# Revolutionary Guards say they destroyed a US radar in Bahrain, and US Central Command says it shot down two drones Reuters called it the first Iranian claim of an attack on US military assets in a Gulf state since early September, and Globes reports that the head of Mossad is in Washington while Prime Minister Netanyahu presses to resume the war. - Published: 2026-11-14T05:15:42.881Z - Canonical: https://polylog.news/2026-11-14/revolutionary-guards-say-they-destroyed-a-us-radar-in-bahrai - Publisher: Polylog (Global desk) - Section: geopolitics - Sources: [Globes (Hebrew)](https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1001563333#utm_source=RSS), [BBC News Hindi](https://www.bbc.com/hindi/articles/cx24e36e2ne6o?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=rss), [ZeroHedge](https://www.zerohedge.com/political/it-all-comes-israelis-joe-kent-reveals-what-happened-when-he-told-trump-about-iran-intel), [Euronews](https://www.euronews.com/2026/11/13/irgc-says-it-destroyed-us-radar-in-bahrain-after-attack-on-southern-iran) Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it [destroyed a US early-warning radar in Bahrain](https://www.euronews.com/2026/11/13/irgc-says-it-destroyed-us-radar-in-bahrain-after-attack-on-southern-iran). It described the strike as retaliation for an air attack on a telecommunications tower in Sirik County in southern Iran and as a "serious warning" to Washington over its activity in the Strait of Hormuz. US Central Command (CENTCOM) rejected the claim. It said the IRGC launched two one-way attack drones toward Bahrain and that US forces shot down both. Neither account could be independently verified. Reuters described it as the first claim of an attack on US military assets in a Gulf country since early September. BBC News Hindi noted that [Iran has repeatedly made Bahrain a target](https://www.bbc.com/hindi/articles/cx24e36e2ne6o?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=rss) and explained why the small kingdom, which hosts major US naval facilities, matters to Washington. The BBC set the IRGC claim beside the US military's denial without favoring either. Israeli coverage puts the exchange in the context of pressure to resume the war. The business daily Globes reported that the IRGC claim followed [a US strike the previous night](https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1001563333#utm_source=RSS) and that the head of Mossad is visiting Washington while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presses to restart the war against Iran. Globes also quoted Trump as saying that if Iran's leadership is unchanged at the end of his term, "it will be a defeat. I will say it is a defeat." US critics of the war challenge where the case for it came from. Joe Kent, former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said in remarks [published by ZeroHedge](https://www.zerohedge.com/political/it-all-comes-israelis-joe-kent-reveals-what-happened-when-he-told-trump-about-iran-intel) that the intelligence he raised with Trump "all comes from the Israelis." He also said that Stephen Miller, now the White House chief of staff, "knew going into the Iran war that this was bad." Kent is a partisan in this dispute, and the White House has not confirmed his account. The fighting is at a low level but continuing. Qatar and Pakistan are [still mediating](https://www.euronews.com/2026/11/13/irgc-says-it-destroyed-us-radar-in-bahrain-after-attack-on-southern-iran). ## What this means The IRGC is testing whether it can impose small costs on US forces in Gulf host states without starting a wider war. CENTCOM's denial lets Washington avoid a public obligation to respond. Bahrain and other Gulf hosts of US forces carry the risk, through insurance premiums, airspace closures and investor perception of Gulf financial centers. Israel wants the war resumed. Trump has said keeping the current Iranian leadership would count as defeat, but he has also signalled he can live with a blockade and no deal. Those positions conflict. The most likely way the conflict escalates is small incidents piling up, not a decision announced in advance. The 1987 and 1988 tanker war is the closest precedent: repeated small exchanges in the Gulf ended in a large US naval strike on Iranian forces. The likelier outcome over the next several weeks is more limited exchanges like this one, each denied or played down, while the blockade continues. This depends on neither side killing the other's personnel. It would be wrong if a strike causes confirmed US casualties, which would force a larger US response. ## What to watch - Watch whether Bahrain's government confirms or denies any damage. A host-state confirmation would weaken CENTCOM's account and raise pressure on Washington to respond. - Watch the outcome of the Mossad chief's meetings in Washington. Any US statement about resuming strikes would show Israel's pressure has worked. - Watch shipping insurance rates for Gulf ports outside Hormuz. A rise would show the market pricing risk on routes it had treated as safe.