Who has attacked Iranian oil tanker?

Reportedly, an Iranian oil tanker Sabiti was hit by missiles in Red Sea waters off Saudi Arabia on Friday. The incident is likely to further heighten friction in the region already rattled by attacks on tankers and oil installations since May. Oil prices rose on the news of the incident and industry sources said it could drive up already high shipping costs.

The Red Sea is a major global shipping route for oil and other trade, linking the Indian Ocean with the Mediterranean via the Suez Canal.

It is the latest incident involving oil tankers in the Red Sea and Gulf region, and may ratchet up tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia, long-time regional adversaries fighting a proxy war in Yemen, at the southern end of the Red Sea.

There was no claim of responsibility for the reported incident and it has yet to be independently confirmed.

The proximity of the tanker at the time of the attack to Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah port gives western media to allege that the missiles could have been launched from the kingdom.

Another plausible theory could be that the ship was hit in an Israeli sabotage operation. The purpose would be to disrupt Iranian tanker activity in the Red Sea corridor as it heads toward the Suez Canal. A third possibility would be that the attack was conducted by a terrorist group.

An Iranian government spokesman has described targeting of an Iranian-owned oil tanker by missiles as a “cowardly attack” and said Iran would respond after the facts had been studied.

“Iran is avoiding haste, carefully examining what has happened and probing facts,” government spokesman Ali Rabei, siad.

Separately, a senior security official said video evidence had provided leads about the incident, adding that the Sabiti was hit by two missiles.

“A special committee has been set up to investigate the attack on Sabiti... with two missiles and its report will soon be submitted to the authorities for decision,” said Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran’s top security body.

“Piracy and mischief on international waterways aimed at making commercial shipping insecure will not go unanswered,” he said.

According to Iranian sources, leakage of cargo from the tanker has been stopped as it heads for the Gulf. The tanker is heading for Persian Gulf waters and it was expected to enter Iranian waters safely. Nasrollah Sardashti, head of National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) that owns the damaged tanker, said the crew was safe and the vessel would reach Iranian waters within 10 days.

Saudi Arabia said it received a distress message from the damaged tanker but the vessel kept moving and switched off its transponder before it could be provide assistance.

The United States has been balaming Iran for attacks on tankers in the Gulf in May and June as well as for strikes on Saudi oil sites in September. Tehran has denied having a role in any of them.

The U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet, which operates in the region, said it was aware of the reports but had no further information.

According to western media, at times, Iranian narratives offer diverging accounts. State-run television, citing the national oil company, said the tanker was hit by missiles while denying a report they came from Saudi Arabia.

It also said, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said the ship was hit twice, without saying what struck it. State television broadcast images from the Sabiti’s deck saying they were taken after the attack but showing no visible damage. The ship’s hull was not in view.

Political risk consultancy Eurasia Group said it did not have firm evidence about who may have been behind the incident.

World 15 years after 9/11

In the aftermath of 9/11, the United States with the help of other developed countries launched counter-terrorism by attacking Afghanistan and Iraq. Apparently, the two countries had nothing to do with those who attacked twin towers and Pentagon.

Afghanistan was attacked for providing shelter to OBL and Iraq was attacked for having WMD. The irony of the fate is that both the pre-texts proved wrong. Now most parts of the world are inferno due to proxy wars. However, the super power will never admit that it breeds and supports terrorists to engage in proxy wars.

Readers are invited to explore the following narratives and arrive at any conclusion at their own:

1. The attacks on twin towers and Pentagon were either the biggest security lapse or the worst melodrama.
2. The attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq had ‘other motives’ but hardly any link with attacks on the US.
3. The key motive was to break out wars to keep the arsenal factories working at full capacity.
4. The US initiated ‘regime change’ movements mainly to destabilize and fragment many countries.
5. To achieve its motives the US created first phantom AQ and later on the second one ISIL.
6. If one watches ‘science fiction movies’ creation of phantoms those go out of control is common.
7. The real world phantoms that operate internationally are Taliban, AQ, ISIL and many others operating locally or in particular regions, most obvious being MENA and South Asia.

If one tries to find reasons for the above-stated narratives then arriving at the following conclusion will be much easy. After having learnt from the experiences of two World Wars, the biggest super power is sponsoring many proxy wars to maintain its number one position.