Oil prices surge, stocks tumble in the wake of Israel's strikes on Iran
Oil prices surged and stocks tumbled Friday in the wake of Israel's strikes on Iran's top military officials and nuclear sites.
The price of Brent crude oil, the global benchmark, climbed more than 8% to almost $74 a barrel, its highest level since early April. Major stock indexes fell more than 1% in premarket trading, though they pared heavier losses as investors assessed that wider fallout from the conflict was initially limited.
Gold prices also reached a new monthly high, rising more than 1% to as much as $3,440 an ounce. The price of bitcoin fell almost 1% to less than $105,000. U.S. bond prices were little changed.
Israel launched strikes on Iran early Friday local time, a dramatic escalation of long-running tensions between the two countries. Israel officials have warned of a "lengthy operation," while President Donald Trump said there was "much more to come" from Israel and that Iran should make a deal. Iran has so far retaliated by launching drones toward Israel while also threatening U.S. assets in the region.
While spiking oil prices usually signal higher gasoline prices for consumers in the coming days and weeks, experts said there was no need to rush out to the pump.
"Higher gas prices are coming. But it will not be insane, and ultimately gas prices remain affordable vs income," Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at price tracker GasBuddy, said in a post on X.
Higher oil prices could stoke inflation, complicating the Federal Reserve's calculations as it continues to weigh a weakening job market against fears of the price impact from Trump's tariffs.
Before the strikes, stocks appeared heading for a wining week after the Trump administration signaled renewed interest in a rapprochement with China over trade concerns. The president said he planned on stabilizing import duties on Chinese goods at 55%, while those on U.S. goods into China would be set at 10%.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Trump makes major U-turn on mass deportation policy that could affect thousands of businesses across country
The Trump administration has for the first time pumped the brakes on its mass deportation agenda, telling ICE officials to pause raids on farms, hotels and restaurants, according to an internal email and three US officials familiar with the situation. The decision, as reported by The New York Times, comes after Trump made a rare acknowledgement that some of the deportations he's ordered has hurt industries in agricultural, hospitality and food sectors. 'Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' he said in a Truth Social post on Thursday morning. 'We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!' he added. He further elaborated on these sentiments in a press conference later that same day. 'Our farmers are being hurt badly by, you know, they have very good workers, they have worked for them for 20 years,' he said. 'They're not citizens, but they've turned out to be, you know, great. And we're going to have to do something about that. We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have, maybe not,' he continued, adding that there would be an 'order' soon. The official order from Trump came on Thursday via an email sent by a senior ICE official, Tatum King, to regional leaders of the ICE department that generally carries out criminal investigations. This post on Truth Social is what got the ball rolling on the switch-up in strategy These investigations often lead to worksite raids, which have been happening in increasing frequency all over the country. These raids have led to nationwide anti-ICE protests, most notably in Los Angeles, where demonstrations have been going on for a week straight. 'Effective today, please hold on all work site enforcement investigations/operations on agriculture (including aquaculture and meat packing plants), restaurants and operating hotels,' King wrote in his message. King clarified that investigations 'human trafficking, money laundering, drug smuggling into these industries are OK.' The order instructed agents not to arrest 'noncriminal collaterals,' a seeming reference to illegal immigrants who have not committed any additional crimes. The Department of Homeland Security confirmed the new guidance and said it would follow it. 'We will follow the president's direction and continue to work to get the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens off of America's streets,' Tricia McLaughlin, a DHS spokeswoman, said in a statement. This marks a huge departure in Trump's rhetoric, since over the last few months, he's advocated for deporting all illegal immigrants, regardless of their criminal record. Trump posted about his change of mind after Brooke Rollins, the secretary of agriculture, told him that farmers were concerned that ICE enforcement would negatively impact their businesses, a White House official and a person familiar told The Times. There are still officials within the administration who are more aligned with the idea of deporting as many migrants as possible. Chief among them is White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who has been advocating for a minimum of 3,000 arrests a day by ICE. ICE confirmed that Miller held a meeting with dozens of top directors and officials on May 20, where he reportedly 'came in there and eviscerated everyone.' According to the Washington Examiner, Miller allegedly told them: 'You guys aren't doing a good job. You're horrible leaders.' He then reportedly gave them an open challenge and asked: 'Why aren't you at Home Depot? Why aren't you at 7-Eleven?' ICE agents were reportedly surprised by the new guidance to limit raids on certain industries after weeks and months of being told to step it up. King said in his memo that the new rules would hamstring the administration's goals for higher numbers of arrests. 'We acknowledge that by taking this off the table, that we are eliminating a significant # of potential targets,' he wrote.
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Scots pay half billion in subsidies while China build the buses
Alexander Dennis has announced it plans to close down its Falkirk area operations to relocate to one single base in Scarborough (Picture: Michael Gillen, National World) Ministers should have been using their leverage over the big operators to keep Falkirk afloat Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... One way and another, the Scottish Government subsidises bus services by more than half a billion pounds a year. There would hardly be a bus on a Scottish road without subsidy which accounts for well over half of total revenue. There has been another £150 million for the ScotZEB programme 'to deliver zero-emission buses to Scotland's roads', the latest in a series of capital funds without which there would be precious few new or refurbished buses on our highways and by-ways. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Put these two facts together and the prospective loss of a bus manufacturing industry in Scotland borders on the incomprehensible. Beyond buses, if a 'procure in Scotland' strategy cannot be applied in this case, what hope is there of enforcing local content provisions in other sectors, notably renewable energy? Without political backbone, it won't happen. Ensuring the survival of Scotland's bus network is a good use of public funds. Equally, for any government to invest this kind of money and then claim it has no leverage over where it is spent is preposterous – and that should be the starting point in addressing the future of Alexander Dennis Ltd and maintaining a proud, skilled industry. While the Scottish Government pours money into our bus network, of more than 250 buses ordered under ScotZEB, 44 will be built in Falkirk. In the second phase of this scheme, two thirds of orders went to a single Chinese company where Scotland is doubtless the boardroom toast. There is something far, far wrong – and avoidable - about that outcome. I saw a sound-bite from Kate Forbes, the deputy first minister, in which her priority was to transfer political responsibility. Her own administration, she said sweetly, was unable to specify 'local content' because of UK legislation and, she claimed, the Scottish Government's pleas for relief from this constraint had been in vain. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Even by SNP standards, it sounded a rather premature piece of blame shifting since every sinew of current effort should surely be devoted to saving these 400 jobs in Falkirk and Larbert, not explaining them away. Ms Forbes' attempt at self-exoneration also failed the credibility test on multiple grounds. Most obviously, the publicly owned Greater Manchester Bees Network has purchased 160 state of the art buses from Falkirk and is delighted with the product. Somehow, the office of Andy Burnham found a way through challenges which Ms Forbes portrays as show-stoppers. Did she or her civil servants ever pick up the phone to Manchester? In the last few days, in an effort to head off redundancies, the Secretary of State for Scotland, Ian Murray, has written to all the Metro Mayors in England, who will soon be ordering buses, asking them to follow Manchester's example. Meanwhile, the Scottish Government claims to be helpless while the orders it funds flow out to China. The legislation which supposedly presents such an obstacle to the Scottish Government is the Subsidy Control Act of 2022 which replaced what existed pre-Brexit. It was needed to keep the UK inside the terms and conditions of the World Trade Organisation and the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT). Dry but necessary stuff. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It is disputed whether the ScotZEB scheme counts as subsidy for the purposes of the Act. Even if it does, the job of Ministers and civil servants in these circumstances should be to put together a case, based on exemptions available, which allows direct awards to be made. At the same time, Ministers should have been using their leverage over the big operators to keep Falkirk afloat. Neither is it true to claim that this is something which has crept up on the Scottish Government without prior notice. Last September, the company started a consultation process about 160 redundancies for exactly the same reasons they are now citing. They needed more buses to build. At that point, every stop should have been pulled out to ensure the ScotZEB orders were going to Falkirk and not to China. Any Minister worth his or her salt looks for deals to make in these circumstances which are not necessarily underpinned by formal agreements. I did it back in my own Ministerial days in not dissimilar circumstances but this is not party political. I have no doubt Michael Forsyth knew how to apply a bit of friendly pressure and I am absolutely certain Alex Salmond would have told a couple of bus operators exactly what was expected from them, or else. If the Scottish Government cannot use its leverage to fight for jobs, it is entirely due to the absence of competence or creativity within its current ranks. John Swinney's plaintive plea that he 'cannot act in a fashion outwith the provisions of the law' is the language of a bureaucrat whose obligation is to find a rationalisation for inactivity. The possibility always exists, of course, that a company has decided on a course of action for its own reasons and has no interest in being dissuaded from it. The only way to find that out is to make an offer which they would, if goodwill exists, be unlikely to refuse. In this case, a decent order for buses, underwritten by the Scottish Government, might, for example, be enough to buy a stay of execution – and would certainly test the bona fides of the Canadian owners. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Trump is deeply obsessed with US history – but he has learned all the wrong lessons from it
Today the US army will parade in style along the National Mall in Washington DC to celebrate its 250th anniversary. This also just happens to be the 79th birthday of President Donald J Trump. As commander-in-chief, he will take the salute from a viewing platform on Constitution Avenue. But this is not a mere vanity project, as some critics have claimed. History really matters to the US's 47th president. One of Trump's last acts before reluctantly leaving the White House in January 2021 was to publish a report by his '1776 Commission', created to 'restore understanding of the greatness of the American Founding'. Deliberately, the commissioners included few university historians because universities were described as often being 'hotbeds of anti-Americanism, libel, and censorship that combine to generate in students and in the broader culture at the very least disdain and at worst outright hatred for this country'. The 1776 Commission demanded a return to truly 'patriotic education', declaring: 'We must resolve to teach future generations of Americans an accurate history of our country so that we all learn and cherish our founding principles once again. We must renew the pride and gratitude we have for this incredible nation that we are blessed to call home.' In this spirit, on 2 May this year, the president posted that he was renaming 8 May and 11 November respectively as 'Victory Day for World War II and Victory Day for World War I' because 'we won both Wars, nobody was close to us in terms of strength, bravery, or military brilliance', and it was time for the US to 'start celebrating our victories again!' The parade on 14 June is also intended to raise the curtain on a spectacular nationwide celebration of the 250th anniversary of US independence, extending right across the country and culminating on 4 July 2026. According to the White House website, one feature will be a video history series that 'tells the remarkable story of American Independence. It will highlight the stories of the crucial characters and events that resulted in a small rag-tag army defeating the mightiest empire in the world and establishing the greatest republic ever to exist.' History on parade, indeed. As is often the case, Trump does start with a valid point. After he witnessed the extravaganza of Bastille Day in 2017, where French and American troops marched down the Champs-Élysées to celebrate the centenary of the US's entry into the first world war, he was determined to stage a parade of his own. So what's wrong with that? Shouldn't countries be proud of their past? OK (if you don't mind the cost). But pride should be rooted in honesty, especially when Nato in Europe is engaged in a proxy war in Ukraine against Vladimir Putin, a systematic falsifier of history. And if we're trying to be honest, world wars aren't like the World Series with one country trumping all the others and winning almost single-handedly. Take the second world war. On 3 May this year, former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev dismissed Trump's claims as 'pretentious nonsense', asserting that 'Victory Day is ours and it is 9 May. So it was, so it is, so it will always be!' Medvedev is now an obedient Putinist, but he and other Russians rightly point to their huge losses in 1941-45 – roughly 27 million people. Stated differently, in the three years from June 1941 to June 1944, between Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union and the D-day landings in Normandy, more than 90% of the German army's battle casualties (killed, wounded, missing and prisoners) were inflicted by the Red Army. That puts Alamein and Tunis, Anzio and the liberation of Rome into a different perspective. Yet Americans can rightly say that they were in a league of their own as a 'superpower' – a word coined in 1944 to signify 'great power and great mobility of power'. Their huge C-47 transport planes and the B-17 and B-24 bombers allowed the US to wage war right across the world. Their modern fleets of aircraft carriers, built to avenge Pearl Harbor, island-hopped across the Pacific to Japan itself. The Pacific war ended with the firebombing of Tokyo and the nuclear obliteration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Or consider the speed of the remarkable breakout from Normandy that enabled allied armies to liberate Brussels on 3 September 1944, occupying positions they had not expected to reach until May 1945. When an astonished Winston Churchill asked how the GIs were being fed and supplied, US general Omar Bradley said he was running trucks up to the front 'bumper to bumper, 24 hours a day'. Ford delivered the goods. But Britain also played a crucial part in victory. Had our embattled island gone the same way as Scandinavia, France and the Low Countries in the summer of 1940, Hitler would have thrown all his resources against the Soviet Union, while Roosevelt's US would probably have turned in on itself and concentrated on defending the western hemisphere. Instead, a combination of Churchillian leadership, modern fighters linked to the new Chain Home system of radar and the courage of the RAF pilots managed to keep Hitler at bay. Eventually, Britain became the essential supply base and launchpad for the liberation of Hitler's Fortress Europe. And so in 1944-45, the allied armies converged on Germany from east, west and south. Of course, it was an unholy alliance, animated by divergent aims and values. But the extermination of nazism was a goal all the allies shared. With this in mind, let's glance back to the US's most important victory: independence. Yes, this was in large measure a David v Goliath story of 'a small rag-tag army defeating the mightiest empire in the world'. The US's independence was indeed testimony to George Washington's leadership and his troops' courage and resilience (reinforced by his insistence on inoculation against the smallpox epidemic). But this was also a world war as the British empire battled against its global foes. Crucially, by the 1780s Britain lost naval supremacy because (unusually) three rival seapowers had combined against it: France, Spain and the Dutch. It was blockade by the French fleet that forced Lord Cornwallis's historic surrender at Yorktown in 1781 and British acceptance of American independence. The purpose of historical research is to set events in context, not to boost national pride. The story of the US's founding, like that of Hitler's defeat, reminds us that allies matter – in the past, the present and the future. That should not be forgotten when history goes on parade. David Reynolds's most recent book is Mirrors of Greatness: Churchill and the leaders who shaped him. He co-hosts the Creating History podcast
