Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
LAST UPDATE | 13 Jun 2019
US SECRETARY OF State Mike Pompeo has accused Iran of being behind attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman earlier today, and said it was taking the case to the UN Security Council.
“It is the assessment of the United States that the Islamic Republic of Iran is responsible for the attacks,” Pompeo told reporters.
“This is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise need to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication,” Pompeo said.
The suspected attacks left two tankers in flames in the waters of the Gulf of Oman, sending world oil prices soaring as Iran helped rescue stricken crew members.
The mystery incident, the second involving shipping in the strategic sea lane in only a few weeks, came amid spiralling tensions between Tehran and Washington, which earlier pointed the finger at Iran over tanker attacks in May.
The Norwegian Maritime Authority said three explosions were reported on board the Norwegian-owned tanker Front Altair after it was “attacked” along with the Singapore-owned ship Kokuka Courageous.
Iran said its navy had rescued 44 crew members after the two vessels, which were carrying highly inflammable material, caught fire.
TV images showed huge, thick plumes of smoke and fire billowing from one of the tankers as it lay out to sea.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif spoke of “reported attacks” as Japan’s prime minister held talks in Tehran.
“Suspicious doesn’t begin to describe what likely transpired this morning,” Zarif tweeted.
The US Fifth Fleet said its warships had received distress calls from both vessels in a “reported attack”.
Iranian state media said the first incident occurred on board the Front Altair at 8.50 am (5.20 am Irish time) 25 nautical miles off Bandar-e-Jask in southern Iran.
The Marshall Islands-flagged tanker, a 111,000-tonne vessel, was carrying a cargo of ethanol from Qatar to Taiwan, official news agency IRNA reported.
“As the ship caught fire, 23 of the crew jumped into the water and were saved by a passing ship and handed over to the Iranian rescue unit,” it said.
“An hour after the first accident the second ship caught fire at 9:50 am 28 nautical miles off the port.”
“I can confirm that the vessel has NOT sunk,” Robert Hvide Macleo, chief executive for the ship’s owner Frontline, wrote in a text message to AFP. No injuries were reported.
The Panama-flagged Kokuka Courageous was headed to Singapore from Saudi Arabia with a cargo of methanol, and 21 of its crew jumped and were rescued, IRNA said.
‘Security incident’
Singapore-based BSM Ship Management said it had “launched a full-scale emergency response following a security incident” involving the Kokuka Courageous which is owned by Japanese company Kokuka Sangyo Ltd.
It said the vessel was about 70 nautical miles from the United Arab Emirates and just 14 from the coast of Iran.
Japan’s Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Hiroshige Seko told reporters in Tokyo: “A tanker carrying Japan-related goods was attacked.
“There were no injuries among the crew members. They got off the tanker. There were no Japanese members.”
The incident came as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was on an unprecedented visit to Iran, seeking to defuse tensions between Toyko’s ally Washington and the Islamic Republic.
Tehran said it has dispatched a helicopter from the port of Bandar-e-Jask to the ships’ location for “further investigation”.
Oil price spike
World oil prices spiked after a merchant shipping information service run by Britain’s Royal Navy reported an “incident” in the Gulf of Oman.
Global oil prices gained around four percent immediately after the reports of the attack. Benchmark Brent oil was trading at $61.74 a barrel, up about three percent.
The European Union called for “maximum restraint” to avoid an escalation in the region.
The Gulf of Oman lies at the other end of the strategic Strait of Hormuz from the Gulf, part of a vital shipping lane through which at least 15 million barrels of crude oil and hundreds of millions of dollars of non-oil imports pass.
On 12 May, four oil tankers – two Saudi, one Norwegian and one Emirati – were damaged in still unexplained attacks in the Gulf of Oman off the United Arab Emirates.
Saudi King Salman earlier this month warned a meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation that “terrorist” attacks in the Gulf region could imperil global oil supplies, as he sought to galvanise support among Islamic countries against arch-rival Iran.
The world’s top oil exporter has ratcheted up tensions with Iran after the sabotage attacks, which were followed by an attack on a key Saudi oil pipeline, which was claimed by Yemen’s Huthi rebels.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Israel or the US in order to further escalate tensions in the gulf, both of these nations are only waiting for an excuse to attack Iran.
@Charles Coughlan: probably the Russians ..they’d love to see the USA bogged down in another gulf war leaving them free to press on into Ukraine
@Charles Coughlan: yep. sounds like a CIA strike to me
@Charles Coughlan: No, Saudi Arabia or United Arab Emirates likely did this. The previous 4 tankers attacked were in a UAE port and now two more tankers are attacked when sailing past UAE.
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are in Yemen fighting a proxy war against Iran, the Iran backed Houti rebels. They are trying to drag the US into a war with Iran. The Houtis are getting arms from Iran including long range missiles, thet are using to attack Saudi Arabia.
Also, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was in Tehran for peace talks, the two tankers hit had Japanese cargo. This seems like it was a criticism against the peace talks by Saudi Arabia.
@Charles Coughlan: the bins were late been collected today. Must be Israel’s ( the root of all evil in the world) fault.
@Dean Anderson: yep, agreed
@Charles Coughlan: yeah, poor oul Iran. Always a victim. And it’s such a lovely country to deal with
@Seamus Murphy: Iran hasn’t invaded another country in over 200 years, the United States has invaded over 200 countries.
@David Jordan: smells like Mossad
@Charles Coughlan:
Block the strait
Tensions rise
Oil rises
Fracking is back in profit
US does well.
@Dorothy Giselsson: Really? You best tell the UN as quick as you can.
@David Jordan: how are the houthis getting arms from Iran? As in just from a geographical perspective? Doesn’t seem practical by land or sea.
@Charles Coughlan: Trump has pointed the finger at Whales.
@Jenny Boyle: And that somehow makes the USA they bad guy????
@Charles Coughlan: really world we are going to trust trump and boris to fix Iran? after the wmds? really another war for oil?
I’m confused. How do the US “pull out”, but the Iranians “break”, a deal?
@George Salter: they’re not the only two signees
@George Salter: exactly, the US scrapped the deal last year, Iran held up their side of the deal for a year after that.
@George Salter: It’s a rhetorical question. “Pulled out” looks better than “Ignored” or “disobeyed”; whereas “break” looks the same.
Essentially, it’s been decided somewhere (probably in the Pentagon and Langley, among others), that Iran are automatically wrong in any disagreement, and, furthermore, that they will always have nefarious hidden agendas, too….
False flag operation.
@George Salter: The pull out method doesn’t work.
@George Salter: For the same reason that Iran backs terrorists but the US backs rebels.
@Fr. Fintan Stack: incorrect, the US only backs “freedom fighters”
@George Salter: Well technically no, pulling out and breaking are different. America announced that they would be pulling out of the deal while Iran started doing stuff contrary to the deal without pulling out. Symantics yes, but they are different.
@Dave O’Keeffe: Iran accepted the deal when the US were part of the deal, if somebody pulls out of the deal then the deal is no longer what Iran signed up to and is de facto broken at that point.
@Diarmuid Hunt: true but all the signees bar the US said they remained committed to the agreement.
@Dave O’Keeffe: Unless they signed a new deal or signed a declaration of their commitment to the altered deal then those words mean nothing, none of the remaining signatories are obligated to adhere to it. Learned that the hard way myself, always get it in writing.
The bias is palpable. Bolton will be along any minute now with irrefutable ‘proof’ it was Iran while producing nothing but sound bites.
@Derek: remember Iraq
@Derek: https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/that-time-john-bolton-said-its-good-to-lie-about-war-4b956c063caa?fbclid=IwAR2kHj1A0Bvkka8O1DIqPrAzb02h2kxv5ujZozlMLu4hIpSbniCFk2WHa3k. Bolton is chomping at the bit for a scrap…..
@Derek: Mike Pompeo seems to have all the evidence he needs.
Surprisingly quickly too!
I’m sure the investigation has been wrapped up by lunch time.
@Philip King ⚡️: Spot on.
Iran will be blamed
@high ho silver: I’d say that the general idea, could have a Israeli fingerprint on it , there itching for the US to attack Iran.
@high ho silver: Two ships carrying Japanese cargo attacked at the same time as Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe was in Tehran for peace talks, and the Iranians rescue 44 sailors (missed that in this article earlier). The Kokuka Courageous has sunk (it was going to Singapore). The MV Front Altair was going to Taiwan. But these might have been stopovers before heading to Japan. Well, I think this crime scene implicates Saudi Arabia. They were attacked close to where the previous 4 ships were attacked. Saudi Arabia wants a direct conflict with Iran.
@Daithi Ó Raghallaigh: do you think the Israeli sentiment towards Iran has anything to do with Iran’s sworn intention of destroying Israel.
@Seamus Murphy: “Iran’s sworn intention to destroy Israel ‘, absolute rubbish.
@Seamus Murphy: that’s an absolute misrepresentation. Can you find one quote from the Iranians where they say that?
@Ivan Connolly: No doubt someone will shortly post a reference to the deliberately mis-translated speech by Ahmadinejad which in reality did NOT call for Israel to be wiped off the map, but it served certain interests to claim it did, and the media initially bought that bogus version and some echo it still.
@Ivan Connolly: https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1003332853525110784?s=09
@Clifford Brennan: https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/531057306142650369?s=09
@Clifford Brennan: And for the record that speech was translated for the Times Of Israel by US-based non-profit Middle East Media Research Institute, which sounds fine till you find more about it and who set it up.
Check it out:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/aug/12/worlddispatch.brianwhitaker
@Squiddley Diddley: Luckily for us the tweets you’ve ignored are very clear. Have you the
“correct” translation that those dastardly folk in memri mistranslated? What was actually said? Has the guy been deliberately misquoted? You’re not going to rely on a 17 year old article to hide behind, surely?
“The US Navy rushed to assist amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran.”
Reuters has a completly different headline, which reports Iranian media that claims the Iranians rescued 44 sailors…
Tanker sinks after attack in Gulf, 44 crew picked up by Iran – IRNA
“Iranian search and rescue teams picked up 44 sailors from the Front Altair and another damaged tanker, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) reported on Thursday, citing an unnamed informed source.”
“https://news.yahoo.com/damaged-tanker-front-altair-sinks-092247989.html
One of the tankers has sunk.
@David Jordan: The two headlines are not actually contradictory. “The US rushed…. and are now assisting the vessels”. The Iranians “rescued 44 sailors”. One could say that one actor protected assets, and the other, lives. But, sure, that would be against the current US-axis narrative, so is obviously boll0cks; sorry, propaganda
@David Jordan:
Iranian state media.
Not saying it’s necessarily fake news, but given Iran’s history when it comes to state propaganda I’d take it with a pinch of salt until they have credible video evidence to back up the claim.
Press Freedom Index 2019 – Iran ranked 170th out of 180:
https://rsf.org/en/ranking?#
@The Great Unwashed: You’re right about Iran, a lot of their news is fabricated so has to be taken with a grain of salt.
But I can see that the MV Kokuka Courageous sailed towards Iran after it was hit. The MV Front Altair sailed away from Iran, it was hit about 2 am UTC (3am our time, 6am their time).
The MV Front Altair was hit around 3am UTC (4am our time and 7am their time) sailed in a circle and then away from Iran.
Just checked the sunrise, it was at 05:24 UTC local time at the port of Fujairah. So both vessels were attacked 30 minutes and 1.5 hours after sunrise. The 4 previous tankers were hit off the nearby UAE port of Fujairah in the early hours of the morning, before sunrise, they blamed mines not torpedos.
It’s probably easier to torpedo a ship when the sun comes up, though this doesn’t help tell who attacked.
@David Jordan: the text before second link should refer to the MV Kokuka Courageous not MV Front Altair. Also, the Front Altair was hit at 2.46am UTC, nearly the same time as the MV Kokuka Courageous, around 3am UTC.
@David Jordan:
Iran may be correct about rescuing the crew but you can understand my skepticism.
I’ll also be skeptical if the US blame Iran for the attack until they can come up with credible evidence to support the claim.
@The Great Unwashed: Also, look at which side of the ships were hit, their Right (Starboard) side. They were sailing out of the a Gulf. What ever hit them, torpedo?, was fired from the UAE/Saudi side of the Gulf. Check their course on Marine Traffic.
I think this is strong evidence that Iran did not do this.
@David Jordan:
I wouldn’t read too much into that. It could have been a mine or a torpedo – if the former the point is moot, and if the latter the strait is so wide at that point that whoever is responsible could have launched the attack from whatever direction they wanted.
While Tango shoots his mouth off world politics slowly but surely descends to anarchy. The whole world, it’s dog and American congress, both sides of the house know that he is the lowest common denomination of a human being. He has no interest other than himself. A lot of the Arab nations in fairness are no better than him but, they are quiet happy to live in their own little bubble. You keep poking the bear and you are going to get a reaction. America will never be ‘great’ while he holds his position and he is dragging the rest of the world down with them.
@Sea Graham: let’s make “America great again”
@Sea Graham: Any tensions with Iran probably have more to do with groundwork for Trumps 2020 campaign than anything else.
The world is so f##$ed up. Iran aren’t a pillar of democracy but if the yanks really cared about democracy then they wouldn’t support the Saudi autocracy. It looks like we’re been prepared for the narrative that the world won’t be safe until Uncle Sam removes the Iranian threat. Such a move protects the Saudis who have a Shia neighbour removed. The Israelis also see the most powerful allies of Palestinian leaders removed. To top it all off. The arms companies need a war. They need to destroy their produce in order for more to be needed. The yanks will recoup their money through the ‘rebuilding’ of Iran’s infrastructure. It’s bad when the world needs the Russians to intervene in order to prevent war.
@The Oracle:
Sunni(Saudi) and Shia(Iran) Islamic sects have been at each others throats for centuries since the split, it basically has its very own version of the cold war but only for a good few centuries longer. Since oil came into the picture in the last century it has drawn various countries of influence, good and bad, onto either side. The Saudis are in the pocket of the US, just ask Kissinger and research how the petro-dollar came about.
@Candace: Agree with all but the assertion that the Saudis are in the yanks pockets. The Saudis are the only force who can keep a pro US lid on the explosive keg that is the middle East. The oil will still be sold of course. However, the wrong bunch of despots come to power and China, Russia or whoever else gets first choice. The rest of us know this too. Iran doesn’t suit this worldview. Most Saudi citizens are anti Israeli imperialism. However, their views are buried within the cocoon of total monarchy. Iran, while not a beacon of human rights, is a society where popular unrest has already overthrown a pro American dictator. If they replace the Saudis as power broker then the yanks and Israel are in trouble.
@The Oracle:
Agreed, interesting times ahead.
We have already long surpassed peak oil production globally. The remaining reserves and the supply chains will be fought over secretly and then openly to protect ways of life and military industrial complex. In the very near future flights to the med and holidays could become impossible due to the cost of overpriced oil. How will military function? We need to reverse oil dependency quickly but even nuclear power plants use oil or gas most of the time to power turbines to pump water to cool reactors. What happens when they can’t get those limited resources anywhere. We are staring into a very seismic change of lifestyle and massive population decline if we don’t adapt quickly and start looking at real alternatives.
@Thomas Quinn: is population decline a necessity I wonder? More people = more consumption = more resources = greater environmental impact
@Thomas Quinn: “We have already long surpassed peak oil production globally.”
This statement is not true besides world is switching from oil to gas which is plentiful.
False flag
Sounds like a CIA conspiracy!
Was it the Americans that attacked or pirates?
@Ibhar Mac Suibhne: Is there a difference?
@Martin Horan: about ten stone
Fuel prices just went back down and now this happens to push prices up again? Funny that…
@K Lawlor: WTI heading below 50 dollars a barrel, Brent around 60, peaceful Middle East not good for profits,
id have more respect for Bolten and Trump if they just dropped the charade of false flag attacks and just attacked Iran.
@Ibhar Mac Suibhne: Why attack Iran, the only war mongers out there (at the moment) are the US, Russians and the Israelis or am I missing something, if you want to see mass shootings visit America where they occur every few days…
Ah, good old US intelligence. Remember the whole WMD thing in Iraq?
Never knew that there were Seals in the Gulf of Oman
@thejamer: It now looks as if it was US seals they launched som special drones loaded with explosives a few miles away from the Ships. Probably between the ships and Iran so that the theory that “iran did it” is supported. Enough to go to war on for a starving beast like the US right now?
A couple of years ago you would be given a tinfoil hat for suggesting this was a false flag operation. How the times have changed.
@Billy Heffernan: Haha, so true.
On another note, Bolton, Pompeo and Gina Haspil need to be fired immediately. Do the NeoCons really expect us to believe Iran are responsible for attacking a Japanese ship while in negotiations with Iran. Trump needs to get his finger out and remove them. They’re not on the same side. The last thing he wants now leading into an election is a war. It would be a dream come true for whoever the democrat contender is.
Gulf of Tonkin 2.
Sounds like it is the go ahead for the irish to pay more at the pumps in the next few days, Just wait and see
Yanks must looking to invade Iran create a war. Raytheon, Boeing and co must seeing drop in profits that they need to sell more weapons.
Golf of Tonkin by proxy. So obvious and also so stupid that it’s done at the same times as the Japanese minister is in Teheran !
Saudi degenerates at it again.
The Saudis, The Israelis or the Yanks. Iran is most unlikely to shoot itself in the foot!
The Liberty Bell this has happened before America wants a war
Or more likely the Arabs to push
Oil prices even higher. Ask who benefits?
Oil baron
@Trust The Chalice: your out there somewhere and il find you
Attack on the USS liberty comes to mind , along with the gulf of Tonkin incident,and the weapons of mass destruction.
Great… a false flag event to start yet another war that’s actually about oil.:|
Methinks a bit of misdirection is afoot
Ask a teenager about black opps
really world we are going to trust trump and boris to fix Iran? after the wmds? really another war for oil?
An attempt to copy the Tonkin Bay excuse” that “allowed” the US to start the Vietnam war? The “proof” is that earlier similar attacks were blamed on Iran, also without a shred of evidence. With the US media not asking for tangible proof the risk for a US attack is now higher than ever. Recall the Iraq war started on just lies. After, no corrective action. Sickening.
It’s time the US or Israel give these tyrant countries a serious slap
Shock and Awe.
It is a worrisome concern in June , 2019 that oil tankers on shipping route at gulf of Oman are being attacked. As per news reports , four oil tankers were attacked on the said route on 12 June , 2019. Now , the news is that two oil tankers , one Norwegian and other Japanese , were attacked in same area on 13 June , 2019 and left adrift. These happenings have reportedly taken up the oil prices , while stoking fears of new confrontation between Iran and the U.S. In this context , it may be apt to refer readers to this Vedic astrology writer’s predictive alerts for more care and appropriate strategy through article – “ World trends in April to August 2019” – brought to public domain widely in March and subsequently on 5 April , 2019. The alert had said that during a period of four and a half months from mid- April to August , particularly June , in the present year 2019 , more care and appropriate strategy was called for in the Arabian Gulf also involving the following :-
“ 1. Economic and financial aspects may reflect major worrisome concerns.
5. ………Fires and blasts may in addition be such concerns”. It seems the alert has been indicative and time –tuned.
have your say