Iran and the US have butted heads once again, this time it’s over the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil shipping route.
On Thursday the 13th June 2 oil tankers were attacked within the Strait of Hormuz, the body of water that lies between Iran and Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Oman. The tankers in question were the Front Altair and Kokuka Courageous, which are Norwegian and Japanese tankers respectively.
The attacks come at a time when tensions between Iran and the US are at an all-time high. Just a month prior, on the 12th of May, 4 other Oil tankers were damaged in the same area, with governments being quick to condemn. The US and its allies declared to the UN Security Council that Iran is to blame for the sabotages in May, and allege that the act of sabotage was too sophisticated to be a result of non-state actors. Iran and its ally Russia, both asserted that no concrete evidence was presented to the Security Council and the remarks are ridiculous and demonstrative of Washington’s malign intentions. Iran has also accused the US of further aggression after the US military posted several ships in the area.
After the most recent spout of attacks, the US military released aerial drone footage of what seems to be crews removing unexploded Limpet mines from the Japanese Kokuka Courageous. This footage was followed by US analysis insinuating that the mines were the same model used by the Iranian military and that the removal crew were members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. The Iranian government has vehemently denied any involvement in the incident, proclaiming the US accusation as inflammatory and baseless. What is particularly interesting in the case of the Kokuka is that the witness statements collected from the crew of the tanker all seem to contradict the US assertions, with the consensus being that flying objects hit the ship twice. The Japanese company director also stated that he disagrees with the US propositions, and says it does not seem to be likely that mines were the source of the damage. This evidence alone seems to infer that the ships were attacked by more sophisticated, rocket-propelled weapons, and serves to disprove the US assertions that mines were involved. At this stage, there is no concrete evidence to support either assertion.
These attacks are significant because the Strait of Hormuz is a key shipping route for close to 30% of global oil supply. It is used by essentially all major oil exporters in the region and hostile activity in the area could impact global oil supply. There are many speculations about which group or government is responsible. Let’s start with Iran; Iran’s economic crisis, catalyzed by US trade sanctions, is also growing and putting a strain on the nations export-centered economy. Because of its current situation, It is not in Irans best interest to be portrayed in a negative light on the world stage as it would strain its vital relationships with other western powers. As well as the political retaliation, Iran, if found guilty may be barred from utilizing the Strait for its own oil shipping activities, by the US Navy, which would be the final nail in the coffin for Iran’s economy. Because of this gloomy outlook, many analysts are speculating that Iran was in fact not responsible for the attacks either directly or in association with another entity. At a glance, Irans government has nothing to gain from elevating the tensions in the region. So if Iran is not the obvious culprit then who is? Iran itself has thrown accusations directly at the US and its allies, saying that the sabotages are false-flag attacks designed to destabilize the region. Although there is also no evidence to support this assertion, the US has moved a carrier group into the region after the attacks and made indirect threats. This overt gesture is nothing out of the ordinary for US foreign policy which is often aggressive. Until there is a clear link to one group or government, these events only serve to further distance Iran from its neighbors, whether or not they were responsible.
