Latest news with #Iran–IraqWar
Time of India
17 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
icra: 4 reasons why crude oil is not likely to sustain $80/bbl. How is India impacted?
Here are 4 reasons why Brent may sustain $80 per bbl: 1) Iran's Strait of Hormuz gamble too costly to close ADVERTISEMENT 2) OPEC production 3) US Shale factor ADVERTISEMENT 4) Global oil demand growth projections ADVERTISEMENT Impact on India While the Israel-Iran tension has kept crude oil on the boil with an 8% jump in the past eight days and 23% over a month, the black gold is unlikely to breach the $80 per barrel mark, according to estimates by a couple of brokerages."While the Iran–Israel conflict is serious and merits close monitoring, we reckon Brent Oil price is unlikely to sustain above US$80/bbl in a durable way unless the Strait of Hormuz is closed, or critical Gulf infrastructure is targeted," Yes Securities said in a note. ICRA too expects crude prices to average between $70-80/bbl for persistent geopolitical tensions and repeated threats, ranging from the Iran–Iraq War to post-Iran Nuclear deal fallout, Iran has never acted on its threat to close the Strait of Securities calls this restraint strategic and economic. The Strait handles nearly 20% of global oil consumption and is vital for Qatar's LNG exports, Iran's own trade, and the energy trade of regional allies like Iraq. A full closure would not only trigger military retaliation, particularly from the US, but also damage Iran's economic interests and international standing, this brokerage has wielded the threat of disruption as a geopolitical bargaining tool, without crossing the line into direct confrontation, Yes OPEC holding spare capacity of 4mbpd—well above Iran's 1.5mbpd exports—and a projected global market surplus of 0.9mbpd before the Israel-Iran flare-up, there is ample supply believes that even if Iranian supplies of 1.5mbpd are taken out, OPEC's spare production capacity of 4mbpd is good enough to compensate for the 2008, the rise of US shale has added millions of barrels per day to global supply, increasing flexibility and price elasticity. This has allowed the market to absorb geopolitical shocks more effectively, with tensions involving Iran, Libya, or Venezuela causing only short-lived price spikes."OPEC's diminished market share and increased spare capacity, especially from Saudi Arabia and the UAE, have further capped volatility, making oil prices more range-bound and positioning US shale as a soft ceiling on prices," Yes Securities which is the second largest consumer of oil, has seen a subdued demand post-COVID due to economic rebalancing and a weak real estate sector, Yes Securities said. Long-term energy transition trends such as the rise of electric vehicles, improved fuel efficiency, and supportive green energy transition policies are further restraining demand growth in OECD countries."This softened outlook is mirrored in recent agency forecasts. The International Energy Agency now expects global oil demand to grow by about 0.72mbpd in 2025, down from the earlier estimate of 1mbpd. EIA now projects global oil consumption to rise by 0.8mbpd in 2025, down from the earlier projection of 1mbpd," Yes to ICRA, crude oil imports from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE that pass through the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) account for 45-50% of total crude imports by India. Moreover, about 60% of the natural gas imports by India pass through the SoH.A $10/bbl increase in the average price of crude oil for the fiscal year will typically push up net oil imports by $13-14 billion during the these elevated crude oil prices, while the profitability of upstream players will remain healthy and their capex plans will remain intact, the marketing margins of downstream players will be impacted, along with the expansion of LPG under-recoveries.
Economic Times
21 hours ago
- Business
- Economic Times
4 reasons why crude oil is not likely to sustain $80/bbl. How is India impacted?
Crude oil may not sustain above $80/bbl despite Middle East tensions, say brokerages, citing factors like OPEC's spare capacity, stable US shale output, and weak global demand. For India, a $10/bbl price rise could inflate oil imports by $13–14 billion, hitting downstream margins and LPG subsidy costs. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Here are 4 reasons why Brent may sustain $80 per bbl: 1) Iran's Strait of Hormuz gamble too costly to close Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads 2) OPEC production 3) US Shale factor 4) Global oil demand growth projections Impact on India Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads While the Israel-Iran tension has kept crude oil on the boil with an 8% jump in the past eight days and 23% over a month, the black gold is unlikely to breach the $80 per barrel mark, according to estimates by a couple of brokerages."While the Iran–Israel conflict is serious and merits close monitoring, we reckon Brent Oil price is unlikely to sustain above US$80/bbl in a durable way unless the Strait of Hormuz is closed, or critical Gulf infrastructure is targeted," Yes Securities said in a note. ICRA too expects crude prices to average between $70-80/bbl for persistent geopolitical tensions and repeated threats, ranging from the Iran–Iraq War to post-Iran Nuclear deal fallout, Iran has never acted on its threat to close the Strait of Securities calls this restraint strategic and economic. The Strait handles nearly 20% of global oil consumption and is vital for Qatar's LNG exports, Iran's own trade, and the energy trade of regional allies like Iraq. A full closure would not only trigger military retaliation, particularly from the US, but also damage Iran's economic interests and international standing, this brokerage has wielded the threat of disruption as a geopolitical bargaining tool, without crossing the line into direct confrontation, Yes OPEC holding spare capacity of 4mbpd—well above Iran's 1.5mbpd exports—and a projected global market surplus of 0.9mbpd before the Israel-Iran flare-up, there is ample supply believes that even if Iranian supplies of 1.5mbpd are taken out, OPEC's spare production capacity of 4mbpd is good enough to compensate for the 2008, the rise of US shale has added millions of barrels per day to global supply, increasing flexibility and price elasticity. This has allowed the market to absorb geopolitical shocks more effectively, with tensions involving Iran, Libya, or Venezuela causing only short-lived price spikes."OPEC's diminished market share and increased spare capacity, especially from Saudi Arabia and the UAE, have further capped volatility, making oil prices more range-bound and positioning US shale as a soft ceiling on prices," Yes Securities which is the second largest consumer of oil, has seen a subdued demand post-COVID due to economic rebalancing and a weak real estate sector, Yes Securities said. Long-term energy transition trends such as the rise of electric vehicles, improved fuel efficiency, and supportive green energy transition policies are further restraining demand growth in OECD countries."This softened outlook is mirrored in recent agency forecasts. The International Energy Agency now expects global oil demand to grow by about 0.72mbpd in 2025, down from the earlier estimate of 1mbpd. EIA now projects global oil consumption to rise by 0.8mbpd in 2025, down from the earlier projection of 1mbpd," Yes to ICRA, crude oil imports from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE that pass through the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) account for 45-50% of total crude imports by India. Moreover, about 60% of the natural gas imports by India pass through the SoH.A $10/bbl increase in the average price of crude oil for the fiscal year will typically push up net oil imports by $13-14 billion during the these elevated crude oil prices, while the profitability of upstream players will remain healthy and their capex plans will remain intact, the marketing margins of downstream players will be impacted, along with the expansion of LPG under-recoveries.
Time of India
21 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
4 reasons why crude oil is not likely to sustain $80/bbl. How is India impacted?
While the Israel-Iran tension has kept crude oil on the boil with an 8% jump in the past eight days and 23% over a month, the black gold is unlikely to breach the $80 per barrel mark, according to estimates by a couple of brokerages. "While the Iran–Israel conflict is serious and merits close monitoring, we reckon Brent Oil price is unlikely to sustain above US$80/bbl in a durable way unless the Strait of Hormuz is closed, or critical Gulf infrastructure is targeted," Yes Securities said in a note. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 23.7% Returns in last 5 years with Shriram Life's ULIP Shriram Life Insurance Undo ICRA too expects crude prices to average between $70-80/bbl for FY2026. Here are 4 reasons why Brent may sustain $80 per bbl: 1) Iran's Strait of Hormuz gamble too costly to close Despite persistent geopolitical tensions and repeated threats, ranging from the Iran–Iraq War to post-Iran Nuclear deal fallout, Iran has never acted on its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz. Yes Securities calls this restraint strategic and economic. The Strait handles nearly 20% of global oil consumption and is vital for Qatar's LNG exports, Iran's own trade, and the energy trade of regional allies like Iraq. A full closure would not only trigger military retaliation, particularly from the US, but also damage Iran's economic interests and international standing, this brokerage said. Live Events Tehran has wielded the threat of disruption as a geopolitical bargaining tool, without crossing the line into direct confrontation, Yes noted. 2) OPEC production With OPEC holding spare capacity of 4mbpd—well above Iran's 1.5mbpd exports—and a projected global market surplus of 0.9mbpd before the Israel-Iran flare-up, there is ample supply cushion. Yes believes that even if Iranian supplies of 1.5mbpd are taken out, OPEC's spare production capacity of 4mbpd is good enough to compensate for the fall. 3) US Shale factor Since 2008, the rise of US shale has added millions of barrels per day to global supply, increasing flexibility and price elasticity. This has allowed the market to absorb geopolitical shocks more effectively, with tensions involving Iran, Libya, or Venezuela causing only short-lived price spikes. "OPEC's diminished market share and increased spare capacity, especially from Saudi Arabia and the UAE, have further capped volatility, making oil prices more range-bound and positioning US shale as a soft ceiling on prices," Yes Securities said. 4) Global oil demand growth projections China, which is the second largest consumer of oil, has seen a subdued demand post-COVID due to economic rebalancing and a weak real estate sector, Yes Securities said. Long-term energy transition trends such as the rise of electric vehicles, improved fuel efficiency, and supportive green energy transition policies are further restraining demand growth in OECD countries. "This softened outlook is mirrored in recent agency forecasts. The International Energy Agency now expects global oil demand to grow by about 0.72mbpd in 2025, down from the earlier estimate of 1mbpd. EIA now projects global oil consumption to rise by 0.8mbpd in 2025, down from the earlier projection of 1mbpd," Yes said. Impact on India According to ICRA, crude oil imports from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE that pass through the Strait of Hormuz (SoH) account for 45-50% of total crude imports by India. Moreover, about 60% of the natural gas imports by India pass through the SoH. A $10/bbl increase in the average price of crude oil for the fiscal year will typically push up net oil imports by $13-14 billion during the year. At these elevated crude oil prices, while the profitability of upstream players will remain healthy and their capex plans will remain intact, the marketing margins of downstream players will be impacted, along with the expansion of LPG under-recoveries.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
2 days ago
- Politics
- First Post
Can Israel really topple Iran's Khamenei? What does Netanyahu exactly want?
Can Israel really topple Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei? Is Netanyahu aiming for more than just stopping a nuclear bomb? While Israel says its strikes are meant to halt Iran's nuclear programme, the recent attacks tell a bigger story. read more Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long insisted that against Iran is aimed at preventing Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. However, the scale and breadth of Israel's recent strikes — but also core regime infrastructure — have prompted growing debate about whether Netanyahu's ambitions may extend to regime change in Iran. After launching a surprise wave of airstrikes on June 12-13, Israel struck more than a dozen locations across Iran in its largest assault since the Iran–Iraq War, under the codename Operation Rising Lion. The and Mossad targeted nuclear sites at Natanz and Isfahan, missile complexes, and military installations, killing several top commanders and nuclear scientists. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While the initial focus was on degrading , subsequent attacks have reached deep into the regime's political and security core, including the foreign and defence ministries, police headquarters, and the state broadcaster in Tehran. Israel has also hit major energy infrastructure, such as the South Pars gas field, the world's largest natural gas reservoir. Analysts say these targets are crucial to the regime's military logistics and economic stability. What Israel is doing looks incremental in logic. It seems to have set a priority of targets. In the first stage, Israel is looking to slow down, if it can't end, . The second aim is clearly to cripple the Iranian military by targeting its delivery systems and the leadership that controls them. As the final goal that Netanyahu has repeatedly and some experts believe that's Israel's evolving strategy — known as the 'Octopus Doctrine' — is to shift from targeting Iran's proxies to striking at the regime's head. They argue that Israel's real objective behind attacks on energy infrastructure is to trigger a social unrest against the Islamic Republic, challenging it from within. Netanyahu has made direct appeals to the Iranian public, urging them to 'stand up to the regime' and suggesting Israel's campaign could 'clear the path for you to achieve your freedom'. This approach could be counter-productive for Israel. It has been seen world over that when countries are attacked by a foreign power, the population rallies around the flag, which becomes their identity. Experts caution that foreign intervention rarely triggers regime change and could even backfire, strengthening the regime by rallying nationalistic sentiment. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD On the ground, the conflict has been devastating. Iran's health ministry reports more than 200 people killed, including many civilians, and over 1,000 injured. Strikes on residential areas and public infrastructure have added to the toll, while the IDF has warned civilians to evacuate areas near military sites. Despite Israel's tactical successes — achieving aerial superiority over Tehran, destroying missile launchers, and eliminating senior military figures — the regime's core remains intact. Much of Iran's underground nuclear enrichment capacity, especially at Fordow, has survived, and Iran has vowed to accelerate its programme once hostilities cease. Meanwhile, the risk of wider regional escalation is growing, with Iran and its proxies threatening further retaliation and mediation efforts underway to prevent further conflict. There's an increasing possibility of the US getting involved in the Israel-Iran military conflict. US President Donald Trump is said to be reviewing his policy of keeping a safe distance from Netanyahu's aggressive moves against Tehran. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While Israel's strikes have dealt serious blows to Iran's military and political leadership, the prospect of regime change remains highly uncertain, at least for now despite reports of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei having been isolated and his son taking all key decisions or rumours that Khamenei is planning to flee Iran. External pressure may destabilise, but it can just as easily unify a population behind its government in times of crisis. For Netanyahu, the stakes are high: failure to achieve his stated aims could have profound consequences for his own political future.
Asia Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Asia Times
No good options for Iran in Israel war
The scale of Israel's strikes on multiple, sensitive Iranian military and nuclear sites on Friday was unprecedented. It was the biggest attack on Iran since the Iran–Iraq War in the 1980s. As expected, Iran responded swiftly, even as Israeli attacks on its territory continued. The unfolding conflict is reshaping regional dynamics, and Iran now finds itself with no easy path forward. The timing of the Israeli strikes was highly significant. They came at a critical point in the high-stakes negotiations between Iran and the United States over Tehran's nuclear program that began earlier this year. Last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a report accusing Tehran of stockpiling highly enriched uranium at levels dangerously close to weaponization. According to the report, Iran has accumulated around 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60% purity. If this uranium is further enriched to 90% purity, it would be enough to build nine to ten bombs. The day before Israel's attack, the IAEA board of governors also declared Iran to be in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in two decades. The nuclear talks recently hit a stumbling block over a major issue – the US refusal to allow Iran to enrich any uranium at all for a civilian nuclear program. Iran has previously agreed to cap its enrichment at 3.67% under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a nuclear deal between Iran, the US and other global powers agreed to in 2015 (and abandoned by the first Trump administration in 2018). But it has refused to relinquish its right to enrichment altogether. US President Donald Trump reportedly urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to attack Iran last week, believing he was close to a deal. But after the attack, Trump ramped up his threats on Iran again, urging it to agree to a deal 'before there is nothing left.' He called the Israeli strikes 'excellent' and suggested there was 'more to come.' Given this context, it is understandable why Iran does not view the US as an impartial mediator. In response, Iran suspended its negotiations with the US, announcing it would skip the sixth round of talks scheduled for Sunday. Rather than compelling Iran to agree to a deal, the excessive pressure could risk pushing Iran towards a more extreme stance instead. While Iranian officials have denied any intention to develop a military nuclear program, they have warned that continued Israeli attacks and US pressure might force Tehran to reconsider as a deterrence mechanism. On several occasions, Trump has insisted he is not seeking 'regime change' in Iran. He has repeatedly claimed he wants to see Iran be 'successful' – the only requirement is for it to accept a US deal. However, in Iran's view, the US proposal is not viewed as a peace offer, but as a blueprint for surrender. And the fear is that this would ultimately pave the way for regime change under the guise of diplomacy. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei responded to the latest US proposal by insisting that uranium enrichment remains a 'red line' for Iran. Abandoning this right from the Iranian perspective would only embolden its adversaries to escalate their pressure on the regime and make further demands – such as dismantling Iran's missile program. The fear in Tehran is this could push the country into a defenceless state without a way to deter future Israeli strikes. Furthermore, capitulating to the US terms could ignite domestic backlash on two fronts: from an already growing opposition movement, and from the regime's base of loyal supporters, who would see any retreat as a betrayal. In this context, many in Iran's leadership believe that giving in to Trump's terms would not avert regime change – it would hasten it. Caught between escalating pressure and existential threats, Iran finds itself with few viable options other than to project strength. It has already begun to pursue this strategy by launching retaliatory missile strikes at Israeli cities. This response has been much stronger than the relatively contained tit-for-tat strikes Israel and Iran engaged in last year. Iran's strikes have caused considerable damage to government and residential areas in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Iran sees no alternative but to push forward, having already been drawn into open confrontation. Any sign of weakness would severely undermine the regime's legitimacy at home and embolden its adversaries abroad. Moreover, Tehran is betting on Trump's aversion to foreign wars. Iranian leaders believe the US is neither prepared nor willing to enter another costly conflict in the region – one that could disrupt global trade and jeopardize Trump's recent economic partnerships with Persian Gulf states. Therefore, Iran's leadership likely believes that by standing firm now, the conflict will be limited, so long as the US stays on the sidelines. And then, Iran's leaders would try to return to the negotiating table, in their view, from a position of strength. Ali Mamouri is research fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
