Trump frustrated with rising oil prices and Fed's Powell
US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he was frustrated with rising oil prices over fears that tension in the Middle East could disrupt supplies.
Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate, which tracks US crude, surged on Wednesday to their highest level since April, before slightly easing on Thursday.
'I don't like – the oil prices have gone up just a little bit over the last few days,' Mr Trump told reporters at the White House.
Brent crude fell 45 cents, or 0.64 per cent, to $69.32 per barrel while WTI crude fell by 20 cents, or 0.29 per cent, to $67.91 per barrel.
'It's gonna keep going down a little bit, right? Because we have inflation under control,' Mr Trump said.
An analysis conducted by Goldman Sachs last month indicated that he prefers crude prices to range between $40 and $50 per barrel, based on his social media posts.
Prices rose on Wednesday after the US was preparing to evacuate non-essential staff from its embassy in Baghdad amid stalled progress in talks with Tehran to reach a nuclear deal. The two sides were expected to meet again in Oman on Sunday.
Mr Trump, who this week said he was becoming less confident that a deal could be reached, warned that Israel could soon strike Iran.
'I don't want to say imminent but it looks like it's something that could very well happen,' he said.
Mr Trump this year began his second term in office with a 'drill, baby, drill' approach to energy, pledging to increase the country's domestic oil production.
However, US crude-oil production is expected to dip over the next 18 months as producers decrease drilling due to lower prices, according to a report from the Energy Information Administration on Tuesday.
'With fewer active drilling rigs, we forecast US operators will drill and complete fewer wells through 2026,' the EIA said.
The agency said it expects US crude oil production to fall from a record high of 13.5 million barrels per day this year to about 13.3 million barrels per day by the fourth quarter of 2026.
The EIA forecast Brent crude to average $61 per barrel by the end of this year and average $59 a barrel in 2026 due to rising global inventories.
Trump lashes out at Powell
Meanwhile, Mr Trump also expressed his frustrations with Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell as the US central bank is expected to keep interest rates steady when it meets next week. Mr Trump added that he 'may have to force something' if the Fed does not lower interest rates, although he did not elaborate.
His comments came hours after government data showed that US producer prices rose less than anticipated last month, helping to calm fears of a tariff-fuelled inflation surge after separate inflation data came in softer than expected this week.
Mr Powell and other Fed officials have indicated a cautious approach towards interest rates, due to uncertainty over the economic affects of tariffs, immigration and other Trump policies.
Mr Trump also said he is 'not going to fire' Mr Powell, although the Fed chairman maintains the law does not give the president authority to sack him. A ruling from the Supreme Court in May give him special protection from being fired by the president based on the central bank's quasi-private structure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
18 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel's attacks on Iran amount to crime of aggression, legal scholars say
Israel's attacks across Iran on Friday, which targeted "dozens" of sites including nuclear facilities, military commanders and scientists, are manifestly illegal, leading scholars of international law have said. Accusing the government in Tehran of beginning to build nuclear warheads, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the attack was aimed at "rolling back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival", adding that it would take "many days". "We struck at the heart of Iran's nuclear enrichment programme," Netanyahu said in a recorded televised address. "We targeted Iran's main enrichment facility in Natanz. We targeted Iran's leading nuclear scientists working on the Iranian bomb. We also struck at the heart of Iran's ballistic missile programme." Netanyahu's decision is premised on "preventive self-defence" arguments, which justify the use of force against another state to prevent an anticipated future attack. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters However, such an argument is inconsistent with the rules governing the use of force under international law, including the limited justifications for the use of force established by the United Nations Charter and the prohibition of the crime of aggression. The use of force is only lawful if it seeks to repel an imminent attack or one that is underway, experts have explained. International law scholar Marko Milanovic said that the stated goals of Israel this time are about preventing a future nuclear attack by Iran. It is not a response to an attack that has started, or one that is imminent. Iran has yet to obtain any nuclear weapons. Therefore, there was no threat of an imminent attack justifying preemptive self-defence. 'It cannot reasonably be argued that Iran would imminently attack Israel, or that using force was the only option to stop that attack' - Marko Milanovic, legal scholar There are three positions with respect to the right to self-defence under international law, explained Milanovic in an article for Ejil Talk. The first is that states can use preventive self-defence to deflect future anticipated threats, in particular those perceived to be existential. The second is that states can use force with the aim of preempting future attacks that are imminent, and the third is that states can only resort to the use of force when attacks have already occurred. According to Milanovic, the use of force to prevent a future attack, as used by Israel in its Friday operation, is considered 'legally untenable' by the majority of international lawyers. "Israel's use of force against Iran is, on the facts as we know them, almost certainly illegal," he wrote. Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter prohibits "the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state". 'No self-defence at all' The only justification for the use of force is outlined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, which is to respond to an attack that is underway. "Unless Israel is able to provide substantially more compelling evidence than is currently publicly available, it cannot reasonably be argued that Iran would imminently attack Israel, or that using force was the only option to stop that attack," said Milanovic. "Israel is therefore using force against Iran unlawfully, in violation of Article 2(4) of the Charter. It is committing aggression." The crime of aggression is one of the four core international crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), alongside genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. It refers to the planning, preparation, initiation, or execution of an act of aggression, or use of force in violation of the UN Charter, by a person in a leadership position, such as a head of state or senior military commander. Other scholars on Friday also accused Israel of committing the crime of aggression. Professor Kevin Jon Heller of the University of Copenhagen said: "Few acts are more unequivocally illegal than preventive (non-imminent) self-defence. So Israel's attack is both unlawful and criminal - the crime of aggression." "Israel's attack on Iran is not simply a violation of the UN Charter. It is a manifest violation of it," he wrote on X. Sergey Vasiliev of the Open University of the Netherlands also qualified the attack as falling under the crime of aggression. "This operation is an unlawful use of force," he wrote. "Iran presented no imminent threat to Israel that would justify such an attack. This is an act of aggression." Netanyahu's justification for Friday's attack is similar to arguments made by Russia to justify its invasion of Ukraine, said Milanovic, or those used by the US to justify the use of force against Iraq. "The problem with this approach is that it is so boundless that it completely eviscerates the prohibition on the use of force - a state could act whenever it perceives an existential threat," argued Milanovic. "In short, this 'preventive' form of self-defence is simply not self-defence at all." According to Jon Heller, while the US has taken the same position as Israel only occasionally, "Israel is the only state that has unequivocally endorsed the right of preventive self-defence."
Middle East Eye
18 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel attacks Iran: Tehran's residents fearful and angry after strikes
At roughly 3:30am the first Israeli missiles rained down across the Iranian capital Tehran. "Both my husband and I were thrown from our bed. The explosions didn't stop. We had no idea what was happening," said Samira, a resident of the northern Tehran neighbourhood of Kamranieh. The windows of the entire apartment had shattered and the chandelier had crashed to the floor. "We got up from the ground in fear and realised the apartment across from ours had been bombed," she told Middle East Eye. Samira - not her real name - lives directly opposite the residence of Ali Shamkhani, an advisor to Iran's Supreme Leader, who was among the senior Iranian officials reportedly killed in Israeli air strikes oi the early hours of Friday morning. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Describing her survival as a "miracle," she said the dining table in her living room was blown to pieces by the force of the blast. Soon after, the sound of warning sirens and emergency vehicles rushing to extinguish fires could be heard resonating across the city. Onlookers gather in front of a building damaged in an Israeli strike on Tehran on June 13, 2025 (AFP) Shamkhani was Tehran's representative at talks with the US over a new deal to limit Iran's nuclear capabilities and ease tensions in the region. His death - which the Iranian government is yet to confirm - alongside the deaths of senior figures in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), senior military leaders, scientists and countless civilians, has obliterated hopes for a diplomatic solution. Now Israel is saying that its operations against Iran, which have heavily targeted its nuclear facilities and reportedly killed 78 people in Tehran alone, could last for more than two weeks. The most brutal attack to hit the capital since the end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988 has left the city's residents reeling, angry and fearful of what could come next. Panic and fear Bahram, a 45-year-old architect living in the Pasdaran neighborhood in northeastern Tehran, was also jolted awake by the blasts. He lives near the Shahid Rajaei complex, one of the main targets of the Israeli strikes. At first, he thought the sound was thunder, but when the explosions continued, he got out of bed and saw smoke rising from the window. 'I stepped onto the balcony, and the entire area smelled of gunpowder,' he said. Friday's attacks are not the first targeting the capital in the past year. In July 2024, Israel killed Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh after attending the swearing-in of Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian in Tehran. Middle East Eye reported that witnesses believed Haniyeh was killed by a projectile fired at a guesthouse controlled by the IRGC. 'I stepped onto the balcony, and the entire area smelled of gunpowder' - Bahram, Tehran resident But Friday's attacks have marked a severe escalation, excarbated by their open-endedness. Danial, 39, lives in the Marzdaran district in western Tehran - another area reportedly targeted by Israel. He says he woke up in shock from multiple blasts, disoriented and frightened. 'All the car windows on my street were shattered,' he said. "And the tires had blown out.' Just hours after the strikes, panicked residents rushed to petrol stations to fill lines formed across fuel stations in the capital. The mix of anger, confusion, and uncertainty was etched on the faces of locals. Some, however, are hoping the attacks will remain limited to military and official targets. Mixed feelings The Israeli and Iranian governments have been enemies for a long time, with both regularly threatening the other regimes' destruction. Among ordinary Iranians, however, views are somewhat more mixed - while some are angry at Israel over its attacks on Iranian soil, others are critical of the Iranian government, which has become increasingly unpopular over a mix of heavy-handed repression, economic failure and corruption. 'Finally, someone took revenge on these criminals,' said 21-year-old Mahsa, a university student. 'Things can't get worse than they already are. We've suffered so much. Let it be done with - death once, mourning once. Whatever happens, it can't be worse than this.' 'Finally, someone took revenge on these criminals' - Mahsa, student 41-year-old Farzaneh, who works in sales at a private auto parts company, said that while she was "scared and worried" she also wanted to "stay hopeful." "Hopeful that in a not-so-distant future, we can live freely and peacefully without cruel people like those who rule over us now," she explained. The war on Gaza, which began in October 2023, has had a polarising effect on a lot of Iranians. While the government and much of the populace has been supportive of the Palestinians, some opposed to the Islamic Republic are sympathetic to Israel and its opposition to a regime they see as a tyranny. Danial, for his part though said Israel "only understands force." "It's naive to think this will be the end of it," he said . "They've attacked our land, and they must be answered with decisive force.' Until 'there is nothing left' The sense of optimism that had permeated Iran after the signing of the 2015 nuclear deal is a distant memory. In his latest comments on the Truth Social network on Friday afternoon, US President Donald Trump warned that Iran should sign a new deal with the US before Israel launched further attacks and "there is nothing left" of the country. Israel's attack on Iran prompts widespread support and alarm at home Read More » Ryan Costello, Policy Director with National Iranian American Council, told MEE that prospects for a new deal were looking bleak. "While we hope that the war will not spread out of control, Iran will not negotiate a nuclear deal when under active bombardment," he said. "Diplomatic efforts need to pivot to ending the bombing and keeping the US out of the war. Unfortunately, Trump's initial remarks after the strikes do not seem grounded in that reality, and risk ensuring the US is a target in any reprisals." Iranian officials have vowed a 'strong and unforgettable' retaliation against Israel, already having launched around 100 (largely intercepted) drones on Friday. The scale of that response - and Israel's counter-response - will likely shape the lives of tens of millions of people, both inside Iran and across the Middle East, and Tehran's residents are waiting with bated breath.
Dubai Eye
30 minutes ago
- Dubai Eye
Oil jumps nearly 9% after Israel's strikes on Iran
Oil prices jumped nearly 9 per cent on Friday to near multi-month highs after Israel launched strikes against Iran, sparking Iranian retaliation and raising worries about a disruption in Middle East oil supplies. Brent crude futures were up $6.19, or around 8.9 per cent, to $75.55 a barrel at 1019 GMT, after hitting an intraday high of $78.50, the highest since January 27. US West Texas Intermediate crude was up $6.22, or 9.1 per cent, at $74.26 after hitting $77.62, its highest level since January 21. Friday's gains were the largest intraday moves for both contracts since 2022, after Russia's invasion of Ukraine caused a spike in energy prices. Israel said it had targeted Iran's nuclear facilities, ballistic missile factories and military commanders on Friday at the start of what it warned would be a prolonged operation to prevent Tehran from building an atomic weapon, while Iran has promised a harsh response. US President Donald Trump urged Iran to make a deal over its nuclear programme, to put an end to the "next already planned attacks". The National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company said oil refining and storage facilities had not been damaged and continued to operate. The primary concern was whether the latest developments would affect the Strait of Hormuz, said SEB analyst Ole Hvalbye. The key waterway had been at risk of impact from increased regional volatility previously but had not been affected so far, Hvalbye said. There also was no impact to oil flow in the region so far, he added. About a fifth of the world's total oil consumption passes through the strait, or some 18 to 19 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil, condensate and fuel. Analysts at consultancy Sparta Commodities said that any significant crude supply disruptions would lead to sour crude grades being marginally priced out of refineries in favour of light sweets. Under a worst case scenario, JPMorgan analysts said on Thursday that closing the strait or a retaliatory response from major oil producing countries in the region could lead to oil prices surging to $120-130 a barrel, nearly double their current base case forecast. "The key question now is whether this oil rally will last longer than the weekend or a week - our signal is that there is a lower probability of a full-blown war, and the oil price rally will likely encounter resistance," said Janiv Shah, analyst at Rystad. "Fundamentals show nearly all Iranian exports going to China, so Chinese discounted purchases would be most at risk here. OPEC+ spare capacity can provide the stabilizing force," he added. In other markets, stocks dived and there was a rush to safe havens such as gold and the Swiss franc. An increase in oil prices would also dampen the outlook for the German economy, the economic institute DIW Berlin said on Friday. It is the only G7 nation that has recorded no economic growth for two consecutive years. "The increased uncertainty speaks in favour of a higher risk premium on the oil price, which is why it is unlikely to fall below $70 on a sustained basis for the time being... Fundamental data is taking a back seat in the current situation," analysts at Commerzbank said in a note.
