Experts refute Iran tanker 'missile attack' claim

By propagating a contentious claim that an Iranian-flagged tanker was attacked off the coast of Saudi Arabia, Iran has sought to portray itself as a victim and justify "retaliatory" attacks, experts told Al-Mashareq.

A closer examination of the October 11th incident indicates the Islamic Republic has been engaged in a disinformation campaign in order to garner international sympathy and provide cover for its own actions, they said.

Iran's goal in spreading news about the "missile attack" on one of its tankers appears to have been to enable its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to carry out attacks under the pretext of self defence, they said.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on October 14th claimed "a government" was behind an alleged attack on the Sabiti, an Iranian-flagged tanker that was at the time in the vicinity of the Red Sea port of Jeddah.

Iran presented photographs of the tanker's damaged hull, which it said had been hit with two separate explosions, and vowed not to let the attack against the Sabiti go unanswered.

The state-owned National Iranian Tanker Company, which owns the Sabiti, said its hull was hit by two separate explosions, but denied reports the attack had originated from Saudi soil.

According to the Saudi border guard, the Sabiti's captain had sent an email saying the front of the vessel had been broken, resulting in an oil spill, the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported.

The kingdom was ready to provide assistance, the SPA said, but the tanker "shut off its tracking system without responding to the [co-ordination] centre's calls".

Satellite imagery from Tanker Trackers -- an international tanker tracking website -- showed that the Sabiti rendezvoused with an Iranian spy ship, the Saviz, for about 14 hours after the incident.

Saviz, an Iranian vessel registered as a cargo ship, has been anchored in the Red Sea for a couple of years and is believed to be providing significant military and logistical aid to the Houthis (Ansarallah) in Yemen.

A pattern of disinformation

Iran propagates these kinds of falsehoods to justify attacks carried out by the IRGC, Saudi military expert Mansour al-Shehri told Al-Mashareq.

In this way it attempts to "always appear as a victim defending itself and any other group that claims to need assistance", he said.

This is a tactic the IRGC has employed since it came to power in 1979, he noted.

With the Sabiti incident, he said, Tehran is trying to "dupe the world into thinking that it was the victim of terrorist attacks by Gulf countries and has the right to defend itself".

The aim is to justify any attack it has carried out in the past and may carry out in the future, either directly or through its proxies in the region, al-Shehri said.

Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states are committed to "exercising maximum restraint", he added, and are trying not to get dragged into "Iranian schemes aimed at heightening tension in the region".

According to reports in the Iranian media, the Sabiti received no final response to its distress call, Iranian affairs researcher Fathi al-Sayed told Al-Mashareq.

But Saudi Arabia has made it clear it responded to the call, he said, and reported that the team that had been on its way to the tanker to respond and assist was surprised to see the Sabiti continue on its course.

Evidence does not add up

A close examination of the photos of the tanker circulated by Iranian media shows the size of the two holes in its hull is not commensurate with the damage it was said to have sustained from missiles, said military expert Talaat Moussa.

"A missile that punches such a hole at a low point in the hull would cause a lot more damage that would disable the ship or stop it dead in the water, not allow it continue on its course and return to Iran," he told Al-Mashareq.

It seems as if, with its reports of an attack on the vessel, Iran seeks "justification to carry out any military operation in the region, be it on Saudi shores or against a Saudi naval target", he said.

If the Iranian tankers were attacked, this would have been easily detected by satellite, Talaat said, noting that even if the attack had been carried out from boats or small ships, maritime tracking sites would have easily spotted it.