Iranian authorities say ‘failure to observe safety procedures' at port where explosion killed at least 70 people
CNN —
Iranian authorities have said there was a 'failure to observe safety principles' at the port of Bandar Abbas, where an explosion Saturday killed dozens of people, but testing is required to determine the causes of the blast.
Eyewitness accounts and video indicate chemicals in an area of shipping containers caught fire, setting off a much larger explosion. The death toll has spiked sharply, with one official telling Iranian state media on Monday that at least 70 have died.
At least 1,000 people were reported injured, according to the Associated Press, citing Iranian state TV. Of those wounded, 190 remain in hospital, said Pir Hossein Kolivand, head of Iran's Red Crescent society.
One surveillance video distributed by the Fars news agency shows a small fire beginning among containers, with a number of workers moving away from the scene, before a huge explosion ends the video feed.
A committee investigating the port explosion released a statement Monday saying that, prior to the blast there had been a 'failure to observe safety principles,' according to state-affiliated outlet Mehr News.
'Determining the definitive cause of this incident requires a complete and comprehensive investigation of its various aspects, which, due to expert requirements, requires technical and laboratory processes,' the statement continued.
The statement also referred to 'discrepancies' in statement given to the committee, but did not elaborate on what these might be or their source.
CNN has previously reported that hundreds of tons of a critical chemical for fueling Iran's ballistic missile program arrived at the port in February. Another shipment is reported to have arrived in March.
Charred merchandise and containers lie at the site of the deadly port explosion.
Meysam Mirsadeh/Tasnim News/AFP via Getty Images
Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni said Monday that authorities 'have been made aware of some shortcomings at the port.'
'Safety precautions and passive defenses were not implemented or taken seriously at the port,' he was cited as saying by semi-official Tasnim news, adding that the fire is under control 'but there are certain containers that just need to burn off, but they are controlled and monitored.'
Some people had been summoned as part of the investigation, he said.
The state-run Islamic Republic News Agency quoted an official as saying the explosion was likely set off by containers of chemicals, but did not identify the chemicals. The agency said late Saturday that the Customs Administration of Iran blamed a 'stockpile of hazardous goods and chemical materials stored in the port area' for the blast.
Iran's national oil company said the explosion at the port was 'not related to refineries, fuel tanks, or oil pipelines' in the area.
Iranian officials have denied that any military material was held at the port. The spokesman for the national security and foreign policy committee of the Iranian parliament, Ebrahim Rezaei, said in a post on X Sunday that according to initial reports the explosion had 'nothing to do with Iran's defense sector.'
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian arrived in Bandar Abbas on Sunday afternoon to investigate the situation and oversee relief efforts, according to state media. The president also met with those injured in yesterday's blast.
'We have to find out why it happened,' Pezeshkian said at a meeting with officials aired by Iranian state television.
The region's governor, Mohammad Ashouri, declared three days of mourning.
Reports of chemical fuel 'for missiles'
The blast comes at a time of high tensions in the Middle East and ongoing talks between Iran and the United States over Tehran's nuclear programme, but no senior figure in Iran has suggested the blast was an attack.
Videos and images from the scene, some of which have been geolocated by CNN, show orange-brown smoke rising from part of the port where containers were stacked. Such a color would suggest a chemical such as sodium or ammonia was involved.
The New York Times reported Sunday that a person 'with ties to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that what exploded was sodium perchlorate, a major ingredient in solid fuel for missiles. The person spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss security matters.'
CNN cannot confirm what was being stored in the area at the time of the explosion and it is unclear why such chemicals would be kept at port for so long.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian surveys the damage of the Shahid Rajaee port explosion in Bandar Abbas, Iran, on Sunday. Authorities were tight-lipped over the cause of the blast, which killed 40 people.
Iran's Presidential Website/Wana News Agency via Reuters
Other experts suggested more mundane chemicals might explain the huge blast.
'This bears the hallmarks of an ammonium nitrate explosion. Ammonium nitrate is a commodity chemical that is widely used as a fertilizer and as an industrial explosive, but it is well known that poor storage can significantly raise the risk of an explosion in the event of a fire.' said Andrea Sella, a professor of chemistry at University College London.
'Material ignites and burns fiercely less than a minute later followed seconds later by the devastating detonation. It is the supersonic pressure wave from that that would have shattered windows.'
But Dan Kaszeta, a chemical weapons expert who reviewed videos from the scene, said reports of sodium perchlorate 'could provide an explanation for how the explosion started, as perchlorates are used in materials like rocket propellant and fireworks.'
'It is difficult for ammonium nitrate to detonate on its own without other chemicals having been part of a reaction.' he told CNN.
Men ride a motorcycle amid the devastation.
Mohammad Rasole Moradi/IRNA/AFP via Getty Images
In February CNN reported that the first of two vessels carrying 1,000 tons of a Chinese-made chemical that could be a key component in fuel for Iran's military missile program had anchored outside Bandar Abbas.
The ship, Golbon, had left the Chinese port of Taicang in January loaded with most of a 1,000-ton shipment of sodium perchlorate, the main precursor in the solid propellant that powers Iran's mid-range conventional missiles, according to two European intelligence sources who spoke with CNN.
Sodium perchlorate could allow for the production of sufficient propellant for some 260 solid rocket motors for Iran's Kheibar Shekan missiles or 200 of the Haj Qasem ballistic missiles, according to the intelligence sources.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry told CNN in February that 'China has consistently abided by export controls on dual-use items in accordance with its international obligations and domestic laws and regulations,' adding that 'sodium perchlorate is not a controlled item by China, and its export would be considered normal trade.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Egypt Independent
5 hours ago
- Egypt Independent
Israel attacks suburbs of Beirut, targeting alleged Hezbollah ‘drone factories'
CNN — The Israeli military carried out strikes on Hezbollah 'drone factories' in southern Lebanon and suburbs of Beirut on Thursday, as large plumes of smoke could be seen rising from the Lebanese capital. The Israeli attack marked its biggest escalation in Lebanon since the US-brokered a ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah in November. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said it was striking 'terror targets of the Hezbollah Aerial Unit (127)' in the southern Beirut suburb of Dahieh. NNA news reported strikes from Israeli drones, saying that a 'series of warning strikes, numbering more than seven' had targeted the city's southern suburbs. The news outlet also said that Israeli drones carried out an airstrike on the town of Ain Qana in Lebanon's Iklim Tuffah region. There were no initial reports of casualties related to the strikes, the spokesperson for Lebanon's Ministry of Public Health told CNN early on Friday morning. The Israeli military had previously warned of a coming strike in the area, intended to target alleged 'underground UAV production facilities' controlled by Hezbollah. The aftermath of Israeli strikes in the Dahieh suburb of the Lebanese capital on Friday. Hassan Ammar/AP IDF Arabic Spokesperson Avichay Adraee issued an 'urgent warning' via social media earlier on Thursday, urging residents of 'Al-Hadath, Haret Hreik, and Burj Al-Barajneh,' neighborhoods to immediately evacuate buildings marked in red on attached maps and adjacent structures, and to stay at least '300 meters (328 yards) away' for safety. A second 'urgent warning' was issued by the Israeli military via a post on X accompanied by a satellite photo of Lebanon with highlighted zones they said showed the locations of Hezbollah sites. The warning urged residents to evacuate nearby buildings 'immediately and stay at least 500 meters away from them.' The announcement prompted widespread panic and evacuations, according to NNA. Social media video captured Thursday night showed dozens of cars leaving neighborhoods in the city's south. The strikes were carried out as Muslims in Lebanon prepared to celebrate Eid al-Adha, known as the Feast of Sacrifice, on Friday. Most Muslims in Lebanon usually celebrate the eve of Eid which fell on Thursday evening local time. The Lebanese army warned that it could suspend its cooperation with a committee led by the United States and France to monitor the ceasefire provisions that include disarming Hezbollah. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam both condemned the Israeli strikes, with Aoun saying that they were a 'blatant violation of an international agreement, as well as the basic tenets of international and humanitarian laws and resolutions' on the eve of an important religious occasion. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz responded to Aoun, saying: 'Mr. President – there will be no calm in Beirut, no order and stability in Lebanon without security for the State of Israel. Agreements must be respected. If you do not do what is required – we will continue to act, and with great force.' Lebanon's new government has vowed to disarm paramilitary groups in the country such as Hezbollah and Palestinian factions. Last week, Salam said that his government had dismantled 500 pieces of weaponry north of the Litani river in southern Lebanon. Israel previously struck the same neighborhood, a Hezbollah stronghold, in late March. A ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon had been brokered in November 2024, but strikes on southern Lebanon targeting Hezbollah militants and facilities have continued. CNN's Charbel Mallo and Lauren Izso contributed to this report
Egypt Independent
5 hours ago
- Egypt Independent
Trump is acting like an authoritarian; California's crisis now rests on what he does next
CNN — Donald Trump is talking and acting like an authoritarian as he escalates a constitutional clash with California over his migration crackdown. Much now depends on whether he's simply talking tough or if he's ready to take an already-tense nation across a fateful line in his zeal for strongman rule. In a mind-boggling moment, on Monday, the president of the United States — the country seen as the world's top steward of democracy for 80 years — endorsed the arrest of the Democratic governor of the nation's most populous state. 'I think it would be a great thing,' Trump, the only convicted felon ever to serve as president, told reporters as he strode across the South Lawn of the White House. Later, Trump deployed hundreds of active-duty Marines to Los Angeles and authorized the arrival of 2,000 more National Guard reservists after a weekend of unrest that saw clashes with police and burning cars in contained areas of the city. The protests were triggered by Immigration and Customs Enforcement sweeps seeking undocumented migrants in a city and state that are epicenters of Democratic power. California and Los Angeles officials reject Trump's claims that they have lost control. On Monday evening, law enforcement officers pushed back demonstrators throwing projectiles with flash bangs. Trump's decision to deploy troops despite the opposition of California Gov. Gavin Newsom represented the latest example of his willingness to flex extraordinary executive power — often on questionable grounds — and marked a break with a first term when he was often talked out of his extreme impulses by establishment officials. For all Trump's multiple previous challenges to the rule of law and democracy, a grave new chapter may be opening. 'The president is forcibly overriding the authority of the governor and mayor and using the military as a political weapon. This unprecedented move threatens to turn a tense situation into a national crisis,' Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said on Monday evening. 'Since our nation's founding, the American people have been perfectly clear: we do not want the military conducting law enforcement on US soil,' Reed said in a statement. California Democratic Rep. Nanette Barragán, whose district encompasses Paramount, just south of Los Angeles, condemned Trump's mobilizations of troops that she said were not justified by the situation. 'This is where I think this is a sign of a dictator,' she told CNN's Jake Tapper. 'And the threat he is making against the governor to arrest him — I mean come on — that is pretty outrageous.' White House border czar Tom Homan speaks with reporters at the White House on Tuesday, May 20, 2025, in Washington. Evan Vucci/AP Trump border czar tells CNN that Democratic claims about troops are 'ridiculous' Top Trump administration officials are throwing around words like 'insurrection.' Not surprisingly, many observers have taken such rhetoric as a sign the White House is prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act — a law that would allow the president to activate troops to put down a rebellion in a state. There is no such revolt in California. Trump's claims on Monday that his swift action stopped Los Angeles being obliterated are also not true. The president's border czar Tom Homan, meanwhile, told CNN's Kaitlan Collins that claims by Democratic officials that protests intensified because Trump sent National Guard troops were 'ridiculous.' Joining 'The Source' from Los Angeles, Homan said, 'It all depends on the activities of these protesters— I mean, they make the decisions.' Protesters gathered in large numbers in Los Angeles on Monday night, raising the prospect of another cycle of tension and uncertainty. The trajectory of the crisis could now turn on whether Trump follows through on his dictator's theatrics by crossing lines not approached by modern presidents — notably on the use of troops in a law enforcement capacity. It may also rely on the restraint of protesters, who would play into Trump's hands by taking part in more unrest that creates alarming television pictures that can fuel Trump's dystopian rhetoric. Creating or escalating a law-and-order crisis or threat to public security and then using it to justify the use of the military on domestic soil would mirror the methodology of tyrannical leaders throughout history. And hopes of restraint are hardly supported by Trump's second term so far. The president has, for instance, invoked highly contentious national emergencies on immigration and trade to unlock rarely used executive powers with no pushback from the Republican Congress. He's used presidential authority against what he regards as centers of liberal authority and influence: at Ivy League universities, in the federal government and in the media. And even in his breakup with erstwhile DOGE chief Elon Musk last week, Trump threatened yet another abuse of power by cancelling federal subsidies for the SpaceX boss's firms. The administration is spoiling for a fight as it lays down a marker in California for other Democratic states where leaders are loath to cooperate with Trump's deportation purge. It obviously also perceives a political advantage in the president positioning himself as the guardian of public order in a way that allows Republicans to accuse Democrats of defending softer immigration enforcement. Protesters confront National Guard soldiers and police outside a federal building as protests continue in Los Angeles following three days of clashes with police after a series of immigration raids, on June 9, 2025Is Trump for real or is he bluffing? But as ever with Trump, there's a question as to whether he's serious with his threats or is staking out an extreme position to please his voters or even to create some perceived leverage for himself. Homan, for instance, told CNN's Collins that Newsom had 'absolutely not' done anything at this point to justify his arrest. And North Dakota Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer adopted the classic GOP line that not everything that the president says should be taken literally when asked about administration threats to detain Newsom. 'You guys could ask every day if I am comfortable with what he said. He hasn't arrested him. I can't imagine that he is going to arrest Gavin Newsom,' Cramer told CNN's Manu Raju. Cramer also voiced the view of many Republicans that, far from behaving like an authoritarian, Trump is rightfully addressing failures by Democratic leaders on immigration policy and public order. 'There's no question about it: Places like California have thumbed their noses at the American people and decided they want to be sanctuary for criminals,' Cramer said. So far, National Guard reservists mobilized by the president over the head of a state governor for the first time since the Civil Rights era in the 1960s have mostly been used to defend federal buildings in Los Angeles. While the announcement of a deployment of Marines to the city was superficially alarming, their orders prohibit them from conducting law enforcement activities like making arrests without Trump invoking the Insurrection Act. The Marines are expected to be used to bolster National Guard members on the ground while up to 2,000 reservists are mobilized. CNN's Evan Perez, meanwhile, reported on Monday evening that while officials like top White House aide Stephen Miller have been talking about an 'insurrection,' administration lawyers have been working to craft a much less confrontational way of protecting the federal government's ability to carry out immigration enforcement, hoping to avoid further inflaming the situation, according to multiple people briefed on the discussions. This may all signify that the president is not yet ready to push the nation toward an unprecedented authoritarian cliff — even if his personal history, not least over January 6, 2021, suggests that in the heat of the moment he often takes the most reckless course. And Trump may be playing with fire in a city and state where anger over his wild four-month-old presidency is boiling. By inserting troops into such a volatile and tense environment, he's opening the possibility that flashpoints could ignite and even that tragic circumstances could unfold. But then again, maybe that's the point, if the president is seeking a predicate to deploy active-duty troops on the streets of American cities. Another troubling omen is that Newsom — who, like Trump, relishes public fights — has no incentive to cave to the man he would like to replace as president in 2029. Newsom, for example, wrote on social media on Monday that the president was deploying another 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, even though only 300 from his initial 2,000-strong contingent had so far arrived in the city. 'This isn't about public safety. It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego,' the governor said. 'This is Reckless. Pointless. And Disrespectful to our troops.' The state has sued the administration over that initial call-up of reservists. State Attorney General Rob Bonta called Trump's federalization of the state's National Guard troops 'unnecessary, counterproductive, and most importantly, unlawful.' The suit created yet another legal morass around one of Trump's most aggressive power grabs. California has now lodged 24 lawsuits against the administration in 19 weeks. With every day that passes in the California public order crisis, the political incentives seem to be driving toward more confrontation rather than a peaceful resolution. But ultimately it's up to Trump how this ends.
Egypt Independent
5 hours ago
- Egypt Independent
Why Trump's move toward using the military on US soil is so fraught
CNN — The country hangs on a hugely significant precipice, as President Donald Trump moves toward making good on his long-running suggestions of an extraordinary step: deploying the military on US soil. About 700 Marines have now been mobilized to join the National Guard in Los Angeles to deal with demonstrations over federal immigration raids, CNN reports. The Marines were previously on 'ready to deploy' status. (It is still unclear what their specific task will be once in Los Angeles, sources told CNN. And like the National Guard troops, they are prohibited from conducting law enforcement activity such as making arrests unless Trump invokes the Insurrection Act.) But to hear the White House tell it, this show of force is not just the right thing to do but also a political winner. Responding to a poll showing 54 percent of Americans approved of Trump's deportation program, White House spokesman Steven Cheung wrote on X Sunday, 'And the approval number will be even higher after the national guard was sent to LA to beat back the violence this weekend.' But whether the American people actually want this military activation isn't nearly so clear. In fact, they've rejected such things in the past. The administration may be making a huge gamble on the American people's tolerance for a heavy-handed federal response. And while Americans might not have much sympathy for the demonstrators in Los Angeles who engage in violence or for undocumented immigrants, recent surveys have shown they often say Trump goes too far in his attempts to address such problems. There is something of an analog for the current situation. It came in 2020 when federal law enforcement suddenly moved to clear Lafayette Square, near the White House, of racial justice demonstrators, resulting in violent scenes. This wasn't the military, but it was controversial – in part because Trump then walked across the square with military leaders for a photo-op. (Then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper also resisted Trump's suggestions of using active-duty military at the time.) The American people did not like what they saw. A USA Today/Ipsos poll conducted a week later showed 63 percent of Americans opposed the use of rubber bullets and tear gas that day. It also showed Americans opposed deploying military forces in other states by 10 points, 51-41 percent. Similarly a CNN poll conducted by SSRS at the time asked a broader question – whether it would be appropriate for a president to 'deploy the U.S. military in response to protests in the United States.' Americans said this would be 'inappropriate' by a wide margin, 60-36 percent. All of which suggest Americans are predisposed to viewing such actions skeptically. These numbers come with caveats, though. The CNN poll question is a great window into how this could be received. But it's possible people's views have shifted or could shift with circumstances, including the role the Marines end up playing in Los Angeles. Back in 2020, the racial justice protests were relatively popular, and people didn't view them as particularly violent. Americans sympathized with the cause, believing George Floyd had been murdered by police. It's too early to tell how people view the demonstrators in Los Angeles. And the plight of the undocumented immigrants whom the administration is trying to deport is probably less sympathetic than the racial justice protesters' cause. (Clear majorities generally support deporting undocumented immigrants, who are in this country without authorization.) But when it comes to the administration's immigration crackdown, Americans have also expressed nuanced feelings. And the poll the White House cited this weekend is a case in point. In the CBS News/YouGov survey, which was conducted before Saturday's protests broke out in Los Angeles, Americans said they approved of Trump's deportation program, 54-46 percent. They also liked its 'goals,' 55-45 percent. But that's not quite the same as saying they approved of the administration's actions, full stop. The same poll asked whether people liked 'the way you think [Trump] is going about' the deportations. And there, Americans actually disliked his approach by double-digits, 56-44 percent. While independents were about evenly split on Trump's deportation program, they disliked how he's gone about it by 30 points, 65-35 percent. This is a dichotomy we see in lots of polling of Trump's deportation actions. Americans like the idea of mass deportation, but not so much the implementation. They like the president a lot on securing the border. But they like him significantly less on 'immigration,' and they like him even less when 'deportation,' specifically, is invoked in the question. One possible reason: Americans see the administration moving haphazardly. That could most notably be the case with things like deporting the wrong people and actions that have been halted by the courts, including ones in which judges have said people haven't been given enough due process. It's possible that people could come to sympathize with the cause of the Los Angeles protesters – if not the violent ones – at least to some degree. While Americans generally favor mass deportation, those numbers decline significantly when you mention the prospect of deporting otherwise-law-abiding people with jobs and those who have been in this country for a long time. (For example, a recent Pew Research Center poll showed Americans opposed deporting undocumented immigrants who have jobs, 56-41 percent, and they opposed deporting the parents of US citizen children 60-37 percent.) But the raids that set off the protests have been directed at workplaces generally – not necessarily at criminals or gang members. The Department of Homeland Security has claimed at least five of the people arrested during Sunday immigration sweeps in Los Angeles had criminal convictions or were accused of crimes. Through it all, the administration has made a rather Machiavellian political calculation: that however much people dislike the means, their support for the ends will carry the day. Maybe people say they don't like the lack of due process the administration has provided – or the wrong people getting sent to a brutal Salvadoran prison – but how much do they really care if the end result is lots of deportations? Similarly, the administration could be making the calculation that scenes of violence in Los Angeles could marshal support for a previously unthinkable step of deploying the military domestically against protesters – something Americans opposed by 24 points just five years ago. So much depends on what the Marines end up doing in Los Angeles and whether Trump invokes the Insurrection Act to allow them to engage in policing activities. But the Trump administration has clearly gone too far for people before as part of their deportation efforts. And the one big crackdown on protesters we have seen in the Trump era didn't go well. This would appear pretty fraught – not just practically, but politically.
