The United States and Iran have exchanged strikes for the first time since signing a ceasefire framework last week, raising fears of a wider escalation just days before the two sides are due to resume talks. Each accuses the other of firing first.
What set off the latest cycle
The flare-up began on June 25, when a drone struck the Ever Lovely, a Singapore-flagged container ship, in the Strait of Hormuz off the coast of Oman. The vessel was damaged but no crew were hurt, and US forces said they intercepted three further drones in the same attack. US Central Command blamed Iran and called it "unwarranted aggression"; President Donald Trump described it as "a foolish violation of our Ceasefire Agreement." Iran has not claimed responsibility for the ship strike.
In response, the US military said it carried out airstrikes on Iranian military targets on June 26 — hitting missile and drone storage facilities and coastal radar sites, according to the Washington Post.
Iran says it struck back
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps then announced it had retaliated. In a statement, the IRGC Navy said it had "targeted the deployment sites of the US military in the region," and warned that "if the aggression is repeated, our response will be broader than this," Al Jazeera reported. As of the time of writing, however, there were no reports of US sites actually being hit, and neither side has reported casualties from any of the exchanges. The Iranian claim could not be independently confirmed.
Dueling claims over who broke the deal
Each government frames the other as the violator. Iran's Foreign Ministry said the American strikes on coastal surveillance facilities "violate Article 1 of the Memorandum of Understanding" — the ceasefire framework signed on June 17, which was meant to halt fighting and open negotiations, including over which shipping lanes vessels may use through the Strait of Hormuz. Washington's position is the reverse: that Iran broke the agreement first by attacking the Ever Lovely, making the US strikes a lawful response.
US Vice President JD Vance issued a blunt warning that "violence will be met with violence" if attacks continue. An Iranian lawmaker, meanwhile, accused the US of striking "in the middle of negotiations."
What happens next
For all the rhetoric, there were early signs that neither side wants a full rupture. Talks between the two governments had been scheduled to continue, and oil prices fell rather than spiked after the exchange — a sign markets are not yet betting on a collapse of the framework. The Strait of Hormuz carries roughly a fifth of the world's seaborne oil, so any sustained disruption there would have global consequences.
With both capitals blaming the other and no neutral arbiter to judge who breached the June 17 deal first, the ceasefire holds, for now, mostly on paper. Whether the scheduled talks survive the latest strikes is the question hanging over the region.
