The War Between the US and Iran: Why Kharg Island Was Bombed – And What Happens Now

It's beginning to feel like a new phase in the war between the US and Iran. Late on Friday evening, Swedish time, the US launched an attack on the strategically vital oil hub of Kharg Island, situated off Iran's coast in the Persian Gulf. As the smoke still hangs thickly over the area, a picture is emerging of a conflict that is rapidly accelerating – and one where no one really knows where it will end.

Kharg Island: Iran's oil heart in the crosshairs

President Donald Trump himself confirmed the attacks on Truth Social, stating they had struck "all military targets" on Kharg Island. The island is absolutely central to Iran's economy – around 90 percent of all Iranian crude oil for export passes through here. Trump was careful to emphasise that they had deliberately chosen not to bomb the oil infrastructure itself, at least not yet. But the threat hangs in the air: if anyone tries to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, then "I will immediately reconsider that decision".

For those of us who have followed the conflict in the Middle East for years, this is a classic show of force. The US is demonstrating that it can strike at the heart of Iran's export revenues at any time. At the same time, it's a balancing act. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has been dead since earlier in March, killed in an Israeli-American attack, and the country has promised retaliation. The question is not if Iran will respond, but how.

The background: From the Twelve-Day War to today's stalemate

This is no isolated incident. We are in a phase that many experts, not least here at home at the Swedish Defence Research Agency, have warned about for a long time. It all properly began in June 2025 with what is already being called the Twelve-Day War. Israel attacked Iran's nuclear technology programme on 13 June, and in the final stage, the US stepped in on Israel's side, bombing three major nuclear facilities, including Fordow, which is buried inside a mountain.

Since then, it's been a low-intensity war with sporadic attacks. But at the end of February this year, the US escalated again. First, they took out Iran's air defence, then their missile and drone capabilities. And now, most recently, the attack on Kharg. It's a systematic dismantling of Iran's military muscle.

How Iran might respond – and why it's dangerous

The short-term threat right now concerns American soldiers and installations in the region. Iran has both the capability and the will to strike back. Consider this:

• The US has around 40,000 soldiers stationed across the Middle East – everywhere from Iraq and Kuwait to Qatar and Saudi Arabia. All are potential targets.
• The Strait of Hormuz is the chokepoint through which a huge portion of the world's oil is transported. The oil price is already shaky. If Iran tries to block the strait, or attack tankers, then we're talking about a global economic shock.
• Allied militias, like Hezbollah in Lebanon or Shia militias in Iraq, could be activated to strike US targets. Over the weekend, an attack on the US embassy in Baghdad was already reported.

At the same time, Iran is weakened. Their air defence is largely gone, and their ability to harm Israel with missiles has proven limited – most were shot down by air defences during the Twelve-Day War. This leads many analysts to expect an asymmetric response. Maybe not tomorrow, but further down the line. "Once the dust settles, they'll revert to the tactics that have served them best over the years: terrorism and asymmetric warfare," as one US expert put it the other day.

What happens now? High-stakes politics and surprising alliances

Back home in Sweden, both Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson and opposition leader Magdalena Andersson are closely monitoring developments. On Sunday's Agenda programme, both were out commenting on the situation. Kristersson was cautiously open to the US line, despite it stretching international law. "The jury's still out," he said. "That is, if this succeeds, then it's permissible. If this creates total chaos in the Middle East, then there are major risks involved." Andersson was more critical, arguing that the US should have gone through the UN Security Council.

On the international stage, things are happening. China, which has been Iran's most important ally and biggest oil customer, has so far only issued diplomatic condemnations. No military support has been seen. Some analysts argue this is precisely what the US wants to achieve. By crippling Iran, they show the entire world, not least China's other allies like Cuba or Venezuela, that the superpower in Beijing won't come to the rescue when it really counts. That would allow the US to calmly shift its military focus to the Pacific and the contest with China.

The war on Iran is therefore much more than a war on Iran. It's a piece on a much larger global chessboard. And as history teaches us, such games tend to have unintended consequences. The only question is what they'll be this time around.