As the New York Times reported, it continues to be unclear who was behind last month’s tanker attacks, despite Bolton’s assertion at the time that Iran was “almost certainly” responsible.

Following Thursday’s alleged attacks, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said “suspicious doesn’t begin to describe what likely transpired this morning” and expressed the urgent need for diplomacy.

Another Iranian official told BBC News that Iran “had nothing to do with today’s apparent attacks” and said “someone is trying to destabilize relations between Iran and the [international] community.”

According to Iran’s Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), an Iranian rescue vessel picked up 44 sailors and brought them to safety following the tanker explosions. 

It is unclear how much damage was done to the tankers or whether anyone was harmed by the reported attacks.

In a column on Thursday, Bloomberg oil strategist Julian Lee argued that while Iran would have “little to gain” from attacking tankers in the Gulf of Oman, it will likely “still get the blame—and suffer the fallout.”

The “group that will benefit from the incident,” Lee wrote, is “the people who want to see the U.S. step up its campaign against Iran and move from an economic war to a military one.”

“There are plenty of those, both in the U.S. and among its allies in the Persian Gulf and wider Middle East regions,” Lee added.

The alleged attacks, Lee concluded, are “absolutely understandable if you’re someone whose ultimate goal is to derail any easing of tensions between the two nations, and to effect regime change in Tehran. Whoever is behind the attacks is no friend of Iran.”

Leave a Reply