Kharg Island, which handles the bulk of Iran’s crude exports and was once floated by President Donald Trump as a potential target could spark broader regional instability and attacks on energy infrastructure if struck by the U.S., a leading energy security expert has warned.

Reports indicate the Trump administration is weighing options that could include a direct attack on Kharg Island.

Discussing the possibility of boots on the ground amid Operation Epic Fury on ‘The Claman Countdown,’ retired Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt also told Liz Claman striking Kharg could be in the ‘offing.’

‘I don’t think a significant number of boots on the ground, other than the chance of an assault on Kharg Island, is in the offing,’ he said March 9.

Trump’s interest in the island dates back to a 1988 interview in which he reportedly suggested targeting Kharg in response to Iranian aggression, according to reports.

‘I’d be harsh on Iran. They’ve been beating us psychologically, making us look like a bunch of fools,’ Trump said. ‘One bullet shot at one of our men or ships, and I’d do a number on Kharg Island. I’d go in and take it.’

Sara Vakhshouri, a global energy analyst, said striking Kharg aligns squarely with Washington’s ‘energy dominance’ doctrine and spoke as U.S. and Israeli military action in Iran rattles energy markets and disrupts oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz.

‘Kharg currently acts as a strategic restraint point in the conflict,’ Vakhshouri, founder and president of SVB Energy International, told Fox News Digital.

‘Interrupting Iran’s main export terminal would likely trigger a major oil price spike, market instability and regional retaliation against energy infrastructure.’

Kharg’s significance is not only tactical but strategic, she added, arguing that it fits squarely within Trump’s long-touted doctrine.

The policy, central to Trump’s first term, prioritized maximizing U.S. oil and gas production, expanding exports and leveraging U.S. energy strength as a geopolitical tool.

‘But when we talk about Kharg, the most important factor is that it fits within the U.S. energy dominance concept,’ Vakhshouri said, suggesting that holding the island in reserve as a pressure point — rather than immediately striking it — may be a more strategic option.

Kharg sits in the northern Persian Gulf, roughly 15 miles off Iran’s mainland. Tankers leaving the terminal pass through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow choke point that handles about one-fifth of global oil trade.

Around 90% to 95% of Iran’s crude and petroleum exports pass through Kharg, making it the regime’s primary oil revenue hub.

‘Roughly 15 to 20 million barrels may be in storage, with around 1.5 to 3 million barrels per day exported through the terminal during the sanctions, with export capacity up to 5 million barrels per day,’ Vakhshouri said.

‘If the export capability from Kharg were lost, this restraint could diminish, shifting the risk toward further strikes on regional energy facilities and, more importantly, prolonged disruption of oil flows and tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz,’ she warned.

‘Putting a price ceiling on such a scenario would depend largely on Iran’s retaliatory actions,’ Vakhshouri added.

‘The certain outcome, however, would be prolonged volatility and uncertainty in the market, driven by fears of further retaliation or an extended cycle of disruption.’

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

A senior Trump administration official and former acting U.S. attorney for D.C. is under disciplinary review for his role in President Donald Trump’s anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion initiative — sparking outrage from the Justice Department, which assailed alleged ethics violations against Ed Martin as a ‘partisan’ effort, and one that unfairly targets Trump and his allies. 

The disciplinary charge, filed Friday to the D.C. Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility and published Tuesday, centers on a letter sent by Martin to Georgetown Law last February while Martin was serving as interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. 

Martin allegedly demanded in the letter that Georgetown Law provide information about its DEI practices and teachings, according to the ethics complaint. It states that without ‘further explanation,’ and without receiving a response from Georgetown Law, Martin then announced he would be imposing sanctions on the school — instructing his staff not to hire any students, fellows, or interns affiliated with the university.

The Justice Department blasted news of the ethics complaint, telling Fox News Digital on Tuesday that the complaint represented yet another ‘clear indication’ of unfair and ‘partisan’ treatment from the D.C. Bar, a body they argued has continued ‘to target and punish those serving President Trump while refusing to investigate or act against actual ethical violations that were committed by Biden and Obama administration attorneys,’ representing what DOJ spokesperson described as ‘a clear indication of this partisan organization’s agenda.’

The complaint was signed by the disciplinary counsel for the D.C. Bar, Hamilton Fox, whose role allows him to function similarly to a prosecutor for attorney misconduct cases.  Fox previously donated thousands to Obama’s first presidential campaign in 2008, according to FEC records reviewed by Fox News Digital. 

The complaint accuses Martin of violating the First and Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by using his role as a government official to demand that the university change its teachings; failing to give the university a time frame to respond; and threatening adverse action against Georgetown Law for teaching a particular viewpoint.

It also accuses Martin of conducting unauthorized, ex parte communications with the chief judge and senior judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit after he was asked to respond to a complaint about his remarks to Georgetown Law. ‘In that letter, he stated that he would not be responding to Disciplinary Counsel’s inquiry, complained about Disciplinary Counsel’s ‘uneven behavior,’ and requested a ‘face-to-face meeting with all of you to discuss this matter and find a way forward,” the complaint said, noting that Martin had copied White House counsel onto the email. 

The Justice Department’s second-highest-ranking official, Todd Blanche, sharply criticized the complaint on social media Tuesday, noting: ‘The DC Bar is such a blatantly Democrat-run political organization.’

‘Thank God I’m not a member, and trust me, I never will be,’ Blanche said in a post on X.Martin, a former defense attorney who helped represent individuals charged in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, has made headlines during his short time at DOJ. His path to confirmation to serve as U.S. Attorney for D.C. stalled last year amid concerns from some Senate Republicans, prompting Trump to install Martin last May as the Justice Department’s pardon attorney. 

Trump also tapped Martin at the time to head up the Justice Department’s so-called ‘Weaponization Working Group,’ or the newly formed internal body within DOJ tasked with probing federal prosecutions viewed by the administration as unfairly partisan. 

Martin was removed last month from his role heading up the working group, though no reason for his removal was immediately provided. 

The complaint will now be kicked to D.C. Court of Appeals for next steps and review — a notoriously lengthy process that will likely take months, if not longer.

News of the ethics complaint comes just days after the Justice Department filed a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that would allow the department to suspend state bar investigations while the DOJ conducts its own review. 

Russia has turned to its so-called ‘shadow fleet’ to carry out a roughly $29.3 million ‘semi-dark’ ship-to-ship oil transfer in the Gulf of Oman, deliberately sidestepping Western sanctions, according to reports.

Maritime intelligence firm Windward AI reported on March 8 that the Russian-flagged tanker M/V TRUST, a vessel already blacklisted by the U.S., European Union and United Kingdom, carried out a ‘high-probability’ covert crude transfer in Omani territorial waters.

Based on an estimated price of about $90 per barrel on March 10, the cargo involved in the transfer was valued at roughly $29.3 million.

‘The timing of the operation coincided with heightened military escalation in the Gulf following Operation Epic Fury, suggesting the vessel exploited regional instability to conduct the transfer under reduced scrutiny,’ Windward said.

The tanker had previously loaded approximately 325,000 barrels of Russian crude oil at the Russian port of Ust-Luga, Windward said.

Windward described the operation as a ‘semi-dark’ activity, meaning one of the vessels transmitted its automatic identification system (AIS) signal while the other did not.

According to the firm, the M/V TRUST had anchored and switched off its AIS transponder while holding what it called a ‘prolonged stationary meeting’ with another tanker, likely producing an anonymous vessel to transfer cargo process.

A fully ‘dark’ meeting, Windward said, typically involves two vessels not transmitting, but, in this case, only one ship appeared to be broadcasting, creating partial visibility that still complicates tracking efforts.

Such tactics are part of a broader strategy by Moscow to continue exporting crude despite sweeping Western sanctions imposed after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The semi-dark oil transfer comes amid heightened volatility in global energy markets tied to the escalating conflict in the Middle East and limited traffic in the Strait of Hormuz given the joint U.S.-Israeli military action against Iran.

Oil topped $100 a barrel March 9 as traders priced in the risk that the conflict was disrupting flows through the Strait, which carries about a fifth of global supply, CNBC reported.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on March 9 that Russia, the world’s second-largest oil exporter and holder of the largest natural gas reserves, stands ready to resume long-term energy cooperation with European customers if they choose to return, Reuters reported.

Meanwhile, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said Tuesday that Russia ‘should not be involved’ in the escalating conflict between the U.S., Israel and Iran.

His comments followed reports suggesting Moscow may be providing intelligence support to Tehran, though the Kremlin has not publicly confirmed the claims.

On Russia’s ship-to-ship semi-dark cargo transfer amid the ongoing conflict, Windward highlighted ‘operational blind spots that enable illicit maritime activity to proceed largely uninterrupted.’

The Trump administration, citing Iran, is taking more action against the Muslim Brotherhood—this time in one of the world’s worst conflicts: the civil war in Sudan.

On Monday, the State Department declared the Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood (SMB) to be a ‘Designated Global Terrorist and intends to designate the group as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, effective March 16, 2026.’ The statement also contained a warning to Iran regarding its meddling in the conflict.

‘The SMB has contributed upwards of 20,000 fighters to the war in Sudan, many receiving training and other support from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps,’ the statement noted. 

It added, ‘As the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, the Iranian regime has financed and directed malign activities globally through its IRGC. The United States will use all available tools to deprive the Iranian regime and Muslim Brotherhood chapters of the resources to engage in or support terrorism.’

In November, the State Department sanctioned the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, declaring it to be a terrorist organization in those countries.

The organization, the State Department noted, is ‘composed of the Sudanese Islamic Movement and its armed wing – the al-Baraa Bin Malik Brigade (BBMB), (and) uses unrestrained violence against civilians to undermine efforts to resolve the conflict in Sudan and advance its violent Islamist ideology.’

The statement added that the group’s ‘fighters have conducted mass executions of civilians in areas they captured, and repeatedly and summarily executed civilians based on race, ethnicity or perceived affiliation with opposition groups.’

Edmund Fitton-Brown, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), told Fox News Digital that the Muslim Brotherhood’s links within the Sudanese government’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) are deep and contribute aggressively in the war against the Rapid Support Forces.

Fitton-Brown, a former U.K. ambassador to Yemen, added that the Brotherhood has a ‘strong component’ in the Sudanese regular army.

Adding that the Brotherhood in Sudan has historical links with Osama Bin Laden, responsible with al Qaeda for the 9/11 terrorist attack, Fitton-Brown stated that the State Department’s move is significant. ‘It is the first concrete indication that the November executive order was only the start of a process.’

On the sanctioning of the Brotherhood in several countries in the region, he said, ‘I expect there will be many more, possibly starting with al-Islah in Yemen.’ He said the move ‘puts Sudan under political pressure because it is effectively associating its government with a terrorist entity.’

The effects of the nearly three-year-long civil war on the people of Sudan are dire. Last month, the Council on Foreign Relations’ global conflict tracker stated the ‘death toll estimates vary widely, with the former U.S. envoy for Sudan suggesting as many as 400,000 have been killed since the conflict began on April 15, 2023. More than 11 million have been displaced, giving rise to the worst displacement crisis in the world.

On Monday, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho., posted on X, ‘This is a vital step to curb the Muslim Brotherhood’s influence in the region, especially as hardline Islamists seek to reassert themselves. Now, we must also seriously consider the same FTO designation for the genocidal Rapid Support Forces and their terror campaign in Sudan.’

Fitton-Brown said the State Department’s designation against the Brotherhood in Sudan ‘is good because it objectively targets a group of people who have brought untold misery to Sudan over decades. It is not a statement of support for the RSF. It is potentially empowering of democratic forces inside Sudan, although it will not be sufficient to change the way Sudan is governed or end the civil war, without much more proactive external involvement in the country.’

Nicholas Coghlan, a former Canadian diplomat in Khartoum, was not as hopeful, telling Toronto’s Globe and Mail that hardline factions within leader Abdel Fattah al-Burhan’s government alliance ‘will push him now to ignore the U.S. and other potential mediators and go all out,’ adding ‘they have nothing further to lose by holding back.’