&w=3840&q=100)
Possibility of Iran's retaliation to US strikes keeps markets on their toes
Iran has vowed to avenge the "unprovoked" attack on its nuclear facilities by the US. Representational image: AP File
Iran has kept up its attacks as Israeli forces launched new strikes on the Islamic Republic's military sites and airports. Iranian leaders have not yet disclosed how they might target US forces in the region in retaliation for Washington's attack on Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites, but they warned American assets were vulnerable.
The US operation on Sunday (May 22), which marked its entry into the conflict, involved 125 aircraft, submarine-launched Tomahawk missiles, and 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs, striking Iran's. It was the first time the bunker busters were used in combat.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
President Donald Trump said the strikes had a 'limited' objective to destroy Iran's atomic program. Still, he warned that any retaliation on US targets would be met with 'far greater' force and hinted at the possibility of regime change.
Markets on alert
The attack and its fallout pushed oil prices up nearly 6 per cent when markets opened in Asia, before easing. Brent crude was trading at $77.65 per barrel as of 8:37 am GMT. US stock futures also fell as investors considered the impact on energy supplies and inflation.
'An expanding conflict adds to the risk of higher oil prices and an upward impulse to inflation,' Bloomberg Economics analysts including Ziad Daoud said in a note.
At the United Nations, Iranian Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani told an emergency Security Council meeting that Tehran's response would be determined by 'the timing, nature and scale' chosen by its armed forces.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it would keep targeting Israel and pointed to American bases in the region as a weakness, though it stopped short of openly threatening US troops.
Damage to Iran's nuclear sites unclear
Although Trump said the three nuclear sites hit by US bombers were 'totally obliterated,' US officials acknowledged it was too early to assess the full extent of the damage, particularly at Fordow, which is buried deep underground.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan Caine said more time was needed to determine the status of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile, estimated at more than 400 kilograms enriched to 60 percent.
The International Atomic Energy Agency told the Security Council it had no way to verify the condition of the sites or the location of the uranium.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Strait of Hormuz under watch
Iran's parliament on Sunday called for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz , a vital waterway for global oil and gas shipments. However, such a decision would require approval from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the Supreme National Security Council.
Iran may also face challenges in organising a direct military response. Russia and China, key allies, have so far offered only statements of support. Russian officials stated their security agreement with Tehran does not include mutual defence. China, which relies on Gulf energy imports, is unlikely to support actions that threaten oil flow or raise prices.
Militias aligned with Iran, long used to conduct regional operations, have also not entered the conflict, leaving Iran increasingly isolated as it weighs its next move.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Will the rules-based international order survive the Trump presidency?
Recent observations on the rules-based international order have suggested that this system of interlocking governance institutions that emerged since the end of World War II, known to some as Pax Americana, might survive or thrive despite the onslaught of political and economic confrontations foisted on the world by U.S. President Donald Trump. The real question is not about its survivability per se, but rather the extent to which it might mutate under pressure from Washington's coercive policy prescriptions inflicted upon developing and emerging economies, particularly across the Asian region. A few definitional remarks are in order at this point. Firstly, the rules-based international order, a liberal paradigm seen as a remedy to the devastation wreaked by the two World Wars, was brought into existence by the U.S. This was made possible by the U.S. pushing ahead with the Marshall Plan to rebuild war-torn Europe, returning it to a minimum threshold of economic advancement and political stability that would enable the continent to support the global narrative of a unipolar world as envisioned by Washington. Thereafter, a broad set of 'norms and institutions that govern international relations as well as broad patterns of power distribution and economic flows across the world, most of it backstopped by American power and leadership' came into force, including the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (as well as the 'Washington consensus' that they implied), and a variety of related organisations. All these institutions existed to put guardrails in place for international politics — in other words these organisations were used as leverage to limit the regional and global ambitions of any potential rival to the aforementioned unipolar balance of power. The triumphs of Pax Americana The argument made by some who see the continuation of the rules-based international order even through the turbulence of the Trump years is that throughout the history of Asia's development, the U.S. has displayed the very same bullying tactics around the region that curbed and shaped the growth trajectory of Asian powerhouse economies. For example, Sandeep Bhardwaj argues that during the post-War years, when Japanese cloth imports of the U.S. outsold American domestic product, the U.S. in 1955 compelled Japan to agree to a voluntary export restriction that capped the latter's share of the U.S. market. However, the U.S. has equally nurtured the quality of openness within the rules-based order, allowing room for Asian and Latin American economies to periodically assert themselves and play a larger role within limited spaces, thus introducing the necessary element of system flexibility that has helped it endure despite a series of economic and political shocks over the past half century. Examples cited of such openness within Pax Americana include the U.S. and developed nations encouraging developing countries to join the United Nations umbrella of institutions; getting China to join the WTO in 2001 after going slow on global concerns about Beijing's human rights violations; supporting Japan's entry to the G-7 in 1973; strongly backing the entry of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, and Saudi Arabia into the G20; establishing the UN Millennium Development Goals to backstop the financing of industrialisation in emerging economies; and structural adjustment loans from the IMF. These loans, however, were a double edged sword, offering a financial lifeline for Asian countries while benefitting U.S. trade policy by forcing the opening up of these markets. The extent of U.S.' power There is no denying that the rules-based international order is far from an authoritarian hierarchy of forced policy prescriptions and expected political genuflection of so-called subordinate Asian nations. Yet, it is fair to ask whether such a warped balance of power in favour of the U.S. could ever emerge, given the Asian trajectory of rapid economic growth built on global trading and capital systems, the collective social emancipation of people, the propagation of individual and institutional liberty, and the growing state capacity for meaningful regional action and collaboration. If the sense of agency and autonomous power of Asian nation-states is overlooked, then it leads to a false sense of U.S. munificence in 'bestowing' openness and flexibility upon the rules-based order. In reality, the U.S., for all its economic heft and technological prowess had no choice but to find its own place within this complex matrix of competing nations worldwide, each strong in specific economic sectors, but perhaps less so in other areas. Within this more reasoned paradigm of the global political economy, which neither denies the unipolarity of the present moment nor overstates the U.S.'s ability to impose its hegemonic ambitions on other nations in today's multi-alliance, interconnected and interdependent framework of international engagement, it becomes clear that damage done to the rules-based liberal international order under the second Trump administration will transform the order to the point of it resembling a new order entirely. Ironically, at the heart of this act of reshaping the rules-based liberal international order, are not so much the consequences of what the U.S. is inflicting upon Asian nations but rather its abrupt pulling of the rug from under the heels of Europe by undermining the ideological cause and financial prospects of NATO and leaving the continent exposed to the risk of ever-increasing depredations of Russia. Similarly, the resoluteness with which Mr. Trump has tied his administration to the whims and fancies of the genocidal and warmongering causes of Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu will rewrite the playbook for everyone. This will impact the rulers of Saudi Arabia and Türkiye, rethinking regional political dynamics, as much as it will aspiring college students from India seeking admissions in countries other than the U.S. in the wake of compulsory social media scrutiny as a condition of visa issuance. A new order Yes, the silhouettes of the old rules-based liberal international order will continue to fall upon the new arrangements that the world will find itself forced to confront by the end of the second Trump term. However, there can be no denying that it will indeed be a new order built on the rise of bilateral agreements in place of broader regional ones. The newer order will feature the widespread use of economic sanctions to penalise political opponents across the globe in contravention of WTO norms; ever-growing skirmishes and limited wars; a reliance on drones and AI to settle territorial and other disputes; as well as a steady, catastrophic dismembering of global institutions fostering cooperation, reducing transactions costs and speaking up for human rights and standards of international engagement more broadly. Pax Americana may well give rise to the next phase of its own evolution, Flux Americana.
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Israel-Gaza war LIVE: U.N., media groups condemn Israel's deadly strike on Al Jazeera team in Gaza
Condemnations poured in from the United Nations, the EU and media rights groups on Monday (Augsut 11, 2025) after an Israeli strike killed an Al Jazeera news team in Gaza, as Palestinians mourned the journalists and Israel accused one of them of being a Hamas militant. Al Jazeera called the strike a 'targeted assassination' while press freedom groups denounced the rising death toll facing Palestinian journalists working in Gaza. Mourners laid the journalists to rest in Gaza City. Palestinians reported the heaviest bombardments in weeks on Monday in areas east of Gaza City, just hours after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he expected to complete a new expanded offensive in the enclave 'fairly quickly'. French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday (August 11, 2025) slammed Israel's plans to step up its military operation in Gaza as a disaster waiting to happen and proposed an international coalition under a United Nations mandate to stabilise Gaza.
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Trump meets with Intel CEO after demanding he resign
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday said he had a "very interesting" meeting with the chief of US chip maker Intel, just days after calling for his resignation. Mr. Trump said on his Truth Social platform that he met with Lip-Bu Tan along with Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent. "The meeting was a very interesting one," Mr. Trump said in the post. "His success and rise is an amazing story." Mr. Trump added that members of his cabinet are going to spend time with Mr. Tan and bring the president "suggestions" next week. "Mr. Tan had the honor of meeting with President Trump for a candid and constructive discussion on Intel's commitment to strengthening US technology and manufacturing leadership," the company said in a posted statement. Intel added that it looks "forward to working closely with him and his Administration as we restore this great American company." Mr. Trump demanded last week that the recently-hired boss of Intel resign "immediately," after a Republican senator raised national security concerns over his links to firms in China. "The CEO of INTEL is highly CONFLICTED and must resign, immediately. There is no other solution to this problem," Mr. Trump posted on Truth Social last Thursday. Mr. Tan released a statement at the time saying that the company was engaged with the Trump administration to address the concerns raised and ensure officials "have the facts." Intel is one of Silicon Valley's most iconic companies but its fortunes have been dwarfed by Asian powerhouses TSMC and Samsung, which dominate the made-to-order semiconductor business. In a statement, Mr. Tan said there has been "a lot of misinformation circulating" about his past roles at Walden International and Cadence Design Systems. "I have always operated within the highest legal and ethical standards," Mr. Tan said. The Malaysia-born tech industry veteran took the helm at struggling Intel in March, announcing layoffs as White House tariffs and export restrictions muddied the market. Intel's niche has been chips used in traditional computing processes, which are steadily being eclipsed by the AI revolution.
