US source told Jerusalem Post the US was behind the attack on Qeshm Island a few hours ago and "It was a small incident intended for self-defense"

US source told Jerusalem Post the US was behind the attack on Qeshm Island a few hours ago and "It was a small incident intended for self-defense"

US acknowledgment of direct action on Iranian territory marks an escalation category distinct from the proxy exchanges and strike-on-strike exchanges that have characterized the running confrontation; episodes of direct, owned US-Iran engagement have historically been brief and bounded when both sides frame them as defensive and limited, which is precisely the framing being offered here. The tell in past rounds of this kind has been the Iranian response sequence: whether Tehran treats it as a threshold event requiring a visible answer or absorbs it under its standing posture, with the former path typically running through proxy channels rather than direct retaliation. Sourcing via a single US official speaking to an Israeli outlet is itself a familiar pattern in these episodes, often functioning as signaling rather than formal attribution, so confirmation posture from other US voices and from Tehran's official channels is the immediate follow-on. The established market transmission in comparable incidents runs through crude, with the distinction that matters being whether Qeshm touches energy infrastructure or shipping through the Strait of Hormuz corridor; strikes confined to military targets on the island have historically produced short-lived risk premia, while anything implicating tanker traffic or export facilities has sustained them. Watch the IRGC statement language, freight and insurance rates in the Gulf, and whether any further US kinetic action follows in the next sessions.