JUST IN: Iran’s IRGC Says It Did Not Carry Out Any Strikes During Ceasefire
Published on Reflecto News | World News | Conflict & Diplomacy
In a definitive statement aimed at countering mounting speculation, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has officially declared that it did not conduct any missile or drone strikes during the ceasefire period that began on April 7. The announcement comes amid reports of attacks on facilities in Gulf states and seeks to establish a clear demarcation between Iran’s actions and what it describes as potential provocations by other actors.
The IRGC’s statement represents an effort to demonstrate transparency regarding its military operations while maintaining the posture of a responsible ceasefire partner .
Official Statement: ‘No Launches Toward Any Country’
The IRGC issued its official statement on Thursday night, carried by Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency, categorically denying involvement in any reported strikes since the ceasefire took effect .
“The armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran have not launched any missiles at any country during the ceasefire hours until now.” — Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Official Statement
The statement emphasized Iran’s commitment to transparency regarding its military actions, noting that any operation conducted by Iranian forces would be officially and publicly announced .
“If the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran hit any target, they will boldly announce it in an official statement, and any action that is not in the statements made by the Islamic Republic of Iran has nothing to do with us,” the IRGC said .
Responding to Gulf State Reports
The IRGC’s denial comes amid reports of attacks on facilities in countries along the southern edge of the Persian Gulf. Kuwait’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a strongly worded statement condemning what it described as “heinous attacks launched by the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies” targeting vital installations in Kuwait on Thursday evening .
Kuwait characterized the incidents as “a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the State of Kuwait and its airspace, and a blatant breach of international law, international humanitarian law, and the Charter of the United Nations” .
The IRGC responded to these allegations by suggesting alternative explanations for any confirmed attacks:
“If these reports published by the media are true, without a doubt it is the work of the Zionist enemy or America.” — Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
This characterization aligns with the IRGC’s broader framing of regional tensions, which attributes destabilizing actions to what it terms the “Zionist enemy” or the United States — entities it accuses of staging provocations and false-flag operations to undermine the ceasefire .
‘Hands on the Trigger’: Defiance and Readiness
Despite the public commitment to honoring the ceasefire, the IRGC has maintained a posture of military readiness. In a joint statement issued shortly after the ceasefire announcement, commanders of the IRGC Aerospace and Navy branches issued a stark warning to adversaries .
“They experienced it today and saw that our hands are on the trigger, and as soon as the enemy makes the slightest mistake, it will be responded to with full force.” — IRGC Commanders Joint Statement
This dual messaging — operational restraint combined with explicit readiness — reflects Iran’s strategic approach to the ceasefire period. While the IRGC asserts it has not launched attacks, it simultaneously warns that any provocation will be met with overwhelming force .
The IRGC reaffirmed the Iranian armed forces’ readiness to defend the country’s sovereignty and regional stability while exposing what it calls the “real instigators” of any destabilizing actions in the Persian Gulf .
Ceasefire Context: Two-Week Truce Brokered by Pakistan
The IRGC’s statement must be understood within the broader context of the two-week ceasefire announced on April 7. The truce, brokered by Pakistan, was announced by President Donald Trump following conversations with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir .
President Trump detailed the terms of the agreement on Truth Social:
“Based on conversations with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir of Pakistan, and wherein they requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran, and subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks. This will be a double-sided CEASEFIRE!” — President Donald Trump
The ceasefire was intended as a step toward a possible broader agreement to halt the conflict that began when the United States and Israel launched strikes against Iran on February 28 .
The Lebanon Dispute: A Ceasefire Interpretation Gap
The IRGC’s denial of strikes comes amid a significant dispute over the ceasefire’s geographic scope. While Pakistan and Iran maintain that the ceasefire agreement includes Lebanon, Washington and Tel Aviv have explicitly denied this interpretation .
This disagreement has direct operational implications. Hezbollah, Iran’s primary proxy in Lebanon, has continued military operations against Israeli targets, launching missile attacks as recently as Thursday . The IRGC has separately warned that if strikes on Lebanon do not stop, a forceful response will follow, stating that Israel would “regret its actions” .
The IRGC has stressed that if attacks on Lebanon are not immediately halted, “it will fulfill its duty and deliver a response that would make Israel regret its actions” .
Implications for the Islamabad Talks
The IRGC’s statement carries significant implications for the upcoming peace talks scheduled in Islamabad, where US and Iranian delegations are set to meet for direct negotiations.
For US-Iran Relations: The IRGC’s denial of ceasefire violations, if accepted, could reduce friction between the two sides and create space for productive negotiations. However, if Gulf states continue to report attacks they attribute to Iran or its proxies, the diplomatic process could be undermined.
For Regional Stability: The IRGC’s suggestion that any confirmed attacks are the work of the “Zionist enemy or America” introduces an additional layer of complexity. If adopted as official Iranian policy, this framing could be used to dismiss legitimate grievances from Gulf states, potentially exacerbating regional tensions.
For Iran’s Negotiating Posture: The IRGC’s statement reinforces Iran’s claim to be acting as a responsible ceasefire partner. This positions Tehran favorably as negotiations commence, allowing Iranian diplomats to argue that any violations originate from other actors.
For the ‘Hands on the Trigger’ Warning: The simultaneous messaging of restraint and readiness creates strategic ambiguity. The IRGC has demonstrated it can exercise discipline — but has also made clear that its patience has limits.
Verification Challenges
The conflicting claims regarding attacks during the ceasefire period present significant verification challenges. Independent confirmation of military operations in the region is difficult due to the fog of war and the involvement of multiple actors with competing interests.
The IRGC has established a clear standard for evaluating its actions: if Iranian forces conducted an operation, Tehran would announce it officially. Any action not claimed by Iran, the IRGC argues, cannot be attributed to the Islamic Republic .
This standard, if accepted by the international community, could serve as a useful tool for assessing responsibility for future incidents — provided Iran adheres to its stated commitment to transparency.
Conclusion: Restraint Amid Tension
The IRGC’s official statement that it did not carry out any strikes during the ceasefire represents a significant data point in assessing the fragile truce’s viability. By publicly committing to restraint and establishing a transparent standard for evaluating its actions, Iran is positioning itself as a responsible ceasefire partner while reserving the right to respond forcefully to any perceived provocation.
However, the simultaneous warnings from IRGC commanders — that “hands remain on the trigger” and that any “slightest mistake” will be met with “full force” — underscore the volatility of the current moment. The ceasefire may be holding, but the underlying tensions that sparked the conflict remain unresolved.
As US and Iranian delegations prepare to meet in Islamabad, the IRGC’s dual messaging serves as both an assurance of good faith and a warning of the consequences should diplomacy fail. The coming days will determine whether this fragile pause can be transformed into lasting peace — or whether the “hands on the trigger” will ultimately be forced to act.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What did the IRGC say about strikes during the ceasefire?
The IRGC stated that Iran’s armed forces “have not launched any missiles at any country during the ceasefire hours until now” and that any action not officially announced by Tehran “has nothing to do with us” .
2. Why did the IRGC issue this statement?
The statement came in response to media reports and allegations from Gulf states, including Kuwait, claiming that Iran or its proxies had conducted attacks on facilities in the region during the ceasefire period .
3. How does the IRGC explain reports of attacks?
The IRGC suggested that if the media reports are true, “without a doubt it is the work of the Zionist enemy or America” — entities it accuses of staging provocations and false-flag operations to undermine the ceasefire .
4. Has Iran abandoned its military readiness despite the ceasefire?
No. While the IRGC states it has not conducted strikes, commanders have simultaneously warned that “hands are on the trigger” and that any “slightest mistake” by the enemy will be met with “full force” .
5. Does the ceasefire apply to Lebanon according to Iran?
Yes. Iran and Pakistan maintain that the ceasefire includes Lebanon. However, the United States and Israel have explicitly denied this interpretation . Hezbollah has continued military operations against Israel, and the IRGC has warned of a forceful response if strikes on Lebanon continue .
6. How has Kuwait responded to reported attacks?
Kuwait’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned “heinous attacks launched by the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies” targeting vital installations. Kuwait called for an immediate end to hostilities and reaffirmed its right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter .
7. What is the status of the broader ceasefire?
A two-week ceasefire between the United States and Iran, brokered by Pakistan, took effect on April 7. It was announced by President Trump, who stated that Iran agreed to the “COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz” .
Stay informed with Reflecto News – Your trusted source for breaking defense and geopolitical intelligence. Subscribe for real-time updates on the ceasefire, the Islamabad peace talks, and regional security developments.