Dubai-based reporting says two oil supertankers were disabled by massive explosions after they ignored warnings against using an "unauthorised route" in the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday night.

Iran's Revolutionary Guards Navy announced the incidents on Thursday, and Iranian state media later said the two tankers "exploded after hitting naval mines," showing what it described as video footage of the incidents. One tanker reportedly caught fire east of the strait.

The IRGC had earlier in the US-Israeli war, which began in February, said it struck tankers directly; more recently it has reported vessels catching fire after hitting mines on routes it calls unauthorised.

The strait carries a large share of the world's oil, so any attack on supertankers there ripples far beyond the region.

What makes this episode striking is the framing: rather than claiming direct strikes as it did earlier in the war, the IRGC now describes tankers hitting naval mines on routes it declares unauthorised — a formulation that puts responsibility on the shipping operators while keeping Iranian forces in the story as the warning authority.

The National's live coverage of the attack noted it has published a video explaining how it verifies Iranian ship attack claims, underlining that the accounts come from one side of the conflict.

The pattern is not confined to one report.

The National's Middle East live blog carried the same IRGC announcement that two supertankers exploded in the Strait of Hormuz, alongside related developments: India said four people were injured in an attack on an oil tanker in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia reported missile debris falling in the Makkah region, and the Houthis claimed they forced Saudi F-15 jets to leave Sanaa airspace.

The UK Maritime Trade Operations agency (UKMTO) has previously said tankers in the strait have been struck by unknown projectiles, a detail reported by Deccan Herald.

These attacks feed what has become one of the most concentrated geopolitical loss events in a generation for specialty insurers.

According to Insurance Business, Middle East losses in the war, terrorism, and political violence market are expected to exceed $2 billion on an annual premium base of roughly $2.5 billion, with Howden Re estimating the total could top $3 billion and Lloyd's disclosing about £1.4 billion in Middle East conflict losses in its half-year results.

Bermuda insurer Pelagos absorbed $115.9 million in Q3 catastrophe and large losses, more than double the $57.4 million a year earlier, which it attributed to Black Sea and Middle East conflicts in its Marine line.

Black Sea hull war premiums have reportedly reached as high as 20% of hull value on some routes.

Attention now turns to whether the strait stays navigable and how owners and underwriters respond.

Diplomatic movement is running alongside the attacks: The National reports that US Vice President JD Vance is considering face-to-face talks with Iran's security chief, that the G7 expressed "grave concern" over Iranian involvement in plots, and that Iranian President Pezeshkian accused the US of using military threats to pursue diplomacy.

Trump, in a Veterans Day speech, signalled the conflict could end, though he called for "total victory" over Iran. For shipowners, each new mine strike raises the cost of transit just as reinsurers reassess their Middle East accumulations ahead of 2027 renewals.