September 6, 2026
Juan Cole
Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – The Trump administration continues to fire on civilian Iranian targets in a campaign that has intensified in the first week of September, after a relatively quiet August, returning the two countries to an dangerous active war footing. On Saturday, the U.S. Navy sank one Iranian oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman. The sailors were warned beforehand to abandon ship. US strikes badly damaged two other tankers by firing at the stern, one near Kharg Island and another near the port of Jask.
Juan Cole
Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – The Trump administration continues to fire on civilian Iranian targets in a campaign that has intensified in the first week of September, after a relatively quiet August, returning the two countries to an dangerous active war footing. On Saturday, the U.S. Navy sank one Iranian oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman. The sailors were warned beforehand to abandon ship. US strikes badly damaged two other tankers by firing at the stern, one near Kharg Island and another near the port of Jask.
The US sinking of an unarmed
Iranian oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman appears to be a war crime. The US never
declared war on Iran, and even in wartime civilian objects are not considered
legitimate targets.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry condemned the strikes as a violation of Article 2, paragraph 3 of the United Nations Charter, which forbids aggressive warfore, calling it “a war crime, and a clear threat to international peace and to the security of commercial shipping.” The ministry warned that the US itself would have to shoulder the responsibility for the consequences resulting from these illegal acts of aggression. (H/t the BBC Monitoring for the link.)
Iran has been lashing out a US bases in Jordan and Kuwait, and at other targets in the Gulf region, in response to US attacks, and Tehran seems to be threatening to return to this tactic in response.
The Central Command maintained that it had hit these crude oil tankers after Iran targeted two US Navy warships with ballistic missiles. A US aircraft carrier and a destroyer, it said, proved able to evade “multiple unprovoked Iranian attacks,” and said that no US personnel were wounded. The statement did not say if the warships took any physical damage.
Again, striking civilian commercial vessels in retaliation for military strikes on military vessels seems extremely problematic in international law. And while I want to be supportive of our US military personnel, I have to say that blockading a country is an act of war and so Iranian strikes at US ships policing the blockade cannot be considered “unprovoked.” The US blockade on Iran comes as part of a series of military acts of aggression that began on February 28 and which were themselves unprovoked.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) is a serial violator of international law itself, and has struck civilian economic facilities of its neighbors such as the Ras Laffan liquefied natural gas plant in Qatar and the Kuwaiti oil fields. But this deplorable behavior does not authorize the US to behave similarly. In fact, you’d think America would want to go out of its way to avoid appearing to imitate illegal Iranian tactics.
The Khatam al-Anbiya’ Operations Room of the IRGC issued a warning that if the US harassment of Iranian ships and the blockade of the country continues, “the strikes of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran against US military vessels in the region will be more severe than before and there is also a possibility of escalation.”
The strikes and counter-strikes of Iran and the US are extremely dangerous and could easily spin out of control. If an Iranian ballistic missile got through US defenses and struck an aircraft carrier or destroyer, it could cause mass casualties among American sailors. Such a loss of life could lead to a war fever and a ground invasion by the US of Iranian territory. Likewise, the Trump administration cannot expect the Iranians to acquiesce in being economically strangled, and the longer the US blockade continues, the more likely it is to drive the Iranian military to lash out, possibly against one of more of the Gulf oil states. Such a development could usher in the big spike in fuel prices that many analysts had expected to result from the war on Iran. The impact on the world economy would be severe, especially since strategic petroleum reserves have already been substantially drawn down.
Tankertrackers announced that tankers with a total of 7 million barrels of oil aboard were ready to transit the Gulf of Hormuz on Sunday. But before the war, some 20 million barrels of petroleum transited the Strait daily. Even with three or four million barrels being diverted to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Oman through pipelines, there’s still a shortfall of at least 9 million barrels a day. In an ordinary global oil market, that kind of deficit would cause prices to skyrocket. China, however, cut its use by some 6 million barrels a day, depending on its reserves instead, and avoiding 1.5 million barrels a day in crude imports because 10 percent of the cars on the road are now electric. The situation is extremely fragile and volatile, and if big military actions break out again, the world economy could see a substantial slowdown.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry condemned the strikes as a violation of Article 2, paragraph 3 of the United Nations Charter, which forbids aggressive warfore, calling it “a war crime, and a clear threat to international peace and to the security of commercial shipping.” The ministry warned that the US itself would have to shoulder the responsibility for the consequences resulting from these illegal acts of aggression. (H/t the BBC Monitoring for the link.)
Iran has been lashing out a US bases in Jordan and Kuwait, and at other targets in the Gulf region, in response to US attacks, and Tehran seems to be threatening to return to this tactic in response.
The Central Command maintained that it had hit these crude oil tankers after Iran targeted two US Navy warships with ballistic missiles. A US aircraft carrier and a destroyer, it said, proved able to evade “multiple unprovoked Iranian attacks,” and said that no US personnel were wounded. The statement did not say if the warships took any physical damage.
Again, striking civilian commercial vessels in retaliation for military strikes on military vessels seems extremely problematic in international law. And while I want to be supportive of our US military personnel, I have to say that blockading a country is an act of war and so Iranian strikes at US ships policing the blockade cannot be considered “unprovoked.” The US blockade on Iran comes as part of a series of military acts of aggression that began on February 28 and which were themselves unprovoked.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) is a serial violator of international law itself, and has struck civilian economic facilities of its neighbors such as the Ras Laffan liquefied natural gas plant in Qatar and the Kuwaiti oil fields. But this deplorable behavior does not authorize the US to behave similarly. In fact, you’d think America would want to go out of its way to avoid appearing to imitate illegal Iranian tactics.
The Khatam al-Anbiya’ Operations Room of the IRGC issued a warning that if the US harassment of Iranian ships and the blockade of the country continues, “the strikes of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran against US military vessels in the region will be more severe than before and there is also a possibility of escalation.”
The strikes and counter-strikes of Iran and the US are extremely dangerous and could easily spin out of control. If an Iranian ballistic missile got through US defenses and struck an aircraft carrier or destroyer, it could cause mass casualties among American sailors. Such a loss of life could lead to a war fever and a ground invasion by the US of Iranian territory. Likewise, the Trump administration cannot expect the Iranians to acquiesce in being economically strangled, and the longer the US blockade continues, the more likely it is to drive the Iranian military to lash out, possibly against one of more of the Gulf oil states. Such a development could usher in the big spike in fuel prices that many analysts had expected to result from the war on Iran. The impact on the world economy would be severe, especially since strategic petroleum reserves have already been substantially drawn down.
Tankertrackers announced that tankers with a total of 7 million barrels of oil aboard were ready to transit the Gulf of Hormuz on Sunday. But before the war, some 20 million barrels of petroleum transited the Strait daily. Even with three or four million barrels being diverted to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Oman through pipelines, there’s still a shortfall of at least 9 million barrels a day. In an ordinary global oil market, that kind of deficit would cause prices to skyrocket. China, however, cut its use by some 6 million barrels a day, depending on its reserves instead, and avoiding 1.5 million barrels a day in crude imports because 10 percent of the cars on the road are now electric. The situation is extremely fragile and volatile, and if big military actions break out again, the world economy could see a substantial slowdown.
No comments:
Post a Comment