West Asia's ceasefire: The oil market got lucky
Mint Editorial Board Oil prices eased on the big-relief news of Israel and Iran agreeing to quit warring. Market traders who stayed calm through the warfare may feel justified, but let's hope their luck doesn't have a half-life. Since regime change now seems off the US agenda, if not Tel Aviv's, calm traders might have got this oil scare right. Gift this article
Global oil prices hardly budged through the Israel-Iran conflict—not even after the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities—before the White House announced a ceasefire. Both Tel Aviv and Tehran have accepted a cessation of armed hostilities.
Global oil prices hardly budged through the Israel-Iran conflict—not even after the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities—before the White House announced a ceasefire. Both Tel Aviv and Tehran have accepted a cessation of armed hostilities.
Also Read: Javier Blas: An Israel-Iran war may not rattle the oil market
Although flickery embers of this June's flare-up reflect the fragility of peace, the global relief is palpable.
Brent crude slipped below its pre-war level of about $70 per barrel as fears eased of an oil-supply squeeze. But a market glut since March isn't enough to explain the equanimity of oil traders. They may all along have expected other nations not to get drawn in.
To their credit, Iran's retaliation aimed at a US base in Qatar only seemed performative, with no harm done, allowing the US to shrug it off.
Also Read: Israel-Iran conflict: Echoes of history haunt West Asia
What of the warring duo? Israel had been warning of Iran's nuclear breakout for over three decades, though evidence of it was always thin. Even if Iran was going for a nuke, it's unclear if its capacity to do so has been crushed, while its incentive to get one may have risen.
Also Read: Mint Quick Edit | The US blasts in: A forever war in Iran?
Hence, tensions will remain. But since regime change now seems off the US agenda, if not Tel Aviv's, calm traders might have got this oil scare right. Let's hope their luck doesn't have a half-life. Topics You May Be Interested In Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
32 minutes ago
- NDTV
Ahead Of New Talks, Iran Blames Europeans For Nuclear Deal Collapse
Tehran: Tehran blamed European powers on Monday for the failure of a landmark 2015 nuclear deal, accusing them of breaking commitments ahead of renewed talks in Istanbul with Britain, France and Germany. The 2015 agreement -- reached between Iran and UN Security Council permanent members Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, plus Germany -- imposed curbs on Iran's nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. However, it unravelled in 2018 when the United States, during Donald Trump's first term as president, unilaterally withdrew and reimposed sweeping sanctions. Though Europe pledged continued support, a mechanism intended to offset US sanctions never effectively materialised, forcing many Western firms to exit Iran and deepening its economic crisis. "Iran holds the European parties responsible for negligence in implementing the agreement," said foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei ahead of Friday's talks in Istanbul with Britain, France and Germany on the deal's future. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and his Turkish counterpart Hakan Fidan spoke by phone Monday to discuss the talks, Fidan's office said, confirming the date had been set for Friday. Iran will also host a trilateral meeting today with Chinese and Russian representatives to discuss the nuclear issue and potential sanctions. The Chinese foreign ministry said Beijing would "continue to play a constructive role in pushing relevant sides to restart dialogue and negotiations, and reach a solution that takes in account the legitimate concerns of all parties". In recent weeks, the three European powers have threatened to reimpose international sanctions on Tehran, accusing it of breaching its nuclear commitments. Germany said the Istanbul talks would be at the expert level, with the European trio, or E3, working "flat out" to find a sustainable and verifiable diplomatic solution. "If no solution is reached by the end of August... the snapback also remains an option for the E3," said its foreign ministry spokesman, Martin Giese. A clause in the 2015 agreement allows for UN sanctions on Iran to be reimposed through a "snapback" mechanism in the event of non-compliance. However, the agreement expires in October, leaving a tight deadline. - 'No intention of speaking with America' - The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran is the only non-nuclear-armed country currently enriching uranium to 60 percent -- far beyond the 3.67 percent cap set by the 2015 accord. That is a short step from the 90 percent enrichment required for a nuclear weapon. Using the snapback clause was "meaningless, unjustifiable and immoral", Baqaei told a news conference, arguing that Iran only began distancing itself from the agreement in response to Western non-compliance. "Iran's reduction of its commitments was carried out in accordance with the provisions outlined in the agreement," he said. Western powers -- led by the United States and backed by Israel -- have long accused Tehran of secretly seeking nuclear weapons. Iran has repeatedly denied this, insisting its nuclear programme is solely for civilian purposes such as energy production. Tehran and Washington had held five rounds of nuclear talks starting in April, but a planned meeting on June 15 was cancelled after Israel launched strikes on Iran, triggering a 12-day conflict. "At this stage, we have no intention of speaking with America," Baqaei said Monday. Israel launched a wave of surprise strikes on its regional nemesis on June 13, targeting key military and nuclear facilities. The United States launched its own strikes against Iran's nuclear programme on June 22, hitting the uranium enrichment facility at Fordo, in Qom province south of Tehran, as well as nuclear sites in Isfahan and Natanz.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
The threat to India's ‘great power' status
Despite U.S. President Donald Trump's claims of having vanquished Iran's enrichment programme, the threat of a U.S.-Israel-Iran war remains alive. A combination of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's legal problems, his government's regional agenda, and the neoconservative influence in the U.S. threaten to overwhelm Mr. Trump's instincts towards non-interventionist peace. War would be disastrous for India's economic interests and harm its 'great power' ambitions. If Iran's government is toppled, U.S.-led unipolarity in West Asia would be cemented, precluding the ability of rising powers such as India to grow their strategic footprint. This touches on a fundamental schism between India and the West — Delhi's multipolar world vision. The Trump administration offers an opportunity to address this. What Iran's defeat could mean A restart of the Israel-Iran war with U.S. involvement poses some risk of regime change or Balkanization in Iran. This would dramatically alter the distribution of power in West Asia. There would remain no nation state that is both not U.S.-aligned and controls all of its territory (Ansar Allah does not control all Yemen). Regardless of how benign U.S. intentions towards India are, this would imperil the trajectory Delhi has been following for the last decade, of strengthening its strategic influence in the region. The negotiating power India held with Israel and Gulf States was underpinned by the fact that Delhi also engaged alternatively aligned states such as Syria and Iran. This has already decreased since President Bashar al-Assad's toppling and would nosedive if Iran's government is ousted. All of India's West Asia energy imports would have to be sourced from governments dependent on U.S. security guarantees, rather than from the diverse mix Delhi draws on now. All this would harm India's ability to rise as a great power. This is in part because reinforcing the strength of the existing global hegemon, the U.S., means a relative weakening of all rising powers. But it is also due to a fundamental clash in world visions between the American hegemon and rising India. Before his Moscow visit, India's External Affairs Minister revealed the basis of this clash saying the meeting with Russia would discuss '…the building of a multipolar world order'. By definition, this involves the displacement of U.S.-led unipolarity. This means that, on this crucial question, Washington's most important Asian partner shares common cause with China and Russia. This underlying tension bubbled to the surface recently with Mr. Trump's threat, cheered on by NATO head Mark Rutte, to slap secondary sanctions of 100% on countries purchasing Russian oil, gas, or other strategic goods. Before this, when India commissioned INS Tamal, a warship manufactured by Russia, the U.K. paper, The Telegraph, ran the headline 'India is an enemy, not a friend or a neutral'. When it comes to fundamental questions of geopolitics, the corporate media in the West reflects the views of the foreign policy establishment. A multipolar world order, in which India is one of the poles, constitutes one of the principal pillars of New Delhi's foreign policy. India's main motivation for supporting partnering with the U.S. — balancing against the China threat — does not outweigh the multipolarity goal. This shapes India's interests, not only in relation to Iran and to West Asia, but also the New Cold War more broadly and the hot wars that will in future spring from it. It has been most clear in India's defiance of Western demands regarding isolating Russia. Going forward, the multipolarity goal will play a greater role in informing Delhi's policy choices, thus inhibiting actions that reinforce U.S.-led unipolarity. Therefore, even given the existing strategic autonomy preference, it looks increasingly less likely that India will align with the Western bloc. Moreover, Delhi likely perceives its clashing worldview with Washington as amplifying U.S. and Western offensive intentions towards India. Path to peace On Iran, India should urge restraint. This can include highlighting that disruption of West Asian oil supplies would weaken India relative to China, which is less dependent on imports — thus harming U.S. interests in Asia. It may also involve quid pro quo. As seen in relation to U.S. attempts to isolate Russia over Ukraine, where India sits on any conflict can impact the collective West's interests. More fundamentally, India should impress on Washington that the U.S. and its allies can best serve their security and economic interests by accepting global multipolarity. When considering the alternatives of kinetic great power war, or (though less likely) Chinese hegemony over Asia and Africa, multipolarity is far from the worst scenario from the West's view. The present moment offers possibility in this regard. Despite the recent dithering on detente with Russia, Mr. Trump knows he was elected on a compatible foreign policy platform of non-interventionism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged early on that the world is moving towards multipolarity. Polls show that Americans, particularly Mr. Trump's base, view the country's vital interests as homeland and near abroad-centred. This translates to tolerance of other poles maintaining hegemony within their own regions. As the most powerful independent state that the U.S. regards as a partner, Indian suasion would carry weight. Kadira Pethiyagoda, author, geopolitics expert at the University of Melbourne, former diplomat, and political advisor (@KPethiyagoda)
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
Iran claims to have replaced most air defence systems damaged during Israel conflict
Tehran, July 21 (UNI) Iran has reportedly managed to replace its air defence systems, majority of which were damaged or completely destroyed during its 12-day war with Israel, according to Iran International. According Mahmoud Mousavi, the army's deputy of operations, "Some of our air defences were damaged, this is not something we can hide, but our colleagues have used domestic resources and replaced them with pre-arranged systems that were stored in suitable locations in order to keep the airspace secure.' During the conflict, the IDF almost completely took over Iranian airspace, firing missiles at critical infrastructure. In retaliation, Iran went on to fire drones and missiles throughout Israel. 'We were able to cover the skies using existing and new systems, securing the airspace of our dear Iran,' he said. 'The enemy, despite its desperate efforts, failed to achieve its goals.' Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, also echoed that message. 'Air defence proved on the front lines of protecting Iran's skies that it will resist any level of threat,' he said. Though Iran claims to have destroyed several Israeli fighter jets, it has yet to release any actual footage to back its claims. IDF officials say that 120 air defence systems were destroyed or disabled since the first wave of attacks—around a third of Iran's pre-war total. Long-range systems, including Russian-supplied S-300s and Iran's Bavar-373 batteries, were among those targeted. 'Iran relied on a fragmented mix of Russian S-300s, Chinese batteries, and local Bavar-373 systems – none of which were adequately integrated… The air defence radar was Russian and Chinese made, which have known issues of target discrimination, without any integration among bases and military units,' wrote the Global Defence Corp. Much of Tehran's military hardware, including its tanks, armoured vehicles, aircraft, helicopters, and missile systems are outdated, as most of it is from the Cold War era. Due to its lack of sophisticated hardware, and Israel having plenty of it, Tel Aviv's aircraft encountered little in the way of resistance, enabling it to target and destroy critical Iranian military infrastructure. UNI ANV SSP
