The United States and Iran exchanged a new wave of military strikes on Thursday (July 9), marking the second consecutive day of direct attacks as tensions over the strategic Strait of Hormuz intensified. The latest escalation has heightened concerns about the stability of one of the world’s most important maritime trade routes, threatening global energy supplies, international shipping, and broader regional security.
The renewed confrontation comes months after the outbreak of war following US-Israeli strikes against Iran in late February. Since then, the conflict has evolved from targeted military operations into a broader struggle over control of the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow but strategically critical waterway through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil shipments pass.
As both nations launched fresh attacks, diplomatic efforts appeared increasingly uncertain despite indications that behind-the-scenes negotiations may still be continuing.
The US military announced that it carried out extensive strikes targeting Iran’s military infrastructure along its southern coastline, saying the operations were designed to reduce Tehran’s ability to threaten international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
According to the US Central Command (CENTCOM), approximately 90 military targets were struck during Thursday’s operation. The targets reportedly included missile storage facilities, drone depots, logistics centres, command sites and other military installations linked to Iran’s coastal defence network.
US officials said the operation was a direct response to recent Iranian attacks against commercial vessels transiting through the Strait of Hormuz.
Washington accused Tehran of deliberately targeting civilian shipping in an attempt to tighten its control over the vital maritime corridor.
US President Donald Trump defended the latest military action, describing it as retaliation for attacks on international shipping.
“This is in retribution for yesterday’s bombing of ships by Iran,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
“If it happens again, it will get much worse!”
Military officials maintained that the strikes were carefully planned to weaken Iran’s capacity to threaten freedom of navigation rather than expand the conflict.
Iran responded within hours by launching missile and drone attacks against several US military installations in the Gulf region.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced that it had targeted what it described as “key infrastructure and facilities” at American bases located in Kuwait and Bahrain.
Among the reported targets were Camp Arifjan and Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, along with facilities in Juffair and Sheikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain.
Residents in Bahrain’s capital, Manama, reported hearing multiple explosions as air defence systems intercepted incoming projectiles.
Kuwaiti authorities confirmed that the country’s military successfully intercepted what it described as hostile missile and drone attacks before they reached their intended targets.
A US military official later stated that the Iranian strikes caused no American casualties and only limited damage to military facilities.
The relatively limited impact of the Iranian attacks suggests that regional air defence systems remained effective despite the increasing intensity of the conflict.
Multiple explosions were reported across different parts of Iran as the American military campaign expanded.
Iranian state media reported that a railway bridge in the country’s northeast had been struck during the attacks.
The official IRNA news agency also confirmed strikes on a military base in Bushehr, a coastal city that is home to Iran’s only civilian nuclear power plant.
Although authorities reported military installations being targeted, there were no immediate indications that the nuclear facility itself had sustained damage.
Elsewhere, Iranian media reported warplanes flying over Kish Island in the Persian Gulf while explosions shook several southern port cities, including Bandar Abbas, Konarak and Chabahar.
Parts of Chabahar reportedly experienced electricity outages following the strikes, although officials did not immediately provide details regarding the extent of the damage.
The widespread attacks underscored the geographical scope of the current conflict, stretching from Iran’s southern coastline to installations deeper inside the country.
The latest fighting once again centred on the Strait of Hormuz, which has become the most significant point of contention between Washington and Tehran.
Before the outbreak of war in February, the narrow waterway functioned as an international shipping lane with unrestricted commercial access.
However, Iran has since insisted that it should control all maritime traffic passing through the strait.
Tehran has declared that foreign vessels must comply with Iranian regulations, pay transit fees and follow authorised shipping routes established by Iranian authorities.
Iranian officials have also warned that ships deviating from approved routes could become military targets.
Those warnings have already translated into action.
Iran’s military reportedly struck at least three commercial vessels in recent days, prompting Washington to launch extensive retaliatory attacks against Iranian military infrastructure earlier this week.
The dispute represents one of the most serious threats to global maritime trade in decades.
The Strait of Hormuz carries a substantial share of global crude oil exports as well as large volumes of liquefied natural gas, making any disruption capable of sending shockwaves through international energy markets.
Although President Trump declared that the previous ceasefire with Iran had effectively ended, he also suggested diplomatic channels remained open.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One late Wednesday, Trump revealed that Iranian representatives had recently contacted his administration.
“They called a little while ago,” he said.
“They want to make a deal so badly.”
However, Trump did not identify who had participated in the conversation or provide details regarding any potential negotiations.
He also questioned whether meaningful progress could be achieved, describing the Iranian leadership as “sort of crazy.”
The mixed messaging reflects the complicated position facing the White House.
On one hand, Washington has adopted an increasingly aggressive military posture in response to attacks on international shipping.
On the other, the administration appears aware of the economic and geopolitical risks associated with a prolonged regional conflict.
Iranian leaders responded defiantly following the latest American strikes.
Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, reiterated Tehran’s position that the Strait of Hormuz would only remain open under what he called “Iranian arrangements.”
Posting on the social media platform X, Ghalibaf accused Washington of relying on intimidation and failing to honour previous commitments.
“The United States still has not learned that bullying and breaking its promises no longer come without consequences,” he wrote.
“Let me be clear: If you strike, you will be struck.”
Iran continues to argue that its control over the strait is necessary to protect national security following the US-Israeli attacks that triggered the conflict earlier this year.
The latest military escalation coincides with preparations for the burial of former Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who was killed during the opening stages of the war on February 28.
The funeral is expected to attract senior political and military figures from across Iran and could further strengthen domestic calls for continued resistance against the United States and Israel.
The timing has added additional political significance to the latest exchange of strikes, with both governments seeking to demonstrate strength during a highly symbolic period.
The rapidly deteriorating security situation has prompted renewed international calls for restraint.
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres appealed to all parties to avoid further escalation and return to diplomacy.
Pakistan, which has played an important mediating role during previous US-Iran negotiations, also urged restraint while encouraging renewed dialogue.
Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a telephone conversation with Qatar’s prime minister on Wednesday.
According to Tehran, both leaders stressed the importance of resolving regional disputes through diplomatic means rather than military confrontation.
The discussions highlighted continuing efforts by regional governments to prevent the conflict from expanding further.
Thursday’s attacks followed another major exchange of military operations earlier in the week.
CENTCOM stated that US forces had struck more than 80 Iranian military targets during Tuesday’s campaign.
Iran, meanwhile, claimed that its Revolutionary Guards had launched attacks against dozens of American military facilities located across Kuwait and Bahrain.
Iranian state television reported that eight members of Iran’s military were killed during the initial American strikes.
Despite the repeated exchanges, US officials said the latest Iranian retaliatory attacks failed to inflict significant damage or casualties on American personnel.
Military analysts note that while both sides continue to exchange strikes, neither appears willing to launch a full-scale ground conflict.
Instead, both governments appear focused on degrading military capabilities while attempting to gain leverage ahead of possible future negotiations.
Despite President Trump’s declaration that the ceasefire had collapsed, several analysts believe diplomatic negotiations have not completely ended.
Gregory Treverton, professor emeritus of international relations at the University of Southern California, said the president faces difficult political and economic choices.
According to Treverton, Trump is caught between maintaining a strong military posture and recognising the growing economic consequences of prolonged conflict.
“It does illustrate the dilemma the president’s in,” Treverton said.
“On the one hand, he doesn’t want to admit that, in effect, we’ve lost this war.”
“On the other hand, he also knows that the longer this goes on, the worse it is for the world economy and the US economy.”
Treverton argued that the administration therefore faces increasing pressure to find a diplomatic solution while avoiding the appearance of backing down.
Experts believe Iran’s greatest strategic advantage continues to be its ability to influence shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
Rather than seeking outright military victory, Tehran appears focused on using the waterway as leverage during negotiations with Washington.
Even if active fighting eventually subsides, analysts warn that commercial shipping may never return to the unrestricted conditions that existed before the war.
“In that sense, almost any outcome of the war is going to be worse than what existed before,” Treverton observed.
Before February, vessels transited the strait freely under internationally recognised navigation rights.
Today, shipping companies face increased military risks, higher insurance costs and ongoing uncertainty regarding future access.
Those changes could reshape global maritime trade even if a new ceasefire is eventually reached.
Neighbouring Oman has condemned recent attacks against Bahrain, Kuwait and commercial vessels but has stopped short of directly blaming Iran.
The Gulf state has consistently maintained a neutral position throughout the conflict, seeking to preserve its long-standing role as a regional mediator.
That neutrality is now under increasing strain as discussions continue over future arrangements governing the Strait of Hormuz.
Washington insists that international shipping must enjoy unrestricted passage through the waterway.
Iran, however, continues to demand transit fees and has rejected proposals allowing vessels to use Omani waters as an alternative route.
The disagreement has complicated mediation efforts aimed at restoring confidence among international shipping companies.
The ongoing conflict continues to have serious consequences for global maritime workers.
International Maritime Organization (IMO) Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez said approximately 6,000 seafarers remain stranded in the region as security conditions prevent normal shipping operations.
Although some commercial traffic cautiously resumed after Washington and Tehran agreed to end hostilities last month, the renewed fighting has once again placed vessels and crews at significant risk.
Three ships were recently attacked while sailing near Oman, where authorities had proposed a temporary maritime transit corridor hugging the country’s coastline.
Shipping companies remain reluctant to fully resume operations while military activity continues around one of the world’s busiest maritime chokepoints.
As both Washington and Tehran continue to exchange strikes while simultaneously signalling a willingness to negotiate, the future of the Strait of Hormuz remains uncertain. The conflict has evolved beyond a bilateral military confrontation into a crisis with significant implications for global energy markets, maritime commerce and regional stability. While diplomatic contacts appear to be continuing behind closed doors, the latest wave of attacks demonstrates how fragile any path toward a renewed ceasefire has become.
