U.S. strikes three more Iranian tankers as Trump calls conflict ‘small potatoes’
Translated from Korean and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- U.S. Central Command said it struck three tankers linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in retaliation for a missile attack on U.S. naval vessels.
- The strikes disabled two tankers and destroyed a third after its crew was ordered to leave, according to the command.
- Iran condemned the attacks as illegal and aggressive, while the Trump administration described the broader conflict as limited and began discussing a postwar regional strategy.
The United States has struck three more Iranian oil tankers in retaliation for an attack on U.S. naval vessels, delivering what Washington describes as a larger economic response without declaring a broader military escalation.
U.S. Central Command said Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fired ballistic missiles at a U.S. aircraft carrier and a guided-missile destroyer patrolling at sea. In response, American forces targeted three tankers linked to the Revolutionary Guards. The Dawni, near Kharg Island, Iran’s largest oil export hub, and the Stark 1, near the Jask area, were rendered inoperable. The Kylo, in the Gulf of Oman, was destroyed after its crew received an order to abandon ship.
If you attack two of our ships, we will remove three of yours, imposing a greater economic cost.
The strikes followed a new Trump administration response policy aimed at inflicting greater economic damage each time Iran attacks. The United States had already begun targeting Iran-linked tankers after Iran attacked commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, under an approach described as “a tanker for a tanker.”
Gen. Brad Cooper, head of U.S. Central Command, said the operation sent a clear message to the Revolutionary Guards: “If you attack two of our ships, we will remove three of yours, imposing a greater economic cost.” He added that the United States would not hesitate to carry out further strikes against Iranian oil carriers if necessary.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry called the attacks “illegal and aggressive acts” and war crimes. Iran’s military warned that it could expand attacks on U.S. warships if Washington continued its maritime blockade and strikes on Iranian vessels.
We are not fighting right now. There is no battle.
At the same time, the Trump administration has sought to reduce the political impact of the conflict before the November midterm elections. Trump described the situation as intermittent military clashes and called it “small potatoes,” saying, “We are not fighting right now. There is no battle.” Vice President JD Vance likewise said he would not call it a war and that there was no active fighting. Democratic Representative Ro Khanna accused the administration of gaslighting Americans about what they could see for themselves.
The administration has also begun planning a postwar Middle East strategy, Axios reported, citing U.S. officials and people familiar with the discussions. The proposal would seek to contain Iran regionally, expand normalization between Israel and Arab countries, and build a regional cooperation system backed by the United States. The plan remains unfinished. One source described it as “cooking, but not fully cooked.”
I would not call this a war.
Originally published by Hankyoreh in Korean. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.