Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf made an explosive accusation on Wednesday, suggesting that an unnamed regional country was actively assisting the United States in planning a military operation to seize Iranian islands including Kharg. He did not name the country, but his warning that Iran would attack its “vital infrastructure” if the operation proceeded left little ambiguity about the seriousness of the threat. The accusation pointed to the increasingly fractured nature of regional alignments as the conflict deepened.
The potential Kharg Island operation had been the subject of growing discussion as the administration sought ways to force the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Kharg handles 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports, and its seizure would give the US significant economic leverage over Tehran. Gulf Arab states that host American military bases would be natural candidates to provide logistical support for such an operation, making them potential targets of Iranian retaliation under Ghalibaf’s warning.
Iran’s multi-pronged approach to deterring a ground operation — threatening to bomb its own territory, promising strikes against assisting neighbours, and warning of new fronts in the Red Sea — reflected a sophisticated asymmetric strategy. While Iran could not match the US in conventional military terms, it retained significant capacity for disruption across a wide geographic area. The threat to neighbouring countries served as a message to Gulf states: the cost of helping Washington would be paid in infrastructure and economic damage.
The 82nd Airborne Division deployment and the continuing build-up of US forces in the region kept the Kharg option alive as a credible military possibility. US commanders had made clear they were “not done” with the military campaign, and the combination of airborne troops, marines, and naval assets gave Washington genuine options for a ground operation. The question was whether the political and military costs of such an action, given Iran’s warnings, were acceptable.
Iran’s parliament speaker’s accusation added a regional political dimension to the already complex crisis. By publicly naming a regional conspiracy — even without identifying the specific country — Ghalibaf was sending a message to Gulf states that Tehran was watching and would hold them accountable for any assistance to US operations. The effect was to raise the cost of cooperation with Washington for countries that were already navigating difficult choices between their American security relationships and their proximity to Iranian retaliation.