[Yves here. Today’s Iran war post launched before complete because I had to run out. It does seem to be largely done but given the resumption of kinetic action, there may be late-breaking news. So please return or refresh this post at 8:30 AM EDT for a final version]
So much for that pause. Trump, perhaps amped up by Netanyahu’s visit or channeling Lindsey Graham at his funeral could not wait for the weekend to resume strikes in the Middle East, albeit here in concert with the Saudis on Iraq allies of Iran.1 As we’ll discuss later, this escalation means the Saudis have no interest in making concessions to Ansar Allah to stop their attacks, which choke Red Sea oil shipments. Note that the last report we had was that Ansar Allah was not letting any tankers go to Saudi ports, even Chinese ones; they were letting only loaded Chinese vessels exit.
I have to confess to being too thick to recognize the clever plot in accusing Iraq militias of the attacks on the Saudi oil operations in Abqaiq, following ones by Ansar Allah on production facilities in Jazan. As we reported yesterday, not only did the Iraqi forces quickly deny any role but Ansar Allah issued an almost offended statement about the Saudis attempting to shift blame, which they depicted as an effort to deny the effectiveness of Ansar Allah as a fighting force.
If you’ve been following the war closely, it’s been clear that the US and Israel have been plotting to Do Something to Iran, perhaps via its border with Iraq, even though the Iraq-Iran war prosecuted against a much weaker Iran killed a lot of Iranians but otherwise did not advance US aims. The US has been trying to enlist Iraqi Kurds to have a go at Iran, with not much success.2 The New York Times and Wall Street Journal reported on “secret” Israel bases in Iraq, supposedly used for refueling and medical treatment…which were not secret to the US. The US also recently attacked pilgrims going from Iran into Iraq.3 Needless to say, Iran has been pounding the US base and operations in Iraq, with the latest attack 6 days ago.
The landing page of PressTV highlights the Iran retaliation on Jordan, which as of this writing is the latest exchange:
And a visual:
As of an hour ago, Aljazeera, unlike PressTV, had not reported on the Jordan strikes, but has caught up:
Note that many have looked at the chronology and (as discussed longer form below) assume the Iran strike on the Jordan base was in retaliation to the US-Saudi strikes in Iraq. But the PressTV lead story says otherwise. From IRGC hits US airbase in Jordan with ballistic missiles, halts trespassing ships in Strait of Hormuz:
The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) has staged a retaliatory ballistic missile strike against an American airbase in Jordan, besides halting three trespassing vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.
“In response to the aggressive actions of the child-killing US military, the brave fighters of the IRGC’s Aerospace Force launched several ballistic missiles at a US airbase and the US military’s Central Command’s headquarters in Jordan,” the Corps said in a statement in early Wednesday….
In line with the MoU, the Islamic Republic also designated a maritime route for safe and legal passage through the Strait of Hormuz. The US has, however, been trying to help ships evade the route by seeking to escort trespassing vessels through an illegal passageway.
Iran’s Armed Forces have staged uncompromising retaliation in the face of each instance of violation, including those taking place in support of illegal vessel movement in the Strait of Hormuz.
Bloomberg’s energy/oil reporter took note:
Iran seems to be linking its attack against a US base in Jordan (with Washington said was a “surprise” attempt to breach its defenses) with an attempted crossing via the Strait of Hormuz of three oil tankers.
— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) July 29, 2026
From the top of its live feed:
United States and Saudi forces have launched attacks on Iran-aligned groups in Iraq in retaliation for “30 IRGC-directed” drone attacks in the past 30 days, including on Saudi Arabia’s oil facilities.
Iran claims an attack on a US base in Jordan, with the Jordanian army saying it shot down five missiles at dawn.
An entry in the feed shows Kuwait is predictably backing the Saudis, which commits it to more escalation:
Kuwait condemns attacks on Saudi oil sites, holds talks with Qatar on regional security
Kuwait’s Foreign Ministry has condemned the strike on oil infrastructure in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia as “blatant aggression” and a “flagrant violation” of the country’s sovereignty.
It said the attacks reflect the “insistence on escalating tensions” by Iran-aligned armed groups despite Riyadh’s “sincere efforts” to de-escalate tensions. Kuwait reaffirmed its “absolute solidarity” with Saudi Arabia and backed any measures it takes to protect its security and resources.
By contrast, the spin at Bloomberg is remarkable. They are flogging the notion that Iran just upped and broke the pause for fun, as opposed to in response to US bombing of Iraqi militias. Mind you, Iran has recently made statements that amount to “Don’t assume we will just sit back and act only in response to attacks.” And many have praised the idea, saying the time is overdue for Iran to be driving the OODA loop.
But “surprise attack”? Seriously? As if Iran is expected to tell the US in advance? This is juvenile, particularly since there was no announced or agreed US ceasefire, merely a short halt in US strikes. And of course it was the US that ended the pause by hitting the militias in Iraq. And the US most certainly did not down all the Iran missiles aimed at the Jordan base. Consistent with the short video at the top of the post, other sources pointed to evidence to rebut CENTCOM’s assertion that the Iran strikes were ineffective:
🚨BREAKING: US CENTCOM Claims All Of Iran’s Ballistic Missiles Were Intercepted
However, there is footage & photos suggesting otherwise, while locals reported impacts.
NOTE: CENTCOM also claimed on July 17 that Iran’s strikes had not injured a single soldier, in a statement… pic.twitter.com/RfZx5gPULA
— MintPress News (@MintPressNews) July 28, 2026
The intent of the “surprise” framing may be to reinforce the reality-challenge Trump claim that the Iran was negotiating with the US. The Administration has continued to flog that idea and investors continue with their Pavlovian behavior of acting as if it were true:
This has to be a fucking joke. https://t.co/D7bHghIZS0 pic.twitter.com/PaSmMxWinV
— HFI Research (@HFI_Research) July 28, 2026
Brace yourself for the story proper, US Intercepts Iran Attack on Bases, Puncturing Days of Calm:
The US said it intercepted an Iranian attack on military bases, ending a dayslong pause in fighting and increasing the risk of a return to full-blown war in the Middle East.
US Central Command said Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces launched multiple ballistic missiles from Iran in an attempted surprise attack on US forces based in the Middle East, and all Iranian missiles were successfully intercepted.
The Iranian attack raised the prospect of renewed escalation, despite President Donald Trump’s repeated assurances that diplomacy with Tehran was making progress.The US said it intercepted an Iranian attack on military bases, ending a dayslong pause in fighting and increasing the risk of a return to full-blown war in the Middle East.
“Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces launched multiple ballistic missiles from Iran in an attempted surprise attack on US forces based in the Middle East,” US Central Command said Tuesday evening. “All Iranian missiles were successfully intercepted. US forces remain vigilant and at a high state of readiness.”
The regional command also said US and Saudi forces conducted military strikes on Iran-backed militants in Iraq after Tehran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps directed 30 drone attacks against US forces in the last 72 hours. The Iranian-linked attacks were not successful, Centcom said.
This is way way into “Department of Huh?” terrain. The major news media have been piously reporting that the pause between the US and Iran that started over the weekend was still holding; the row between Ansar Allah and the Saudis was depicted as separate.
The CENTCOM press release flogs the false notion that Ansar Allah acted on Iran orders. Those who have been paying attention know better. The trigger was the Saudis enforcing their long-standing air blockade by preventing the landing of a commercial aircraft at Saana, returning mourners who had attended the Iran Supreme Leader Khamenei’s funeral, by blowing up the runway, forcing a landing at another airport. But CENTCOM asserts that Iran was pulling the strings:
U.S. Central Command and the Saudi Arabian Armed Forces conducted precision strikes in Iraq, July 28, against Iran-aligned terrorists that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) directed to attack U.S. forces and Saudi energy infrastructure.
This Global 21/Patricia Marins assessment on Substack is mixed bag but the overview is more on target than the US patter. It accepts the US-Saudi spin that it was the Iraqi forces that made some of the later attacks on Saudi energy infrastructure. I put that in the “not proven” category. It is just as credible the US and Saudis instead attempted to use that claim to justify further preparation in Iraq for a US/Israel operation against Iran, with the unduly optimistic hope that Iran would not treat that as a break in the “pause”. But it at least has a timeline and more about what happened. From US and Saudi attack has Iran at its epicenter:
On the 29th, Saudi Arabia, together with the United States, carried out a major airstrike on Iraqi soil against the PMF militia, killing at least 10 fighters and wounding dozens more.
The Saudis claim the attack was in retaliation for the launch of more than 30 drones against their territory in the previous 72 hours, carried out in coordination with Yemeni attacks.
The Saudi-American strike hit at least six Iraqi cities, including the PMF headquarters in Basra.
The PMF is a pro-Iranian militia with more than 200,000 members that was incorporated into the Iraqi armed forces and receives salaries from the government. Even so, it maintains strong loyalty to Iran, as do most of the region’s Shia militias…
And why not in Yemen? Obviously, because the Houthis would retaliate with missiles, sending Saudi oil facilities up in flames, even if the whole of Yemen were to burn.
The Americans and Saudis now plan to deal with Yemen, but the situation is far more complicated than that. Upon learning of the American attacks on PMF positions, Iran launched missiles against the U.S. base in Jordan, which suggests that the Iranians were deeply disturbed by the strikes and intend to maintain an offensive posture, at least for as long as the U.S. keeps its blockade in place.
This is precisely the point at which all sides decided to settle matters with force, leading me to believe that the Yemenis will continue their attacks and the blockade of Saudi ships in the Bab el-Mandeb.
A view from Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش on Twitter:
Why Did Iran Strike Jordan?
A. Iran’s current leadership is determined to set the pace of the confrontation rather than simply react to decisions made in Washington. Tehran wants to demonstrate that it retains the initiative and can shape the escalation on its own terms.
B. Iranian leaders increasingly interpret Washington’s caution as a sign of hesitation and a lack of political will to sustain a prolonged confrontation. In Tehran’s assessment, that creates an opportunity to test American resolve.
C. From Iran’s perspective, the maritime blockade itself constitutes an act of war. [Ahem, it is an act of war] Unlike previous crises, the current leadership appears unwilling to accept restrictions on its maritime access without responding militarily.
D. Today’s strikes should also be viewed in the broader regional context. They are closely linked to the activities of Iran-backed militias in Iraq against Israel, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Tehran sees these fronts as part of a single campaign aimed at reshaping the regional balance of power while exploiting what it views as the strategic vulnerabilities of the Gulf states and the United States.
E. The attack also reflects the doctrinal shift that has taken place in Iran since the death of Ali Khamenei. The new leadership is not content with deterrence through retaliation alone; it increasingly favors proactive military initiatives while relying heavily on its missile, drone, and proxy capabilities. Tehran believes the current crisis presents an opportunity to redefine the security order in the Persian Gulf in its favor.
F. The pressure now shifts back to Washington. Iranian decision-makers appear to believe that a limited U.S. response will not alter the strategic equation. Their expectation is that the United States will eventually face a choice between accepting a broader escalation or making significant strategic adjustments.
The wee problem continues to be Trump. Robert Barnes continued his discussion of Trump’s warped thinking processes with Daniel Davis:
From a lightly edited machine transcript:
60 Minutes Australia did an interview with the people who just wrote Regime Change book who confirmed a lot of things we talked about in sense of Trump’s decision-making behavior radically changing from his first term to his second term, especially over the last year. Trump told them,told Maggie Haberman that he wanted to be seen as a Napoleonic figure. So what you’ve had is one part is you’ve had a personality shift in Trump. Not the peace president, not the America restoration president, not the Andrew Jackson president of the working man, not you know Abraham Lincoln restoring the republic, not you know Teddy Roosevelt taking on the big corporate interest, not the peace president of of you know Reagan and Eisenhower and the Republicans of the 20s. But instead Napoleon. He wants to be like Napoleon. And you what did Napoleon do? expand, extend, increase, build empire.
Napoleon did not just build a short-lived empire. He even crowned himself as Emperor.4
But be careful what you wish for. Napoleon quickly lost all of his conquered territory. The big reason France was able to keep its pre-war boundaries was the extremely skillful negotiation by Napoleon’s Foreign Minister Talleyrand. Not only did Talleyrand have long-standing relationships with many key figures across Europe, but he was already in talks with them before France’s final defeat, particularly Tsar Alexander I. As readers no doubt know well Napoleon ended his life imprisoned in Elba after an unsuccessful attempt to regain his crown.
For the sake of completeness, a recap of official account of the Netanyahu-Trump visit, from The Cradle in Netanyahu, Trump hold ‘excellent, Iran-focused’ meeting in Washington:
Israeli Prime Minister and wanted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu held talks with US President Donald Trump in Washington on 28 July – with Hebrew media reports indicating that the premier lobbied for larger escalation against Iran.
In a statement, Netanyahu called the meeting “excellent” and said it was “one of the best conversations I’ve had with our friend, US President Trump.”
“It was a meeting with full cooperation, with mutual support, with understanding on the joint goal that Iran won’t have nuclear weapons, and also other goals,” the premier added….
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance, War Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump’s envoy to the region Steve Witkoff, and CIA chief John Ratcliffe were also present, as shown in images released by Netanyahu’s office….
The official said it was a “very good” and “very positive” meeting, stressing that the two “reiterated the joint commitment to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons.”
Another senior Israeli official told Hebrew outlet Channel 12 that “We are in a critical period” and that “President Trump will make a decision soon where he is heading.”
“We are not pushing him, but also aren’t burying our heads in the sand. Netanyahu presented [Trump with] the Israeli perspective,” the official added.
According to the report, Netanyahu “believes there is no choice” but to attack the Islamic Republic again.
Netanyahu is stressing that they need to be “significant attacks — on nuclear facilities, capabilities that have been rebuilt, and sites that weren’t previously hit.”
The prime minister thinks this would possibly be able to “shake the stability of the regime.”
We have not been keen to promote the idea that Ukraine mixing things up with Iran by attacking an Iranian civilian ship in the Caspian Sea is more than gimmick designed to flatter Trump to extract more money and weapons from the US. Mark Sleboda describes long-form how distances and US weapons depletion argue against anything meaningful action on this front:
Plus Ukraine backed down:
Ukraine called Iran’s FM Dr. Araghchi to BEG for Forgiveness
This is GOLD, they realized Iran could LIGHT THEM UP pic.twitter.com/TinVZSb0zP
— Ryan Rozbiani (@RyanRozbiani) July 28, 2026
Was assured by Ukrainian FM @andrii_sybiha that the attack on an Iranian ship was unintentional and Ukraine seeks no escalation.
Iran does not seek escalation either, but made clear any attack on our citizens or interests is unacceptable. There must be restitution for losses.
— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) July 28, 2026
While military action and escalation scheming proceeds, Oman and Iran continued their discussion of the management of the Strait of Hormuz. Oman is clearly hewing to the requirements of UNCLOS. Passage charges are not allowed. Fees can be levied only in connection with services provided, along with modest charges to support safe navigation, such as to defray the cost of lighthouses. As Babak Vahdad shows on Twitter there is a lot of talk but no real motion. As is easy to predict, no way, no how is Iran ceding control of the Strait of Hormuz, even if it does find a way to throw a bone to Oman. 4
And some odds and ends. The very end of this Janta Ka segment shows a lawyer long-from rebutting Mayor Mandami’s claim that he lacks the legal authority to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu when he visits New York City for a UN session this fall:
_____
1
Saudi Defence Ministry confirms attacks on Iran-supported Iraqi militias in Iraq. The attacks were done jointly with the U.S.
Press the translate button https://t.co/4qts71H6oC
— Anas Alhajji (@anasalhajji) July 29, 2026
2 Getting some Kurds to join as mercs is not the same as meaningful backing.
3
🚨BREAKING: US Airstrikes Kill Civilians At The Iran-Iraq Border
The Shalamcheh border crossing area was struck. pic.twitter.com/BnmDxKb3zt
— MintPress News (@MintPressNews) July 23, 2026
The epic painting by Jean-Louis David, The Coronation of Napoleon, depicts his wife Josephine as crowing Napoleon. However:
Napoleon, accompanied by Joséphine, entered the church wearing a crown of laurels, a purple velvet cloak lined with ermine, and the necklace of the Légion d’honneur while holding a gold scepter, the hand of justice, and a sword featuring a gold handle encrusted with diamonds….Napoleon famously seized it from the pope’s hands and placed it on his own head. He then took the imperial diadem, turned to his wife, who knelt at his feet, and placed it on her head. Although Napoleon’s self-crowning may have seemed bold, a number of sovereigns in history had crowned themselves. The most unusual aspect of this part of the ceremony was the crowning of Joséphine. French queens were rarely coronated—Marie de Médicis was the last to be crowned, in 1610—and not one had ever been coronated alongside her husband.
Perhaps the most significant change in the final work was the shift in the central action. Initially, David planned to depict Napoleon crowning himself, his right arm holding the crown high above his head, his left hand clutching the sword, and the pope sitting passively behind him. Ultimately, however, David painted the emperor crowning Joséphine, both of his hands holding the diadem high above the empress’s bowed head.
4 From Babak Vahdad:
Gharibabadi says Iran and Oman have discussed creating a temporary shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz to replace the existing northern and southern lanes.
-Oman proposed a 50–50 arrangement, with half the route under Iranian control and half under Omani control. Tehran rejected it.
– Iran’s counterproposal is far more ambitious: the entire inbound route must be under Iranian control, along with part of the outbound route. Only then would Tehran move to the next stage of negotiations.
– This is highly significant. Iran is not asking merely to participate in the management of Hormuz. It is seeking predominant control over access to the Gulf, ensuring that ships entering the waterway pass through a route subject to Iranian authority.
– Gharibabadi’s statement that Iran will not recognise the southern route “even for one hour” makes the position even clearer: Tehran is challenging not only the current navigation arrangement, but the legitimacy of any route operating independently of Iranian consent.
– In other words, Iran is trying to turn the reopening of Hormuz into a new and potentially permanent security architecture in which no vessel can enter the Gulf without passing under Iranian supervision.
And from Babak Vahdad @BabakVahdad
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said in a televised interview that Oman had proposed bringing in a third country to clear mines from the southern part of the Strait of Hormuz, but Tehran refused to allow it.
– Iran is making clear that it will not accept a foreign military or security presence in the Strait, even when presented as a limited demining operation aimed at restoring navigation.
– Tehran appears ready to discuss the reopening and management of shipping lanes, but only on terms that preserve a decisive Iranian role in the security architecture of Hormuz.
– The statement also suggests that the real dispute is no longer only about whether navigation resumes, but about who is authorised to guarantee it.
– For Iran, allowing a third country to conduct demining operations could create a precedent for a broader and more permanent international naval presence.
– Gharibabadi’s statement therefore fits the emerging Iranian doctrine: Hormuz is not merely a commercial waterway to be reopened after the war, but a strategic asset and an instrument of deterrence that Tehran does not intend to trade away in negotiations.
