ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — Even as it battled the deadliest drug epidemic in American history, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration permitted hundreds of thousands of fentanyl pills to hit the streets of New Mexico between 2023 and 2025, according to three current and former DEA agents and government records reviewed by The Associated Press.

DEA agents repeatedly monitored shipments of fentanyl pills — but did not seize them — as federal prosecutors sought to bring bigger criminal cases against traffickers of a synthetic opioid that the White House last year designated a “ weapon of mass destruction.”

Agents and experts, however, said the tactic amounted to a gamble with public safety that potentially imperiled communities in and around Albuquerque and may have violated U.S. Justice Department rules intended to safeguard the public.

“We poisoned our community to make cases,” DEA Special Agent David Howell told AP in a series of interviews in New Mexico. “Through our own willful blindness, we get to say, ‘We don’t really know what happened to the drugs.’ But we 100% got people killed.”

Ridding the streets of illicit fentanyl, manufactured mostly in Mexican labs, became DEA’s top priority over the past decade as overdose deaths surged. At the same time, its lethality — a few milligrams can kill the average adult — upended time-tested tactics that had been used to combat drugs like cocaine and heroin. Those methods have included allowing drug transactions to be completed so agents might follow the narcotics through the supply chain. Fentanyl, however, is so dangerous that the U.S. Justice Department developed guidelines for agents in such circumstances, encouraging them to seize the opioid whenever “practicable.”

Albuquerque, which has a neighborhood so besieged by drugs it’s known as “War Zone,” and other regions in New Mexico remain at the epicenter of the fentanyl epidemic. While overdose deaths nationwide fell 14% last year, government data show New Mexico tallied a 21% spike.

Alex Uballez, who served as U.S. attorney in New Mexico from 2022 through last year, said authorities at times allowed drug shipments to go unseized as part of a broader effort to gather intelligence and build cases against major drug traffickers. He said the approach reflected his office’s limited resources and his belief that prosecuting larger organizations can have a bigger impact than interdicting every suspected drug transaction.

Precise intelligence on drug deliveries

In some cases, the DEA had such detailed intelligence about drug deliveries that agents were able to tally precise pill counts, according to reports reviewed by AP.

Advertisement

Agents, for example, deciphered coded chatter over cellphones and closely surveilled a transaction at a mobile home park in Albuquerque in June 2023, according to a 66-page report reviewed by AP. Agents wrote in the report that traffickers delivered 74,000 pills as part of that deal, a figure federal prosecutors later confirmed in a court filing.

Days earlier, another DEA report showed, investigators watched the same distribution ring deliver a spare tire hiding another suspected fentanyl shipment that similarly went unseized.

“We did nothing, but sit back and watch,” said Howell, who filed an official whistleblower complaint in 2023 to bring attention to what he thought was a tactic that risked public safety.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Months passed before federal authorities busted the traffickers, and Howell, who participated in the surveillance, said authorities today cannot account for the unseized shipments.

“It’s outrageous to put that many lives at risk in hopes of making a big case,” said Tristan Leavitt, president of Empower Oversight, a whistleblower advocacy group that has asked the Senate Judiciary Committee and Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General to investigate Howell’s claims.

A former DEA supervisor, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation, said he and his Albuquerque colleagues allowed “millions” of pills to go unseized during a multi-state investigation last year.

Advertisement

Howell reported in his whistleblower disclosures that agents on that case permitted the delivery of at least 1.8 million fentanyl pills.

That investigation, the former supervisor and Howell told AP, culminated in the largest fentanyl bust in DEA history, a takedown announced in May 2025 by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi that resulted in the seizure of more than 3 million pills.

“The amount we ultimately seized was hitting the streets every month while that case was going on,” the former supervisor said, adding that the DEA could have dismantled the organization six months earlier.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Albuquerque did not answer questions about the unseized fentanyl shipments but, in a statement to AP, said the “conduct” Howell brought to light happened during the prior administration.

Advertisement

“The current leadership of this office is focused on aggressively investigating and prosecuting fentanyl trafficking and disrupting the criminal organizations responsible for distributing these drugs,” Tessa DuBerry, a spokesperson for the office, wrote in an email.

Uballez, the former U.S. attorney, said estimated pill counts “based on intercepted phone calls are not reliable.”

“I don’t think I’d contest that drugs are ‘walked,’” he said, referring to the law enforcement tactic of allowing contraband to go unseized to further an investigation. “How much and how frequently — and with what certainty — is incredibly difficult to answer in retrospect.”

To seize or not to seize

As fentanyl overdoses became an epidemic over the last decade, the U.S. Justice Department developed an internal playbook for combatting the deadliest drug ever to cross the Mexican border. The game plan coincided with a publicity campaign that warned Americans that “One Pill Can Kill,” a DEA effort to highlight fentanyl’s unique dangers.

Advertisement

Adopted in 2017, the department’s two-page “Fentanyl Protocols” called on agents to “seize or otherwise prevent the distribution” of fentanyl “as soon as practicable.” The rules, which have not previously been made public, said that “protecting public safety is paramount,” irrespective of whether seizures compromise investigations.

The Justice Department rewrote the rules in 2024 to afford law enforcement more discretion in such cases. The updated protocols say investigators “may exercise discretion in determining whether to take action to prevent the trafficking of fentanyl,” balancing public safety risks against “the benefits to be achieved through preserving the investigation.”

The DEA rarely discusses the tactic of allowing drugs to go unseized. Its agent manual describes taking drugs off the street as “the usual course of action” but adds “there may be instances where the investigative objectives can be better achieved by not doing so.”

The agency has long used “controlled deliveries” in which constant surveillance of the drugs — and often replacing them with fake narcotics — is followed by a takedown to recover them, according to current and former agents.

Advertisement

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was savaged with bipartisan criticism after two of those guns surfaced at the scene of the fatal shooting of a Border Patrol agent, and the Justice Department explicitly forbid agents from allowing firearms to be trafficked.

Blowing the whistle

Howell became so unnerved by his agency’s failure to seize fentanyl that he began flagging overdose deaths that might have been caused by the very pills DEA permitted to flow to dealers. One of those cases included a 15-month-old toddler who died after ingesting burned fentanyl residue last year in Española, a New Mexico town ravaged by grinding poverty and addiction.

Howell, who joined DEA 19 years ago after a decade in the Navy, took his allegations to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel. The agency, tasked with protecting whistleblowers, initially found a “substantial likelihood of wrongdoing” and asked the Justice Department to investigate.

In early 2024, Howell told the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility that DEA agents had observed — yet not seized — separate deliveries of 150,000 and 50,000 fentanyl pills.

DEA and federal prosecutors, he added, “are placing themselves in a precarious position where they will not be able to prove that the fentanyl they could have stopped did not result in the death of a person.”

Starmer became Prime Minister in July 2024

Advertisement

Keir Starmer has announced plans to step down as Prime Minister.

Sir Keir Starmer became Prime Minister in July 2024 after leading Labour to a landslide general election victory, ending 14 years of Conservative government. The former Director of Public Prosecutions entered Downing Street with a large parliamentary majority and a promise to deliver economic stability, rebuild public services and restore trust in politics.

However, his premiership has come under increasing pressure in recent months amid falling poll ratings, internal party unrest and a series of political setbacks. Labour suffered disappointing results in local elections and by-elections, while a growing number of MPs publicly questioned whether Starmer remained the right person to lead the party into the next general election.

One of the most damaging episodes for his government was the fallout from the appointment of former Labour grandee Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States. The controversy triggered the resignations of several senior aides and prompted calls from some Labour figures, including Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar, for Starmer to step aside.

More recently, tensions within the government deepened over defence spending, culminating in the resignation of senior ministers who accused the Prime Minister of failing to provide adequate funding for the armed forces. The dispute fuelled further speculation about his leadership and highlighted divisions within Labour’s parliamentary ranks.

Pressure intensified following the recent Makerfield by-election, won by Andy Burnham, who returned to Westminster and quickly emerged as the focal point for MPs seeking a change of leadership. Reports suggest dozens of Labour MPs have backed Burnham as a potential successor, with some estimates putting support for him well into three figures.

Over the weekend, multiple reports indicated Starmer had been holding discussions with cabinet ministers, donors and trade union leaders about his future.

Labour now face a leadership contest or an agreed succession process to determine Britain’s next prime minister. Burnham is considered the frontrunner, although figures including Wes Streeting and Yvette Cooper have also been mentioned as potential contenders.

Former Airdrie and Shotts MSP Alex Neil warned voters were furious at politicians on both sides of the border treating the sector – which supports more than 60,000 north east jobs – as a “sacrificial lamb”.

A former Lanarkshire MSP has urged John Swinney to “grow a backbone” and back North Sea drilling after the party’s humiliating by-election defeat in Aberdeen South.

Former Airdrie and Shotts MSP Alex Neil warned voters were furious at politicians on both sides of the border treating the sector – which supports more than 60,000 north east jobs – as a “sacrificial lamb”.

It comes as the Scottish Conservatives swept to a shock victory in Thursday’s by-election after billing the vote “a referendum on the oil and gas industry”.

Former MSP Douglas Lumsden won a thumping majority of more than 6000, defeating the SNP’s Richard Thomson for the Tories’ first Scottish by-election win since 1973.

Mr Neil, who served in SNP Cabinets under both Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, called on Swinney to renounce the “economic madness” of Sturgeon-era opposition to new oil and gas projects, such as Rosebank oil field and Jackdaw gas field.

He told the Sunday Mail: “It’s about backbone. Swinney needs to stand up to the Greens and to Sturgeon because he’s sitting on the fence and that’s the worst of all possible worlds.

“If you sit on the fence, you don’t please anybody. You’ve got to come off the fence, especially when Scotland’s economy demands it.

“Now the people are demanding it. A clear majority of people in Scotland think that we should continue to develop our oil and gas fields as long as we possibly can, as long as they’re profitable, as long as they’re producing good, high earning jobs.

“There’s public support for this, but I think John’s feart. We are making ourselves the sacrificial lamb when no one else in the world is contemplating such a stupid policy.

“I just think we’ve got it completely wrong on oil and gas and we’re going to pay a much heavier political price in the future if we don’t get it right.”

Meanwhile, the Labour government under Keir Starmer and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has introduced a controversial ban on oil and gas exploration in the drive for Net Zero. Following Andy Burnham’s seismic by-election win in Makerfield, the former Greater Manchester mayor is strongly tipped to oust Starmer from No 10.

Attention is already turning to his possible Cabinet picks with Miliband, a close Burnham ally, currently the frontrunner with bookies to become Chancellor.

Mr Neil, 74, said: “The worst possible thing Andy Burnham can do is make Ed Miliband the Chancellor of the Exchequer because he’ll then be in an even more powerful position to destroy the oil and gas industry.

“It’s quite clear that is on his agenda and that has huge implications. He couldn’t care less what happens to Scotland, the Scottish economy, or the people in Aberdeen and the northeast of Scotland.

“He just doesn’t care because he’s ideologically obsessed with getting rid of the oil and gas industry. My strong advice to Andy Burnham is not to touch Miliband with a barge pole, don’t let him near the Treasury, because that will be Burnham’s downfall.

“Make him foreign secretary and let him go and travel the world as much as he likes. But don’t give him a say in economic policy because he’s absolutely out of tune with the people.”

*Don’t miss the latest headlines from around Lanarkshire. Sign up to our newsletters here.

And did you know Lanarkshire Live had its own app? Download yours for free here.

The commemorations begin today, June 22, with a flag-raising ceremony outside Bolton Town Hall at 10.55am, followed by a free luncheon for veterans and serving personnel in Festival Hall.

The main Armed Forces Day event will take place in Victoria Square on Saturday, June 27, from 10am until 3.30pm.

A formal service is due to begin at 10.40am, with visitors also able to enjoy military displays, cadet activities, music and family-friendly entertainment throughout the day.

Military vehicles and equipment will be on display, while charities, emergency services and community organisations will also be attending.

Children will be able to take part in free activities and challenges, with stalls and demonstrations planned across the town centre.

The day will begin with a Sea Cadet flag ceremony and conclude with a sunset flag-lowering ceremony at around 3.30pm.

Armed Forces Day is held nationally to recognise the contribution of serving personnel, reservists, veterans, cadets and military families.

Events take place across the UK each year on the final Saturday in June.

Bolton’s event is expected to feature cadet displays, military equipment, community stalls and activities designed to bring residents together in support of the Armed Forces community.

It fell into administration in February, for the second time in 12 months, after a “tough start” to 2026.

Alistair McAlinden and Geoff Jacobs from Interpath were appointed joint administrators, and Interpath announced last month that Quiz would implement a “closure plan” for its final stores over the coming weeks.

More than 100 head office and warehouse jobs were also put at risk when the company entered administration.

UK fashion brand Quiz to shut final 20 UK stores this weekend

Now, it has been confirmed that all of the remaining Quiz sites, of which there are 20, will shut down by the end of tomorrow (June 20), according to Drapers.

The Scottish retail brand operated 40 standalone stores across the UK before falling into administration.

Three stores were shut before May 21, which was when it confirmed that a “phased closure plan” would see the remaining sites also close down.

Several Quiz store closures took place on June 10, including locations in Aberdeen, Inverness, Warrington, Basingstoke, Bracknell, and Dunfermline.

In the last week, Quiz stores in Warrington, Basingstoke, Hanley, Mansfield, Eastbourne, Telford, Carlisle, Watford, Clydebank, and Irvine have also permanently closed.

Interpath confirmed today that the remaining 20 stores will close by the end of trade on Saturday (June 20), at the latest.

Alistair McAlinden, head of Interpath in Scotland and joint administrator, said: “As the Quiz stores close their doors for the final time, we would like to thank every member of staff for their commitment over the past five months.

“In exceptionally challenging circumstances, their professionalism ensured the business could continue to trade effectively.

“We are extremely grateful for their efforts and wish them all the best for the future.”

The number of workers impacted by all these closures also remains unknown.

Heavy discounts of up to 80% will be on offer at these remaining Quiz stores as administrators seek to sell off as much as possible to help pay the collapsed firm’s outstanding debts.

Full list of the remaining 20 Quiz stores closing by tomorrow

The full list of the final 20 Quiz outlets that will be shutting by the end of tomorrow is:

• St. Enoch
• Derby
• Leicester
• Northampton
• Portsmouth
• Castleford
• Newtownabbey
• Livingston
• Buchanan
• Stirling
• Trafford
• Fort
• Merryhill
• Braehead
• Meadowhall
• Metro
• Cardiff
• Arndale
• Craigavon
• Hull

Other UK companies that have closed or entered administration/liquidation in 2026

Quiz follows several retailers that have entered administration this year, as well as others who have announced widespread store closures.

Major high street brands LK Bennett and Claire’s both closed all their stores in April, having previously fallen into administration.

UK fashion retailer Leading Labels is also set to close its remaining 15 stores after falling into liquidation.

Other retailers have been forced to close stores this year, including:

Iguanas Holdings Limited, which runs 47 Las Iguanas restaurants across the UK, and Poundstretcher have also “fallen into financial difficulties”.

Recommended reading:

It’s also been reported that Morrisons is looking to sell some of its in-store pharmacies as it continues to cut costs.

It’s not been all bad news for the UK high street, with several major brands announcing new store openings for 2026, including Aldi, M&S, and Superdrug.

Did you ever shop in Quiz? Let us know in the comments below.

Here are some key questions:

How do candidates enter the contest?

Labour’s rules mean even getting onto the ballot can be a complex process.

First, candidates must secure the backing of 81 Labour MPs, 20% of the party’s parliamentary strength.

Sir Keir Starmer (Image: PA MEDIA)

They then need to receive nominations from either 5% of constituency Labour parties, or three affiliated organisations (which must include two trade unions) which represent 5% of affiliated membership.

Only after passing those two stages will candidates go before the party membership.

Who could stand in a contest?

Andy Burnham’s decision to stand in the Makerfield by-election – giving up the Greater Manchester mayoralty to become an MP – suggests he believes he has the necessary backing from the parliamentary party to get onto the ballot.

Former health secretary Wes Streeting has repeatedly insisted he has the 81 names required to mount a leadership bid, and has spent the weeks since his resignation setting out his stall.

Former Royal Marines officer Al Carns, who quit as armed forces minister in a row over defence funding and the treatment of Northern Ireland veterans, has also hinted he would seek to enter a leadership race, although it is unclear whether the MP – who was only elected in 2024 – has the supporters required to get on the ballot paper.

How would a Labour leadership contest work?

After a leadership hopeful nails down 81 backers in the Commons and support from constituency parties and trade unions, candidates are then put to a vote among party members, who rank them in order of preference.

A contender is declared the winner if they get more than 50% of first preferences, and this usually happens through a process of elimination during rounds of voting, the timetable for which is set by Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee (NEC).

How long will this take?

Labour’s NEC will set the timetable for the whole election, including how long potential candidates have to secure nominations and how long members will be able to vote.

The party’s last leadership contest, in 2020, ran for around three months, with nominations opening in early January and the result announced in early April.

NEC sources have previously suggested there is little appetite for a long contest, with a maximum of two months being floated.

But Mr Burnham’s supporters have suggested a “transition” period that would see the new leader take over in September, which would mean a longer contest.

What would a coronation look like?

Andy Burnham’s significant support among the parliamentary party could mean he ends up as the only candidate.

With no need for a membership ballot, that scenario could see the contest wrapped up within a matter of weeks or even days.

But given Mr Burnham’s apparent preference for a three-month “transition” period to allow him to prepare for government, it is unclear what would happen next in the event he was the only candidate.

Insisting on a transition would leave Sir Keir as a lame duck over a period that includes a Nato summit where countries are expected to set out plans to increase defence spending, and a UK-EU summit in Brussels seen as crucial to Labour’s attempts to reset relations with the bloc.

There is some precedent for such a coronation, however. Gordon Brown was the only candidate to receive enough nominations in Labour’s 2007 leadership election more than a month before Tony Blair formally stepped down as prime minister.

In that period, Mr Brown still attended leadership hustings around the country to set out his ideas and attempt to win over the public.

A Utah judge is set to decide Monday whether prosecutors crossed a line with public comments about evidence in the murder case against Tyler Robinson, who is accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Defense attorneys for Robinson are asking Judge Tony Graf to prevent prosecutors from pursuing the death penalty, arguing that statements made to the media about a bullet fragment recovered from Kirk’s body could unfairly influence potential jurors.

The dispute centers on comments from the Utah County Attorney’s Office after the defense revealed that early testing was inconclusive on whether the bullet fragment matched the firearm investigators say was used in the shooting.

Robinson’s attorneys accused prosecutors, including Deputy Utah County Attorney Christopher Ballard, of attempting to shape public opinion by discussing the ballistics evidence outside the courtroom. They argued the comments could damage Robinson’s chances of receiving a fair trial.

Prosecutors pushed back, saying they responded only after speculation surrounding the case spread publicly. Ballard told the court he did not disclose specific details about the evidence and spoke only in general terms about the challenges of ballistics testing.

The high-profile case has drawn intense attention and fueled unverified theories online, including speculation about possible additional suspects. Authorities and attorneys have expressed concern that misinformation could complicate efforts to select an impartial jury.

Legal experts say the defense request is unlikely to succeed. Paul Cassell, a University of Utah law professor and former federal judge, said courts typically handle concerns about media coverage by carefully screening potential jurors rather than blocking prosecutors from seeking the maximum punishment.

“It would be extraordinary” for the judge to remove the death penalty option over the comments, Cassell said.

Robinson, 23, of southwestern Utah, has not entered a plea. Prosecutors have said they will seek the death penalty if he is convicted of aggravated murder in the Sept. 10 killing of Kirk, a close ally of President Donald Trump who was shot while speaking at Utah Valley University.

Judge Graf held a hearing last week on whether prosecutors should face sanctions over their remarks. Robinson’s attorneys also pointed to a separate Utah case involving prosecutorial conduct and argued that limiting the death penalty could be an available remedy in extreme circumstances.

A key hearing is scheduled for July 6-10, when prosecutors must present evidence showing the case should proceed to trial.

The Government’s plan for 1.5 million homes is doomed.

Governments don’t build houses. Builders do. But no one builds at a loss or for a miserable profit that doesn’t reward risk or effort.

In 1988 there were more than 12,000 small/medium registered builders.

By 2017 less than 3,000 survived because of increased costs, unrealistic demands and over regulation.

Traditional family firms in York were squeezed out when York Council hiked “affordable” targets from 25 per cent to 50 per cent while reducing the threshold from 25 to 15 dwellings; a ludicrous two dwellings in villages.

As predicted by myself and Paul Cordock planning applications dried up and outturn plummeted – despite City of York Council claiming hostel bed spaces and Lawful Use certificates as new homes.

York’s council blamed anyone but its own policies. Particularly the banks; but many builders had cash reserves and didn’t need to borrow.

Read next:

Those that did couldn’t receive funding because financiers would not take risks where “affordable” demands stripped out profits leaving no headroom for contingencies.

There is a reason why many more homes were built in the 60s and 70s and why people could afford to buy them. There wasn’t the excessive regulations and financial burdens that have since been heaped upon house builders.

Today, even big companies are struggling. They pick and choose sites to proceed and are scaling back operations. Apprenticeships are reduced and the skilled workforce declines. Many entrepreneurs have left the industry. Newcomers are rare because the incentive has largely been destroyed.

Those of us with a lifetime’s construction experience know Labour’s housing targets are unachievable.

Matthew Laverack,

Retired architect and housebuilder,

Lord Mayors Walk,

York

What do you think?

Feel strongly about an issue? Write us a letter. Please write no more than 250 words and you must provide your full name, address and mobile number. Send your views by email to: letters@thepress.co.uk

Write a comment

Join the debate and leave a comment in our comments section below this article – we may use your comments for a follow up article.

The Daily Record first backed calls for Keir Starmer to resign in February. In an editorial column published after Labour was thrashed in the Gorton by-election, losing heavily to the Greens, we said the PM should do the honourable thing and walk away.

The Record View stated: “If Starmer cannot win a suburban seat in Greater Manchester where Labour previously enjoyed a thumping majority, he cannot win anywhere.

“The PM can complain all he likes about Reform and the Greens running populist campaigns which offer voters nothing but a bunch of easy answers.

“But many voters are looking for an alternative to Labour and the Tories – and both of these traditional left and right parties are in turmoil as a result.”

Read the full Record View

OBBUERGEN, Switzerland (AP) — Negotiators from the U.S. and Iran were set to engage in a second day of talks Monday to solidify a permanent end to the war between the countries, after a first day of mediation began with a rocky start.

Mediators Qatar and Pakistan hailed what they called “encouraging progress” made during the talks as Iran and the United States agreed to create a “de-confliction cell” to address the fighting in Lebanon. A senior U.S. diplomat claimed progress on multiple fronts, including the establishment of “mechanisms” to ensure the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for global energy shipments, remains open and that a ceasefire in southern Lebanon holds.

Yet the first full day of talks between the U.S. and Iran, who were accompanied by Qatari and Pakistani officials, was jolted by blistering statements from U.S. President Donald Trump, who from thousands of miles away from the Swiss negotiating venue at a mountainside resort near Lake Lucerne was firing off comments that offended the Iranians.

Iranian state media said talks had paused after the “publication of an insulting message by the U.S. President.” The Iranian delegation then met with Qatari mediators and left the negotiating site, state media said. The senior U.S. diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity to brief journalists on the ongoing talks, said late Sunday that the Iranians remained on site and the negotiations were on.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian had vowed to “never back down from the right to enrich uranium,” according to state media, and Trump later told Fox News in a phone interview that Pezeshkian should watch what he says and also threatened to take over Iran, according to one of the news channel’s correspondents.

Trump also continued to issue warnings against Iran on social media, posting as negotiators worked: “Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!!”

The chief negotiators for the U.S. include JD Vance, the vice president; special envoy Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of the president. Iran is represented by Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Araghchi wrote on X that Pakistani and Qatari mediators delivered “major progress to end the Lebanon War.” He added that the first “real test” of negotiations would be whether the mechanism succeeded in halting the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah.

The senior U.S. diplomat said among the issues discussed was Iran’s messaging as it related to the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran’s military said it closed Saturday in response to continued fighting in Lebanon. U.S. Central Command has disputed that Iran closed the strait again.

The interim deal to end the fighting in Iran, signed last week by the leaders of the U.S. and Iran, outlines a 60-day period for negotiators to settle the future of Tehran’s nuclear program amid concerns that it wants to use it for military purposes, a claim Iran denies. The fate of frozen Iranian assets, among other thorny issues, are also on the agenda.

Though the talks will encompass a vast array of complex matters, Iran first wants to focus on addressing the fighting in Lebanon.

Saturday’s renewed ceasefire in Lebanon appeared to be holding, and Israel’s military said it would lift movement restrictions for residents near the Israel-Lebanon border on Monday morning. Neither Israel nor Hezbollah is a signatory to the U.S.-Iran deal.

There was cautious calm Monday in Lebanon, with no Israeli strikes reported overnight after a day of quiet Sunday. Hezbollah likewise has not announced any attacks on Israeli forces since Saturday.

The lull in fighting in Lebanon is the longest since the outbreak of the latest Israel-Hezbollah war on March 2.

___

Kim reported from Washington. Associated Press reporters Abby Sewell in Beirut, David Rising in Bangkok and Jon Gambrell in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, contributed to this story.