The uneasy truce between the United States and Iran is showing signs of collapse as both sides escalate military action and sharpen their rhetoric over the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, raising fears of a renewed regional conflict. Adding to the tensions, Trump said he had “left instructions” for a massive military response should Iran succeed in any alleged plot to assassinate him. Speaking publicly, he warned that Iran would be bombed “at levels they have never seen before,” while claiming he had remained on Tehran’s “kill list” for years.
US President Donald Trump has declared that the Strait of Hormuz remains “open,” directly contradicting Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority, which said maritime transit would not resume until “stability and calm are restored.” The conflicting statements underscore the deep mistrust that continues to define relations between Washington and Tehran despite ongoing diplomatic contacts.
Trump’s remarks that Iran has hatched a plot to “assassinate” him followed the funeral of Iran’s former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who, according to Iranian reports, was buried at the Imam Reza Shrine in Mashhad 131 days after being killed during joint US-Israeli strikes inside Iran. They also came amid renewed reports of an alleged Iranian assassination plot targeting the US president.
Despite the heightened rhetoric, Trump said Washington had agreed to continue discussions after what he described as a request from Tehran. However, he simultaneously insisted that the ceasefire between the two countries was effectively over.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran has asked us to continue talks. We have agreed to do so, but the United States has stated to them, in no uncertain terms, that the ceasefire is OVER!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
The latest military escalation centres on the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s traded oil and natural gas normally passes. Long regarded as one of the world’s most strategically important waterways, the strait has become the principal flashpoint in the deteriorating US-Iran relationship.
Iran said it launched retaliatory strikes against US military facilities in Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Jordan following renewed American attacks on its southern coastline. Iranian officials also claimed they would consider targeting additional regional bases if further strikes continued.
The United States said its latest operations were launched after Iranian forces attacked the Cyprus-flagged container ship GFS Galaxy while it was transiting the Strait of Hormuz. According to US Central Command (CENTCOM), the vessel caught fire after the attack, suffered severe engine-room damage and was unable to continue its voyage.
An Indian national remains missing following the attack, while 10 other crew members were rescued.
The US military confirmed that it carried out a third wave of airstrikes within a week, targeting approximately 140 military sites across Iran. CENTCOM said precision strikes hit missile and drone launch sites, naval facilities, ammunition depots, communication networks and coastal surveillance systems.
Explosions were reported in several Iranian port cities, including Bandar Abbas, Sirik, Chabahar, Bandar-e Deyr, Jask, Asaluyeh and on Qeshm Island. Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency said projectiles struck military installations near Qeshm but reported no civilian casualties. Explosions were also reported in Bandar Abbas and Hajiabad.
US officials said the strikes were intended to degrade Iran’s ability to threaten commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
“We bombed the hell out of them last night,” Trump told NBC’s Meet the Press.
Iranian media reported that at least one naval officer was killed during the attacks.
The renewed fighting comes nearly halfway through a 60-day interim agreement intended to pave the way for a permanent end to hostilities between the two countries. However, the latest exchange of strikes has placed those negotiations in jeopardy.
Iran continues to insist that it should exercise primary control over navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and has suggested that commercial vessels could face new transit conditions. The United States, meanwhile, maintains that the waterway remains an international shipping route that must stay open.
US military officials said more than 140 vessels transited the strait during the past week, although a multinational maritime security organisation overseen by the US Navy reported that commercial traffic had fallen significantly from pre-conflict levels.
Before the conflict, nearly 140 ships crossed the strait each day, carrying about 20 percent of globally traded oil and natural gas. Although oil prices initially surged to around $120 a barrel during the fighting, they have since retreated as markets adjusted to the evolving security situation.
The United Nations has expressed alarm over the rapidly escalating confrontation. The UN Secretary-General António Guterres said he was “deeply concerned by the serious escalation,” warning that continued military exchanges risk further destabilising the Middle East and threatening one of the world’s most critical maritime trade corridors.
As Washington and Tehran exchange military blows while simultaneously signalling a willingness to continue negotiations, the contradiction at the heart of the current crisis remains stark. The fragile truce that briefly offered hope of de-escalation now appears increasingly vulnerable, with every new strike bringing the region closer to another full-scale conflict.
The flip-flop continues with Trump saying at the same time that Washington has agreed to continue talks with the Islamic Republic following Tehran’s request, but reiterated that the US still considers the ceasefire between the two sides to be “over”.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran has asked us to continue ‘talks.’ We have agreed to do so, but the United States has stated to them, in no uncertain terms, that the Cease Fire is OVER!” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.
The result is that a direct military conflict has erupted between the United States and Iran following reciprocal missile strikes, shattering a fragile three-week-old ceasefire and raising imminent fears of an all-out regional war. Concurrently, Washington has reimposed economic sanctions on Tehran, triggering an immediate surge in global energy markets.
Brent crude, the international pricing benchmark, jumped 6 percent to $78 per barrel after US President Donald Trump declared that the interim peace agreement was officially “over”. Following the initial Iranian strikes on shipping, the U.S. also took the significant step of revoking a critical license that—for the first time in years—had permitted Iran to openly conduct its oil sales in U.S. dollars as part of the broader interim deal.
Earlier, addressing reporters at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkiye, Trump expressed deep scepticism about a diplomatic resolution. While he noted that U.S. representatives could technically continue negotiations, he cast severe doubt on any positive outcome. “They can talk, but I think they’re wasting their time,” he remarked. Later, speaking further on the operations from Ankara, Trump added, “We attacked very powerfully last night, the very dangerous people from Iran. They’re sick; there’s something wrong with them.”
The rhetoric quickly drew a sharp rebuke and strong condemnation from Tehran. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who also serves as a top negotiator for the nation, retorted on the social media platform X that Trump’s dismissive remarks “are not a sign of power but an admission of the failure” of overall U.S. policy toward Iran. Further warnings emerged from the Iranian legislative branch, where Ebrahim Rezaei, the spokesman for the Iranian Parliament’s National Security Committee, promised a swift retaliation following the American strikes, writing on X, “Wait for the hard slap by Iranians”.
Almost at the same time, amid spiralling regional tensions, Iran’s top negotiator and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf strongly hit back at Washington, detailing numerous breaches of bilateral agreements by the United States. In a post on X, the senior Iranian official enumerated several “major violations” of the MoU committed by the US administration, indicating a severe breakdown in diplomatic commitments between the two countries. According to the Parliament Speaker, these American actions include “violating Iranian adjustments in the Strait”, “persistent threats of further strikes”, “reinstating oil sanctions”, “attacks on southern Iran”, and “continued Zionist aggression” in Lebanon.
Issuing a firm warning against Washington’s hard-line approach and asserting Tehran’s refusal to back down under intense military and economic pressure, Ghalibaf concluded his statement on a defiant note. “The era of bullying and extortion is over. It leads nowhere,” he wrote on X. “We don’t fold.” The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs echoed this stance, labelling the operations a “gross violation” of the pact, while Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the US strikes had “rendered key, fundamental elements of the war-ending agreement ineffective”.
Conversely, the international community saw prominent Western backing for Washington’s actions, alongside shifting diplomatic stances from regional neighbours. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte strongly endorsed the U.S. offensive, stating that the military response from Washington was fully warranted following Iran’s persistent strikes on commercial vessels. Meanwhile, regional condemnation against Tehran intensified; the Oman Foreign Ministry released an official statement condemning Iran’s attacks on military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait, as well as its hostile operations against ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Qatar’s Foreign Ministry also slammed Iran for its role in the escalating violence.
During his remarks at the summit, the US President issued a sweeping series of military and economic threats directed at the Iranian government. Beyond initiating further rounds of missile strikes, Trump indicated that the United States is prepared to reinstate a naval blockade and directly target Iran’s domestic power grids and water treatment facilities—actions that prominent international law experts warn would constitute flagrant war crimes.
Furthermore, he warned that American forces “may take over” Iran’s strategic Kharg Island, a highly aggressive manoeuvre that military analysts note would almost certainly require a deployment of ground troops. Trump has threatened to seize the critical oil-production hub of Kharg Island at previous points in the conflict, including just last month when he publicly questioned whether the U.S. “has the stomach for it”. The geopolitical stakes surrounding the island are immense, as approximately 90 percent of all Iranian oil exports pass directly through the facility.
The escalation marks a total collapse of the June 17 memorandum of understanding (MoU), which had established a 60-day window for formal peace negotiations. Both nations have traded blame for violating the pact, which notably allowed Tehran to continue selling crude oil on the global market for the duration of the diplomatic talks.
At the centre of the dispute is a fundamental disagreement over the implementation of the agreement’s core terms. David Des Roches, former Pentagon NATO operations director, explained that the original framework was straightforward: “The MoU required the US to lift its reciprocal blockade of Iran’s ports – which it did – and it required the US to waive sanctions for the Iranian sale of oil – which it did – and it required Iran to not interfere with civilian shipping in the Strait of Hormuz”. Under this interim deal, Iran and the United States had originally agreed to allow commercial ships to navigate through the strait for 60 days without paying transit charges.
However, a major point of contention has emerged over the fifth clause of the MoU, which dictates that Iran “will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels, with no charge for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman, and vice versa”. Tehran has interpreted this specific provision to mean that it holds sole “responsibility in determining arrangements for the safe passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz,” according to Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei.
Consequently, Tehran has insisted on controlling the precise routes of these vessels and has vowed to eventually charge fees for passage—a move that would fundamentally upend decades of established maritime practice in the waterway. According to Des Roches, when Iran launched its initial attacks on these ships, Tehran was actively trying to instil a “new normal” entirely outside the original boundaries of the MoU, creating an environment where ships were forced to traverse Iranian waters under the explicit threat of attack if they did not comply. “That’s unacceptable to President Trump. So these strikes are a retaliation to that action,” Des Roches noted.
This unilateral routing policy has been used by Iran to justify its recent attacks on unapproved vessels transiting the strait. Washington specifically accused Iran of having recently targeted three distinct ships transiting the strait, including the Marshall Islands-flagged MT Al Rekayyat, the Saudi Arabia-flagged MT Wedyan, and the Liberian-flagged MT Cyprus Prosperity. The vessels targeted appeared to be utilizing a route close to Oman’s shore rather than the specific path ordered by Tehran. In response, the U.S. and several Gulf Arab states have firmly stated they will not agree to let Iran charge passage fees through the international strait.
The sudden breakdown in diplomacy and the fresh wave of attacks on shipping vessels, occurring despite ongoing negotiations, may expose a profound ideological divide within Iran’s senior leadership. Hard-liners within the regime seek lasting, uncompromised control over the strategic waterway, viewing it as a globally vital conduit for fuel shipments and a critical lever in confronting Western powers. Conversely, pragmatists within the government are pushing for a permanent peace deal capable of lifting crippling international sanctions to provide desperately needed economic relief to the domestic population.
Compounding the internal political tension is a transition of power following a major leadership loss. Formal negotiations to reach a final diplomatic deal had been scheduled to commence immediately following the daylong funeral for Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed on February 28 during the opening moments of the war. The extensive funeral proceedings were originally intended to serve as a designated period of lower military tensions. Elsewhere, ceremonies honouring the late Supreme Leader drew prominent regional figures; Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Iraqi Prime Minister Ali Falah al-Zaidi, and various other high-ranking Iranian and Iraqi officials travelled to attend funeral services in the Iraqi city of Najaf.
Instead of a cooling-off period, the conflict has rapidly intensified. This fierce rhetorical and military retaliation from Tehran comes in direct response to a dramatic escalation of hostilities, with the United States launching extensive operations against Iranian targets following fresh maritime incidents. Washington defended its latest military actions by asserting that the new wave of strikes was executed in direct retaliation for Tehran’s operations against commercial shipping navigating the critical Strait of Hormuz. The American military’s latest bombardment marks the second consecutive day of major airstrikes against Iran, pushing the adversarial nations to the brink of an all-out war.
This rapid escalation represents the most severe security crisis since both countries signed the mid-June memorandum of understanding, a diplomatic breakthrough that had temporarily halted the hostilities. As part of this sweeping offensive, US forces launched targeted strikes across eastern Iranian cities—including Iranshahr, Bandar Abbas, Konarak, Chabahar, and Bushehr—as well as Aq Qala in the north-eastern region of the country. According to the state-run news agency IRNA, at least one firefighter was killed during a bombardment at the Iranshahr airport.
Providing further operational details of the heavy bombardment, the US military’s Central Command (CENTCOM), which is responsible for military operations in West Asia, confirmed its forces executed a series of counter-offensives on July 7 against Iran to further degrade its ability to attack commercial shipping and innocent civilian mariners. CENTCOM stated that its forces hit over 80 targets with precision munitions as an immediate response to the shipping attacks, later expanding the total to 90 specific Iranian military targets hit along the coastline.
According to official statements, the dynamic strikes successfully hit Iranian air defence systems, command and control networks, coastal radar and surveillance assets, key missile and drone storage repositories, naval capabilities, and vital military logistics infrastructure, alongside more than 60 Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) small boats in and near the Strait. CENTCOM declared its forces remain fully prepared to hold Iran “accountable” for any violations of the agreement.
Following his departure from the NATO summit in Ankara, Trump arrived at a military base in the United Kingdom, where he utilized his social media platform to share several videos depicting what he claimed were active explosions inside Iran. Accompanying the footage, the President issued another stern warning to Tehran, writing: “This is in retribution for yesterday’s bombing of ships by Iran. If it happens again, it will get much worse!”
Despite the aggressive rhetoric, Trump had stated earlier in the day that he did not expect the current back-and-forth military engagements to evolve into a “long-term” campaign. “Anything that happens is going to happen very fast,” he remarked, though he simultaneously implied a more absolute conclusion by suggesting the U.S. military might “just finish the job”.
Nevertheless, the President consistently doubled down on his previous threats to target critical Iranian civilian infrastructure, explicitly naming electricity networks and desalination plants, alongside his intent to seize the vital oil-production hub on Kharg Island. Trump amplified international anxieties over a broader war by explicitly pronouncing that the interim agreement to pause hostilities was “over,” even as he hedged by noting he would still permit ongoing diplomatic talks to proceed.
The ripple effects of the American strikes instantly widened the theatre of conflict across the Persian Gulf. Hours after the initial US bombardments, air raid sirens echoed across Bahrain. Concurrently, Kuwait’s Ministry of Defence reported that its national air defence networks were actively engaged in confronting incoming rocket and drone attacks.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps subsequently claimed responsibility for the regional spill over, confirming they had launched large-scale retaliatory attacks targeting 85 US military sites across Bahrain and Kuwait in response to the US attacks. Specifically, the IRGC claimed to have targeted the US Fifth Naval Base at Port Salman in Bahrain, as well as Kuwait’s Ali Salem Airbase. Additionally, Iranian forces asserted that they successfully shot down an American MQ9 drone that attempted to “interfere in the operation”, adding an ominous warning that future responses could become even more expansive.
While sporadic attacks had repeatedly strained the unstable ceasefire in recent weeks, Trump’s latest declarations and the ensuing heavy military exchanges have injected profound new uncertainty into the region. The immediate market reaction drove oil prices sharply higher following his statements. Analysts warn that a full-scale reignition of the conflict threatens to completely engulf the wider Middle East and would almost certainly paralyze vital energy shipments moving through the strategic Strait of Hormuz.
