Oil rises and US stock futures slide as markets react to US strike on Iran nuclear sites
NEW YORK (AP) — The price of oil rose and U.S. stock futures fell as global markets react to the U.S. strike against nuclear targets in Iran.
The price of Brent crude oil, the international standard, rose 3.3% to $79.60 a barrel. U.S. crude rose 3.1% to $76.16 a barrel.
On Saturday, U.S. forces attacked three Iranian nuclear and military sites, further increasing the stakes in the war between Israel and Iran.
Futures for the S&P 500 fell 0.5%, while futures for the Dow Jones Industrial Average slipped 0.4%. Treasury yields fell slightly. The modest moves indicate markets are taking the latest development in stride.
The conflict, which began with an Israeli attack against Iran on June 13, has sent oil prices yo-yoing, which has in turn caused see-saw moves for the U.S. stock market, because of rising and ebbing fears that the war could disrupt the global flow of crude. Iran is a major producer of oil and also sits on the narrow Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world's crude passes.
An Iran retaliation that included closing off the waterway would be technically difficult to pull off but traders are afraid Iran could severely disrupt transit through it, sending insurance rates spiking and making shippers nervous to move without U.S. Navy escorts
Some analysts think Iran is unlikely to close down the waterway because the country uses it to transport its own crude, mostly to China, and oil is a major source of revenue for the regime.
'It's a scorched earth possibility, a Sherman-burning-Atlanta move,' said Tom Kloza, chief market analyst at Turner Mason & Co. "It's not probable.'
Kloza thinks oil futures will ease back down after initial fears blow over.
Ed Yardeni, a long-time analyst, agreed, writing in a report that Tehran leaders would likely hold back.
'They aren't crazy,' he wrote in a note to investors Sunday. 'The price of oil should fall and stock markets around the world should climb higher.'
Other experts aren't so sure.
Andy Lipow, a Houston analyst covering oil markets for 45 years, said countries are not always rational actors and that he wouldn't be surprised if Tehran lashed out for political or emotional reasons.
'If the Strait of Hormuz was completely shut down, oil prices would rise to $120 to $130 a barrel,' said Lipow, predicting that that would translate to about $4.50 a gallon at the pump and hurt consumers in other ways.
'It would mean higher prices for all those goods transported by truck, and it would be more difficult for the Fed to lower interest rates.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Why global markets are brushing off U.S. strikes on Iran
The U.S. joining the war between Israel and Iran might seem like a geopolitical flashpoint that would send markets tumbling. Instead, investors are largely shrugging off the escalation, with many strategists believing the conflict to be contained — and even bullish for some risk assets. As of 1 p.m. Singapore time, the MSCI World index, which tracks over a thousand large and mid-cap companies from 23 developed markets, declined only 0.12%. Safe havens are also trading mixed, with the Japanese yen weakening 0.64% against the dollar, while spot gold prices slipped 0.23% to $3,360 per ounce. The dollar index, which measures the U.S. dollar against a basket of currencies, rose 0.35%. In general, the market reactions after the U.S. strikes have been less aggressive, especially relative to just over a week ago when Israel launched airstrikes against Iran. "The markets view the attack on Iran as a relief with the nuclear threat now gone for the region," said Dan Ives, managing director at Wedbush, adding that he sees minimal risks of the Iran-Israel conflict spreading to the rest of the region and consequently more "isolated." While the gravity of the latest developments should not be dismissed, they are not seen as a systemic risk to global markets, other industry experts echoed. On Saturday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that the United States had attacked Iranian nuclear sites. Traders are now keeping a close eye on any potential countermeasures from Iran following the U.S. strikes on its nuclear facilities. Iran's foreign minister warned that his country reserved "all options" to defend its sovereignty. According to Iranian state media, the country's parliament has also approved closing the Strait of Hormuz, a pivotal waterway for global oil trade, with about 20 million barrels of oil and oil products traversing through it each day. "It all depends on how Iran responds," said Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer at Bleakley Financial Group. "If they accept the end of their military nuclear desires… then this could be the end of the conflict and markets will be fine," he told CNBC. Boockvar is not of the view that Iran will carry out the disruption of global oil supplies. The worst-case scenario for markets would occur if Iran were to close the Strait, which is unlikely, said Marko Papic, chief strategist at GeoMacro Strategy. "If they do, oil prices go north of $100, fear and panic take over, stocks go down ~10% minimum, and investors rush to safe havens," he said. However, markets are subdued now given the "limited tools" that Tehran has at its disposal to retaliate, Papic added. The idea of shutting down the Hormuz waterway has been a recurring rhetoric from Iran, but it has never been acted upon, with experts highlighting that it is improbable. In 2018, Iran warned it could block the Strait of Hormuz after the U.S. pulled out of the nuclear deal and reinstated sanctions. Similar threats were made earlier in 2011 and 2012, when senior Iranian officials — including then-Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi — said the waterway could be closed if Western nations imposed more sanctions on Iran's oil exports due to its nuclear activities. "Tehran understands that, if they were to close the Strait, the retaliation from the U.S. would be swift, punitive, and brutal," Papic added. In a similar vein, Yardeni Research founder Ed Yardeni said the latest events have not shaken his conviction in the U.S. bull market."Geopolitically, we think that Trump has just reestablished America's military deterrence capabilities, thus increasing the credibility of his 'peace through strength' mantra," he said, adding that he is targeting 6,500 for the S&P 500 by the end of 2025. While predicting geopolitical developments in the Middle East is a "treacherous exercise," Yardeni believes that the region is in for a "radical transformation" now that Iranian nuclear facilities have been destroyed.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
NATO leaders gather Tuesday for what could be a historic summit, or one marred by divisions
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — U.S. President Donald Trump and his NATO counterparts are due to gather Tuesday for a summit that could unite the world's biggest security organization around a new defense spending pledge or widen divisions among the 32 allies. Just a week ago, things had seemed rosy. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte was optimistic the European members and Canada would commit to invest at least as much of their economic growth on defense as the United States does for the first time. Then Spain rejected the new NATO target for each country to spend 5% of its gross domestic product on defense needs, calling it 'unreasonable.' Trump also insists on that figure. The alliance operates on a consensus that requires the backing of all 32 members. The following day, Trump said the U.S. should not have to respect the goal. 'I don't think we should, but I think they should,' he said. Trump lashed out at Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's government, saying: 'NATO is going to have to deal with Spain. Spain's been a very low payer.' He also criticized Canada as 'a low payer.' Spain was the lowest spender in the alliance last year, directing less than 2% of its GDP on defense expenditure, while Canada was spending 1.45%, according to NATO figures. Then Trump ordered the bombing of nuclear installations in Iran. In 2003, the U.S.-led war on Iraq deeply divided NATO, as France and Germany led opposition to the attack, while Britain and Spain joined the coalition. European allies and Canada also want Ukraine to be at the top of the summit agenda, but they are wary that Trump might not want President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to steal the limelight. The two-day summit in The Hague involves an informal dinner Tuesday and one working session Wednesday morning. A very short summit statement has been drafted to ensure the meeting is not derailed by fights over details and wording. Indeed, much about this NATO summit is brief, even though ripples could be felt for years. Founded in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed by 12 nations to counter the threat to security in Europe posed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, notably via a strong U.S. presence on the continent. Dealing with Moscow is in its DNA. Keeping the peace outside the Euro-Atlantic area is not. NATO's ranks have grown to 32 countries since the Washington Treaty was signed 75 years ago. Sweden joined last year, worried by an increasingly aggressive Russia. NATO's collective security guarantee — Article 5 of the treaty — underpins its credibility. It's a political commitment by all countries to come to the aid of any member whose sovereignty or territory might be under attack. Trump has suggested he is committed to that pledge, but he has also sowed doubt about his intentions. He has said the U.S. intends to remain a member of the alliance. The United States is NATO's most powerful member. It spends much more on defense than any other ally and far outweighs its partners in terms of military muscle. Washington has traditionally driven the agenda but has stepped back under Trump. The U.S. nuclear arsenal provides strategic deterrence against would-be adversaries. NATO's day-to-day work is led by Rutte, a former Dutch prime minister. As its top civilian official, he chairs almost weekly meetings of ambassadors in the North Atlantic Council at its Brussels headquarters. He chairs other 'NACs' at ministerial and leader levels. Rutte runs NATO headquarters, trying to foster consensus and to speak on behalf of all members. NATO's military headquarters is based nearby in Mons, Belgium. It is always run by a top U.S. officer. With Trump demanding greater defense spending, it's unclear what role Ukraine will play at the summit. Zelenskyy has been invited, but it's unclear whether he will have a seat at NATO's table, although he may take part in Tuesday's dinner. Russia's war in Ukraine usually dominates such meetings. More broadly, NATO itself is not arming Ukraine. As an organization, it possesses no weapons of any kind. Collectively, it provides only non-lethal support — fuel, combat rations, medical supplies, body armor, and equipment to counter drones or mines. But individually, members do send arms. European allies provided 60% of the military support that Ukraine received in 2024. NATO coordinates those weapons deliveries via a hub on the Polish border and helps organize training for Ukrainian troops. A key part of the commitment for allies to defend one another is to deter Russia, or any other adversary, from attacking in the first place. Finland and Sweden joined NATO recently because of this concern. Under NATO's new military plans, 300,000 military personnel would be deployed within 30 days to counter any attack, whether it be on land, at sea, by air or in cyberspace. But experts doubt whether the allies could muster the troop numbers. It's not just about troop and equipment numbers. An adversary would be less likely to challenge NATO if it thought the allies would use the forces it controls. Trump's threats against U.S. allies — including imposing tariffs on them — has weakened that deterrence. Due to high U.S. defense spending over many years, the American armed forces have more personnel and superior weapons but also significant transportation and logistics assets. Other allies are starting to spend more, though. After years of cuts, NATO members committed to ramp up their national defense budgets in 2014 when Russia illegally annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula. After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the NATO allies agreed to make 2% of GDP the minimum spending level. Last year, 22 countries were expected to hit that target, up from only three a decade ago. In The Hague, the allies were expected to up the ante to 3.5%, plus a further 1.5% for things like improving roads, bridges, ports and airfields or preparing societies to deal with future conflicts. Whether they will now remains an open question.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
US asks China to stop Iran from closing Strait of Hormuz
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called on China to prevent Iran from closing the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most important shipping routes. His comments came after Iran's state-run Press TV reported that their parliament had approved a plan to close the Strait but added that the final decision lies with the Supreme National Security Council. Any disruption to the supply of oil would have profound consequences for the global economy. China in particular is the world's largest buyer of Iranian oil and has a close relationship with Tehran. Oil prices have surged following the US' attack, with the price of the benchmark Brent crude reaching its highest level in five months. "I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them (Iran) about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil," Marco Rubio had said in an interview with Fox News on Sunday. "If they [close the Straits]... it will be economic suicide for them. And we retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries' economies a lot worse than ours." Around 20% of the world's oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, with major oil and gas producers in the Middle East using the waterway to transport energy from the region. Any attempt to disrupt operations in the Strait could could send global oil prices skyrocketing. They jumped to their highest since January, with the price of Brent crude reaching $78.89 a barrel as of 23:22 GMT Sunday. "The US is now positioned with an overwhelming defence posture in the region to be prepared for any Iran counter attacks. But the risk for oil prices is the situation could escalate severely further," said Saul Kavonic, Head of Energy Research at MST Financial. The cost of crude oil affects everything from how much it costs to fill up your car to the price of food at the supermarket. China in particular buys more oil from Iran than any other nation - with its oil imports from Iran surpassing 1.8 million barrels per day last month, according to data by ship tracking firm Vortexa. Energy analyst Vandana Hari has said Iran has "little to gain and too much to lose" from closing the Strait. "Iran risks turning its oil and gas producing neighbours in the Gulf into enemies and invoking the ire of its key market China by disrupting traffic in the Strait", Hari told BBC News. The US joined the conflict between Iran and Israel over the weekend, with President Donald Trump saying Washington had "obliterated" Tehran's key nuclear sites. However, it's not clear how much damage the strikes inflicted, with the UN's nuclear watchdog saying it was unable to assess the damage at the heavily fortified Fordo underground nuclear site. Iran has said there was only minor damage to Fordo. Trump also warned Iran that they would face "far worse" future attacks if they did not abandon their nuclear programme. On Monday, Beijing said the US' attack had damaged Washington's credibility and called for an immediate ceasefire. China's UN Ambassador Fu Cong said all parties should restrain "the impulse of force... and adding fuel to the fire", according to a state-run CCTV report. In an editorial, Beijing's state newspaper Global Times also said US involvement in Iran "had further complicated and destabilized the Middle East situation" and that it was pushing the conflict to an "uncontrollable state".
