Skip to content
Sign in
↑Part of: Iran warns Gulf cable links could be cut if US and Israel strike again
Geopolitics · Middle East

Iran officials warn of Gulf cable attacks if U.S. and Israel strike again

Two senior Iranian security officials told Reuters that Tehran has plans to attack undersea communications cables in the Gulf if the United States and Israel strike Iran again. One official said Iran would seek to prevent repairs, while Yadollah Javani said Iran could target seven cables beneath the Strait of Hormuz if Iranian infrastructure came under attack.

AI-assisted synthesis · Based on 4 independent reports from 8 outlets · Article text read from 3 of 4 reportsHow it's made

View timeline · 10 entries
8 outlets4 regionsLatest reporting 4 min read
Coverage: MixedL 1 · C 5 · R 2
Updat3 graphic: Iran
Updat3 graphic · Map data: Natural Earth Natural Earth (public domain)

What happened

Key facts

  • Two senior Iranian security officials told Reuters that Iran has plans to attack undersea cables in the Gulf if the United States and Israel attack Iran again (per i24news.tv, CNA, unn.ua).
  • One official said that if Iran is attacked, there would be no further red lines for targets including undersea cables and military bases (per i24news.tv, CNA, unn.ua).
  • One official said Iran would seek to prevent repairs to prolong disruptions, including to internet connections (per CNA, i24news.tv, unn.ua).
  • An Iranian official said Iran had access to the undersea cables and warned Washington not to “play with fire.” (per CNA, unn.ua, i24news.tv).
  • Yadollah Javani, deputy head of political affairs for Iran's Revolutionary Guards, said Iran could target seven major internet cables beneath the Strait of Hormuz if Iranian infrastructure came under attack (per i24news.tv, CNA, unn.ua).
  • The International Telecommunication Union says undersea cables carry around 99 per cent of global internet traffic (per CNA, unn.ua).

The brief

Two senior Iranian security officials have told Reuters that Tehran has plans to attack undersea communications cables in the Gulf if the United States and Israel strike Iran again. The officials framed the warning conditionally: one said a renewed attack on Iran would remove limits on possible targets, naming undersea cables and military bases, including covert ones.

The comments describe a stated contingency, not a confirmed attack. One of the officials said Iran would try to stop repairs to extend any disruption, including interruptions to internet connections.

The official also claimed Iran had access to the cables and warned Washington not to “play with fire.” These are the official’s claims; the accounts do not independently verify Iran’s access or establish that Tehran has put an attack plan into operation. A separate warning came from Yadollah Javani, deputy head of political affairs for Iran's Revolutionary Guards.

He said Iran could target seven major internet cables beneath the Strait of Hormuz if Iranian infrastructure came under attack. That statement identifies a possible target and a separate condition; the senior officials’ remarks refer more broadly to a renewed U.S. and Israeli strike on Iran.

The warnings place communications infrastructure alongside military bases in the officials’ stated range of potential targets. The possibility of disruption would depend not only on damage to a cable but also on whether repairs could proceed: one official specifically described blocking repair work as a way to prolong interruptions.

No attack or repair obstruction is reported as having occurred. The scale of the potential network impact is not the same as the scale of global internet dependence on undersea cables overall. The International Telecommunication Union says those cables carry around 99 per cent of global internet traffic.

Alan Mauldin, research director at telecommunications research firm TeleGeography, said less than 1 per cent of international bandwidth passes through the Strait of Hormuz, so the global effect of an attack confined to that route could be limited. Mauldin also pointed to other data routes: the Red Sea carries traffic between Europe, East Africa and Asia.

He said capacity routed through it represents about 3 per cent of global international demand and around 10 per cent of traffic moving between regions. Those figures describe the Red Sea, not the Strait of Hormuz, and do not establish the effect of any particular Gulf cable disruption.

The immediate stated trigger for the broader plan is a further U.S. and Israeli strike on Iran; Javani tied his specific cable warning to an attack on Iranian infrastructure. The officials’ remarks therefore set out conditions and threatened targets, while leaving any actual operational decision contingent on those stated events.

Why it matters

  • Internet users and businesses relying on Gulf cable routes could face interrupted connections if Iran attacked the cables and prevented repairs; an official specifically described blocking repairs to prolong disruption.
  • The Strait of Hormuz carries less than 1 per cent of international bandwidth, according to TeleGeography research director Alan Mauldin, while the International Telecommunication Union says undersea cables collectively carry around 99 per cent of global internet traffic.
  • Iranian officials have named seven major cables beneath the Strait of Hormuz as possible targets if Iranian infrastructure comes under attack.

What to watch next

  • Whether the United States and Israel carry out another strike on Iran, the condition the senior Iranian officials attached to their broader cable threat.
  • Whether Iranian infrastructure comes under attack, the condition Yadollah Javani gave for targeting seven cables beneath the Strait of Hormuz.
  • Whether Iran attempts to obstruct cable repairs, the measure one official said Tehran would use to prolong disruptions.

How it's being covered

Coverage analysisShow details
9 source articles · 8 unique outlets · 3 distinct reports
Outlet political mix: Mixed· 1 Left · 5 Center · 2 Right
Where the outlets are based: Asia 38% · Middle East 25% · Other 37%
Outlet political mix
Mixed
Left
Center
Right
1 outlet
5 outlets
2 outlets
The marker shows coverage balance: each unique outlet counts once.
Geography
Where the outlets covering this story are based.
8 unique outletsDominant coverage: Asia
How we measure coverage

One source is from a wire service (AP, Reuters, AFP or Bloomberg), whose reporting other outlets often republish.

How outlets' accounts compare

4 framing differences · 3 uncorroborated claims · 5 information gaps
The reports repeat the same account with different emphasis; its central claims are not independently confirmed in the reporting Updat3 read.Compared across 3 reports whose article text Updat3 read.
Framing / emphasis differences
Sources emphasise different angles, actors or consequences of the same reporting.
  • i24NEWS and CNA foreground the conditional plan to attack Gulf cables if the United States and Israel strike Iran again; CNA also reports the official’s stated plan to prevent repairs.
  • CNA and UNN include the claim that Iran has access to the cables and the warning to Washington, while i24NEWS does not include those details in its excerpt.
  • CNA gives Mauldin’s assessment that the Strait of Hormuz carries less than 1 per cent of international bandwidth and adds Red Sea routing figures; i24NEWS does not include that technical context.
  • The senior officials condition their broader cable threat on a further U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran; Javani separately conditions his warning about seven Strait of Hormuz cables on an attack against Iranian infrastructure.
Updat3: These are differences of emphasis, not disputes about what is reported. They do not show that the reported claims are true.
One-sided or uncorroborated claims
Claims that come from one party or one source family and are not independently corroborated.
  • An official said there would be no more “red lines” if Iran were attacked, naming undersea cables and military bases.
  • An official warned Washington not to “play with fire” and claimed Iran had access to the cables.
  • Javani said Iran could target seven major internet cables beneath the Strait of Hormuz if Iranian infrastructure came under attack.
Updat3: Not independently corroborated yet — treat as a claim, not an established fact.
Not established by the reporting
Information the available reporting does not contain or confirm. This is a gap, not a disagreement.
  • The accounts do not describe any prior U.S. or Israeli strike that triggered the stated conditional threat.
  • The accounts provide no casualty or civilian-impact figures related to cable attacks.
  • The accounts do not cite an accountability process or identify economic interests of the governments involved.
  • The claims that Iran has access to the cables and could attack them are attributed to Iranian officials; the supplied accounts do not independently verify them.
  • The accounts report threats and conditional plans, not an attack on cables or an attempt to obstruct repairs.
Updat3: Updat3 cannot conclude anything about this from the current sources.

Timeline

Developments from this story's sources, dated background we compiled and fact-checked, and our earlier coverage. Each row says which.
  1. The roots of the US-Iran rupture date to August 19, 1953, when a CIA- and MI6-backed coup overthrew Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and restored Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s authority.
    Background · from our historical context
  2. On May 8, 2018, President Donald Trump announced the US withdrawal from the agreement and the restoration of US sanctions.
    Background · from our historical context
  3. From 2019, Iran exceeded JCPOA enrichment limits; Tehran said those steps answered the US withdrawal.
    Background · from our historical context
  4. The strikes followed direct exchanges between Iran and Israel in 2024.
    Background · from our historical context
  5. Iran launched missiles at Israel, saying it was retaliating for the killings of senior figures including Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  6. Israel struck Iranian military targets, saying it was responding to Iran’s October attack.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  7. The United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes across Iran.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  8. Iran announced that vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz would need prior authorization from the IRGC Navy.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  9. The United States and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding concerning freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz; implementation later stalled over security disagreements.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  10. Iran presented a proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz after an interim ceasefire collapsed.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3

How we got here

On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel began coordinated strikes on Iran, including attacks on power plants, air defenses and military infrastructure; the war that began that day remained ongoing as of October 24, 2026. The strikes followed direct exchanges between Iran and Israel in 2024.

On April 1, 2024, a strike on an Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus killed senior Iranian commanders; Iran said its April 13–14 drone and missile attack on Israel was a response. On October 1, Iran launched missiles at Israel, describing the attack as retaliation for the killings of senior figures, including Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Original sources

3 of 9 articles · Asia · Show all

Every story links to the reporting it was built from. How we choose sources

Spotted a factual error, a broken link or a misleading summary? Tell us.