Iran is rearming its missile program and a ship of supplies just arrived from China, Western sources say
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 has anchored outside the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas on Thursday, ship tracking data shows. It could be a signal that Iran's missile production is back to business as usual after the devastating, and embarrassing, attacks by Israel on key factories last year.
The ship, Golbon, left the Chinese port of Taicang three weeks ago loaded with most of a 1,000-ton shipment of sodium perchlorate, the main precursor in the production of the solid propellant that powers Iran's mid-range conventional missiles, according to two European intelligence sources.
The 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 shipment comes as Iran has suffered a series of regional setbacks with the collective defeat suffered by its allies: The fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and Hezbollah's losses in Lebanon. Following Israel's strike on Iran's missile production facilities in October, some Western experts believed it could take at least a year before Iran could resume solid-propellant production. This delivery points to Iran being not far from – or that they could already be back to – the production of its missiles.
The shipment was purchased on behalf of the Procurement Department of the Self Sufficiency Jihad Organization (SSJO), part of the Iranian body responsible for the development of Iran's ballistic missiles, according to the sources.
The second ship, Jairan, has yet to be loaded and leave China, with both vessels operated by the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) company, the sources told CNN. The Jairan is due to ferry the remainder of the 1,000 tons to Iran. The Golbon left the Taichang port for Iran on January 21.
CNN has reached out to IRISL for comment.
The sources could not say if the Chinese government knew of the shipments prior to media reporting about their movement late January. The delivery of sodium perchlorate in itself is not illegal, nor does it breach Western sanctions.
China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters in January that she was not aware of the specifics of the case, but that China has always abided by its export control laws as well as the country's international obligations.
The United States and United Kingdom have levied sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines company, with the State Department saying the firm is the 'preferred shipping line for Iranian proliferators and procurement agents.'
The UK treasury said the company was 'involved in hostile activity' by Iran and highlighted its links to the Iranian defense sector.
Both the Golbon and Jairan are under US sanctions.
Meanwhile, China has remained a diplomatic and economic ally for sanctions-hit Iran, decrying 'unilateral' US sanctions against the country and welcoming Tehran into Beijing and Moscow-led international blocs like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS.
China also remains by far Iran's largest energy buyer, though it has not reported purchases of Iranian oil in its official customs data since 2022, according to analysts.
Despite China's historic ties to Iran's defense sector, observers say Beijing has scaled back security ties over the past decade as it seeks to bolster relations with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states. The US has in recent years, however, sanctioned a number of Chinese entities for alleged roles supporting Iranian military drone production. Recent joint naval drills between China, Iran and Russia have also signaled a potential deepening of government to government strategic ties.
While Iran would need solid propellant for a range of missiles, including smaller air defense weapons, the lion's share of such deliveries would likely be headed towards Iran's ballistic missile program, Fabian Hinz, research fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told CNN.
Although sodium perchlorate trade is not restricted by Western sanctions, it can be chemically transformed into ammonium perchlorate - a fuel and oxidizer which is a controlled product.
'Ammonium perchlorate is the material that was used in the solid rocket propellants of the Space Shuttle,' Andrea Sella, professor of inorganic chemistry at University College London, told CNN.
'There really aren't very many alternative things' that the chemical in the Chinese deliveries can be used for, aside from for rocket propellants, fireworks and fuel, he said, adding: 'perchlorates have a fairly narrow range of uses.'
Increasing controls on perchlorates in the West have seen China become a major alternative supplier of such chemicals, he said.
China has long been 'a primary source of sodium perchlorate for Iran's missile programs, dating at least to the mid-2000s,' Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, told CNN.
'This is just the latest shipment in a decades-old pattern,' Lewis added.
Defense analyst Hinz said that while Iran has previously boasted of its ability to produce ammonium perchlorate themselves, this delivery hints at supply chain bottlenecks as domestic precursor supply has been unable to meet missile production needs. It's a problem even countries like the US can face, he added.
Hinz said that Iran's solid propellant production infrastructure has 'dramatically expanded in the last few years - and potentially even since October 7, (2023),' with new sites built and existing ones enlarged.
Kheibar Shekan missiles have a range of 880 miles (around 1,420 km), with their Haj Qasem cousins able to reach targets 900 miles (around 1,450 km) away, according to the Western intelligence source. Although not the most technically advanced weapons in Iran's arsenal, their range does make them valuable for attacks on Israel.
Hinz said that variants of such missiles have been used by Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen against Israel, despite the distance ostensibly outstripping the missiles' standard range. Modifications of the warhead mass or secondary propulsion units could lengthen their reach, he said.
Solid propellant is also used in Iran's short-range missiles – like those used in the past against US bases in the region and in exports to Russia, Hinz said. Iran's largest and most powerful ballistic missiles typically use liquid propellant.
According to the Israel Defense Forces, wreckage from at least one Kheibar Shakan missile was recovered following Iran's October 1, 2024 barrage against Israel. Analysis from one of the Western sources confirmed that some 50 medium-range missiles with solid propulsion were fired at Israel by Iran in this attack.
Iran's arsenal is believed to hold 'over 3,000 ballistic missiles,' US Air Force Gen. Kenneth McKenzie told Congress in 2023 - but exact numbers of each type of missile are unknown.
A western intelligence official told CNN that, although relevant US government agencies are aware of the delivery, there is limited concern over the shipment. If Iran does funnel the chemicals towards missile fuel production, especially on weapons destined for Russia, that will be of greater concern, the source said.
The Iranian government declined to comment in response to questions posed by CNN for this article.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Young people are skeptical of the American Dream
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. There are some striking divides in a new CNN poll, but they aren't necessarily the partisan kind Americans have come to expect: The divides are more gray than red versus blue. The first has to do with the American Dream, which a growing number of Americans feel is out of reach. Most, 54%, still agreed with the idea that 'people who want to get ahead can make it if they're willing to work hard,' in the new poll, conducted by SSRS. What's noteworthy is that when CNN asked the same question back in 2016, more than two-thirds of respondents, 67%, agreed with that optimistic idea. Looking at the new poll's results by age, younger Americans are less bullish that they can 'make it.' About half, 51%, of those under 45, felt that 'Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people,' compared with 41% of those 45 and older. There's likely some partisanship behind those numbers, since younger Americans tend to be more liberal, despite the inroads that President Donald Trump and Republicans have made with young people. But the age divide exists, to a more modest extent, even within the Democratic Party. More than two-thirds of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents under 45 say that hard work and determination are no guarantee of success. A smaller portion, 62% of older Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents feel that way. Read the full report by CNN's Ariel Edwards-Levy. A second question in the poll asks whether the government should do more or whether it is trying to do too many things already. A majority, 58%, say the government should do more to solve the country's problems, up from just 51% when CNN asked the question nearly two years ago. More young people, 63% of those under 45, said they want more from the government, compared with 54% of those 45 and older. The government arguably does more for older people: It helps to provide health care in the form of Medicare and retirement benefits in the form of Social Security for a large portion of older Americans. At the same time, the ballooning national debt means those programs' future is on an unsustainable path for younger Americans. Asked about which party they feel represents their views on the economy, three-quarters of people over 45 picked either Democrats (32%) or Republicans (42%), leaving just about a quarter of older Americans who said neither party represented them on the economy. A larger portion of people under 45, 38%, said they did not feel represented by either party on the economy. Another CNN story published Monday might help explain some of the malaise felt by younger Americans. This is from CNN's report on the 'No hire, no fire' economy by Matt Egan: … Even as the overall labor market looks relatively healthy, economists say this is the worst market for new college graduates since the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. Recent grads are finding that it takes considerable time to get hired, leaving them unemployed and saddled with student debt for a frustratingly long time. For the first time since record-keeping on the topic began in 1980, the unemployment rate for recent graduates (those 22 to 27 years old with a bachelor's degree or higher) is consistently higher than the national unemployment rate, according to Oxford Economics. The unemployment rate for people between 20 and 24 is twice the national average, and there is evidence that companies are adjusting how they make entry-level hires as they adopt AI advancements. All of that could point to a distinct lack of optimism among younger Americans.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - China's courtroom espionage strategy demands a federal response
In April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit handed down a decision in a stunning case that should be a wake-up call to lawmakers across the country. In U.S. v. Pangang Group, a Chinese state-owned enterprise admitted in open court that it had engaged in state-sponsored industrial espionage, stealing American trade secrets to achieve strategic goals for China's government. The company even tried to invoke sovereign immunity, claiming that theft for the purpose of national industrial development was a legitimate function of the Chinese state. This brazen confession didn't just confirm China's role in weaponizing commercial enterprises for geopolitical gain — it also underscored how vulnerable our systems remain to economic sabotage. One of the least understood, but potentially most damaging, tools in this arsenal is third-party litigation funding. It's time that Congress wakes up and takes steps to address this looming threat. During my time in Congress, I served on the Committee on National Security and learned about many forms of foreign interference, but few are as insidious as third-party funding. Under this system, outside financiers — often anonymous — fund lawsuits in return for a cut of the potential winnings. There is no federal requirement to disclose these arrangements, including whether the backers are foreign nationals, sovereign wealth funds or shell corporations tied to adversarial governments. That must change. Third-party funding isn't necessarily inherently malicious, but this opacity and the nature of these arrangements opens the door to abuse. Although its backers have historically been hedge funds or other investors in pursuit of healthy returns that are insulated from the broader market — which raises its own set of ethical concerns about subverting the justice system to earn a profit — these actors are generally not seeking to undermine the U.S. more broadly. Foreign-backed funders, on the other hand, can use litigation to drain resources from U.S. companies through prolonged legal battles. Not only that, but they can also use such proceedings to obtain access to proprietary information such as technical data, trade secrets and supply-chain vulnerabilities through the discovery process. For firms tied to sectors like AI, pharmaceuticals, aerospace or semiconductor design, this is a direct national security risk. The FBI has called China's economic espionage the 'greatest long-term threat to our nation's information and intellectual property, and to our economic vitality.' Yet right now, we lack even the most basic safeguards to ensure that our courtrooms aren't being used as intelligence-gathering venues for hostile foreign powers. That is unacceptable. Fortunately, there are solutions that are currently under consideration. Rep. Ben Cline's (R-Va.) Protecting Our Courts from Foreign Manipulation Act of 2025 would be a critical first step. It would prohibit foreign governments and sovereign wealth funds from investing in third-party litigation funding, require transparency about who is funding litigation, and direct the Department of Justice to report annually on foreign activity in this space. Another promising effort backed by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is the Litigation Funding Transparency Act, which would mandate disclosure of funding sources in all federal civil cases, ensuring that judges, juries and defendants know who's really pulling the strings behind the scenes. These federal efforts echo a growing movement at the state level. In my home state of Kansas, for example, lawmakers recently enacted Senate Bill 54 — a strong, bipartisan reform that mandates the disclosure of third-party litigation funding agreements within 30 days of execution. It also requires a sworn statement that identifies all parties to the agreement, whether the funder can influence litigation or settlement decisions, and if any foreign entity is involved in the financing. But piecemeal state action can only go so far, and we need Congress to act quickly. Third-party litigation funding should not be a backdoor for China or any other adversary to undermine American companies, steal our intellectual property, or compromise our national defense base. When state-owned enterprises such as the Pangang Companies can openly admit in court that they steal American innovation for geopolitical gain, we can no longer afford to treat litigation finance as just another investment vehicle. It now has the potential to be a vector of strategic exploitation. National security isn't bounded by state lines, and neither is foreign influence. The threats are real, the stakes are high, and the time for action is now. Let's not wait for the next courtroom confession to learn what China already knows: that America's legal system is a battlefield, and without reform, we're fighting blindfolded. Todd Tiahrt previously represented the 4th District of Kansas in the U.S. House of Representatives and served on the House Committee on National Security. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration requests another pause in tariff ruling on two toy companies
The Trump administration has asked for a pause in a second court ruling challenging its sweeping tariffs invoked under emergency powers. The administration asked a US appeals court to stay a preliminary injunction from last week in a case that affected two US toymakers. The filing Monday argued that halting the tariffs would threaten trade negotiations with other nations and undercut the tariffs as a 'credible threat.' Last Thursday, US District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras ruled that two American family-owned toy companies, Learning Resources and hand2mind, would be irreparably harmed by Trump's tariffs. The judge also ruled that there was no provision for tariffs in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, under which Trump enacted the majority of his tariffs. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling to the US DC Circuit Court of Appeals. The ruling came during a chaotic legal week for Trump's tariffs, adding to the uncertainty around his economic vision. Though the lawsuit filed on behalf of Learning Resources and hand2mind only focuses on tariffs applying to the two companies, a broader legal case that began in the US Court of International Trade is unfolding, with potential implications for Trump's trade policies and the global economy. On May 28, the niche trade court ruled that President Donald Trump overstepped his authority to impose the sweeping tariffs under IEEPA, blocking his 'Liberation Day' tariffs and tariffs placed earlier this year against China, Mexico and Canada, designed to combat fentanyl coming into the United States. The Trump administration immediately appealed that ruling, and less than 24 hours later a federal appeals court paused the ruling, temporarily restoring Trump's ability to levy tariffs under the act. The Court of International Trade had issued a joint judgement on two separate cases: one filed by wine importer V.O.S. Selections and four other small businesses and one by twelve Democratic state attorneys general led by Oregon. Contreras, the judge in the case filed on behalf of the toy companies, issued a stay on his ruling for two weeks last Thursday. But he ordered the two companies be protected from tariffs regardless of how the case before the trade court played out. Richard Woldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources, told CNN Monday he was expecting the administration to appeal. 'We're very gratified by the ruling of the district court and believe the reasoning of the district court will be upheld,' he said. In Monday's filing in the toy companies case, the Trump administration said the district court 'lacks jurisdiction' and that the trade court exclusively has jurisdiction. CNN's David Goldman and Dan Berman contributed to this report.
