The US-Iran exchange of fire shatters the ceasefire illusion! The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps effectively strikes US military bases, and the "legal struggle" for the Strait of Hormuz is driving up energy shipping premiums.

On June 27, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran announced early in the morning that they had carried out strikes on multiple US military bases in the Middle East in response to the US airstrike on the Sirik region in southern Iran on June 26. According to CCTV News, this was the first time the US military had used force against Iran since the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the two countries. The immediate trigger for this round of conflict was Iran's drone attack on a commercial ship flying the Singapore flag and sailing along the coast of Oman, leaving the Strait of Hormuz on June 25. In response, the US military deployed fighter jets on the 26th to strike Iranian missile and drone storage facilities, as well as coastal radar positions, leading to explosions in the Sirik region. Iran's Tasnim News Agency quoted local sources as saying that there were multiple explosions in the Sirik region around 11:30 pm local time on the 26th, and Iranian state television cited informed sources as saying that "two projectiles" hit a communication tower in the area. Both sides quickly engaged in intense public exchanges. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard's statement was strong, while US Vice President Pence issued a warning of force. At the same time, the issue of control over the Strait of Hormuz has escalated from a diplomatic dispute to a legal game where both sides hold their own arguments, directly affecting global expectations for oil supply and assessments of maritime safety. According to Xinhua News Agency, Iranian state television reported on the 27th that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran stated that the US military had been struck in multiple deployment points in the region. The US Central Command released a statement on the 26th saying that the US military had carried out strikes against Iran that day in response to a commercial ship passing through the Strait of Hormuz being attacked the day before. After the exchange of fire, high-level officials from both the US and Iran quickly engaged in a heated exchange, focusing on who had violated the ceasefire agreement first. The fundamental dispute in this conflict revolves around the management authority of the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard's statement explicitly cited legal grounds, stating that according to Article 5 of the Iran-US memorandum of understanding, Iran is responsible for the management of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran believes that the US's airstrike for a "violation of the authorized navigation route by an unauthorized vessel" is a direct violation of this clause. The US Central Command's position is opposite, claiming that the US will continue to provide safe passage coordination and support for commercial ships traveling through the Strait of Hormuz, and will "maintain presence and vigilance to ensure that all terms of the agreements reached with Iran are adhered to and remain effective." The essence of the two positions is fundamentally contradictory: Iran argues that they have the authority over the passage of ships in the strait and have the right to take action against "violation vessels," while the US claims the right to escort commercial ships and classifies Iran's interception actions as a breach of contract. This legal disagreement means that similar conflicts could continue to occur within the agreement framework. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard issued a clear warning at the end of their statement: "If aggression happens again, our counterattack will be even greater than this time." The conflict near the Strait of Hormuz, a key global oil shipping channel, directly challenges market expectations for the safety of this route. The escalation of conflict brings pressure to the market on three levels: 1. Oil: The US-Iran conflict has brought back the "risk premium for disruption of shipments" through the Strait of Hormuz. If the conflict continues or escalates, the insurance and diversion costs for oil tankers passing through the strait will increase, disrupting expectations for the oil supply side. 2. Shipping: The drone attack on a commercial ship flying the Singapore flag is a direct threat to international maritime security. Shipping companies will need to adjust their risk assessments for the Strait of Hormuz route, leading to upward pressure on war risk premiums. 3. Safe-haven assets: With the US-Iran conflict escalating and the questionable enforceability of the ceasefire agreement, geopolitical risk sentiment is rising, reinforcing the demand logic for safe-haven assets like gold. This article was reprinted from "Wall Street See News" and edited by GMTEight: Feng Qiuyi.