BP, Shel, CVX: Oil Stocks Give Mixed Reception to Ukraine Peace Hopes as Prices Slide
Elevate Your Investing Strategy:
Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence.
Brent crude futures lost 0.7% to trade at $65.09 per barrel, while West Texas Intermediate futures retreated by 1% to $62.82 a barrel.
Peace Summit
The drop came after what appeared to be a successful meeting at the White House between President Trump, Ukraine's leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy and a gaggle of European leaders, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
In a social media post following the meeting, Trump said he had spoken with Russian president Vladimir Putin and was working to arrange a summit between Putin and Zelenskyy, to be followed by a meeting of all three leaders.
An end to the conflict, calming at least one of the main geopolitical crises around the world would be a plus for the global economy. But, it might not be so welcome in the balance between oil supply and demand.
That's because a deal could see the lifting of sanctions on Russian crude exports bringing more oil onto the market, at a time when demand is still volatile.
'An outcome which would see a ratcheting down of tensions and remove threats of secondary tariffs or sanctions would see oil drift lower toward our $58 per barrel Q4-25/Q1-26 average target,' said Bart Melek, head of commodity strategy at TD Securities.
Stocks React
Suvro Sarkar, lead energy analyst at DBS Bank, added: 'Oil prices are largely responding to outcomes of recent meetings between Trump-Putin and Trump-Zelenskyy and while no outright peace deal or ceasefire seems imminent, there has been some progress made and chances of further escalation or intensification of sanctions on Russia from US or Europe may be off the table for now.'
All of these key stocks have had a volatile 2025 to date hit by international issues such as Ukraine and Iran, as well as tariff fears.
That uncertainty may be down to tempered expectations over whether the current talks will actually lead to an end in hostilities.
According to the Wall Street Journal, cryptocurrency-based prediction market, Polymarket, currently points to a 38% chance of a ceasefire, well below the 78% seen in March.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
15 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump's ‘chilling effect' is coming for museums, historians warn
Historians and researchers are expressing 'grave concern' about President Trump's push to purge museums of information he dislikes. 'Such political interference stands to impose a single and flawed view of American history onto the Smithsonian, placing at risk the integrity and accuracy of historical interpretation,' Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, told CNN Wednesday. 'Such actions diminish our shared past and threaten to erode the public's trust in our shared institutions.' Weicksel said she has been fielding messages of concern not just from fellow historians, but also from people with no professional affiliations. 'Many of them are parents who are concerned about the Smithsonian's future,' she said. 'Others are frequent museum visitors.' On Tuesday, Trump called museums 'the last remaining segment of 'WOKE'' and said, 'We are not going to allow this to happen.' He was seemingly following up on last week's letter from the White House informing the Smithsonian Institution of a content 'review' that would aim to 'ensure alignment with the president's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions.' That announcement prompted the American Alliance of Museums, which represents 35,000 professionals in the sector, to speak out against 'growing threats of censorship against US museums.' 'This is not just a concern for select institutions,' like the Smithsonian, the group said. 'These pressures can create a chilling effect across the entire museum sector.' The American Association for State and Local History argued in a statement that the Trump administration's broader goal is to 'delegitimize the work of the history field and to rob the public of its ability to learn from the past.' 'Censoring and manipulating content to fit a predetermined, triumphalist narrative is the antithesis of historical practice and a disservice to us all,' the association said. The ultimate danger 'is that you get an incomplete picture of what happened in the country,' Annette Gordon-Reed, the Pulitzer-winning Harvard historian, said on CNN's 'Anderson Cooper 360.' 'If you can't learn from history, if you don't know what actually happened,' Gordon-Reed said. 'So, it's a way of keeping people ignorant of the past.' Trump's follow-up message on Truth Social said, 'We have the 'HOTTEST' Country in the World, and we want people to talk about it, including in our Museums.' The president said he had directed attorneys to 'go through the Museums' and 'start the exact same process that has been done with colleges and universities where tremendous progress has been made.' In some ways, his rhetoric is a continuation of a fight that liberals and conservatives have been having for decades about how much to emphasize America's sins versus its strengths. 'America's national museums have been captured by a niche ideological faction that believes that Western civilization, and, indeed, our nation, is irredeemable,' the editors of the conservative publication National Review wrote last week. 'If the White House gets this review right, it can help make the Smithsonian a cultural gem that all Americans can once again take pride in.' Weicksel and other leaders in the field argue that Americans already have a great deal of trust in museums and historical sites, and MAGA-style ideological meddling will diminish that trust. 'Across numerous surveys, a majority of Americans consistently say they want a full, honest, and unvarnished presentation of our nation's history,' the Organization of American Historians said in a statement last week. The organization predicted that the administration's review would 'undoubtedly be in service of authoritarian control over the national narrative, collective memory, and national collections.' The Smithsonian is not part of the executive branch, but it is federally funded, and it has a Board of Regents that includes the vice president. The institution began a review of its own in June, and last week it said that it would 'continue to collaborate constructively' with the White House. Dozens of groups representing historians came to the Smithsonian's defense back in March when a Trump executive order disparaged the institution, presaging this month's actions. 'Our goal is neither criticism nor celebration; it is to understand — to increase our knowledge of — the past in ways that can help Americans to shape the future,' the groups said in an open letter. 'The stories that have shaped our past include not only elements that make us proud but also aspects that make us acutely aware of tragedies in our nation's history,' the letter continued. 'No person, no nation, is perfect, and we should all — as individuals and as nations — learn from our imperfections.'
The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
Korea's democracy prospers and the Korea-US alliance is intact
We express our deep concern over the recent commentary by Gordon Chang published in The Hill, which presented inaccurate and misleading portrayal of the Republic of Korea's democracy, its president, and its alliance with the U.S. Korea's democracy has evolved through the resilience of its people, and it continues to thrive. At the same time, the Korea-U.S. alliance has developed into a future-oriented comprehensive strategic alliance. President Lee Jae Myung's upcoming visit to Washington D.C. and his summit with President Trump will mark yet another milestone in this enduring and indispensable alliance. The claim that Korea's June 3 presidential election was marred by irregularities, or that our democracy is in crisis, is entirely without foundation. Korea's democracy is internationally recognized as transparent and vibrant. The election was held freely and fairly, and no evidence of irregularities was found. The absence of any objection from Korea's independent judiciary or major political parties proves this fact.. Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and leaders across the world publicly congratulated Lee on his victory, reaffirming confidence in the integrity of Korea's democratic institutions. More than 100 countries likewise recognized the strength and resilience of Korea's democracy. Lee earned 49.4 percent of the vote, the second-highest share since the introduction of direct presidential election in 1987. Baseless attacks against a duly elected leader who secured the support of a majority of citizens are more than political criticism. They represent a disregard for the Korean people themselves, dismissing their democratic choice, the resilience they have shown in overcoming grave constitutional challenges, and the trust that sustains Korea's partnerships with the international community. Equally false is the assertion that former President Yoon Suk Yeol faced fabricated charges of insurrection. He was unanimously impeached by Korea's Constitutional Court after unlawfully declaring martial law. The allegations of insurrection against Yoon will be decided in accordance with fair judicial procedures, which constitutes another cornerstone of democracy. He has been treated in accordance with relevant laws and regulations, in the same manner as any other criminal suspect in Korea, and allegations that he was denied medical care are entirely unfounded. Claims that the current Korean government restricts freedom of expression on social media, investigates citizens, and raids religious facilities are patently false. Rather, the majority of Koreans have been deeply shocked by allegations in the media that certain religious figures provided bribes to Yoon and his wife. Our government will continue to respond firmly to such falsehoods and to the grave affronts and attacks they represent against the people of the Republic of Korea. The allegation that Lee is weakening our alliance with the U.S. is simply incorrect. Since his candidacy, Lee has consistently stated that the alliance is the cornerstone of Korea's diplomacy and security. Since taking office, he has repeatedly reaffirmed this commitment. The Ulchi Freedom Shield joint exercise is being conducted as planned. Adjustments to the schedule were made only after thorough consultation between the two governments to ensure the safety of troops under extreme heat and to maintain a balanced combined defense posture throughout the year. The investigation at Osan Air Base was limited to the area controlled by Korea and did not involve U.S. personnel or materials. The alliance is not only the bedrock of Korea's security but also a pillar of stability in the region. Also, the two countries are working closely together to respond to both threats and opportunities under a firm shared commitment. Under Lee's leadership, the Republic of Korea will continue to develop the alliance into a future-oriented comprehensive strategic alliance. Lee's visit to Washington D.C. and his summit with Trump will be a defining milestone in charting the course of future cooperation. To claim otherwise is to misrepresent reality and to disregard the bipartisan, multi-dimensional cooperation that has long underpinned the alliance. If the contributor of the above-mentioned commentary truly wishes to see the Korea-U.S. alliance flourish, then, ahead of this important first summit since Lee's inauguration, the responsible course is not to spread baseless accusations but to support this opportunity for the alliance to advance and prosper.
The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
Even Hillary Clinton admits Trump's foreign policy is working
Well, here's something you don't see every day. President Trump's foreign policy is getting high marks from an unusual grader — Hillary Clinton. Indeed, the former first lady, secretary of State and Democratic presidential candidate is typically no fan of The Donald; she's called him an illegitimate president, a threat to our democracy, a Russian stooge, and every other smear in the book. But even Clinton admits Trump is doing a pretty good job strengthening the U.S. relationship with European allies while getting more out of them in terms of NATO defense and their financial contributions. Watch Clinton speaking with liberal Fox News commentator Jessica Tarlov: 'I actually was encouraged by the events of the last several months,' said the former secretary of State. 'The NATO commitment by individual member states to increase their defense spending, it's something that prior administrations have certainly sought, and I think it's great that we're seeing these commitment they now have to follow through on.' Clinton continues: 'There is beginning to be a better understanding, both by the president and the people around him, as well as by the leaders of our European allies, that there can be common ground amongst us. The kind of dismissiveness of that we saw in the first Trump administration has been replaced by a much more obvious working relationship, to the good of European security, transatlantic security, and hopefully Ukrainian security.' That's high praise from a Democratic political figure who previously accused Trump of being totally beholden to Vladmir Putin and Russia, and of working to subvert the NATO alliance, and of being an isolationist — all notions that are explicitly disproven by Trump's diplomatic efforts to engage the West in the project of mediating peace between Russia and Ukraine. And, actually, it's not just Russia and Ukraine. Trump is working to achieve peace all over the globe — something that has attracted the notice of moderate liberal commentator Bill Maher. Let's watch: 'If you're the kind of person who can find some good in anybody, this would be the good in Donald Trump. He really does not like war. Thailand and Cambodia were firing at each other, Rwanda and the Congo — most people don't even know about these — India and Pakistan, Armenia and Azerbaijan, he got involved in all of them.' All we are saying is give peace a chance! That's what I believe in, it's what Donald Trump seems to believe in, and it's what America First really means. War should be a last resort. Diplomacy can accomplish more than sanctions or airstrikes or, god forbid, boots on the grounds. Letting countries trade with each other and benefit from each other's resources is a surer way to get our allies and our enemies to serve our interests than twisting their arms with force. We don't need to ask the American people to send their hard-earned tax dollars overseas in some naive hope that it will make foreign peoples friendlier to us, nor should we bomb them into somehow loving America. Neither of those strategies — liberal interventionism and neoconservatism — work for us. What does work is libertarianism, or you can call it military noninterventionism, or foreign policy populism, or just call it America First. It's what the people want, and it's what they're currently getting, and even Hillary Clinton has to admit, it's sort of working.
