Oil surges to five-month high after US hits Iran's key nuclear sites
Oil prices jumped today to their highest since January as the United States' weekend move to join Israel in attacking Iran's nuclear facilities stoked supply concerns.
Brent crude futures were up $1.52 or 1.97% to $78.53 a barrel as of 0503 GMT. US West Texas Intermediate crude advanced $1.51 or 2.04% to $75.35.
Both contracts jumped by more than 3% earlier in the session to $81.40 and $78.40, respectively, touching five-month highs before giving up some gains.
The rise in prices came after US President Donald Trump said he had "obliterated" Iran's main nuclear sites in strikes over the weekend, joining an Israeli assault in an escalation of conflict in the Middle East as Tehran vowed to defend itself.
Iran is OPEC's third-largest crude producer.
Market participants expect further price gains amid mounting fears that an Iranian retaliation may include a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly a fifth of global crude supply flows.
"The current geopolitical escalation provides the fundamental catalyst for (Brent) prices to traverse higher and potentially spiral towards $100, with $120 per barrel appearing increasingly plausible," said Sugandha Sachdeva, founder of New Delhi-based research firm SS WealthStreet.
Iran's Press TV reported that the Iranian parliament had approved a measure to close the strait. Iran has in the past threatened to close the strait but has never followed through.
Iran and Israel exchanged air and missile strikes on Monday, as global tensions rose over Tehran's expected response to a US attack on its nuclear facilities.
"The risks of damage to oil infrastructure ... have multiplied," said Sparta Commodities senior analyst June Goh.
Although there are alternative pipeline routes out of the region, there will still be crude volume that cannot be fully exported out if the Strait of Hormuz becomes inaccessible. Shippers will increasingly stay out of the region, she added.
Goldman Sachs said in a Sunday report that Brent could briefly peak at $110 per barrel if oil flows through the critical waterway were halved for a month, and remain down by 10% for the following 11 months.
The bank still assumed no significant disruption to oil and natural gas supply, adding global incentives to try and prevent a sustained and very large disruption.
Brent has risen 13% since the conflict began on June 13, while WTI has gained around 10%.
Given the Strait of Hormuz is indispensable for Iran's own oil exports, which are a vital source of its national revenues, a sustained closure would inflict severe economic damage on Iran itself, making it a double-edged sword, Sachdeva added.
Meanwhile, Japan on Monday called for de-escalation of the conflict in Iran, while a South Korean vice industry minister voiced concern over the potential impact of the strikes on the country's trade.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Extra.ie
26 minutes ago
- Extra.ie
Iran launches missile attacks on US base in Qatar
Iran has launched missile attacks on a US base in Qatar. The attack comes after the US struck three nuclear facilities in Iran over the weekend. Iran has confirmed that they launched the attack in 'response to the blatant military aggression carried out by the criminal regime of the United States against the peaceful nuclear facilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran.' US president Donald Trump. Pic: Daniel Torok/The White House via Getty Images Iran's Supreme National Security Council said in a statement that the operation against US forces in Qatar's Al-Udeid base was successful and that 'the number of missiles used equalled the number of bombs the US employed in its attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.' According to the New York Times, Iran coordinated the base attack in Qatar with Qatari officials to minimise casualties. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump shake hands during a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office of the White House Pic: Yuri Gripas/Abaca/Bloomberg via Getty Images Iranian officials told the Times that Iran 'symbolically needed to strike back at the U.S. but at the same time carry it out in a way that allowed all sides an exit ramp.' The White House has said that it is monitoring threats to US bases in the region. At the time of writing, no casualties have been reported. Speaking ahead of Iran's attack, the Taoiseach had called for an immediate de-escalation. Taoiseach Micheál Martin. Pic: Liam McBurney/PA Wire 'Diplomacy and dialogue is ultimately the only way to resolve these issues,' Mr Martin said. 'Iran should commit not to develop nuclear weapons and disavow its nuclear and uranium enrichment programme. Nuclear safety is an issue here, modern warfare is very destructive. 'It is civilians who ultimately suffer, and that is why we need an end to these wars and bring an end to conflict.' Mr Martin added that the escalation should not draw attention away from the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. 'We shouldn't lose sight of the catastrophe still unfolding in Gaza, while the war between Iran and Israel continues,' he said.
Irish Times
40 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Nato summit: ‘Trump whisperer' Rutte hopes to sell two-tier spending solution
Nato allies have reached agreement on a new defence spending target of 5 per cent of gross domestic product, as demanded by US president Donald Trump , who is due to attend the alliance's summit in The Hague this week. Last-minute complications thrown up by the Spanish government, when prime minister Pedro Sánchez demanded a special exemption from the new target, appeared by Monday to have been resolved by the use of more flexible terms for Madrid. The two-tier agreement – an increase of 3.5 per cent of GDP for military spending combined with an additional increase of 1.5 per cent of GDP for related non-military costs – is a major win for Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte. Rutte was referred to as the 'Trump whisperer' in 2018 when he persuaded the US president not to abandon the military alliance. His task now, in wartime, is even more onerous. READ MORE It is no exaggeration to say that in the current geopolitical climate Nato's future – perhaps even its existence – hinges on the capacity of its 32 member states to increase their military spending to 5 per cent of GDP, as demanded by Trump. The US president has repeatedly accused Europeans of sheltering under its nuclear umbrella without paying appropriately for the privilege. In March he said: 'If you're not going to pay, we're not going to defend.' Many European countries have, in fact, increased defence spending since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 – although not by enough, either for Trump or the scale of the threats the Continent faces. Figures from the European Council show EU member states' total defence expenditure rose by more than 30 per cent in 2021-2024 to about €326 billion – about 1.9 per cent of EU GDP. Even so, only 22 of Nato's 32 members met its annual spending target of 2 per cent of GDP last year. Countries such as Canada, Italy and Belgium still lag behind but have pledged to reach the target by the end of this year. The US also falls shy of the 5 per cent mark. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, it spent $997 billion on defence in 2024, roughly 3.4 per cent of GDP. However, this is the highest outlay among the major developed economies, exceeding the combined total of the next nine highest spenders. In the top job only nine months, Rutte tested a two-tier plan at an informal meeting of Nato foreign ministers in Turkey last month. On foot of their response, he has written to the 32 allies asking them to increase their military budgets to 3.5 per cent of GDP on 'hard military spending'. He has also proposed a further 1.5 per cent be earmarked for dual-purpose civil-military spending, such as infrastructure and cybersecurity – bringing the total to Trump's 5 per cent., The two together bring the total into line with Trump's demand for 5 per cent – handing the president the kudos. For those countries who complain the increase is too costly, the former Dutch prime minister has included a softener that suggests an incremental increase to the 5 per cent, initially by 2032, then by 2035. As part of Operation Orange Shield, fighter jets, attack helicopters and navy frigates will patrol The Hague during the summit, with Patriot missile batteries ringing the city and lockdown around the conference centre. Some 9,000 people, including 45 heads of state and government, are due to attend the meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday. King Willem Alexander will host a formal dinner on Tuesday. Total cost: €183.4 million.
The Journal
an hour ago
- The Journal
Timeline: When did Donald Trump really decide to bomb Iran?
AS THE SMOKE clears from Sunday's US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, retrospective analysis of the timeline of events suggest Donald Trump knew he was never going to negotiate with Iran. Called Operation Midnight Hammer, the carefully choreographed bombing of critical sites in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan was carried out by a fleet of B-2 bombers using 14 'bunker buster' missiles and decoy planes in an effort to destroy what Israel maintains is a nefarious Iranian nuclear programme. In the hours after the mission, Trump claimed it a 'a spectacular military success'. The flight path and timeline of Operation Midnight Hammer. US Defence Department US Defence Department Less than two days prior to 'one of the most complex and historic military operations of all time', in the words of White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, Trump communicated that he would make a decision on whether to strike Iran 'within the next two weeks', leaving the door open for negotiations. The New York Times analysed this statement with respect to the timeline of events leading up to US intervention in Iran, suggesting Washington engages in a deliberate exercise of political and military misdirection. 25 March – US says no nuclear threat from Iran The US published its annual threat assessment, stating: 'We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that Khamenei has not reauthorised the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.' This was reaffirmed by US director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard who told a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing that month that nuclear weaponisation by Iran was not impending. Trump said this week that Gabbard's testimony before the committee was 'false', after which she has backtracked on her March statement, attacking 'dishonest media' and claiming Iran could soon build a nuclear weapon 'if they decide to'. 12 April – 60-day ultimatum US and Iranian officials held 'constructive' talks in Oman on the subject of limiting Iran's uranium enrichment and moves towards developing nuclear weapons after Trump sent a letter to Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei. In the letter, Trump gave Iran sixty days to show 'substantial progress' on the issue. To keep the ultimatum viable, Trump asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to strike before then to allow for negotiations to achieve a peaceful resolution. 26 May – Netanyahu warns he will strike Despite Trump's negotiation window facilitating active talks on limiting Iranian nuclear capabilities, Netanyahu told a group of US lawmakers that he would undertake military action against Iran without seeking American approval , according to CNN. Advertisement Netanyahu has for over three decades in politics tried to enlist the help of the US in dismantling Iran's nuclear programme, constantly warning of weaponisation in the very near future, but to no avail. 8 June – Camp David talks Less than a week out from the commencement of Israel's strikes against Iran, Trump and his national security advisers huddled at Camp David where military plans were drawn up. Sources told ABC News that among the items on the agenda in those discussions was Israel's plan to proactively strike upon the passing of Trump's 60-day deadline. This claim has legitimacy, considering reports of daily contact between Trump and Netanyahu prior to Israel's pre-emptive attack on Iran's military sites and army officials. 9 June – IAEA gives verdict The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a statement commenting on Iran's uranium enrichment efforts. IAEA director general Rafael Mariano Grossi said: 'Unless and until Iran assists the Agency in resolving the outstanding safeguards issues, the agency will not be in a position to provide assurance that Iran's nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful.' 13 June – Israel strikes first One day after the lapse of Trump's 60-day window, Israel began airstrikes against Iran, triggering what have become daily missile exchanges between both sides. The initial attacks killed top Iranian military figures, including Ali Shamkhani, a key nuclear negotiator and close aide to Iran's leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei 16 June – Trump ditches the G7 Three days after fighting began, Trump left the G7 Summit in Canada under the guise of working to resolve the conflict. That same day, he shirked any appearance of confidentiality about his country's military plans in Iran, posting to Truth Social: 'Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!' 17-19 June – Trump keeps the world guessing In the week leading up to the American strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, Trump remained ambivalent about whether he would intervene in the conflict, telling reporters 'I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do'. He faced opposition to the move, even from the most ardent of the Maga movement, including the outspoken Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor-Greene and conservative TV host Tucker Carlson. 20 June – America intervenes Trump authorised a fleet of US B-2 bombers to drop 14 bunker busters on Iranian nuclear sites in the early hours of the morning local time. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth said 'took months and weeks of positioning and preparation', implying that the US was always fully intent on assisting Israel is dismantling Iran's nuclear capabilities if called upon. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... Our Explainer articles bring context and explanations in plain language to help make sense of complex issues. We're asking readers like you to support us so we can continue to provide helpful context to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay. Learn More Support The Journal
