U.S. declares Iran ceasefire “over” after new strikes and expanded attacks

No right-leaning articles are supplied, so there is no right-side framing to audit; the checkable gaps are inside the existing Guardian, Axios and CBS coverage. A major omission split: the Guardian says the US hit “more than 80 targets,” then Iran attacked US military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait and the IRGC claimed “85 facilities” were targeted. Axios mentions the US strikes and the prior tanker attacks, but not Iran’s Bahrain/Kuwait retaliation or either target count; the CBS market piece also omits those counts and the Bahrain/Kuwait detail. The sanctions-waiver framing also diverges. The Guardian says the US “revoked a temporary sanctions waiver for Iranian oil exports,” while CBS says the old license “would be superseded by a narrower waiver,” and Axios adds that the revocation “still enables significant Iranian sales” and “doesn’t fundamentally change oil market dynamics.” On markets, the numbers do not line up cleanly: the Guardian reports an “immediate 3% rise in oil prices,” Axios gives Brent at $77.53, about $5 above the start of the week, while CBS reports oil “jumped 6%,” with Brent up 6.3% to $78.80. Word choice also shifts the same event: the Guardian says “hostilities have resumed” and “fragile ceasefire,” Axios says markets take Trump “seriously, but not literally,” and CBS says “re-escalation of hostilities.” None of the articles answers the core question: what exact MOU terms define a ceasefire violation, and who decides when it is formally “over”?