The United States is moving to approve a new arms deal for Israel worth $2.8 billion, including 40,000 one-ton bombs, according to what American media reported.
The Washington Post reported that the package, funded by American taxpayer money, includes some of the most lethal munitions in the Western arsenal, and includes 20,000 MK-84 bombs, 20,000 BLU-117 bombs, and 20,000 I-2000 Penetrator bunker-busting warheads.
In the same context, the New York Times quoted an American official as saying that the administration of President Donald Trump had approved the deal.
A senior US administration official said - according to Agence France-Presse - that “all arms sales deals abroad proceed according to approved procedures,” but he refrained from commenting on the deals that are still being completed.
Talk about the deal comes in light of the US Department of Defense acknowledging the existence of a “shortage” of ammunition related to the war in Iran, and Washington spending $22.3 billion on ammunition between February 28 and June 30.
In February 2025, the Trump administration approved the sale of weapons to Israel worth $7.4 billion, which included bombs, missiles, and related equipment, including MK-84 munitions.
The administration of former President Joe Biden had suspended a shipment of bombs weighing two thousand pounds due to fears of civilian casualties in Gaza, but the Trump administration agreed to deliver them to the Hebrew state after assuming power in early 2025.
The Strait of Hormuz is turning into an increasingly dangerous arena in light of the escalation of tension between Iran and the United States, and there are opportunities to return to negotiations and diplomatic solutions, with oil tankers being exposed to attacks and navigational accidents on an almost daily basis.
The latest of these targets and ship accidents was what the Sultanate of Oman announced, on Tuesday, that it had towed a tanker flying the Panama flag after extinguishing a fire in it and rescuing most of its crew members, while the Iranian Revolutionary Guard said that the ship itself exploded after it collided with a sea mine, in a story rejected by Washington.
The Omani authorities announced the towing of the Panama-flagged oil tanker “Al Ghaya” to one of the Sultanate’s ports, after rescue teams put out a fire that broke out in its engine room after it was targeted. The Maritime Security Center of the Omani Ministry of Defense said that the tanker was about 1.3 nautical miles northeast of Musandam Governorate, noting that one of the Royal Navy ships evacuated 23 of its crew members and provided them with the necessary medical care, while search operations continue for two others who are still missing.
The Omani authorities did not specify who targeted the tanker or the type of weapon used, nor did they mention the date of the attack. The British Maritime Trade Operations Authority had previously reported receiving a report that, on Saturday, a ship was attacked by a projectile of unknown origin while crossing the Strait of Hormuz, followed by a fire breaking out on board.
The British maritime security company Vanguard, in turn, confirmed that a tanker flying the Panama flag was attacked by a projectile of unknown origin while crossing the strait, and that the Omani Navy moved to evacuate its crew members.
A different Iranian account of the incident
But the Iranian Revolutionary Guard gave a different account of the incident, confirming that the “Ghaya” oil tanker collided with a sea mine and exploded in the Strait of Hormuz.
The official Iranian Radio and Television Corporation quoted the Revolutionary Guards as saying that the tanker was sailing in the southern route of the strait, which Iran said it had mined, adding that the ship was completely ignited after the mine exploded.
Thus, the Iranian story does not talk about the ship itself, although the two parties provide a different explanation of the nature, location, and circumstances of the accident. Oman merely said that the tanker was targeted, while the Revolutionary Guard attributed the damage to the explosion of a sea mine.
The US Central Command, Centcom, rejected the Iranian story, and said that the Al-Ghaya tanker was attacked by an Iranian missile last month, which led to it being out of service, before it was now subjected to a new attack by a drone while it was anchored in the waters off the coast of Oman.
Central Command said that the tanker is currently being towed by a regional partner, and described the Iranian account of the mine as an attempt to justify obstructing the movement of commercial ships in the strait.
The conflicting narratives add a new layer of complexity to the security situation in Hormuz, as the dispute is not limited to the party responsible for the attack, but extends to determining the nature of the weapon used and whether the ship was targeted while crossing the strait or after it stopped off the Omani coast.
The number of ships in the strait decreased
The “Gaya” incident reveals that the Strait of Hormuz crisis has become more than just mutual threats between Iran and the United States, and affects the safety of commercial ships, their crews, and the marine environment.
With the continuing conflicting accounts of maritime accidents and the escalation of risks to tankers, traffic in one of the most important oil lanes in the world appears to be facing a more turbulent phase, at a time when the cost of the confrontation on energy security, trade and the environment together is increasing.
Shipping data showed that shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz witnessed a further decline at the beginning of this week, following the escalation of attacks in the region. Preliminary data from Kepler showed on Tuesday that the number of ships that crossed the strait reached only 4 on Monday, down from 10 the previous day.
The incident comes at a time when the Strait of Hormuz has become a major point of contention between Tehran and Washington since the outbreak of war on February 28, after the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran.
Iran has practically closed the strait since the start of the war, while the United States, in response, announced a blockade of Iranian ports with the aim of preventing ships from reaching or leaving them and cutting off revenues from Tehran.
Before the outbreak of war, about a fifth of the world's oil supplies passed through the Strait of Hormuz, which also represents a major corridor for Gulf countries' exports of oil, liquefied natural gas, and fertilizers. Therefore, the continued disturbances there not only threaten the movement of ships, but also add direct risks to energy markets and global supply chains.
The Sultanate of Oman also recently announced the postponement of a meeting scheduled to be held between Iran and Arab countries in the region to discuss navigation in the strategic sea lane.
Oil slicks increase the risk
The repercussions of the escalation are not limited to navigation and energy security, as its environmental effects have begun to appear in the waters of the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. Recent satellite images, according to Greenpeace estimates, showed the presence of five large oil spills in the region. The organization said that the pollution reached the Iranian coast near protected areas around Qeshm Island, and one of the spots appeared off the Omani side of the strait.
Greenpeace potentially linked some of the spots to the Risko oil tanker, which it said was targeted by the US military along with other tankers linked to Iran. The organization indicated that one of the hypotheses is that the tanker sank and oil continued to leak from it, but it is not clear that this is the cause of the stains conclusively.
Another oil slick was also spotted off the southern coast of Oman, where the oil tanker “Karoline Bezenzhi”, which is classified as part of the Russian so-called “shadow fleet” and is subject to sanctions from the European Union, ran aground.
Greenpeace estimated the visible area of one of the spots at about 400 square kilometers on September 11, before rising to about 600 square kilometers the next day. It is not yet clear what caused this expansion, amid possibilities that include the ship being exposed to additional damage or the effects of weather conditions and sea movement.
