Al Arabiya English, on Iran, 29 October 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Iran’s IRGC says three tankers on fire after hitting mines in Hormuz 

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findings

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said Thursday that three tankers had caught fire after hitting mines while attempting to navigate the Strait of Hormuz, a day after the US military insisted it had demined key routes through the waterway. “Over the past 24 hours, three violating oil tankers exploded and caught fire after striking mines while attempting to pass through the unauthorized southern route of the Strait of Hormuz,” the IRGC said in a statement.

For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app. The vessels had “switched off all their radar and navigation systems” and disregarded warnings from the IRGC navy, the statement said. It was not immediately clear when the incidents occurred, or which flags the tankers were flying. In recent weeks, Iran has reported multiple vessels striking sea mines, prompting US Central Command (CENTCOM), which runs military operations in the region, to reaffirm on social media its insistence that all mines in “primary transit routes” have been cleared.

On Thursday, Hossein Mohebi, the spokesman for the IRGC challenged the claim, saying: “Prove your Hormuz mine-clearing claim with independent evidence, not statements!” in a post on X. through the strategic waterway, which normally carries about one-fifth of global oil and gas consumption. The United States and helped tankers to travel the waterway.

On Sunday CENTCOM said it had helped Gulf countries export 1.5 billion barrels of oil via Hormuz since the summer. Iran considers ships using the southern corridor near the Omani coast unauthorized. In their statement on Thursday, IRGC said “the IRGC Navy states that the unauthorized route through the Strait of Hormuz is mined, and that vessel owners and crews are responsible for transiting these routes and should not pay attention to CENTCOM’s delusions on social media.”

Left out here: Drops what it reported before

The article never says the IRGC has claimed it laid these mines itself. Al Arabiya English reported nine days earlier that the IRGC said the mines were planted by its navy on the same southern route. Without this, a reader can take the mines as a hazard of unclear origin rather than an IRGC weapon aimed at ships using the route.

How we know

Earlier in the day, the British maritime agency UKMTO said it had received a report of a ship on fire in the strait but gave no details about the cause or any casualties. It was not immediately clear if it was one of the three ships referred to by IRGC. They also said they had captured a US reconnaissance drone during an operation in the strait in a separate statement. “The IRGC Navy announced that its electronic warfare unit had successfully captured a US MQM-170 drone during an offensive operation in the western Strait of Hormuz,” the statement said.

Read more: Ship on fire in Strait of Hormuz: Maritime agency Advertisement Advertisement

Read the original article on english.alarabiya.net (opens in a new tab)
What we found (2)

Al Arabiya English reports the IRGC's claim that three tankers caught fire after hitting mines in Hormuz and attributes the Iranian and US claims with care. It dates the war only as an outbreak on February 28 and never says the US and Israel launched the attacks on Iran. It also leaves out that the IRGC said its navy planted mines on this route, which the outlet reported nine days earlier.

  1. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    “Since the outbreak of the war on February 28, Iran has severely restricted traffic”

    Why this matters
    The words "the outbreak of the war" date the war with no actor. Iran is then the first and only party shown taking an action.
    The impression it gives
    The reader comes away believing the war simply broke out, and that Iran's restriction of the strait was the opening move.
    The context
    Other coverage of the same events says the disruption began after the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran in February. The article never names who started the war.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “has in response imposed a blockade on Iranian ports”

    Why this matters
    The phrase "in response" presents the US blockade as a reaction to Iran's restriction of shipping.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes the United States to be the party reacting, and Iran to be the one that started the confrontation over Hormuz.
    The context
    Iran restricted the strait after US and Israeli attacks on Iran began the war. With that left out, the article reverses the order of who moved first.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  2. Drops what it reported before

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never says the IRGC has claimed it laid these mines itself. Al Arabiya English reported nine days earlier that the IRGC said the mines were planted by its navy on the same southern route. Without this, a reader can take the mines as a hazard of unclear origin rather than an IRGC weapon aimed at ships using the route.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Al Arabiya English

  1. 28 OctIran warns any Israeli-led attack would be ‘devastating’ for global markets3.0
  2. 25 OctQatari mediators reportedly in Tehran in US-coordinated effort to ease tensions0.0
  3. 23 OctUS could strike Iran this weekend, envoy says0.0
  4. 22 OctIran warns US data centers, AI facilities could be targeted if war resumes0.0
  5. 22 OctIran’s IRGC threaten to hit US bases in retaliation for Hormuz escorts3.0

Everything we scored from Al Arabiya English