Oil prices fall on Opec+ output hike expectations and possible Iran talks
Brent, the benchmark for two thirds of the world's oil, was down 1.16 per cent to $68 a barrel at 1.54pm UAE time, while West Texas Intermediate, the gauge that tracks US crude, was trading 1.13 per cent lower at $66.24 a barrel.
'Bears are back in control this morning following reports that US-Iran nuclear talks are resuming and that Opec is expected to announce a production increase of 411,000 barrels per day this weekend,' Ipek Ozkardeskaya, senior analyst at Swissquote Bank, said.
'While rising supply and softening demand suggest a move back below $65 per barrel, the strong support seen this week near that level hints that any downside might take longer to materialise.'
US news website Axios reported on Thursday that the US is planning to hold nuclear talks with Iran next week, with both White House envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi will be in attendance in Oslo during the negotiations.
This came after Iran reaffirmed its commitment to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty on Thursday, a day after President Masoud Pezeshkian put into effect a law suspending co-operation with the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.
'Our co-operation with the IAEA will be channelled through Iran's Supreme National Security Council for obvious safety and security reasons,' Abbas Araghchi said in a post on X.
Opec is also expected to agree to raise output by 411,000 barrels per day for August on Sunday, when the member countries meet virtually. This will be the fourth consecutive monthly increase after similar agreements led by Saudi Arabia and Russia for May, June and July.
Janiv Shah, vice president of oil markets at Rystad Energy told The National that the Opec+ hike has been largely priced in, "as the market trades in a narrow band amid reduced risk premiums and geopolitical forces."
Investors are also keeping a close eye on trade negotiations between the US and its trading partners.
'While geopolitical tensions in the Middle East have eased, broader concerns about weakening global demand and uncertainty around trade negotiations continue to weigh on sentiment,' Soojin Kim, research analyst at Japan's MUFG Bank, said.
'On the supply side, upcoming nuclear talks with Iran and newly announced sanctions on entities involved in oil trade are adding complexity.'
New US sanctions on Iran oil
On Thursday, the US Treasury imposed sanctions on networks that have collectively transported and purchased billions of dollars' worth of Iranian oil as the US continues to pursue its maximum pressure campaign on Tehran to curtail its oil revenue.
Among the entities sanctioned were a network of companies run by Iraqi businessman Salim Ahmed Said that has 'profited from smuggling Iranian oil disguised as, or blended with, Iraqi oil,' a statement posted on the department's website said.
The US treasury also imposed sanctions on several vessels engaged in the covert delivery of Iranian oil to global markets.
Oil prices have remained volatile this year amid geopolitical tensions and tariffs announced by US President Donald Trump.
The tariffs unveiled in April had a bearish impact on oil prices because of concerns about demand and a slowdown in the global economy.
Geo-political tension between Iran and Israel and ensuing 12-day war pushed prices higher on supply disruption concerns, especially for crude transported through the Strait of Hormuz in the Arabian Gulf.
Fading geopolitical premium
Brent and WTI surged as much as 13 per cent after the conflict broke out between Iran and Israel on June 13. However, they fell in subsequent days as geopolitical premium faded and markets focused on fundamentals.
Iran is an important oil producing nation and is the third-biggest producer of oil among the Opec group. It producers about 3.3 million barrels a day.
'The Israel-Iran war sparked a sharp spike in geopolitical premiums for oil prices but as it became clear that there was no change to supply or shipments from the region and both parties observe a ceasefire, oil markets have quickly refocused their attention to fundamentals,' Edward Bell, acting group head of research and chief economist at Emirates NBD, said.
'At $66 per barrel as of the start of July, prices for Brent futures are now lower than they were ahead of the first attack on June 12.'
China demand concerns
Demand concerns in China, the world's second largest economy, are also weighing on oil prices.
Apparent demand has been running nearly 3 per cent lower year on year for the first five months of 2025, despite economic momentum stabilising in the country, Mr Bell added.
The International Energy Agency last month said oil demand will grow by just 720,000 barrels per day in 2025, slower than in 2024, with only a marginal pickup next year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
37 minutes ago
- The National
From sanctuary to scrutiny: Afghans in America face the weight of Trump's immigration clampdown
Sayed Naser was due to attend a family wedding in September 2023 when the Taliban killed his brother, he says, forcing him into hiding and eventually prompting him to flee Afghanistan. Mr Naser says he worked with US forces during the country's two-decade war, as a translator and logistics contractor at several military bases. This made him and his family a target for reprisal attacks after the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and fall of Kabul. Fearing for his life, Mr Naser escaped to Iran before obtaining a humanitarian visa for Brazil. He travelled to the country in 2024 and, from there, made the treacherous overland journey through the Darien Gap to Mexico, covering thousands of kilometres. Advocates for Mr Naser say he was paroled into the US legally at San Ysidro using the CBP One app, a mobile tool developed by the US Customs and Border Protection to schedule appointments for non-citizens seeking to enter the US at designated spots along the country's southern border. The app has since been made defunct by the US administration of President Donald Trump as part of the government's clampdown on immigration. Mr Naser applied for asylum when he arrived and also has a continuing case for a Special Immigrant Visa, which gives a way to permanent residency for foreign nationals who have worked with the US government and face serious threats because of their service. When Mr Naser attended a court hearing for his asylum case in San Diego on June 12, he was detained by two masked agents with the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. Footage of the arrest shows Mr Naser being handcuffed while he explains his situation to the officers. 'For more than three years I worked with the US military back in my home country," he tells them. 'I worked in a very dangerous part of Afghanistan … I have all the evidence.' Advocacy groups backing Mr Naser say an immigration judge dismissed his asylum case, granting a motion by the Department of Homeland Security that it was 'improvidently issued'. Shawn VanDiver, who was in the US Navy and is president of AfghanEvac, an organisation helping to relocate and resettle Afghan allies of the US, told The National that Mr Naser is now at serious risk of being deported to a country where he faces an uncertain future. 'With one stroke of a pen, Sayed was thrust into a secretive, fast-track deportation pipeline that offers no courtroom and no lawyer," Mr VanDiver said. 'That could see him flown out of the country within days – possibly not even to Afghanistan, but to any third nation President Trump picks.' The US Supreme Court in a recent ruling allowed the Trump administration to deport migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show harm they could face, handing the President another win in his pursuit of mass deportations. That case was filed after the administration tried to send a group of primarily South-East Asian migrants to politically unstable South Sudan. Reports suggest officials are also considering sending migrants to Libya, despite previous US condemnation of that country's treatment of those detained. Brian McGoldrick, a lawyer working for Mr Naser, told The National his client was 'very dejected' on learning that his asylum case had been dismissed. If he is not immediately deported, he could spend the foreseeable future in detention while authorities come to a ruling. 'It's already been a long process for him," Mr McGoldrick said. The department did not respond to a request for comment on Mr Naser's case. Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for public affairs at the DHS, told PBS: 'We were working with the Pentagon and we found there was no verifiable information that Mr Naser worked with the US government while he was in Afghanistan.' His advocates say her comments are untrue, and that he was vetted through the CBP One app and his application for work authorisation in the US. 'Broadly, the Department of Defence didn't keep records,' Mr VanDiver said. 'The record-keeping was on the Afghan wartime allies themselves.' Democratic senator Chris Coons of Delaware called Mr Naser's detention 'one of the most heartbreaking betrayals of the Trump administration.' 'He should not be facing imminent deportation," Mr Coons said. Mr VanDiver added: 'Masked ICE agents, like the Gestapo, are snatching people up and throwing them in jail. They stood with us in war. This is the thanks they get. People are absolutely terrified … they don't know what to do.' 'No other option' On a hot and humid day in the outskirts of Richmond, Virginia, Abdullah Zarify is rolling out handmade rugs in the city's Watan Market, a business he built himself after escaping to the US as the Taliban seized Kabul. Mr Zarify worked with an American defence contractor during the US war and, along with several members of his family, was among the tens of thousands of Afghans who were evacuated on military planes as the militants entered Kabul in 2021. 'We didn't have any other option', he told The National. Mr Zarify, 29, secured an SIV through his employment and has since obtained permanent residency in the US, where he now lives with his wife, three children, two brothers and mother. His two sisters remain in Afghanistan and his father has died. 'I want a peaceful life', Mr Zarify said. 'We had to leave our country to save ourselves and save our children … nothing is guaranteed there.' As part of the continuing clampdown on immigration, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced in May that the US government would suspend Temporary Protected Status – an immigration classification granted to people from certain countries facing unsafe conditions – for Afghans. 'Afghanistan has had an improved security situation," Ms Noem said in a statement, which noted that allowing Afghans to stay in the US was against the national interest. 'Its stabilising economy no longer prevents them from returning to their home country.' TPS is set to end for Afghans on July 14. It comes as the State Department continues to advise against all travel to Afghanistan with its highest warning of 'Level 4: Do not travel', because of civil unrest, terrorism and kidnapping across the country. 'US citizens are advised not to go to Afghanistan," Mr Zarify says. 'If [Ms Noem] says it is safe … why do you give an advisory to US citizens? I know my country's situation and I know my people don't deserve to be deported.' While Mr Zarify's status in the US is considerably safer than those on TPS, he sympathises with fellow evacuees under threat of deportation, saying he has heard of cases in which Afghans have been tortured by the Taliban for speaking out about their rights. He is also a vocal critic of the group's stance on women. The Taliban has barred women from travelling without a male guardian and stopped girls from attending high school. 'Who wants their children to be uneducated?' Mr Zarify asks. 'I have a daughter and I want her to go to school. Uneducated means blind … do you want to raise your children blind?' 'Amnesty for all' The Taliban has urged Afghans hoping to live in the US to return to Afghanistan, with Prime Minister Hasan Akhund promising to protect those who worked alongside US forces. 'For those who are worried that America has closed its doors to Afghans … return to your country … you will not face trouble,' he said in a speech that was broadcast on state media to mark Eid Al Adha. In June, Afghanistan was included in a US travel ban on citizens from 12 countries, in what Mr Trump says is a move to protect America from 'foreign terrorists'. That came as an Afghan national who was evacuated amid the fall of Kabul and moved to Oklahoma, Nasir Ahmed Tawhedi, 27, pleaded guilty to plotting an election day terrorist attack in the US on behalf of ISIS. Taliban supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada has, according to Mr Akhund, 'granted amnesty for all". Mr VanDiver has rejected the idea that it is safe for Afghans to return to their country. 'The folks that served alongside us are marked for death by the Taliban … we get pictures all the time of Afghans who are killed," he says. 'Sure, the Taliban has all this propaganda out there … we know what's really happening and we know it's not safe. I have some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you if you believe the Taliban has an amnesty.' Mr Naser, who is being held at the Otay Mesa detention centre in southern California, has indirectly addressed Mr Trump since being detained. 'Please don't turn your back on us', he said in a message delivered by Mr VanDiver during a press conference. 'Keep your promises, let me live in peace with my family in this country that I love.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
What happens if Iran were to acquire the bomb?
The recent attacks on Iran and its nuclear facilities shocked the global community. While the world watches closely for further developments and hopes for a diplomatic resolution to this crisis, the attacks on Iran and its next steps will have a profound impact on the nuclear non-proliferation regime. The existing nuclear non-proliferation regime, established to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, is based on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), negotiated in 1968. It enjoys nearly universal membership and was instrumental in preventing the acquisition of nuclear weapons by another two dozen states, as was predicted before the treaty was put in place. Iran, a party to the NPT, threatened to withdraw even before the attacks. If Iran were to leave the NPT and focus on resurrecting its nuclear programme to build nuclear weapons, it would deal a major blow to the non-proliferation regime and its credibility. Moreover, regardless of Iran's decision about its membership in the NPT or pursuit of nuclear weapons, the damage to the efforts to curtail the proliferation of nuclear weapons has already been done. The 21st century has witnessed several attacks by nuclear-armed states against non-nuclear-weapon states, including the 2003 invasion of Iraq, with the rationale of preventing the alleged acquisition of nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction. Some countries, like Libya, agreed to give up the pursuit of nuclear weapons and were nonetheless attacked later. Ukraine, which inherited a nuclear weapons arsenal from the Soviet Union, gave them back to Russia and joined the NPT as a non-nuclear-weapon state. Many in Ukraine today ask themselves whether the decision to forgo nuclear weapons was the right one, and whether Ukraine would have been attacked if it had chosen to keep them. Countries also look at North Korea, which left the NPT and rushed to build nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching the US as a deterrent against military attacks. So far, this strategy has worked, and North Korea continues to expand and enhance its nuclear arsenal, proudly exhibiting it to ensure the US and others get the message. With the waning reliability of US commitments to its allies, some states may decide that they can only protect themselves with the ultimate deterrent – nuclear weapons. In South Korea, for example, public opinion already favours the nuclear weapons option. Iran's nuclear programme has made countries in the Middle East and beyond nervous for decades. We've heard disconcerting statements from Turkey and Saudi Arabia regarding a potential pursuit of nuclear weapons if Iran were to acquire the bomb. Would attacks on Iran and its nuclear programme shift the calculus of some of these countries regarding their own nuclear ambitions, serving as a catalyst for further nuclear proliferation? Iran insists on the peaceful nature of its programme. However, several elements of it were developed without a particular need for an existing or even planned nuclear energy programme and have been a source of proliferation concern. Iran was on the verge of having everything, including significant stocks of highly enriched uranium, but the bomb itself. It played the nuclear hedging game for over two decades but vastly expanded and accelerated it in the last couple of years. Future proliferators will take note of the risks posed by the ambiguity of their intentions while acquiring nuclear technologies and capabilities that could lead to weaponisation. It remains to be seen whether Iran will leave the NPT and focus on resurrecting its nuclear programme. Iran has already moved forward with the suspension of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, a key component of the non-proliferation regime that inspects nuclear activities and facilities and is a legal obligation under the NPT. It would be in its own interest to return to full co-operation with the IAEA and offer full transparency of its nuclear programme. Ultimately, further proliferation in the region, ignited by Iran's withdrawal from the NPT and pursuit of nuclear weapons, would be against Iran's own interests. Beyond a diplomatic solution to the existing crisis, there are several steps that NPT states could pursue to prevent further proliferation in the Middle East and beyond. One of these is an explicit legal obligation or regional agreement not to pursue national programmes for uranium enrichment and reprocessing of spent fuel – two critical elements of the nuclear fuel cycle capable of producing fissile material for nuclear weapons. In this regard, the UAE stands as an example of steering clear of any ambiguity in its nuclear power programme. In its agreement on nuclear co-operation with the US (the so-called 123 agreement), it took on an obligation not to pursue these sensitive technologies. Another option is for any new facility involving enrichment and reprocessing to be established as an international or multilateral facility subject to international safeguards. One could argue that robust regional and international co-operation on nuclear energy and its peaceful applications could eventually pave the way for co-operation, transparency and trust-building among countries in the region. Another way to alleviate proliferation concerns in the Middle East is the establishment of a regional verification arrangement to supplement IAEA safeguards, modelled on the Brazilian-Argentine Agency for Accounting and Control of Nuclear Materials (ABACC). Such an arrangement could build confidence in the peaceful nature of nuclear activities. In recent years, interest in nuclear power as a carbon-neutral energy source has significantly increased, including in the Middle East. It holds the promise of reliable and clean energy, with uses in various other applications beyond electricity generation, including desalination of water and many other benefits. For this promise to be realised, the NPT must hold firm, and the system of checks on proliferation must remain in place.
Arabian Business
an hour ago
- Arabian Business
UAE delivers 1 billion meals to people in need: Sheikh Mohammed
The UAE has delivered more than one billion meals to people in need as part of a major humanitarian project. Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice President, Prime Minister and Ruler of Dubai, announced the successful completion of the humanitarian project launched in Ramadan 2022 to provide one billion meals to those in need worldwide. Sheikh Mohammed said: 'Three years ago we launched a humanitarian project aimed at distributing 1 billion meals to those in need globally. The project has fully achieved its goal this month, distributing one billion meals across 65 countries. UAE 1 Billion Meals project 'An additional 260 million meals will be distributed over the course of next year. We have also established sustainable real estate endowments to ensure the continued provision of food aid in the years to come. 'We thank God for the ability to give, for the chance to fulfil our promise, and for the blessing of this good nation, whose kindness has touched the world. 'May God protect the UAE and its people, and may they always be a symbol of good and generosity.' The 1 Billion Meals initiative built upon the success of the previous 10 Million Meals and 100 Million Meals campaigns launched in 2020 and 2021, respectively. As the largest food aid initiative of its kind in the region, the 1 Billion Meals initiative aims to provide nutritional support to underprivileged individuals, families, women, and children, reflecting the UAE's inclusive approach to humanitarianism, which offers assistance and aid to all communities without discrimination. To ensure its long-term impact and the continued distribution of meals worldwide, the 1 Billion Meals Endowment initiative was launched in 2023 as the largest sustainable food aid endowment fund. Mohammed Al Gergawi, Minister of Cabinet Affairs and Secretary-General of the Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Global Initiatives (MBRGI), stated that the MBRGI, guided by the vision of Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, mobilises resources and efforts to improve food security in underserved communities. He attributed the success of the 1 Billion Meals initiative to the significant community engagement and generous contributions from individuals and organisations across the UAE. Al Gergawi highlighted the vital role of partners, including UN agencies and regional and local organisations, in implementing the initiative, enabling it to deliver one billion meals by the end of July 2025, with plans to reach the pledged total of 1.26 billion meals by the end of 2026. Al Gergawi said: 'We remain committed to strengthening our strategic partnerships locally, regionally and globally to support those most in need and create sustainable solutions to address food challenges. 'The MBRGI's commitment to eradicating hunger extends beyond providing meals; it encompasses empowering communities to develop comprehensive strategies to combat poverty and malnutrition. 'This aligns with the MBRGI's vision for sustainable development and is being actively pursued by a wide range of UN agencies and regional and local partners.' The 1 Billion Meals initiative partnered with UN organisations through two main avenues: Direct food aid through distributing food parcels, meals, supplements, smart vouchers, etc Sustainable projects empowering individuals and families to become self-sufficient. These include empowering farmers and creating jobs in food production and other relevant sectors The 1 Billion Meals initiative recorded remarkable achievements in collaboration with several UN partners, including the UN World Food Programme (WFP) – the initiative's largest partner in the direct food aid avenue through the distribution of food parcels and smart vouchers. The UNHCR's contribution to the initiative focused on refugees and displaced communities by delivering food parcels, vouchers, and sustainable projects. The 1 Billion Meals initiative collaborated with the UN Trust Fund (UNITLIFE), which focused on sustainable agriculture and women's empowerment in food production. It also collaborated with the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), which champions international efforts to eradicate hunger. The Food Banking Regional Network, a key partner of the initiative under direct food aid, distributed food parcels through local food banks. Life for Relief and Development helped provide food aid to low-income families and individuals through the delivery of food parcels. The Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Humanitarian and Charity Establishment is a strategic partner of the initiative, distributing food parcels in the UAE and other countries. The Emirates Food Bank focused on supporting low-income families and individuals within the UAE. MBRGI, the region's largest organisation in the field of charity, humanitarian and aid work, invested over AED2.2bn ($599m), impacting 149 million people across 118 countries in 2024. The impact encompassed MBRGI's five pillars: Humanitarian Aid and Relief Healthcare and Disease Control Spreading Education and Knowledge Innovation and Entrepreneurship Empowering Communities The Humanitarian Aid and Relief pillar encompasses emergency relief during crises and disasters, as well as sustainable development projects and services. Launched in 2015, MBRGI consolidated over 30 humanitarian and development initiatives and organisations supported by His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum for over two decades. Focusing on underserved communities and vulnerable populations, the MBRGI aims to foster hope and address pressing global challenges, particularly in less fortunate regions. It invests in human capital by empowering individuals, honing skills, and building a qualified workforce to drive development. The MBRGI also prioritises improving education, combating poverty and disease, and promoting tolerance and coexistence.
