
Investors see quick stock market drop if US joins Israel-Iran conflict
Financial markets may be in for a "knee-jerk" selloff if the U.S. military attacks Iran, with economists warning that a dramatic rise in oil prices could damage a global economy already strained by President Donald Trump's tariffs.
Oil prices fell nearly 2 per cent on Wednesday as investors weighed the chance of supply disruptions from the Israel-Iran conflict and potential direct U.S. involvement. The price of crude remains up almost 9 per cent since Israel launched attacks against Iran last Friday in a bid to cripple its ability to produce nuclear weapons.
With major U.S. stock indexes trading near record highs despite uncertainty about Trump's trade policy, some investors worry that equities may be particularly vulnerable to sources of additional global uncertainty.
Chuck Carlson, chief executive officer at Horizon Investment Services, said U.S. stocks might initially sell off should Trump order the U.S. military to become more heavily involved in the Israel-Iran conflict, but that a faster escalation might also bring the situation to an end sooner. "I could see the initial knee-jerk would be, 'this is bad'," Carlson said. "I think it will bring things to a head quicker."
Wednesday's dip in crude, along with a modest 0.3 per cent increase in the S&P 500, came after Trump declined to answer reporters' questions about whether the U.S. was planning to strike Iran but said Iran had proposed to come for talks at the White House. Adding to uncertainty, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected Trump's demand for unconditional surrender.
U.S. Treasury yields fell as concerns over the war in Iran boosted safe haven demand for the debt.
The U.S. military is also bolstering its presence in the region, Reuters reported, further stirring speculation about U.S. intervention that investors fear could widen the conflict in an area with critical energy resources, supply chains and infrastructure.
With investors viewing the dollar as a safe haven, it has gained around 1 per cent against both the Japanese yen and Swiss franc since last Thursday. On Wednesday, the U.S. currency took a breather, edging fractionally lower against the yen and the franc.
'I don't think personally that we are going to join this war. I think Trump is going to do everything possible to avoid it. But if it can't be avoided, then initially that's going to be negative for the markets,' said Peter Cardillo, Chief Market Economist at Spartan Capital Securities in New York. "Gold would shoot up. Yields would probably come down lower and the dollar would probably rally."
Barclays warned that crude prices could rise to $85 per barrel if Iranian exports are reduced by half, and that prices could rise about $100 in the "worst case" scenario of a wider conflagration. Brent crude was last at about $76.
Citigroup economists warned in a note on Wednesday that materially higher oil prices "would be a negative supply shock for the global economy, lowering growth and boosting inflation—creating further challenges for central banks that are already trying to navigate the risks from tariffs."
Trump taking a "heavier hand" would not be a surprise to the market, mitigating any negative asset price reaction, Carlson said, while adding that he was still not convinced that the U.S. would take a heavier role.
Trades on the Polymarket betting website point to a 63 per cent expectation of "U.S. military action against Iran before July", down from as much as an 82 per cent likelihood on Tuesday, but still above a 35 per cent chance before the conflict began last Friday.
The S&P 500 energy sector index has rallied over 2 per cent in the past four sessions, lifted by a 3.8 per cent gain in Exxon Mobil and 5 per cent rally in Valero Energy. That compares to a 0.7 per cent drop in the S&P 500 over the same period, reflecting investor concerns about the impact of higher oil prices on the economy, and about growing global uncertainty generated by the conflict.
Turmoil in the Middle East comes as investors are already fretting about the effect of Trump's tariffs on the global economy.
The World Bank last week slashed its global growth forecast for 2025 by four-tenths of a percentage point to 2.3 per cent, saying that higher tariffs and heightened uncertainty posed a "significant headwind" for nearly all economies.
Defense stocks, already lifted by Russia's conflict with Ukraine, have made modest gains since Israel launched its attacks. The S&P 500 Aerospace and Defense index hit record highs early last week in the culmination of a rebound of over 30 per cent from losses in the wake of Trump's April 2 "Liberation Day" tariff announcements.
Even after the latest geopolitical uncertainty, the S&P 500 remains just 2 per cent below its February record high close.
"Investors want to be able to look past this, and until we see reasons to believe that this is going to be a much larger regional conflict with the U.S. perhaps getting involved and a high chance of escalating, you're going to see the market want to shrug this off as much as it can,' Osman Ali, global co-head of Quantitative Investment Strategies, said at an investor conference on Wednesday.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Straits Times
16 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Israeli strike on south Lebanon kills one
The attack comes a day after Israel killed a woman and wounded 25 other people in strikes across the country's south. PHOTO: REUTERS BEIRUT, Lebanon - An Israeli strike on southern Lebanon killed one person on June 28, the Lebanese Health Ministry said, the latest attack despite a ceasefire between Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah. In a statement, the ministry said that an 'Israeli enemy' drone strike on a car in Kunin, south Lebanon, killed one man in a preliminary toll. The Israeli military did not immediately comment on the incident. The attack comes a day after Israel killed a woman and wounded 25 other people in strikes across the country's south. Lebanon's state-run National News Agency reported that the woman was killed in an Israeli drone strike on an apartment in the city of Nabatiyeh. Israeli military spokesman Avichay Adraee said on social media that the army 'did not target any civilian building'. The attacks on June 27 included a 'wave of successive heavy strikes' in the Nabatiyeh region which injured seven people, according to the NNA. The Israeli military said it 'identified rehabilitation attempts made by Hezbollah beforehand and struck terror infrastructure sites in the area'. Mr Adraee said the civilian building 'was hit by a rocket that was inside the (fire and defence array) site and launched and exploded as a result of the strike'. Israel has repeatedly bombed its northern neighbour despite the November ceasefire that aimed to end over a year of hostilities with Hezbollah. Under the ceasefire deal, Hezbollah was to pull its fighters back north of the Litani river, some 30 kilometres from the Israeli border, leaving the Lebanese army and United Nations peacekeepers as the only armed parties in the region. Israel was required to fully withdraw its troops from the country but has kept them in five locations in south Lebanon that it deems strategic. AFP Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.


CNA
3 hours ago
- CNA
US Senate Republicans aim to push ahead on Trump's sweeping tax-cut, spending Bill
WASHINGTON: US Senate Republicans will seek to push President Donald Trump's sweeping tax-cut and spending Bill forward on Saturday (Jun 28) with a procedural vote that could kick off a marathon weekend session. The Bill would extend the 2017 tax cuts that were Trump's main first-term legislative achievement, cut other taxes and boost spending on the military and border security. Nonpartisan analysts estimate a version passed by the House of Representatives last month would add about US$3 trillion to the nation's US$36.2 trillion government debt. Senate Republicans have been deeply divided over plans to partly offset that Bill's heavy hit to the deficit, including by cutting the Medicaid health insurance program for low-income Americans. Republicans are using a legislative manoeuvre to bypass the Senate's 60-vote threshold to advance most legislation in the 100-member chamber. Their narrow margins in the Senate and House mean they can afford no more than three Republican no votes to advance a Bill that Democrats are united in opposing, saying it takes a heavy toll on low- and middle-income Americans to benefit the wealthy. Trump has pushed for Congress to pass the bill by the Jul 4 Independence Day holiday. The White House said early this month that the legislation, which Trump calls the "One Big Beautiful Bill", would reduce the annual deficit by US$1.4 trillion. While a handful of Republicans in both chambers have voiced opposition to some of the Bill's elements, this Congress has so far not rejected any of the president's legislative priorities. A successful vote to open debate would kick off a lengthy process that could run into Sunday, as Democrats unveil a series of amendments that are unlikely to pass in a chamber Republicans control 53-47. TAX BREAKS, SPENDING CUTS Democrats will focus their firepower with amendments aimed at reversing Republican spending cuts to programs that provide government-backed healthcare to the elderly, poor and disabled, as well as food aid to low-income families. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer summarised the reasons for his party's opposition to the Bill at a Friday press conference by saying "it has the biggest cuts to food funding ever", and could result in more than 2 million people losing their jobs. He also highlighted the Republican rollback of clean energy initiatives ushered in by the Biden administration. Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune stressed the tax-cut components during a Friday speech to the Senate. "The centrepiece of our Bill is permanent tax relief for the American people," he said as he showcased legislation that contains a new tax break for senior citizens and other taxpayers. The measure, Thune said, will "help get our economy firing on all cylinders again". It would also raise the Treasury Department's statutory borrowing limit by trillions of dollars to stave off a first default on its debt in the coming months. If the Senate manages to pass Trump's top legislative goal by early next week, the House would be poised to quickly apply the final stamp of approval, sending it to Trump for signing into law. But with Senate Republicans struggling to find enough spending cuts to win the support of the party's far right, Trump on Friday loosened the leash a bit, saying his Jul 4 deadline for wrapping it all up was "important" but "it's not the end-all". Among the most difficult disagreements Senate Republicans struggled to resolve late on Friday was the size of a cap on deductions for state and local taxes and a Medicaid cost-saving that could hobble rural hospitals.

Straits Times
4 hours ago
- Straits Times
US immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling
That outcome has raised more questions than answers about a right long understood to be guaranteed under the US Constitution. PHOTO: REUTERS WASHINGTON - The US Supreme Court's ruling tied to birthright citizenship prompted confusion and phone calls to lawyers as people who could be affected tried to process a convoluted legal decision with major humanitarian implications. The court's conservative majority on June 27 granted President Donald Trump his request to curb federal judges' power but did not decide the legality of his bid to restrict birthright citizenship. That outcome has raised more questions than answers about a right long understood to be guaranteed under the US Constitution: that anyone born in the United States is considered a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents' citizenship or legal status. Ms Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on June 27 morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried. 'There are not many specifics,' said Ms Lorena, who like others interviewed by Reuters asked to be identified by her first name out of fear for her safety. 'I don't understand it well.' She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality. 'I don't know if I can give her mine,' she said. 'I also don't know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality.' Mr Trump, a Republican, issued an order after taking office in January that directed US agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the US who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was blocked by three separate US district court judges, sending the case on a path to the Supreme Court. The resulting decision said Mr Trump's policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked. On June 27 afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship. If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating 'an extremely confusing patchwork' across the country, according to Ms Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute. 'Would individual doctors, individual hospitals be having to try to figure out how to determine the citizenship of babies and their parents?' she said. The drive to restrict birthright citizenship is part of Mr Trump's broader immigration crackdown, and he has framed automatic citizenship as a magnet for people to come to give birth. 'Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn't meant for that reason,' he said during a White House press briefing on June 27. Immigration advocates and lawyers in some Republican-led states said they received calls from a wide range of pregnant immigrants and their partners following the ruling. They were grappling with how to explain it to clients who could be dramatically affected, given all the unknowns of how future litigation would play out or how the executive order would be implemented state by state. Ms Lynn Tramonte, director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance said she got a call on June 27 from an East Asian temporary visa holder with a pregnant wife. He was anxious because Ohio is not one of the plaintiff states and wanted to know how he could protect his child's rights. 'He kept stressing that he was very interested in the rights included in the Constitution,' she said. Advocates underscored the gravity of Mr Trump's restrictions, which would block an estimated 150,000 children born in the US annually from receiving automatic citizenship. 'It really creates different classes of people in the country with different types of rights,' said Ms Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a spokesperson for the immigrant rights organisation United We Dream. 'That is really chaotic.' Adding uncertainty, the Supreme Court ruled that members of two plaintiff groups in the litigation - CASA, an immigrant advocacy service in Maryland, and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project - would still be covered by lower court blocks on the policy. Whether someone in a state where Mr Trump's policy could go into effect could join one of the organizations to avoid the restrictions or how state or federal officials would check for membership remained unclear. Ms Betsy, a US citizen who recently graduated from high school in Virginia and a CASA member, said both of her parents came to the US from El Salvador two decades ago and lacked legal status when she was born. 'I feel like it targets these innocent kids who haven't even been born,' she said, declining to give her last name for concerns over her family's safety. Ms Nivida, a Honduran asylum seeker in Louisiana, is a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and recently gave birth. She heard on June 27 from a friend without legal status who is pregnant and wonders about the situation under Louisiana's Republican governor, since the state is not one of those fighting Trump's order. 'She called me very worried and asked what's going to happen,' she said. 'If her child is born in Louisiana … is the baby going to be a citizen?' REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.