logo
What the Israel-Iran war means for oil prices and the cost of goods

What the Israel-Iran war means for oil prices and the cost of goods

As Israel and Iran, now joined by the US, escalate from conflict to war, the price of oil is rising.
Energy and fuel costs, food prices, and spending on infrastructure and welfare programs will likely be affected, says a leading economics researcher.
This means higher prices for consumers across Asia.
For Asian nations, there is no real alternative to oil from the Gulf states, meaning volatility in that region is likely to cause pressure thousands of kilometres away.
Indo-Pacific countries who rely on oil imports would have to spend more, but many do not have the resources to keep borrowing without cutting spending in other areas," said Joaquin Vespignani, associate professor in finance at the University of Tasmania.
"For the average person ... inflation will increase significantly, while income may decline. So, you have a double whammy there,' he said.
Prices have already increased 3 per cent following the US's bombing of an Iranian nuclear site.
A squeeze on oil supplies could have serious ramifications for countries such as Indonesia which have provided fuel subsidies. ( Reuters: Ajeng Dinar Ulfiana )
Are oil prices likely to rise more?
Yes, according to Dr Vespignani. In the initial stages of the Israel-Iran war, markets reacted with a 5 per cent "risk premium", he said.
'Forecasts under high-risk scenarios suggest Brent could exceed $US100 per barrel if supply from Iran is disrupted and strategic transport routes are compromised.
'If the United States becomes further involved, especially through direct engagement or enhanced sanctions on Iranian crude exports, we could see a significant and sustained rise in oil prices into 2025.''
How will that affect the Indo-Pacific?
'The impact could be very significant,'' said Dr Vespignani. 'India, Indonesia, and most Southeast Asian nations are highly dependent on imported oil, much of it sourced from the Middle East.''
India imports about 85 per cent of its crude oil, Indonesia imports about 60 per cent, and Southeast Asia imports more than 70 per cent. Countries like Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam are heavily exposed to price increases.
'If prices rise by $US10–20/barrel over a sustained period, this would widen current account deficits, increase fuel subsidies, and feed into broader inflation,' said Dr Vespignani.
Joaquin Vespignani said the Indo-Pacific would be significantly affected by any price rises or interruption to supplies from the oil-producing Gulf states. ( Supplied )
In India, for example, a 25 per cent increase in global oil prices would raise its oil import bill by an estimated $US30–40 billion annually, placing substantial pressure on the current account deficit, the rupee and domestic inflation.
Indonesia would face similar pressure.
The burden on the state budget due to fuel subsidies could substantially increase the deficit or force a reallocation of spending from infrastructure and welfare programs.
Dr Vespignani said countries with little room to move with finances and external vulnerabilities would be forced to choose between inflation control, currency stability, and managing sustainable debt.
'[This] could also slow economic growth, reduce disposable incomes, and create new pressures on government finances — particularly in economies still recovering from COVID-19 and global food price inflation,' he said.
Oil tankers pass through the Strait of Hormuz ( Reuters: Hamad I Mohammed )
What happens if Iran blocks the Strait of Hormuz?
Iran has approved a move to close the Strait of Hormuz, which still requires sign off from the Supreme National Security Council, a body led by an appointee of Ali Khamenei.
The step is widely seen as Iran's most effective threat to hurt the West.
The Strait of Hormuz is the world's most critical oil chokepoint — about 20 per cent of global oil flows pass through it. Analysts agree if Iran were to block or significantly restrict shipping, the immediate result would be a major supply shock.
The price of crude oil could surge well above $US90–105 per barrel depending on the duration and severity of the blockade, said Dr Vespignani.
'India, Indonesia, and most Southeast Asian countries would be among the hardest hit due to their geographic proximity and trade links to Gulf producers,' he said.
'Refiners in these countries would face delays, higher freight and insurance costs, and ultimately be forced to pass on costs to consumers.''
Any squeeze on oil supplies would mean 'higher costs for fuel, electricity, and transport — with downstream effects on food and manufacturing prices.''
Are there alternatives to Middle East oil?
'There are no immediate short-term alternatives that can fully offset a severe supply disruption,' said Dr Vespignani.
He said strategic reserves can provide some buffer but these are relatively small and would only cover a few weeks of demand.
'In the absence of substitution options, higher prices will be required to reduce demand — potentially weakening growth and amplifying inflation pressures across the Indo-Pacific.''

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Iran could be banned from the 2026 World Cup in USA over bombings
Iran could be banned from the 2026 World Cup in USA over bombings

Daily Telegraph

time25 minutes ago

  • Daily Telegraph

Iran could be banned from the 2026 World Cup in USA over bombings

Don't miss out on the headlines from Football. Followed categories will be added to My News. Iran could be spectacularly banned from participating in the 2026 FIFA World Cup amid the threat of war between the Islamic Republic and tournament host nation USA. The national team back in March were the sixth team to qualify for the tournament set to take place in America, Mexico and Canada next year, but the latest air strikes on the country's nuclear facilities have the world watching on with ongoing military tensions continuing to escalate. The situation makes it unlikely Team Melli — Iran's national football team — will be playing games on US soil. Their fourth successive World Cup appearance is now in serious jeopardy. A tournament ban is a genuine possibility given several teams have been barred from international tournaments previously on the basis that warring nations cannot participate. Russia have been indefinitely suspended by FIFA since invading Ukraine while FIFA and UEFA also banned Yugoslavia during 1990s as a result of the Balkans conflict. Even if Iran do participate in next year's tournament, they are most likely to be without supporters as the country remains on President Donald Trump's banned travel list which bars citizens from travelling to America. The decision was made back in March and included severe travel restrictions to over 40 countries including Iran, Afghanistan, the Republic of Congo, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and others. Exemptions will most likely be granted for the team and associated staff only. There is no associated ban from Mexico and Canada, who will host the other 26 matches of the tournament. Despite already qualifying for the 2026 World Cup in the US, Iran's hopes of participating may be quashed as the threat of war continues to loom between them and the tournaments host nation. Photo: AP Photo/Vahid Salemi. With the schedule already drawn up to decide cities, date and stages, the best case scenario would be for Iran to be drawn into Group A and play all three group stage matches in Mexico. However, any progress to the knockout stages means the side will play at least one match in America, creating a logistic nightmare for organisers. Meanwhile, Iran and Inter Milan striker Milan Mehdi Taremi has found himself stuck in his home country in the capital city of Tehran amid the ongoing war with no way of getting out. Taremi was named by Inter in the 32 man squad for the ongoing FIFA Club World Cup in the US, but is unable to join his side as the conflict continues. The 32-year-old initially flew back to Iran to compete in their qualifiers against Qatar and North Korea and to accept Iran's footballer of the Year award, and planned to leave for Los Angeles straight after but was left stranded. Iran and Inter Milan striker Mehdi Taremi remains stranded in Iran and unable to join his teammates currently in America playing the FIFA Club World Cup. Photo: AP Photo/Vahid Salemi. It was Taremi's two goals in the 2-2 draw against Uzbekistan that sealed his sides World Cup qualification back in March, but the striker has now been left stranded as his club scrambles to find a way out. It is reported that Inter president Giuseppe Marotta has been in contact with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Italian ambassador to Tehran to find a way out for the Milan striker, but has been unsuccessful. The player himself is said to been in constant contact with teammates, who won their most recent group stage match against Urawa Reds. Neither FIFA president Gianni Infantino nor host nation President Trump have yet commented on Iran's participation in the tournament. Originally published as Iran could be banned from the 2026 World Cup in USA over bombings

Are flights to Dubai and Doha cancelled? Airlines assessing risk during Israel-Iran war
Are flights to Dubai and Doha cancelled? Airlines assessing risk during Israel-Iran war

ABC News

time25 minutes ago

  • ABC News

Are flights to Dubai and Doha cancelled? Airlines assessing risk during Israel-Iran war

Australian travellers have so far been spared flight cancellations or major disruptions, despite global airlines avoiding areas of conflict in the Middle East or suspending services altogether. Flight trackers show airlines are avoiding airspace over Iran, Iraq and Israel, while some have cancelled services to areas on the southern side of the Gulf. Former A380 captain James Nixon said avoiding certain airspace was "business as usual" for airlines. "You just trust the security department of the airline that you're not going to be rerouted over anything like that, and they close those air spaces immediately," he said. "Every day, there are airlines having to be rerouted over airspace." How is safety monitored? Mr Nixon, who has 31 years' experience flying, said companies that monitored flight risks, such as Ops Group, provided information to airlines' security and flight planning departments. "They just build flight paths around the areas that are closing," he said. "People are now being routed over Saudi and up through Egypt, and into Europe that way, and they are not going through Iraq, Iran or Jordan." He said at this stage, those areas on the southern side of the Persian Gulf were "completely safe". "It is hundreds of miles away from any action," he said. University of Southern Queensland Professor of Aviation Kan Tsui said airlines would be monitoring risks through their safety management systems. "They have a standard procedure to assess the risk to any particular flight," he said. "Once they assess a risk to the flight that's ongoing … they will have a plan to reroute or avoid particular airspace." Virgin Australia's newly launched flights to Doha, in partnership with Qatar Airlines, haven't been affected. It only launched its Sydney to Doha and Brisbane to Doha services last week. The airline is monitoring the situation closely. Qantas doesn't itself fly to Doha or Dubai. Those flights are operated by Emirates or Qatar. Which Airlines are cancelling flights? Some airlines have suspended services. Singapore Airlines has cancelled flights. ( ABC News: Brant Cumming ) Singapore Airlines cancelled flights to and from Dubai on Sunday after a "security assessment of the geopolitical situation". It warned further services on the Dubai route may be affected "as the situation remains fluid". British Airways A British Airways plane. ( Flickr: Clement Alloing ) British Airways also suspended flights to Doha and Dubai. It said it was reviewing the situation for future flights. Air France Passengers wait at the Air France check-in counter at the Tom Jobim International airport in Rio de Janeiro June 1, 2009. An Air France plane with 228 people on board was presumed to have crashed into the Atlantic Ocean on Monday after hitting stormy weather during a flight from Rio de Janeiro to Paris. ( Sergio Moraes: Reuters, file photo ) Air France cancelled flights to and from Dubai and Saudi Arabia's capital, Riyadh. Emirates Emirates are resuming flights to Adelaide. ( Supplied: Emirates ) Emirates, which operates out of Dubai, has suspended all flights to Iran and Iraq for the next week at least. Qatar Airways Qatar Airways has cancelled flights to Iraq, Iran and Syria. ( Supplied: Facebook Qatar Airways ) Qatar Airways has cancelled flights to Iran, Iraq and Syria It advised other passengers that some flight times may change to minimise disruptions. Etihad Airways In this May 4, 2014 file photo, an Etihad Airways plane prepares to land at the Abu Dhabi airport in the United Arab Emirates ( AP: Kamran Jebreili ) Etihad Airways warned its customers the situation remained "highly dynamic". "Further changes or disruption, including sudden airspace closures or operational impact, may occur at short notice." Israel's Airports Authority said so-called rescue flights to the country would expand on Monday to 24 a day, although each flight would be limited to 50 passengers. Israeli airline El Al said it had received applications to leave the country from about 25,000 people in about a day. Could flight prices increase? Given the volatility of the situation, Professor Tsui said the broader impacts on the aviation industry wouldn't be known for days. One impact of flying longer routes to avoid the region, he said, was it used more fuel. "Whether the airline passes on the extra operational cost to passengers really depends on the airlines," he said. "But I predict that the airlines would pass on the cost to passengers, so maybe in the near future or in future bookings, their ticket price would be increased." He said another factor could be travellers cancelling their plans — perceiving, whether correctly or incorrectly, that travel was more dangerous at the moment. "[In the past we have] seen the impacts of geopolitical risks or war affecting travel demand or tourist demand … [travellers being] more cautious, thinking about not just the ticket price itself but also their safety." ABC/Reuters

America First? Why MAGA is split on the US strikes on Iran
America First? Why MAGA is split on the US strikes on Iran

SBS Australia

time41 minutes ago

  • SBS Australia

America First? Why MAGA is split on the US strikes on Iran

United States President Donald Trump's Republican base is divided over his decision to join Israel's assault on Iran. On Sunday morning, 125 US aircraft dropped 14 'bunker buster' bombs on three Iranian nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. The strikes, which were carried out without consulting Congress, have caused some Republicans to break ranks with the president and join Democrats in criticising the move. Here's what's been said and why the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement is split on the issue: Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is usually a steadfast supporter of Trump, even going so far as to question the integrity of the 2020 presidential election, which Trump lost to Joe Biden. However, she has broken with him to criticise the bombing of Iran. "Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war ... This is not our fight," she's said. Kentucky congressman Thomas Massie — previously a pro-Trump Republican but not as reliable a supporter as Greene — has also been a vocal opponent of bombing Iran. On CNN's Inside Politics program, he said he was concerned that "three bombings to neutralise Iran" might be the 2025 version of "two weeks to slow the spread", referencing the COVID-19 pandemic. "This could turn into a protracted, prolonged engagement ... most of us were tired of the wars in the Middle East and Eastern Europe and we were promised that we wouldn't be engaged in another one." He argues the move is "unconstitutional" and last week introduced a motion to block the US from entering the conflict. South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham has disputed claims that Trump had acted outside his authority. "He had all the authority he needs under the constitution. They are wrong," he said on NBC's Meet the Press. Missouri senator Eric Schmitt has also expressed support for Trump, describing him as a "foreign policy realist, not an ideologue". "He has taken limited military action to achieve a crucial objective that is in the core national interest of the United States: preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons," Schmitt wrote on X. "He doesn't want another Forever War. He wants peace ... What happens now is up to Iran." Michael Green is a professor and CEO of the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney. He told SBS News there are tensions between a group supportive of Israel, which "sees the logic of taking out the nuclear weapons capability while Iran is weak", and an isolationist group that "wants no more interventions and wars". While there's division within Trump's ranks, Green stresses the group opposing Trump is a minority. It's a section within MAGA that shares an "America First" ideology and is against military interventionism, dating back to the early 1940s when they were opposed to entering the war in Europe. "There's a history to this America First movement and this isolationism on the right wing of the Republican Party that goes back to the pre-war era, and even longer, so it's always been there," he said. Green said Trump made one of the group's most vocal members, Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence as an acknowledgement to that part of MAGA that "he was hearing them and was sympathetic on this interventionist stance". However, he said the majority of Republicans support Trump. Professor Wesley Widmaier, from the Australian National University's Department of International Relations, said these tensions are evident in the now-viral interview between Republican senator Ted Cruz and political commentator Tucker Carlson. In a heated exchange, Carlson quizzed Cruz's knowledge on Iran — from its population to ethnic make-up — in an attempt to highlight his ignorance about the country and more broadly question his support of Israel's war with Iran. "Not that social media is real life. I completely concede that, but that illustrates the kind of tensions within Trump's base," he said. Alongside Massie, many Democrats are calling on Trump to be held accountable by Congress, arguing it's unconstitutional to order military intervention without consulting Congress. Over the weekend, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer said "no president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy". Schumer also called on Trump to enforce the 1973 War Powers Act, which requires a president to obtain a Congressional declaration of war before committing to military action. However, interpretation of the act is debated and it contends with a constitutional designation of the president as the "commander-in-chief" of the nation's military — a power that presidents have previously invoked to justify strikes without congressional approval. Green explains that the main political issue is that Trump made the call without bipartisan support, potentially causing an issue with Democrats as well as Republicans down the line. "Not getting a vote from Congress, but consulting leadership, that's the norm," he said. "When you have a significant piece of intelligence for a military strike, the president — Republican or Democrat — informs ... the eight most prominent members of the Congress on national security — Republicans and Democrats." "Trump didn't tell anyone on the Hill. He just did it without informing Congress, and the Democrats are saying he didn't tell us. So if it goes badly, he has left himself without bipartisan support." Green said this isn't unconstitutional and previous presidents have signed off on military intervention without bipartisan support. He points to former president Barack Obama authorising a military campaign against the self-proclaimed Islamic State group in Syria in 2014 and Bill Clinton signing off on intervention, including airstrikes, in Kosovo in 1999. Although Trump's decision to act unilaterally could backfire with the Democrats and Republicans, Green is confident the president has factored that into his calculations. "I think Trump probably calculated correctly that Iran's options are limited, and so the politics would probably hold for him," he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store