Oil Updates — Brent futures down nearly $2 after US delays decision on direct Iran involvement
SINGAPORE: Brent crude prices pared gains from the previous session and fell nearly $2 on Friday after the White House delayed a decision on US involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict, but they were still poised for a third straight week in the black.
Brent crude futures fell $1.89, or 2.4 percent, to $76.96 a barrel by 5:55 a.m. Saudi time. On a weekly basis, it was up 3.8 percent.
The US West Texas Intermediate crude for July — which did not settle on Thursday as it was a US holiday and expires on Friday — was up 53 cents, or 0.7 percent, to $75.67.
The more liquid WTI for August rose 0.2 percent, or 17 cents to $73.67.
Prices jumped almost 3 percent on Thursday as Israel bombed nuclear targets in Iran, and Iran fired missiles and drones at Israel after hitting an Israeli hospital overnight. The week-old war between Israel and Iran showed no signs of either side backing down.
Brent futures trimmed previous session gains following the White House's comments that President Donald Trump will decide whether the US will get involved in the Israel-Iran conflict in the next two weeks.
'Oil prices surged amid fears of increased US involvement in Israel's conflict with Iran. However, the White House press secretary later suggested there was still time for de-escalation,' said Phil Flynn, analyst at the Price Futures Group.
Iran is the third-largest producer among members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, extracting about 3.3 million barrels per day of crude oil.
About 18 million to 21 million bpd of oil and oil products move through the Strait of Hormuz along Iran's southern coast, and there is widespread concern the fighting could disrupt trade flows in a blow to supplies.
'The 'two-week deadline' is a tactic Trump has used in other key decisions. Often these deadlines expire without concrete action, ... which would see the crude oil price remain elevated and potentially build on recent gains,' said Tony Sycamore, analyst at IG.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
23 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Targeting Iran's Supreme Leader is madness
Last week, the idea resurfaced that Israel may target Iran's Supreme Leader – as if he were just another easy military target in the fierce war between Israel and Iran, which may soon involve the United States. US President Donald Trump made a point of distancing himself from the Israeli plan, announcing that the Iranian Supreme Leader is at the top of Israel's target list and now within their reach. Trump made it clear he opposes Israel's move and does not support it. For all the latest headlines, follow our Google News channel online or via the app. This issue is far more serious than just another military objective; it could become a matter of ideology and trigger deeply dangerous cycles of revenge. There have been times in history when warring parties refrained from targeting leaders and symbolic figures for reasons beyond direct military calculation. For example, Emperor Hirohito of Japan was a ruler and a sacred symbol. Documents confirm that he authorized his military leaders to go to war, invade Manchuria, and carry out the attack on Pearl Harbor, which led to America's entry into World War II. Yet, during the war, and on the recommendation of General Douglas MacArthur, the US government decided not to target him. He was also excluded from the list of Japanese leaders prosecuted after the American victory and the occupation of Tokyo. That decision paved the way for reconciliation between the US and Japan, and helped the Japanese people accept the Americans. Hirohito remained emperor and respected until his death, living for another 45 years. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is a spiritual leader, and any harm inflicted on him would cause wounds that may never heal – regardless of how decisive the Israeli or American victories are on the battlefield. The Supreme Leader is a lifelong authority, not a president. He would play a vital role in bringing about peace, just as Ayatollah Khomeini did in 1988, when he unilaterally announced an end to the war with Iraq – a war we thought would only end with the complete destruction of one or both countries. We remember that no one in the Iranian regime at that time dared to call for a ceasefire with neighboring Iraq – except the late Supreme Leader. Some people get carried away by the intoxication of war, blinded by overwhelming military power and temporary victories, only to create hatred that could last for decades or even centuries – when they could have achieved victory without doing so. There is no doubt that the Israelis possess superior intelligence capabilities and overwhelming destructive power, which allow them to penetrate deep into Iran and reach its leadership's hideouts, as they have done in Lebanon and Gaza. But Iran's Supreme Leader cannot be equated with Hezbollah's Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, who was assassinated last year. The difference in symbolic weight is enormous, and the consequences of a miscalculation are grave. And even if the comparison isn't entirely accurate, the execution of Saddam Hussein on Eid al-Adha in 2006 – though he was a Baathist and not a religious or tribal leader – came at a heavy price. US generals later attempted to reconcile with Sunni forces, but failed. Washington still suffers the consequences of that event, especially with half the Iraqi population. That grave mistake could have been avoided, and the resulting rift healed, after their military victory. Israelis are capable of stunning military victories, as they achieved in 1967 and again last year – but that doesn't mean they win the larger war. We are truly on the brink of entering a new and critical chapter of history that will reshape what we've known and lived through over the past half century. What's needed now is the use of the threat of force without reaching for its maximum limits—to bring about change through consensus, as much as possible. That would benefit everyone, including Israel, the United States, Iran, and all the nations in the region. Both winners and losers share an interest in reducing tensions and achieving a collective peace.
Al Arabiya
23 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Maersk halts stops in Israel's Haifa due to Iran–Israel conflict
Danish shipping giant Maersk announced Friday that it was temporarily suspending vessel calls in Israel's Haifa port due to the country's conflict with Iran. Maersk said it made the decision after 'careful analysis of threat risk reports in the context of the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran, specifically regarding the potential risks of calling Israeli ports and the ensuing implications for the safety of our vessel crews.' 'At the moment we are not experiencing further disruptions to our scheduled operations in the region,' it added in a statement. The conflict erupted a week ago when Israel launched air strikes on Iran, saying its arch foe was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon.
Al Arabiya
23 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Saudi nuclear regulator says attack on civilian nuclear sites violates international law
Saudi Arabia's Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Commission said on Friday that any military attacks on civilian nuclear facilities violates international law, following Israel's strikes on Iranian nuclear sites amid an air war between the two countries.
