitism rather than countering it. By contrast, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) openly backed the legislation.

The vote follows nearly three years of sustained protests by students and faculty against Israel’s war in Gaza.

According to data from the Ministry of Health in Gaza, attacks carried out following the 7 October 2023 operation and the subsequent military campaign launched by Israel have killed more than 73,000 Palestinians, while flattening the vast majority of the region’s universities, schools, and civilian infrastructure.

Encampments erected on university campuses demanded an end to the carnage and called on universities to divest financial holdings from companies profiting from the occupation and the war.

The Washington administration and its allies frequently characterised these protests as antisemitic. The Trump administration, meanwhile, targeted universities with various investigations and threats to freeze federal funds.

Aiming to protect their congressional majority in the November midterm elections and during the final two years of Trump’s term, House Republicans are keeping the issue on the agenda to deepen divisions among Democrats, who have grown increasingly critical of Israel as mass casualties in Gaza mount.

In July, amid accusations that the campaign in Gaza had reached genocidal proportions, more than 100 House Democrats supported an initiative to cut certain military aid to Israel, a US ally.

Critics argue that the latest bill is an extension of anti-BDS legislation previously enacted across more than 30 US states, which compels public contractors and public institutions to pledge not to boycott Israel.

Free speech advocates have long maintained that these state laws conflict with the First Amendment of the Constitution.

The measure passed by the House of Representatives aims to expand this pressure to the entire federal student financial aid system.

Although no US university has formally adopted a BDS decision, the bill makes even limited commercial or academic distancing from the Israeli government—including entities operating in the occupied Palestinian territories—grounds for terminating federal funding.