2026伊朗-海湾危机追踪
CC
Events Archive
strikeMar 25, 2026

"They Attacked Us While We Were Talking": Iran Says US Betrayed Diplomacy Twice, Rules Out New Talks

Summary

"They Attacked Us While We Were Talking": Iran Says US Betrayed Diplomacy Twice, Rules Out New Talks In an exclusive interview with India Today Global, Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmail Baghaei delivers a scathing indictment of US diplomacy, reveals that American strikes hit Iran mid-negotiation- twice- and warns that any ceasefire ultimatum is nothing but a cover for further war crimes against the Iranian people. The war between Iran, Israel, and the United States has now entered its 25th day — and Tehran is in no mood for diplomacy. In a rare and candid exclusive interview with India Today Global's Senior Executive Editor Geeta Mohan, Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmail Baghaei pulled no punches, painting a picture of a nation that believes it has been systematically deceived, bombed, and betrayed- not once, but twice- while sitting at the negotiating table. Baghaei revealed that Iran and the United States were deep in a structured diplomatic process, with technical talks on a possible nuclear agreement scheduled for Vienna, when American strikes hit Iranian soil on 28 February. It was not an isolated incident. In June, US forces had struck Iran just two days before a sixth round of negotiations was set to begin. "This was a betrayal of diplomacy," he said- a phrase he noted has now entered the common lexicon inside Iran. With Iranian cities under sustained bombardment, the Strait of Hormuz weaponised, and a school in Minab struck by two Tomahawk missiles that killed more than 170 children, Baghaei was unequivocal: Iran will defend itself for as long as the attacks continue, reparations will be sought, and no ultimatum from Washington will be treated as anything other than a declaration of intent to commit war crimes. On India, on Khamenei's health, on regime change, and on the future of the nuclear deal- Tehran speaks. And it speaks with fury. Q Are Iran and the U.S. currently in talks- direct or indirect? A There are no talks or negotiations between Iran and the United States, as there have been none throughout the past 25 days of what we consider their illegal war against Iran. We have a very catastrophic experience with US diplomacy. We were attacked twice within a span of nine months while we were in the middle of a negotiating process to resolve the nuclear issue. This was a betrayal of diplomacy- a phrase now widely used in Iran- and it happened not once but twice. No one can trust U.S. diplomacy. Our brave armed forces are currently focused on defending Iran's territory and sovereignty against this brutal, illegal war. Q Is there any room for mediation- perhaps through Oman, Pakistan, or other regional actors? A You can ask Oman's Foreign Minister about his experience mediating between Iran and the United States. The institution of mediation was also badly betrayed by the United States. Many countries in the region and beyond have reached out to Iran offering to mediate. We have received messages requesting negotiations, and we have responded- our position is clear: we will continue to defend ourselves. Iran is under constant bombardment by the United States and Israel. So can anyone believe their claims of diplomacy or mediation are credible when they started this war and continue attacking us? Pakistan is our neighbour. We have good relations with Pakistan, as we do with other neighbours, and we believe they have good intentions. Our Foreign Minister has been in contact with his Pakistani counterpart and with other neighbouring foreign ministers. These contacts are ongoing, and we understand that regional countries are concerned and are trying to help ease the situation. Q Who speaks for Iran diplomatically? Is there a coordinated diplomatic voice- the Foreign Minister, the Speaker of Parliament, or others? A The Foreign Minister is responsible for Iran's foreign diplomacy, and he is fulfilling that role. The system is absolutely coordinated, and decisions are made as and when necessary, at the appropriate time. The Speaker of Parliament, Mr. Ghalibaf, is a high-profile politician who functions within the mandates and authorities given under the constitution. The division of labour among our authorities is clear-cut and transparent. For now, we are 100% focused on defending Iran's sovereignty and territory against these brutal attacks. Q President Trump has spoken with Prime Minister Modi, who called for de-escalation and for keeping the Strait of Hormuz open. What is Iran's reaction? Is the U.S. looking to India to use its good offices with Iran? A I wish everyone who has the opportunity to speak with the United States would use it to remind them that their war is illegal and criminal, and that they are responsible for the threat to the Strait of Hormuz and all the resulting economic consequences for the international community. As for India, we have good relations. Our ministers have been in close contact in recent days. Indian vessels have been passing through the Strait of Hormuz after coordination with Iranian authorities, and we have facilitated their safe passage. India has not been participating in or assisting the aggression against Iran. Our bilateral relationship is one of mutual respect and mutual interest. Q The U.S. cited an 'imminent threat' from Iran as justification for its attack. What do you make of that- especially since the Pentagon itself later rejected that claim? A They know very well there was no imminent threat from Iran to the United States. They have changed their justifications multiple times. First they claimed an imminent threat; then they said it was because of an alleged Iranian nuclear weapon- even though in June they had claimed to have obliterated Iran's nuclear programme. Iran's nuclear programme is fully safeguarded by the IAEA, and there is not a single piece of evidence from the IAEA indicating it has been or is being weaponised. Then Marco Rubio said they attacked because they had intelligence that Israel was about to strike Iran and wanted to pre-empt. This is a whimsical war built on lies. It is not only a brutal assault on the Iranian nation, but an attack on the entire fabric of international law and the United Nations Charter. Q Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the GCC countries are worried about their energy infrastructure. Has Israel's energy infrastructure been struck? What is Iran's position on President Trump's proposed five-day moratorium? A Threatening to attack Iran's civilian infrastructure is itself a war crime. The United States is expanding the war across the whole region. From the outset, the U.S. used the airspace, military bases, and logistical assets stationed in Persian Gulf countries to attack Iran- effectively dragging the entire region into their war of choice. We have called on our neighbours: please do not allow the United States and Israel to abuse your soil and your territory to attack Iran. We have no intention of engaging in any hostility with our neighbours- we have been in a friendly mode with all of them and remain committed to those relationships. But their territories are being used by the United States to attack us, and under international law we are entitled to defend ourselves. Any ultimatum is a sign of deception and a clear intent to commit war crimes. Q Iran has stated that attacks on Gulf state bases were justified because those facilities were used to launch strikes on Iran. Does that mean Iran holds those countries responsible? A It is quite evident that a major part of U.S. attacks are being launched from the territories of Persian Gulf countries- their military bases and assets stationed there. President Trump himself tweeted about tanker aircraft stationed at a military base in Saudi Arabia. The missiles that struck the desalination facility on Qeshm Island came from one of the Persian Gulf countries. I wish the countries of the region had not allowed this U.S. military presence, because it has now proven to be a liability rather than a source of security or stability. Under international law, what other choice do we have but to fight back? Q What was the origin of the Tomahawk missiles that struck the school in Minab, killing more than 170 children? A It was one of the countries of the region. Two Tomahawk missiles struck this elementary school within 14 minutes of each other- clearly intended to maximise casualties. This was a war crime. No one can deny it was intentional and premeditated, carried out by the United States. I prefer not to name the country. Q Even if President Trump calls for a complete ceasefire, do you think Israel will stop? Is Netanyahu listening to Trump? A We are not in the business of distinguishing between the United States and Israel. They started this together. Even in June, when Israel initiated its aggression against Iran, the United States followed. Both are jointly responsible for all the atrocities being committed against Iranians. Q Iran is reportedly demanding reparations. What would those look like in terms of numbers? A Billions of dollars of damage have already been incurred, and many lives have been lost. Our authorities will tally the full accounting. But any aggressor must be held accountable and pay the cost of the war. More important to us, however, is ensuring that this vicious cycle- war, negotiations, ceasefire, then war again- does not repeat. The United Nations and the general membership must shoulder their responsibility and hold the United States and Israel accountable for what they have done to the world economy and to the peace and security of the Persian Gulf region. Q Your Foreign Minister has indicated openness to a nuclear deal. Are we looking at a revival of the JCPOA? A It is very difficult for anyone to believe such claims given our clear experience. We had the nuclear deal in 2015; the United States withdrew unilaterally. We then attempted several times to reach a new agreement on the nuclear issue. On both occasions, they torpedoed the negotiating table and attacked Iran in the middle of the process. They are not serious about diplomacy. Iran, by contrast, has consistently demonstrated its seriousness about negotiation as a means of resolving disputes. But the trust has been badly damaged- even though we were previously negotiating in an atmosphere of near-zero trust. Iran's sincerity was betrayed. I would urge you to speak with our Omani friends as well; their Foreign Minister mediated for over a year and knows precisely how much progress was made before the United States chose to torpedo the process. Q Iran has announced it will accept payment in Chinese yuan rather than U.S. dollars- effectively challenging the petrodollar. How significant is this, and are you not concerned about the fate of countries that previously challenged dollar dominance? A Our number-one priority right now is to protect our national security and defend our people against this barbaric act of aggression. We cannot allow speculation to distract us from that. What I will say is that the United States itself has weaponised its currency against the entire world economy for decades- sanctioning countries, pressuring states across the Global South. That is what they have been doing for years against almost every country. Q Will Iran continue to charge vessels or countries a fee for passing through the Strait of Hormuz? A Absolutely. A series of measures is in place for passage through the Strait of Hormuz due to the war situation imposed on Iran. Under international law, a coastal state cannot allow its enemies- the aggressors- to use these straits to further their acts of aggression. What Iran is doing is ensuring that vessels belonging to or associated with the United States, Israel, or other countries that are in any manner participating in or assisting the aggression are not permitted passage. Other states that have nothing to do with this act of aggression may pass through the Strait of Hormuz after the necessary coordination with Iranian authorities, to ensure that passage is conducted safely and securely. This is part of a responsible approach. Q Is the Trump administration's proposed five-day moratorium a genuine offer, or a decoy to buy time while the U.S. amphibious strike group moves toward the theater- with Kharg Island as the ultimate objective? A We cannot underestimate any scenario. We have experience with deception and with the abuse of diplomatic processes as cover for preparing aggression. Our armed forces and authorities take all possibilities into account. What is clear is that such ultimatums are a sign of deception and a declaration of intent to commit war crimes. Threatening to attack civilian targets is a clear intent to commit war crimes. And everyone knows that Iran has the will, the capacity, and the capability to fight back against any such acts. Q President Trump has spoken of controlling the Strait of Hormuz 'with the next Ayatollah,' implying regime change is a goal. What is the status of Supreme Leader Khamenei's health? And looking ahead, who leads Iran- Mojtaba Khamenei, President Pezeshkian, Foreign Minister Araghchi, or Speaker Ghalibaf? A American authorities say whatever they wish to say- this is not the first time we have heard such things. It is for the world audience to make their own judgement. What matters is that Iran has a sophisticated, well-established system rooted in a popular revolution, grounded in Iran's identity and in the people's right to self-determination. The Supreme Leader is fine. Our system is working efficiently. Our armed forces are acting in accordance with their plans to defend Iran. Most importantly, our people are united against this barbaric act of aggression. As for leadership structure: every person in our system acts within the mandates and authorities granted by the constitution. The division of labour is clear-cut and transparent. Q What are Iran's expectations from India? And what does peace ultimately look like from Iran's perspective? A Every country has responsibilities under international law. India is a pioneering country in the developing world and a very important member of the Non-Aligned Movement. We have good bilateral and historic relations. If we want a future based on the rule of law- not on the rule of wind and force- then everyone must stand up against this clear injustice against a civilisational state and call out the culprits. I understand the different relationships various countries have with the United States and Israel, but what is at stake here is the rule of international law and of morality itself. India and other countries can play a very important role in de-escalating the situation. The clear fact is that the Iranian nation is under a brutal attack. Those who started this war must stop it. We are defending ourselves, and we will continue to do so for as long as it takes- because this is not a war of Iran's choosing. Q Are talks completely off the table? A We were in talks with the United States. We were in a serious diplomatic process when they attacked Iran- when they betrayed that process. Please remember: we were attacked on 28 February. We were supposed to meet the following Monday. We had agreed to continue our talks in Vienna to discuss the technical details of a possible deal, and they attacked Iran. This was not the first time. In June, they attacked Iran just two days before the sixth round of negotiations. Iran is defending itself and will continue to do so as long as these attacks continue.

Actors involved

USIranIsrael

Sources

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIranProxyRussia
1 source

A total of four commodity vessels crossed the strait on Monday, mostly on the Iranian route, down from seven the previous day, Kpler data showed. Also read: US military completes its latest strikes on Iran, marking the 10th successive night of attacks The four vessels included two tankers that exited the strait as well as two vessels that entered.

The two vessels that exited comprised a tanker that was carrying petrochemicals and one that was empty. Meanwhile, the two vessels that entered the strait included a bitumen tanker and an oil tanker. There were no visible very large crude carrier (VLCC) or liquefied natural gas tankers passing through the strait on Monday.

Shipping tensions intensified further as Yemen's Iran-aligned Houthis said on Monday they were imposing a naval blockade on Saudi Arabia, a move that threatens to disrupt global energy supplies beyond the Gulf. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations agency said on Tuesday it had received multiple reports that a tanker had messaged that it had been struck by an unknown projectile in the Strait of Hormuz.

Separately, Greek shipping company Dynacom Tankers said two of its managed vessels were hit by projectiles of unknown origin on Monday while sailing off the coast of Oman, while a third tanker was struck by a drone at Russia's Novorossiysk CPC terminal in the Black Sea.

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranProxy
1 source

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. and Iran are back to bombing every day in a bid to control the Strait of Hormuz. And neither is backing down, showing the limitations of President Donald Trump’s reliance on escalating airstrikes to bend Tehran to his will.

While the Trump administration says it is open to diplomacy, Iran so far has refused to loosen its grip over the crucial oil shipping corridor in the Persian Gulf. It is raising questions about the strategy for the next phase of the conflict as intensifying attacks have collapsed an interim ceasefire deal, left additional American troops dead and sent U.

S. gasoline prices back up — posing new problems for Republicans ahead of the midterm elections. Even with glimmers of hope for talks, the sides could be headed back to all-out war, with Trump warning that “every time Iran kills an American Soldier” going forward, “they will pay for that killing many times over.

” The renewed escalations reflect "a fundamental misreading of the Iranian psyche and a lack of learning” from previous fighting, said Mona Yacoubian, director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“I think it’s driven by a calculus on either side that they can double down on military escalation as a way of breaking the impasse and getting the other side to relent,” Yacoubian said. “The danger, of course, is that the more escalatory it becomes, the harder it will be to seize any potential opening back to diplomacy.

” The Trump administration says the door to diplomacy is open Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. is still open to negotiating, telling reporters Sunday night that Iran continues "to send signals that they want to talk, that they want to negotiate, but their behavior is what we’re responding to.

And their behavior is they’re launching missiles and drones at ships” in the Strait of Hormuz, where a fifth of the world's oil normally passes. “The United States always remains open to a diplomatic solution, and we’ve tried multiple times with Iran, and we’ll continue to try," he said.

"If that door opens, we’ll be happy to see it open.” Trump is focused on making Iran pay for the recent deaths of U.S. troops, violations of the interim deal reached last month and attacks on ships in the strait, according to a U.S. official, who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

The official said that military strikes on Iran would continue until Trump decides otherwise, but that talks between the countries also would go on. For some outside observers, the administration appears to be struggling to find an off-ramp, both militarily and diplomatically.

“This administration currently is flustered,” said Alan Eyre, a former U.S. diplomat once involved in past nuclear negotiations with Tehran and now a fellow at the Middle East Institute. “It really doesn’t have a coherent and consistent strategy as to how to extricate itself from this quagmire.

” There are some limitations to Trump's air war The U.S. military can only accomplish so much as it ramps up attacks on Iran, experts say. The conflict has demonstrated the limits of relying solely on air power, said Christopher Preble, a scholar at the Stimson Center think tank focused on U.

S. foreign policy. But he noted that sending in ground troops would be unpopular with many Americans and members of Congress. “It seems that President Trump certainly has the capability to continue to bomb, and Iran will have the capability to continue to keep the strait closed — or closed well enough,” Preble said.

David Schenker, a former official in the first Trump administration who is now a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the renewed strikes on Iranian infrastructure are a repeat of attacks during the early weeks of the war. And those did not result in Iran’s capitulation.

“The U.S. hit 13,000 targets in the first 6 weeks of the war, and this didn’t sway Iran to take a knee,” he said. Retired Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, who served under President Joe Biden, said previous wars such as Vietnam showed the limitations of air power alone.

“Generally, you have to couple air power with ground operations, sometimes naval operations as well, and certainly space today,” he said. When launching the war on Feb. 28, the U.S. and Israel struck many fixed targets identified before the conflict began.

But Iran had a long time to prepare for the attacks by concealing and dispersing weapons. “So the easy targets are pretty much gone,” Kendall said. “They can hide ballistic missiles and cruise missiles and small air vehicles pretty easily.

So it’s a very hard job to try to suppress that kind of a threat over a period of time. And that’s why they’re still able to attack not just ships in the Straits, but also our bases in the region and so on.” Diplomacy has struggled with a lack of trust between the US and Iran A diplomatic solution also could prove elusive.

Eyre, of the Middle East Institute, said the Trump administration has shown no preference for “actual diplomacy,” relying instead on close advisers with little international relations experience while outsourcing some of the work to mediators such as Qatar, Pakistan and Egypt.

“We’ve got a tough road ahead of us, but it theoretically could be done,” Eyre said of potential negotiations to end the conflict. “Unfortunately, there is so little mutual confidence in the other side. There’s so little bilateral trust between the U.

S. and Iran that it makes everything so much harder.” Both Schenker and Yacoubian said recent comments from Trump, Rubio and their Iranian counterparts reflect some openness to diplomacy. Yacoubian pointed to the “measured” response from Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to the recent killing of U.

S. service members in Jordan, indicating a possibility for an off-ramp. Iran’s release last week of an Iranian-American woman who had not been allowed to leave the country also showed a sign of goodwill from Tehran, she said. But these small, positive signals could quickly become moot if the decision by Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi rebels Monday to announce a maritime embargo against Saudi Arabia expands to a complete shutdown of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

That, Yacoubian says, could constitute “a perfect storm of disruption” for the already precarious global economy. ___ Amiri reported from New York. Associated Press writers Aamer Madhani and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranProxyRussiaChina
1 source

Over the weekend, after exchanges where the US hit bridges and a desalination plant in Iran (reportedly repaired very quickly) and Iran’s response included hitting a much more important desalination and power plant in Kuwait and pounding important US operations in Jordan, the US attacks fell way back one night and CENTCOM and even Trump were quiet.

Some speculated that more Gulf states were denying the US the use of their airspace and the US was having to make a major regrouping. However, the US resumed strikes last night, with the pretext that the US had suffered two more military deaths on top of two just reported.

1 Trump had promised intensified strikes beginning more or less today if Iran did not return to negotiations, as in capitulate. And as many noted, the US had escalated last week, albeit not to the level of attacks during the initial phase of the war, not just with the number of strikes but also the targeting: the aforementioned desalination plant, bridges, too close for comfort to the Bushehr nuclear plant2 and to a nuclear site under development at Darkhovin.

Many have argued that the latest round of strikes look like shaping attacks in preparation for a ground operation, which pretty much everyone with even a modicum of military knowledge sees as insane.3 Daniel Davis has also mentioned in passing that despite all the noise about using ground forces and other signs of a buildup, such as more refueling tankers flying to Jordan, that Trump was shaken by the near-disaster at Isfahan, where a supposed rescue of a downed pilot resulted in the loss of more air assets than in any single engagement since Vietnam.

Many experts have contended that that was an actual operation, a botched attempt to remove some of Iran’s “nuclear dust.” However, Scott Ritter may have squared that circle. See his brief clip starting at 11:55: From a lightly-edited machine transcript: Jawaid: Scott Ritter thinks that Israeli lap dog Trump will soon launch a ground invasion of Iran, but he will fail miserably.

Also, this is something Iran has been wanting Trump to commit to for a long time. Ritter: There’s a a mission called a raid. Um, and I, you know, we already had US troops fighting on the ground. We did a raid to rescue a pilot. We were in limited ground combat operations there.

I think there’s a high potential that the US will conduct a raid here and there because that’s a that’s a a very specific task. A raid is is the only military mission where we plan to retreat. You know, every other military mission there’s no plan. You commit and you go, but a raid is in and out.

So maybe we can do a raid, but the idea that we’re going to land in seize territory, there’s zero chance that will happen because there’s zero chance of success. Now admittedly, if pilot rescue came about as the result of the botched operation in Isfahan, that would be debatable as a raid.

Even though the intent again was to retreat, the US would have had to stage equipment for the removal and transport of nuclear material, so there would be a short-lived occupation of terrain and not just a fast snatch and grab, as with Maduro. Nevertheless, the US military may not be totally suicidal, so the plan may be for a fast landing to inflict some sort of concrete form of damage that cannot be well inflicted from the air and then to decamp.

This segment also includes a very informative explanation of how important the operations in Jordan are to the US, and how the Iran intend is destroy bases so that the US has to retreat to Israel and then Iran will proceed forcefully against the remaining assets there.

We’ll soon turn to updates, but to start with some bigger picture considerations: it is disconcerting to see how many commentators resort to the trope that neither side can prevail on the battlefield, that they will in the end negotiate an outcome. As we pointed out, a study of modern wars found that more than half did not.

The distrust between the two sides, which has now reached the level of mutual loathing as a result of the fast breakdown of the already likely to fail Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), means any “deal” is vanishingly unlikely. Iran knew even before it entered into talks that the US and Israel intended to execute a “mowing the lawn” strategy, of keeping crippling sanctions in place and beating up on Iran every so often to weaken it and hopefully create severe internal divisions that would trigger an overthrow or balkanization.

Even if Iran’s 47 year record of taking severe punishment and surviving says this plot would probably fail, Iran had been preparing since the Iraq War for the US and Israel to launch a major campaign. After the illegal launch, the assassination of a major part of Iran’s leadership, as well as war crimes exemplified by the massacre of school children in Minab, the nation is highly unified around inflicting a decisive defeat on the US, so that it won’t even think about military action against Iran for at least a decade.

We were far from alone in making that case early in the war and Iran’s resolve has only stiffened as it can see how it has weakened the US while Iran has learned from combat and claims to have even bigger inventories of key weapons than it had at the start of the war.

Critically, Iranian leaders have said, bluntly, that negotiating with the US is not just pointless but also demeaning. Consider the germane parts of a recent statement by the Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei,4 as summarized at PressTV: - Leader said the United States had once again violated the memorandum of understanding signed between the presidents of Iran and the US, proving that the signature of the American president is worthless and unreliable.

- He said bullying, hegemonic ambition, and savagery are inseparable characteristics of the United States and that Washington had once again revealed its true, unmasked face to the world. - He described the latest developments – US attacks against southern Iran, mainly targeting the civilian infrastructure – as further evidence of America’s deceitfulness, irrationality, unreliability, and wickedness.

- Leader said the United States is seeking to ignite further war despite facing heavier costs and greater disgrace. - He warned that the Iranian nation and the Resistance Front have unforgettable lessons for the United States, adding that the bravery of Islamic resistance fighters and the courageous people of southern Iran have already demonstrated examples of those lessons.

However, Araghchi subsequently gave an interview which can be read as pushing back against the Supreme Leader:5 Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says that negotiations with the U.S. should be pursued even if the chances of success are only 10 percent, further highlighting disagreements between Iran’s political and military echelons.

“I am the Foreign Minister for the interests of… pic.twitter.com/uW1DzcfRhG — Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) July 19, 2026 Keep in mind also that China is still bleating about the need to settle the conflict and Pakistan and Qatar (among others) are also pressing for a resumption of the talks, so Araghchi as Foreign Minister has to keep the idea in play, irrespective of whether he privately places much stock in the idea.

6 And there is another way to read Araghchi’s talk: So they wanted to manufacture a clean record of “we exhausted every diplomatic option." Once that record existed, the hardliners with Mojtaba could shut the process down without looking like the ones who refused talks.

Moderates who pushed the channel now own the failure, and… https://t.co/Y63yYJVaEZ — Vonbury Research (@VonburyResearch) July 19, 2026 Kinetic action seems likely to continue to dominate: ADVISOR TO IRANIAN SUPREME LEADER, MOHSEN REZAEI, SAYING: “I declare it is over.

Both negotiation and war are over. If in the next two or three days the Americans continue the war, we will enter a phase of complete offense and destruction.”#Iran #IranWar pic.twitter.com/1M3A1pboH9 — Iran Now – WANA (@WANA_Iran) July 18, 2026 Robert Pape also seems confident that US escalation will continue7.

I found this discussion noteworthy because Andrew Neil strongly resisted the idea that there would be no negotiated ending and also found it inconceivable that Iran could become, as Pape has argued, the fourth world power. In other words, Neil seems to epitomize a set of normally pretty smart people who find it hard to see where the direction of travel is going because those outcomes so conflict with their priors: From a lightly cleaned up machine transcript: Pape: This is not what’s coming in the next few weeks likely.

What’s much more likely is he’s [Trump’s] going to do the close blockade and if he can then use the southern corridor with that close blockade to reopen the Strait, he’ll he’ll be probably satisfied with that. Very unlikely that’s going to work and that’s why you’ve got the 82nd Airborne and the Marines there to push back further.

Now, I’m not saying this is going to work, Andrew…. Neil: So, I’ve got to ask you some questions in this because I’m unclear. Do you think that the of the limited options President Trump now has, that escalation as you describe it is the most likely?

Pape: Yes. Neil: And that escalation will begin with a much more aggressive, more comprehensive a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz with the possibility of ground incursion on the northern side of the straight in Iranian territory? Pape: Yes. Yes, and it’s our and and the first part has already started this week.

So, so you’re already seeing in fact last week was the beginning of the air suppression campaign for this week. And as President Trump laid out the bombing schedule last night, the reason he will, if he if this keeps going forward, okay, just keep saying that if, he’s going to want to take out things like electric power and bridges is because he’s going to want to try to suppress as much of Iran’s military defenses as he can as he goes forward here.

And the military is giving him the plans for doing that. One place where I differ with Pape is that he posits that Congress might get out of bed in six months and Do Something to check Trump then. To again invoke Stein’s Law, if something cannot continue, it will stop.

The US and Israel can of course carry on with terrorism within Iran, such as assassinations and cyber attacks. But the level of weapons depletion and on current trajectories, shortly-arriving fuel shortages, seems very likely to put a choke chain on US aggression soon.

From Larry Johnson in The US Faces a Strategic Crisis with Iran…The Rapid Depletion of US Battlefield Missiles:8 The tables below are based on the most recent publicly available analyses from CSIS, the Payne Institute, and major media outlets (as of mid-2026), and provide a current (overly optimistic in my opinon) estimate for US inventory levels of these key weapons systems.

Please note that actual inventories are classified; these are informed estimates derived from DOD budget documents, procurement records, and reported expenditures during Operation Epic Fury (the US-Israeli war with Iran). Air Defense Missiles Anti-Radiation / SEAD Long-Range Strike (Ground & Sea-Launched) Missiles These are not just the numbers currently in the hands of US CENTCOM (i.

e., the US military command in charge of the war against Iran), these are the total numbers available to all of the US military commands. If these missiles are allocated evenly to the other two critical commands — i.e., EUCOM (European Command) and PACOM (Pacific Command) — then you begin to understand the gravity of this deficit.

Let’s take the case of the Tomahawk missile. Let’s assume there are 3,000 left (I believe that is a generous over estimate) and the remaining number are divided evenly among CENTCOM, EUCOM and PACOM… That means each command gets 1,000. Does anyone want to argue that in the event of a hot war with Russia or China that EUCOM and PACOM respectively would be able to sustain combat operations for more than four weeks?

Hell, CENTCOM fired 850 of them during the first four weeks of EPIC FURY. Here’s another major problem: All eight missile systems rely on rare earth elements — there are no exceptions among modern US precision-guided weapons. The dependence is nearly universal because rare earth permanent magnets are irreplaceable for the high-performance actuators, guidance motors, and seeker gimbals that make these weapons accurate.

And who controls the supply chain of these rare earth minerals? China!… The supply chain isn’t just about mining — it’s about processing, separation, and magnet manufacturing, which China controls: - Mining: China ~60% of global rare earth oxide production - Refining/Separation: China ~91% - Sintered NdFeB Magnet Manufacturing: China **~94%** Now to updates.

From Aljazeera’s live feed: - A vessel is on fire in the Strait of Hormuz after being hit by a projectile, forcing the crew to abandon ship. They were later rescued by a tugboat. - One person has been killed and several others wounded after the US military attacked the Iranian city of Tabriz in northwestern Iran.

The entries in the feed include ones describing how Mr. Market is taking cheer from the Iran Foreign Ministry admitting they are getting communiques from intermediaries and reviewing them as if they originated from the US. Recall that the negotiators have often developed ideas and tried to sell both sides on them.

Bloomberg’s Javier Blas, who has been a consistent seller of lower oil prices, is refreshingly precise about Iran not saying either way as to whether the missives were from the US or just the negotiators operating on their own: Iran has received “some proposals” from unspecified mediators regarding the war with the US, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmail Baghaei says in press conference, without elaborating.

— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) July 20, 2026 Contrast that with the Aljazeera account: Oil prices ease after Iran says US contacts continuing through mediators Oil prices have scaled back their gains after hitting their highest in a month after Iran said diplomatic exchanges with the US are ongoing via mediators despite renewed conflict in the Middle East.

Grr. Another Aljazeera live feed entry: Iran ‘counting down the minutes’ for US ground invasion [Today’s Iran war post launched more or less complete. I will be off duty for a while. If there are any updates, they will come in the comment section later] Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei says the United States will face “consequences of any adventure” to seize Kharg Island in southern Iran.

He added there are people in Iran’s leadership “counting down the minutes to welcome” US forces in any ground invasion. Kharg is the heart of Iran’s oil industry. It sits 55km (34 miles) off Iran’s coast in Bushehr province. President Trump has repeatedly threatened to seize the territory during the war.

A raid on Kharg could fit Ritter’s raid scenario, with the US busting things up and then leaving.9 But experts have pointed out that Iran has at least four other export routes. Kharg is the most efficient but losing it while being repaired would be inconvenient as opposed to a fatal blow.

From Bloomberg’s landing page: From US Bombs Iran for Ninth Day as Standoff Over Hormuz Deepens: The US conducted a ninth straight day of airstrikes on Iran, trying to force the Islamic Republic to stop shipping attacks and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

The American military bombed military targets and communications networks in a three-hour operation ending around 5:30 a.m. Iranian time on Monday. Iran continued to attack US bases in the likes of Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain and Iraq. The standoff shows no sign of easing, with Iran refusing to relent over Hormuz and insisting it has a right to manage traffic through the waterway.

Energy prices have jumped on the worsening hostilities. Brent crude oil rose to above $90 a barrel for the first time in more than five weeks in early trading on Monday. US gasoline prices climbed back over the $4-a-gallon mark, potentially hurting President Donald Trump and his Republican party ahead of midterm elections in November… Hormuz Shipping Traffic Slumps as US-Iran Hostilities Worsen The tit-for-tat attacks are getting deadlier….

Shipping volumes have slumped and the number of tankers and other vessels going through Hormuz is roughly down to the same level from the height of the conflict in March and early April… US President Donald Trump warned Iran last week he’d escalate airstrikes and widen the scope of targets until it backed down… Kuwait continues to experience some of the worst attacks from Iran.

Over the weekend, Kuwait’s main state energy company said an unspecified site sustained “significant material losses,” causing its evacuation and a number of injuries, while two power and desalination plants have been hit in recent days. And from Hormuz Traffic Near Standstill as US-Iran Hostilities Escalate: - Visible traffic through the Strait of Hormuz appeared at a near standstill Monday after Iran targeted vessels in the narrow waterway.

- A Marshall Islands-flagged bulk carrier and a liquefied petroleum gas carrier appeared to approach the strait, with the bulk carrier turning off its transponder while approaching. - The targeting of vessels will likely raise fresh concerns over the safety of ships transiting Hormuz, which could deepen disruptions to energy flows from the Persian Gulf to global customers.

Indirectly importance of US operations in Jordan, the lead story in the Wall Street Journal is Jordan Becomes New Flashpoint in U.S.-Iran War as Troop Deaths Rise. But it fails to set forth any of the juicy details that Janta Ka presents. This is the thin strategic gruel offered: For years, Jordan sought to play down its close military and intelligence cooperation with the U.

S. The U.S. aircraft that carried out strikes on Islamic State from a base in Jordan during the American war with the militants didn’t advertise the country they were operating from. But Jordan’s role is now becoming too prominent to obscure. Jordan has become an attractive location for U.

S. armed forces since it is among the most permissive in the Arab world when it comes to allowing the U.S. to operate from its bases. A bit more on Jordan: The view from Tehran. “The increased focus on Jordan may serve as part of Iran’s preparation and testing of operational concepts for more intense and precise strikes against Israel in later stages of the conflict.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia—have at times sought to impose limits… — Policy Tensor (@policytensor) July 20, 2026 By contrast, the House of Saud published a remarkably revealing document (hat tip Eugene Linden), Iran Struck Prince Sultan and No One Was Required to Say So: Iranian ballistic missiles struck Prince Sultan Air Base in Al-Kharj on July 18, wounding twelve US service members — two critically — and hitting KC-135 Stratotankers on the flight line while a second rotation was still climbing out.

Saudi Arabia’s Civil Defense Authority cleared the sirens six minutes later without naming the weapon, the origin, or the damage, and neither Riyadh nor Washington has issued an official statement since. The strike was the first direct Iranian attack on Saudi territory in approximately four months, a gap during which the IRGC struck Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, and the UAE while conspicuously sparing the Kingdom.

Its return to PSAB — confirmed by a US official to Axios, corroborated by satellite imagery, and detailed by Air & Space Forces Magazine — ended whatever territorial immunity Saudi Arabia believed it still possessed. But the more consequential development is not the strike itself.

It is the silence that followed, and the institutional architecture that sustains it: a three-party managed ambiguity in which Iran, Saudi Arabia, and CENTCOM each benefit from leaving the damage question unanswered, because answering it would force a public reckoning with a PAC-3 reserve that is approaching a ceiling none of them can afford to name.

The strike was confirmed by a US official cited by Axios as “the first time the Islamic Republic has directly attacked the kingdom in four months” — a description that the State Department, the Pentagon, and the Saudi Ministry of Defence have each declined to repeat on the record.

Air & Space Forces Magazine, drawing on multiple US military sources, reported at least twelve wounded and multiple Stratotankers damaged on the tarmac. Open-source satellite imagery corroborated the impact site within the base perimeter. Iran’s state broadcaster supplied what no government would.

The missiles were launched “moments after American refueling planes took off,” a detail that only makes sense if the IRGC had real-time ISR coverage of PSAB’s tanker rotation schedule. The aircraft hit were those that remained on the flight line after the airborne pair departed — the timing was deliberate, and the targeting message was not about maximising destruction but about demonstrating that PSAB’s daily operational patterns are watched, clocked, and within reach….

Riyadh cannot confirm the strike without confronting two questions it has spent the war avoiding. The first is defensive: if Iranian missiles hit PSAB and wounded US personnel, the Sakhir Declaration — the mutual defence framework Saudi Arabia negotiated with Washington — becomes the operative instrument, and invoking it requires publicly admitting what the Arab Center DC described as the core strategic dilemma: “the PAC-3 architecture is functionally exhausted.

” The second is economic. Aramco’s August Arab Light OSP already dropped $11 month-on-month to $1.50 per barrel below Oman/Dubai, the largest such cut in over two decades and the lowest since June 2020. Confirming that Iranian ballistic missiles are landing on military installations 77 kilometres south of the capital forces a sovereign-risk reassessment that Riyadh’s fiscal position — a Q1 deficit of SAR 125.

7 billion, with Aramco’s free cash flow at 0.85 times its quarterly dividend — is not structured to absorb…. Washington faces a different but parallel constraint. Confirming the strike means confirming that 2,300 US service members at PSAB are taking casualties at a base where 43 US warplanes have been grounded since Saudi Arabia’s Operation Project Freedom in May 2026.

CENTCOM cannot describe a defensive engagement at PSAB without also describing the legal anomaly: the 1977 USMTM memorandum governing US presence is not a Status of Forces Agreement, and Project Freedom severed the operational relationship between American air power and Saudi host-nation authority.

An official statement would invite the Congressional question that the Pentagon’s communications strategy is built to defer: why are American troops still at a base where their aircraft have been grounded by the host nation, absorbing Iranian fire under a legal framework that was designed for peacetime advisory missions?

Please read this article in full. It contains remarkable operational detail. It is over my pay grade as to why it was published, but it seems to suggest considerable unhappiness at Riyadh. Due to the length of this post, we have skipped over the fact that Ansar Allah seems just about to threaten or actually close the Bab el-Mandeb strait: 🚨 BREAKING 🇾🇪 YEMEN’S HOUTHI FORCES WILL MAKE A “HUGE” ANNOUNCEMENT TODAY AT 8:30 AM ET.

REPORTS EXPECT THEM TO ANNOUNCE A BLOCKADE OF THE BAB EL-MANDEB STRAIT. TOGETHER WITH THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ, THESE TWO CHOKEPOINTS HANDLE OVER 25% OF GLOBAL SEABORNE OIL TRADE. IF TRUE,… pic.twitter.com/yjavHpPKOi — Wimar.X (@DefiWimar) July 20, 2026 This does not look terribly negotiation-receptive.

And some additional sightings from Twitter: Israelis have never felt less secure. 64% are unhappy with how the endless wars have been run. 73% are upset at how there has been no real investigation of October 7. 73% of the public also feel the government has not dealt well with the rise in crime.

No one wins from these… https://t.co/4OjhLUD14O — Shaiel Ben-Ephraim (@academic_la) July 19, 2026 These remarks would seem to negate happy thinking about negotiations: ⚡️⭕️ Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei says Tehran is determined to exercise sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz through measures already taken, and states the US failed to fulfill its commitments under a memorandum of understanding, so Iran will not fulfill… — Middle East Observer (@ME_Observer_) July 20, 2026 The average price for a gallon of gas hit $4, the second time it has reached that benchmark since the war in Iran disrupted global oil supplies https://t.

co/Cg8rE3XnJ7 pic.twitter.com/3UqHfwU4sc — CNN (@CNN) July 20, 2026 Done for today! See you tomorrow! ____ 1 What kind of admission of weakness is this? Part of the job description of a service member is that they may wind up dying for their country.

Admittedly, the US is widely suspected of suffering a much higher body count and covering that up. But this show of extreme sensitivity to losses again shows the US has a glass jaw. 2 Nima also discusses at some length at the top of a new talk with Larry Johnson why they look misguided.

He knows Bandar Abbas well, which is where the US has been hitting bridges so as to isolate it. Nima explains and even shows pictures that the bridges exist only to cope with seasonal floods for a few months a year. Those sluices are dry now, so Bandar Abbas is easily accessible by all sorts of routes.

3 🚨 BREAKING: Russia has evacuated 198 of its personnel from the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant in Iran. It is believed that the plant could be targeted again. pic.twitter.com/lPoQB05qgo — GBC (@GBC_Press) July 17, 2026 4 A new trope in the US-backing commentary community is to depict the new Supreme Leader as a figurehead, which is easy to make stick given his lack of public appearances (I suspect that among other things, he is having facial reconstruction; that can take an extremely long time since procedures are done serially with healing time in between).

I believe it was on a recent Dialogue Works talk where Professor Marandi debunked one popular claim, that he IRGC was operating on its own authority. Professor Marandi described the governing structure and said the military (both the regular forces and the Guards) needed approval of the Supreme Leader for its operations.

Having said that, I have commented that Iran seems to have a Japanese-style decision-making structure, as in more bottoms-up than the West. That results in more time to make decisions but much more internal cohesion when they are reached, since those at lower levels would be able to voice concerns and make suggestions.

Upon reflection, this would make sense given that Iran adopted its “mosaic” structure of extreme decentralization so as to allow it to function well even when the leadership was killed or incommunicado, as we saw at the onset of the current conflict.

In the Japanese model, decisions are effectively made at the senior-middle level ranks, which does tend result in the board and CEO being ceremonial. But the top level can and does say no, or effectively does so by asking probing questions and sending the matter back down the chain for further study and perhaps some revision.

I have been involved in decisions in Japan where the board and CEO were highly engaged, and these were ones that were of critical strategic importance. 5 DropSite has a longer recap of Araghchi’s remarks: ⭕️ Iran FM Araghchi: Wars End Either Through Total Victory or Negotiations… Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi: 🔹 A war must be ended precisely at the point when you hold the upper hand on the battlefield.

Ending a war is possible either through total military victory or… pic.twitter.com/kHeYhShsXC — Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) July 20, 2026 IMHO his analysis is wrong-headed. As indicated above, a bit over half the modern wars do not end with a negotiated settlement.

And it is a false dichotomy to say that to win, Iran must conquer the US and Israel. FFS, please explain Vietnam. Bad logistics and depleting weapons mean that ex nukes, the US cannot win against Iran. The question is how long it takes and how much damage is done not just to Iran but also the world economy.

Keep in mind the intermediaries are still busy but motion is not progress: #Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesperson has confirmed that Tehran has received "ideas and proposals" from mediators. He declined to provide any further details regarding the specifics of the mediation efforts.

pic.twitter.com/8Pzs25eauc — Iran Nuances (@IranNuances) July 20, 2026 6 A memorable scene in the Daniel Ellsberg memoir Secrets is when Ellsberg, widely seen as the top US expert on Vietnam, briefed McNamara in a helicopter about how badly things were going.

McNamara said, “Just as I suspected,” and then upon landing updated the press on the great progress the US was making. 7 It has taken me too long to see why Pape often acts as if he is speaking to children or the stoopid. Making this his normal manner of presentation means that when he actually is having to speak to someone who is being stoopid, they won’t take offense.

8 However, to quibble with Johnson on another matter: he has been saying, as he does in the talk linked in Footnote 2 above, that the Iran attacks on a former US base in Syria, Al Tanf, were pointless because the base had been vacated for years. Vanessa Beeley, who has spent a lot of time on the ground in Syria and still has contacts there, begs to differ.

She says the base was recently restored to service. From Why did Iran target the US Occupation base at Al Tanf, Syria? On Friday 17th July, Iran carried out an extensive attack on the US occupation base at Al Tanf in Syria. A drone and missile strike targeted a US Special Operations Command base in south-eastern Syria..

the first strike on Syrian territory since the toppling of the former government in December 2024. In a statement, the IRGC said its aerospace forces conducted what it described as the 11th phase of “Operation Nasr-2,” targeting the strategically located base near Syria’s borders with Iraq and Jordan.

The IRGC further claimed the attack destroyed a radar installation and several U.S. military helicopters, while alleging that many American personnel were killed. This strike occurred as the build up of both Turkish and HTS military forces increases inside Syria, along the border with Lebanon and in the coastal region to the north of Lebanon.

I have been reporting on this here and here. Syrian sources provided more detail on the attack: Despite previous reports of an almost total evacuation of the Al Tanf base, located on the borders of Syria, Iraq and Jordan, almost 5 months ago – the intensity of the strikes suggested a shift in the site’s operational status.

This was not an empty base, in fact, according to sources, the IRGC’s tracking systems and human intelligence in the region detected U.S. forces airdropping “Special Forces” units into the base approximately two weeks before the attack. Analysis would suggest that the purpose of these drops might be to prepare for a ground incursion across Iraqi territory (Sulaymaniyah Axis) in coordination with the local Kurdish separatist factions in Iraq.

One military analyst told me: The attack reflects the operator’s ability to breach the secrecy surrounding U.S. movements and to convert radio and visual data into precise target coordinates. According to reports from inside Syria, the strikes inflicted direct damage on the base’s newly constructed infrastructure, neutralised the US elite combat force and derailed the Iraq-Axis operation against Iran.

Of course, US media will not report on the planned operations or on the number of casualties – such a critical security breach and the significant scale of damage, as reported, will not be revealed. 9 Maybe mines?

strikeUnverifiedIran
1 source

Vessel transits through the Strait of Hormuz totaled 53 in the week through July 20, according to Lloyd's List Intelligence data, down from 157 the previous week, with tanker and gas carrier movements falling to 30 from 90. Kpler tracking showed daily crossings declining from averages above 20 vessels before July 15 to single digits by July 16 and remaining low thereafter.

These figures followed the reported start of a U.S. blockade and related maritime restrictions announced by Iranian authorities.

Location: Strait of Hormuz