Saudi energy minister on potential loss of Iranian oil: we only react to realities
ST PETERSBURG, Russia, June 19 (Reuters) - Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, asked if the kingdom and Russia would step in to replace any potential loss of Iranian oil, said on Thursday that the country will "only react to realities".
The prince, speaking at an economic forum in St Petersburg, added that OPEC+ has been a reliable organisation that was attentive to circumstances when they prevailed, declining to comment on hypothetical questions.
Oil prices have risen more than $10 over the past week on Middle East escalations after Israel attacked Iran last week.
While the two foes have targeted energy infrastructure in each other's countries, a disruption to Middle Eastern oil exports or production has yet to happen.
The U.S. is weighing a direct involvement in the conflict, an option which analysts say would raise the risk premium to oil prices even higher, increasing the chances of disruptions to energy supplies.
Iran is a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, but is exempt from production cuts that the group along with other allies including Russia have in place.
OPEC+, as the alliance is known, was in the process of increasing production targets for eight of its members before Israel's attack on Iran last week.
The group of eight which includes Saudi Arabia, Russia, the UAE, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Algeria and Kazakhstan will meet next on July 6 to decide on whether to increase production further from August.
At their last meeting, Russia favoured pausing an output hike of 411,000 bpd for July, but eventually agreed for the hike to go ahead.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump denies report that he has approved US attack plans against Iran
Donald Trump has denied a report in the Wall Street Journal that he has approved US plans to attack Iran, saying that the news outlet has 'no idea' what his thinking is concerning the Israel-Iran conflict The Journal reported late on Wednesday that Trump told senior aides a day earlier that he had approved attack plans but was delaying on giving the final order to see if Tehran would abandon its nuclear program. The report cited three anonymous officials. On Thursday, Trump responded to the report, posting on Truth Social: 'The Wall Street Journal has No Idea what my thoughts are concerning Iran!' But Trump's decision is dependent on whether the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) would destroy the Fordow uranium enrichment site, a US official told Axios. Fordow, which is built into a mountain south of Tehran, is a target of Israel's, but they lack the 'bunker-buster bombs' and aircraft needed to destroy it; the US has access to both. 'We're going to be ready to strike Iran. We're not convinced yet that we're necessary. And we want to be unnecessary, but I think the president's just not convinced we are needed yet,' a US official told the outlet. A day earlier, on Wednesday, Trump told reporters: 'I have ideas on what to do but I haven't made a final – I like to make the final decision one second before it's due. 'I may do it, I may not do it,' he added, referring to direct involvement. 'The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.' Iran's mission to the UN issued a statement saying: 'Iran does NOT negotiate under duress, shall NOT accept peace under duress, and certainly NOT with a has-been warmonger clinging to relevance.' Uncertainty around direct US involvement in the conflict comes as the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, called Trump 'a great friend of Israel' and thanked him 'for standing by us'. The Pentagon has sent multiple warships to the Middle East, including three navy destroyers and two carrier strike groups, while the state department has ramped up assistance to US citizens advised to leave the region. Trump's denial of the Journal's report comes as a heated split in the Make America great again coalition over support for a strike on Iran appeared to be cooling. Both the former Fox primetime host Tucker Carlson and former White House political strategist Steve Bannon had expressed concern that another Middle East military engagement in Iran would run counter to Maga's 'America First' policies. Bannon said on Wednesday that Trump could win over Maga doubters if he made the case for Iran engagement directly to the American people. Trump also said that Carlson called him to apologize for saying that he 'is complicit in an act of war'. 'Tucker's a nice guy. He called and apologized the other day because he thought he said things that were a little bit too strong and I appreciated that,' Trump said on Wednesday from the White House.
Telegraph
9 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Iran's IRGC is already at war with Britain
For years, Britain and its allies have appeased Iran's regime – ignoring its calls for a second Holocaust while it built the nuclear weapons, missiles and terrorist armies with which it hoped to achieve it. While our politicians call impotently for 'de-escalation' and shuffle outdated aircraft around the globe, their greatest failure is not overseas. It is here at home. For all of the fulmination about the need for 'regional stability' thousands of miles away, nobody seems to be doing anything about the IRGC agents operating freely on our soil. The IRGC is radicalising young people in the UK. IRGC figures have addressed British students at our prestigious universities, denying the Holocaust and inciting hatred: 'The real Holocaust took place in Iran. The one the Jews claim is a lie.' Students were told that 'the battlefront is the university', that they were 'soft-war officers' and 'holy warriors' in a coming apocalyptic war to end 'the era of the Jews'. This is not empty rhetoric. Just last month, Security Minister Dan Jarvis told Parliament that police and MI5 have responded to 20 Iran-linked plots since 2022. These include assassination and abduction attempts. The IRGC is behind them. Founded in 1979, the IRGC functions as a second military that answers directly to the fundamentalist mullahs who rule Iran. Believed to have well over a quarter of a million personnel, it has a mandate to spread terror at home and abroad. It propped up Assad in Syria, provided the weapons that the Houthis fire at Royal Navy ships and Israeli cities, and built up the genocidal death cults of Hezbollah and Hamas. The IRGC not only trains, arms and supports this axis of terror but has also brutally crushed four major civilian uprisings in Iran since 2009. It works day and night to foment anti-Semitism and sow bloodshed across the region. In Britain, eight IRGC officials have been exposed as having addressed students under the banner of the Islamic Students Association. They spread hatred, promote violence against Jews, and call for martyrdom. These are just the cases that we know about. Just like the thwarted IRGC plots that the authorities understandably say very little about, there are doubtless countless other cases of our universities and even schools being used as recruiting grounds – in recent days an exposé has claimed that adorers of the Iranian regime have set up a summer camp in Britain. Taken together, it is clear to anybody paying attention that there is a domestic danger in Britain that should command the urgent attention of our politicians. As Sir Richard Dearlove, a former head of MI6 recently said of proscribing the IRGC under the Terrorism Act, 'I just don't get why we haven't done so.' He added: 'It is the agency through which Iran has conducted what I would call 'arm's length warfare'... It should have been identified as a terrorist organisation a long time ago.' We at Campaign Against Antisemitism – along with many others – have long called for a ban on the IRGC. Our polling shows that 93 per cent of British Jews – who are increasingly concerned about their security in the UK – agree. Events in the Middle East heighten the urgency. The IRGC is already known to have mapped the Jewish community in the UK, with the former Security Minister Tom Tugendhat telling Parliament two years ago: 'Between 2020 and 2022, Iran tried to collect intelligence on UK-based Israeli and Jewish individuals. We believe this information was a preparation for future lethal operations.' Unless the IRGC is proscribed, our security services can only swoop when they have evidence that a plot is being prepared – as they did just last month, arresting Iranian nationals in Swindon, London, Stockport and Rochdale. But proscription would enable our protectors to arrest IRGC operatives immediately, just for being IRGC operatives. Some believe that there may be a legislative complication in proscribing an entity that is a state agency, but that is no excuse for inaction. Indeed the Government's independent reviewer of terrorism legislation has proposed legal changes to address this. Besides, if Iran's regime collapses, the IRGC may continue as a rogue terror army without state status. The threat will remain – or grow worse. Two governments have failed to act. This one still can. Both the Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary promised before the last election to ban the IRGC. They must now honour that promise.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Insight: How Trump, a self-proclaimed "peacemaker," embraced Israel's campaign against Iran
WASHINGTON, June 19 (Reuters) - Roughly one month ago, from the stage at an investment forum in Saudi Arabia, U.S. President Donald Trump issued a warning to Iran that would prove prophetic. "We'll never allow America and its allies to be threatened with terrorism or nuclear attack," Trump told the crowd, sending a message to the leadership in Tehran. "The time is right now for them to choose. Right now. We don't have a lot of time to wait. Things are happening at a very fast pace." That May 13 ultimatum received little attention at the time. But behind the scenes, the president already knew an attack on Iran could be imminent - and that there might be little he could do to stop it, according to two U.S. officials. By mid-May, the Pentagon had begun drawing up detailed contingency plans to aid Israel if it followed through on its long-held ambition to strike Iran's nuclear program, the officials said. And the U.S. had already diverted thousands of defensive weapons away from war-torn Ukraine toward the Middle East in preparation for potential conflict, according to a Western source familiar with the matter and a Ukrainian source. The Pentagon declined to comment for this story. This account of the weeks and days leading up to Trump's decision to throw his support behind Israel's bombing campaign is based on interviews with over a dozen administration officials, foreign diplomats and Trump confidantes, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations. The picture that emerges is that of a long, secretive preparation process and a president who for weeks found himself torn between diplomacy and supporting military action - and was ultimately persuaded in part by an ally whose actions he did not fully control. While Trump has long described himself as a peacemaker - dispatching Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff to the region several times to try to seal a diplomatic accord - he had several trusted political allies pushing him to back an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. And U.S. intelligence had indicated a unilateral Israeli strike was possible, even likely, even if Trump wanted to wait, according to two U.S. officials. While it is unclear if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Trump's more hawkish allies ever got him to a "yes" to Israel's plans, by the days leading up the strike he was at least not a "no," according to two senior U.S. officials and a senior Israeli source. That stance, people familiar with the dynamics said, helped tip Israel into action. Seven days into the Israel-Iran conflict, Trump is left with a dilemma, said Aaron David Miller, a veteran diplomat who has advised six secretaries of state on Middle East policy. He can try again to pursue a diplomatic resolution with Iran, allow Iran and Israel "to fight it out," or he can enter the war with U.S. airstrikes on the deeply buried Fordow enrichment plant, a step that would have unknown consequences for the region. Trump "let it (the Israeli attack) happen," said Miller. "He got on the tiger and he's riding it." The White House, the Israeli prime minister's office and Iran's delegation to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment. Tehran has consistently said its nuclear program is designed for peaceful purposes only, a conclusion Washington has rejected. One of the first hints that Trump might sign off on an Israeli bombing campaign came in April. During a closed door meeting on April 17, Saudi Arabia's defense minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian: Take Trump's offer to negotiate an agreement seriously because it presents a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel. Reuters could not determine whether the message was sent at Washington's behest, nor whether Iran's leaders took that message seriously. With hindsight, they should have. The Israel Defense Forces and the head of U.S. Central Command, General Michael "Erik" Kurilla, were discussing detailed intelligence about Iran's missile buildup and nuclear program and steps that could be required to defend U.S. troops and Israel itself in any conflict with Iran, according to a U.S. official and senior Israeli official. Meanwhile, the U.S. was funneling weapons to Israel that would be useful for an air war with Iran. In one instance in early May, a large shipment of defensive missiles originally meant for Ukraine were diverted to Israel instead, according to the Western source and the Ukrainian source. The diverted shipment caused consternation in Kyiv and sparked continued fears that additional weapons needed to defend against Moscow will instead be used to defend U.S. interests elsewhere, the Ukrainian source said. In the opening months of Trump's term, Israel had already proposed to Washington a series of options to attack Iran's facilities, according to sources. While Trump had rebuffed those ideas, saying he preferred diplomacy for the time being, several people close to him said he was never dead-set against using military force against Iran. He had done so before. In 2020, despite a foreign policy during his first term that was otherwise marked by restraint, Trump ordered a drone strike that killed major general Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' division responsible for its international operations. The Iranian government has since sought to murder Trump in revenge, U.S. prosecutors have said, an allegation Tehran denies. Behind the scenes, Trump had been pulled in multiple directions on the Iran issue since before he even took office. On one side, many supporters - including conservative media personality Tucker Carlson - and administration officials saw Trump's Make America Great Again movement as an antidote to decades of foreign wars that cost thousands of American lives without significantly advancing American interests. On the other, several close Trump allies - from conservative commentator Mark Levin to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham - were portraying a nuclear Iran as an existential threat that must be removed at any cost. Trump himself took pride in being a broker of peace. "My proudest legacy," he said during his inauguration address, "will be that of a peacemaker and unifier." Ultimately, no U.S. official, Trump confidante or diplomat Reuters talked to identified an epiphany that tipped the scales for the president. One senior administration official said that after months of sitting on the fence a lack of diplomatic progress, a push from the Israelis and appeals by hawkish allies likely wore him down. Trump aides and allies have noted that Israel's attack unfolded just after the expiry of a 60-day deadline the Trump administration had set for a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran. The senior U.S. official said another dynamic was at play: As U.S. intelligence consistently showed Israel might go ahead with an attack with or without U.S. support, the administration could look caught off guard if they did not get behind it. Worse, it could appear that the U.S. was opposing a longtime ally. Although Trump had appeared to some to snub Netanyahu as he pushed for a peaceful solution to the crisis, privately, Israel understood that Washington would stand by it, said a separate official. By the time Trump talked to Netanyahu on Monday, June 9 - one of many phone calls in recent days - his stance was one of tacit, if not explicit approval, according to one U.S. and one Israeli official. The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had said he would like more time to see diplomacy play out. But the U.S. official said that he did not explicitly veto Israel's plans. By Wednesday, June 11, it was clear to Washington that Israel's plans were a go. That day, Reuters reported that the U.S. was preparing a partial evacuation of its Iraqi embassy amid fears of reprisals from Iran following an imminent attack. The next day, June 12, Washington sent a formal diplomatic note to several regional allies, warning them that an attack was imminent. That evening, Israel launched its overnight barrage, an attack that almost immediately escalated into an air war. Trump and some key cabinet members watched the events live from the wood-paneled "JFK room," part of the White House Situation Room. Other officials watched the events nearby. On the menu, per one official: stone crabs from a local restaurant. The initial attack appeared to be a success, with several close advisers to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei killed and key nuclear sites seriously damaged. Over the weekend, the Israelis considered killing Khamenei himself, but were waved off by Trump, according to two U.S. officials. Almost immediately, a political civil war erupted in Trump's Republican Party, with several high-profile conservatives, including members of Congress, accusing his administration of fanning the flames of war. Seven days on, the U.S. intelligence community believes the strikes have set Iran's nuclear ambitions back by only months, according to a source familiar with U.S. intelligence reports, confirming a CNN report. A significant blow to Iran's nuclear ambitions, most analysts say, will require dropping bunker-busting bombs on the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, the crown jewel of Iran's nuclear program. Only the U.S. has that capability. Trump has said he is considering such a strike, which would represent a major escalation for the United States. As of Thursday, his intentions were still unclear.
