Iran to close Strait of Hormuz, strike twice
as many targets - in response to
any US attack: Source
July 8th, 2:35pm
(PressTV)
Iran has issued a firm warning that it will not back down from its
management of the Strait of Hormuz and is prepared to fight to
maintain control over the strategic waterway, an informed
security source told Press TV on Wednesday.
The source revealed that developments over the past 48 hours
have solidified Tehran's resolve, with a new military and
strategic doctrine now in place.
According to the source, Iran's updated strategy dictates that in
the event of any fresh attack on Iranian soil or interests, the
Islamic Republic will respond with overwhelming force.
The source elaborated on Iran's new retaliatory framework, stating
that following any strike against Iran, two immediate actions will
be taken: first, the Strait of Hormuz will be completely closed to
all maritime traffic; and second, Iran will strike enemy targets
at a ratio of at least two to one, meaning that for every
Iranian target hit, at least two enemy targets...
will be struck in return.
"The memorandum of understanding signed on this matter - clearly
states that Iran will reopen the Strait in accordance with its own
arrangements. Therefore, Iran will not permit the establishment
of any new route ......outside the framework of its own
arrangements," the source said.
The source also addressed recent threats made by US
President Donald Trump, delivering a blunt message
to Washington.
"Any threat will receive a powerful response. Iran does not
distinguish between the United States and its partners
in the region,” the source told Press TV.
“Trump will gain nothing from these recent threats, but he will
certainly lose both the Strait of Hormuz and the negotiations
over a final agreement. The choice is now his."
________________________________________________
US has no choice ---- but to recognize Iran’s
'new order' in Strait of Hormuz: Senior MP
July 8th, 1:38pm
(PressTV)
A senior Iranian lawmaker says the United States has no choice
but to recognize the Islamic Republic’s new regime governing
the Strait of Hormuz - after US military strikes that violated
the ceasefire agreement with Tehran.
Ebrahim Azizi, head of Parliament's National Security and Foreign
Policy Committee, wrote in a post on X, "There is no alternative:
Recognize the new Iranian order in the Strait of Hormuz."
Azizi's post came after US forces carried out airstrikes ----- against
coastal bases and civilian facilities in Iran's southern Hormozgan
Province and Mahshahr city, in the early hours of Wednesday.
In response, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) said it had
targeted 85 US military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait with missiles
and drones, describing the operation as an "initial response"
to the US aggression against Iranian territory.
The US Central Command said earlier that the US strikes
were carried out in response to what it described as
Iranian attacks on three commercial vessels
transiting the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday.
Meanwhile, the IRGC has declared any alternative transit routes
"unacceptable and extremely dangerous," saying coordination
with its Navy is mandatory for vessels passing through the
strategic waterway.
Iran's central military command also warned that it would not
allow Washington to interfere in the management of the
strategic waterway.
Tehran has said that parts of the Strait of Hormuz lie within
Iranian territorial waters and that international law
recognizes the sovereignty and jurisdiction of
coastal states over their territorial seas.
Wednesday's strikes marked the latest escalation despite a
ceasefire that took effect in April -- and a memorandum of
understanding signed by Tehran and Washington last
month, which called for a permanent end to
hostilities and further negotiations
toward a final agreement
within 60 days.
The US President Donald Trump said
on Wednesday, that the ceasefire
is over.
Citing ceasefire violations involving the Strait of Hormuz,
the reinstatement of oil sanctions, attacks on southern
Iran, and the continued Israeli military aggression in
Lebanon, Iranian Parliament Speaker, and chief
negotiator, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, said
Washington's actions ....would fail to
weaken Iran's resolve.
Qalibaf said that the "era of bullying and
extortion is over. It leads nowhere.
We don't fold."
_______________________________________
Any source of support for US military
‘legitimate target’: Iran’s Khatam
al-Anbiya Headquarters
July 8th, 1:20pm
(PressTV)
Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters says
any source of support for the “aggressor US army”
will be considered a legitimate target for Iranian
armed forces.
The Wednesday statement came following a fresh wave
of US strikes Tehran says has “openly violated” the
ceasefire and “trampled on” the Islamabad
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU).
The United States attacked sites in southern Iran,
prompting Tehran to respond by attacking US
bases in the Persian Gulf region, among
other positions.
“The source -- of any support for the aggressor US army
to violate the sovereignty and territory of Islamic Iran
- will be a legitimate target for the armed forces,”
the headquarters said.
The headquarters also reiterated that the only safe
route for commercial ships and oil tankers in the
Strait of Hormuz is the path designated by Iran,
and Tehran -- will not allow any interference
in the management of the Strait.
The latest attacks came as Iran marked the funeral
ceremonies of the martyred Leader of the Islamic
Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei,
in Iraq.
The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) said the
retaliatory strikes were “an attempt to overshadow
massive funeral processions in Iran and Iraq for
the martyred Leader, which represented a
major political defeat for Washington.”
In an “initial response” to the US aggression, the IRGC’s
naval and aerospace forces conducted a joint missile
and drone operation, striking 85 locations hosting
important US military facilities.
The Foreign Ministry has denounced US military attacks
on southern Iran as a “flagrant violation” of the truce
agreement.
The strikes - hit facilities at Port Salman and the US Fifth
Fleet’s area in Bahrain, as well as Ali Al Salem Air Base
in Kuwait.
The IRGC also announced the downing of an MQ-9 drone
over Bushehr province that attempted to interfere with
the operation.
The latest escalation follows strikes on several ships
transiting the Strait of Hormuz that were not
following Iran’s authorized route.
Oil prices jumped five percent immediately after remarks
by US President Donald Trump, having already reached
their highest level in two weeks.
The White House also revoked sanction waivers on
Iranian oil sales, cancelling a license announced
in June that had allowed Iran to produce, sell
and deliver crude oil until August 21.
Iran’s chief negotiator, Parliament Speaker Mohammad
Baqer Qalibaf, said the United States had committed
“major” breaches of the MoU, including by
reinstating the oil sanctions.
______________________________________________
Belgium routs US, but FIFA's political
capitulation to the White House
overshadows the game
by Mohammad Ali Haqshenas
July 8th, 12:57 pm
(PressTV)
Belgium's commanding display in the knockout-stage clash
brought the US' 2026 World Cup campaign to an end, but
not before a controversial intervention from the White
House - once again - laid bare the deep-seated
dysfunction in global football governance.
On the pitch, the verdict ---- was clear. Belgium’s clinical 4-1
dismantling of the US in the Round of 16 comprehensively
extinguished the host nation’s ambition to make further
inroads, reducing the highly anticipated match to a
masterclass in European tactical superiority.
Yet, as the final whistle blew, the overwhelming sentiment
across the international sporting community was
not one of closure.
The definitive end of the US World Cup campaign.... has done
nothing to quell the geopolitical conflagration surrounding
FIFA’s decision-making machinery ------ leaving the
tournament’s governing body..... facing an
unprecedented crisis of legitimacy.
The defining legacy of this match will not be Belgium’s
clinical finishing, but rather the administrative
architecture that allowed US striker
Folarin Balogun to step onto
the field.
Following a straight red card in the Round of 32 against Bosnia
& Herzegovina, Balogun’s mandatory suspension was abruptly
deferred by FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee in a midnight ruling
that invoked the rarely utilized Article 27 of the FIFA
Disciplinary Code.
By converting a mandatory sporting ban into a suspended
one-year probationary period, FIFA preserved the host
nation’s star asset for prime-time television, but in
doing so, it put its own institutional integrity on
trial ––––––– for the umpteenth time during
this tournament.
Iran’s football team took a swipe at US Homeland Security
Secretary Kristi Noem after the US’ defeat to Belgium,
posting a brief, pointed message on its official page:
“Dance with me!”
The executive order... on football!
The crisis escalated from a standard sporting appeal into
an unprecedented geopolitical standoff following direct
intervention from the highest office in the host nation.
President Donald Trump acknowledged his role in applying
pressure on football’s global governing body, much to the
chagrin of fans and observers worldwide.
"I saw the play, and I'm a person that loves sports – that
wasn't a foul," Trump stated. "I asked for a review.
I think they made a really brilliant decision."
For decades, FIFA has ruthlessly suspended national
associations – from Nigeria to Kuwait – for minor
infractions involving state interference in local
football federations. Yet, when confronted
with this direct intervention from the
executive branch.. of the world's
''largest economy'' - and World
Cup co-host, the governing
body's rigid commitment
to political neutrality...
collapsed.
An intervention that changed nothing
The immense irony of the affair lay in its ultimate irrelevance
to the sporting outcome. For all the backroom diplomacy
and administrative gymnastics required.... to secure
Balogun’s eligibility, the striker cut a peripheral,
frustrated figure on the pitch.
Swallowed... by a disciplined Belgian backline, he made no
discernible impact on the game before being substituted
near the end of the match --- that the US lost decisively.
FIFA accepted catastrophic reputational damage
to facilitate a sporting intervention that yielded
absolutely nothing.
In this instance, football governance was contorted to serve
a perceived commercial and political emergency, only for
the cold realities of ninety minutes on the pitch - to
render the entire bureaucratic maneuver futile.
A red line crossed
The backlash from the European football establishment was
swift and unsparing. Following FIFA's midnight U-turn, the
Royal Belgian Football Association (RBFA) launched
an immediate legal challenge against
Balogun's reinstatement.
FIFA rejected the challenge on narrow procedural grounds,
treating the Belgian inquiry as an unauthorized appeal of
a Disciplinary Committee decision.
The RBFA expressed absolute astonishment at the ruling,
vigorously objecting to the lack of transparency and
equal treatment.
The administrative maneuvering - drew a scathing rebuke
from European football's governing body -- with a senior
UEFA official warning that FIFA had officially "crossed
a red line" ------- by allowing external political
considerations --- to dictate field-level
disciplinary actions.
Prominent football figures across Europe echoed these
concerns, viewing the decision as an assault on
the core tenets of fair play.
Former Liverpool manager Jürgen Klopp slammed the
precedent. "It's a red card, even if it's a shame
because Balogun can't play, but it's there
in the rules," Klopp said.
"This is our game, not theirs... If Trump and Infantino
really worked this all out between themselves ---
that's crazy. It calls everything into question.
"These two individuals, neither of whom has a clue
about football, shouldn't have anything to do
with it," the 59-year-old added.
Host advantage --- or host privilege?
The core philosophical question left in the wake of the
Balogun affair is whether the boundaries of legitimate
home advantage have been permanently blurred into
political privilege.
Host nations traditionally enjoy.. favourable scheduling,
enthusiastic home crowds, and familiar environments.
They are not, however, supposed to operate under
an entirely different tier of the rulebook.
The perception of preferential treatment is exacerbated
--- by the sharply contrasting experiences of other
participating nations during this tournament.
Throughout the group stage, the Iranian national team and its
delegation - faced intensive restrictions by the host nations
as several staff were denied visas, the team had to leave
US soil right after the matches, and it was allowed to
come into the US just 24 hours before the games
in an apparent discrimination compared to
other participating teams.
Add to this the ban on entry of fans from Iran and several
other participating countries in the 2026 World Cup.
Netizens and international commentators - have pointed out
the glaring asymmetry that while the host nation’s political
apparatus successfully lobbied to overturn an explicit red
card, fans and families from parts of the West Asian and
African nations affected by rigid immigration policies,
faced immense barriers simply trying to enter the
country to watch their teams play.*
This - is another proof that the 2026 World Cup has failed to
offer a fair playing field, operating instead on a multi-tiered
hierarchy of accessibility and administrative leniency.
Long after the stadium lights in the US are turned off and the
final is played, the legal and institutional precedent
established by Article 27 ....will haunt the
sport’s regulators.
By capitulating to the host nation's highest political office,
FIFA handed a powerful blueprint to future host nations -
to hijack the biggest football tournament in the world.
During future tournaments, whenever a key player is dismissed,
or a critical suspension is handed down, powerful states will
now point directly to the Balogun precedent of July 2026.
The institutional leverage required to maintain independent
refereeing and autonomous disciplinary procedures
has been profoundly eroded.
Belgium’s 4-1 victory proved that political interference cannot
buy performance on the pitch. However, by permitting that
interference to alter the basic regulations of the
competition, FIFA has inflicted a deep, self-
inflicted wound on its own credibility –
one that will far outlast... the US'
exit from the tournament.
[RR adds: *only non-white countries' fans!]