The Middle East conflict

[RT4038]

While it's not illegal, I do believe you have to be careful about who you criticise the Israeli government to, because as others have said, some take it to be "antisemitism" - which is of course nonsense. It's the sort of thing one probably wouldn't say to untrusted work colleagues, for example.

Crazy really, would criticising Erdogan for example make you an Islamophobe? Criticising Mugabe make you an anti-Black racist? All very manipulative IMO and those that promote defamatory "antisemitism" allegations are in my opinion trying to silence criticism of the regime.

The difference being Erdogan is the leader of one Islamic majority country, Mugabe was leader of one Black majority country but anything Israeli is the only Jewish majority Country ? Therefore easy to manipulate any criticism of that one country as being anti-Jewish as a whole, because there is no other Jewish country to be comparing with.

 

[Annetts key]

So, with the U.S.A. and Iran still not conceding much to each other and the on going U.S.A. blockade of ships that have visited Iranian ports, how long before forces in support of Iran block the Bab-el-Mandeb strait to "unfriendly" ships?

And if this happens, how high will the price of oil go? Right as the U.S.A. primaries are in progress or due to start, ahead of this November's elections.

Trump has screwed himself, his own party, the U.S.A. and most of the rest of the world. I hope the Republicans lose heavy and the Democrats gain control of the house and maybe, just maybe, the Senate as well.

Edit: Ahh, I now know that Iran have "opened" the Strait of Hormuz (I'll add a quote and a link later). I wrote the above post before I became aware of this latest news....

 

[Peter Mugridge]

So, with the U.S.A. and Iran still not conceding much to each other and the on going U.S.A. blockade of ships that have visited Iranian ports, how long before forces in support of Iran block the Bab-el-Mandeb strait to "unfriendly" ships?

Has Iran's unexpected re-opening of the Strait earlier today completely wrong-footed Trump?

 

[dosxuk]

Has Iran's unexpected re-opening of the Strait earlier today completely wrong-footed Trump?

I think everything the Iranians have done has wrong footed Trump. They seem very adept at not doing what he expects at the very least

 

[SargeNpton]

I think everything the Iranians have done has wrong footed Trump. They seem very adept at not doing what he expects at the very least

I think that everything Trump does is as if it's a business deal. If the deal isn't to his liking, he just walks away. Unfortunately, he doesn't realise that international politics doesn't work that way.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think that everything Trump does is as if it's a business deal. If the deal isn't to his liking, he just walks away. Unfortunately, he doesn't realise that international politics doesn't work that way.

He's not to be fair got a very good record at that either. He inherited a whackload of money and spent his life losing it. Kind of a reverse Lord Sugar.

 

[The Ham]

He's not to be fair got a very good record at that either. He inherited a whackload of money and spent his life losing it. Kind of a reverse Lord Sugar.

I'm sure he'll be a good case study for business A Levels - give details of how to run a loss making casino (8 points)

 

[najaB]

He's not to be fair got a very good record at that either. He inherited a whackload of money and spent his life losing it.

I'm fairly sure that I read that, had he simply put the $400M that he got from his father into a index tracker acount and done nothing more, he would be considerably more wealthy than he is.

In other words, he did worse than just putting the money in the bank.

 

[Cowley]

I'm fairly sure that I read that, had he simply put the $400M that he got from his father into a index tracker acount and done nothing more, he would be considerably more wealthy than he is.

In other words, he did worse than just putting the money in the bank.

I think that’s correct. His father also stepped in with a substantial amount to save one of DJT’s casinos early on as well. From a Washington Post piece.

In a 2007 deposition, Trump admitted he had borrowed “a small amount” from his father’s estate: “I think it was like in the $9 million range.” And as Trump’s casinos ran into trouble, Trump’s father also purchased $3.5 million in gaming chips but did not use them, so the casino would have enough cash to make payments on its mortgage — a transaction that casino authorities later said was an illegal loan.

 

[DerekC]

I'm fairly sure that I read that, had he simply put the $400M that he got from his father into a index tracker acount and done nothing more, he would be considerably more wealthy than he is.

In other words, he did worse than just putting the money in the bank.

I doubt if that's true now the Trump dynasty has made billions out of his presidency.

 

[Cowley]

I doubt if that's true now the Trump dynasty has made billions out of his presidency.

Well yes. You make a good point!

 

[Bantamzen]

I doubt if that's true now the Trump dynasty has made billions out of his presidency.

Indeed, however I suspect a lot of that money made recently has been through, well let's just say somewhat underhand means and could likely be investigated by a future US government. There's a reason Trump is so friendly with the Argentinian leader...

 

[Cdd89]

The wrangling over the Strait is interesting to me as both sides are playing games over it.

One on hand, Iran has a point that the US continuing to blockade the Strait is not in line with a ceasefire, and I suspect the blockade's real purpose was to pressure Iran via China (this also explains why Iran cares about looking reasonable). Conversely, Iran keeps performing partial reopeningd and directing traffic via routes near their coast, suggesting it's open but dampening traffic by claiming it's mined is also in bad faith.

It'll be interesting to see how this develops as the US decision not to withdraw the blockade is very notable. Given that oil prices are critical to Trump's domestic support, I suspect the admin strongly prefers an outcome where the strait is fully open to traffic by May, with de-mining operations completed and without the immediate threat of re-closure, as that would have greatest effect on oil prices – and is willing to use the blockade to push for this outcome even at a short term cost. This is in direct contention with Iran's preference for an immediate partial spending, where it as is kept active as a long-term bargaining chip, i.e. by suggesting restrictions and threatening its imminent closure at any time. Hypothetically, it's the US trading off the benefit a ~$90 oil price some indefinite length of time, vs a longer closure resulting in a ~$80 oil price.

 

[brad465]

Something tells me this conflict has a while to go yet:

Iran war latest: US negotiators to return to Pakistan for talks as Trump repeats threat to Iran's infrastructure

A White House official has told the BBC the US delegation will be led by JD Vance - Iran has not confirmed it will take part.

www.bbc.co.uk

US intercepts and boards Iranian-flagged cargo ship that tried to get through blockade - Trump
​

Trump says US forces intercepted an Iranian-flagged cargo ship, issued a warning, "stopped them right in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engine room", and have taken control of the vessel, after it tried to get through the US blockade.

 

[Cdd89]

Something tells me this conflict has a while to go yet

That's certainly the most obvious reading. But note how the escalatory actions are coming from the US, yet we know for a fact that Trump is desperate to end the conflict. That doesn't add up.

My interpretation is the Strait of Hormuz is probably settled, likely with pressure on Iran from countries like China; and the US are using their own blockade as leverage toward their final settlement. The US can remove the blockade at any time when they want energy prices to fall, so keyed before the midterms to present a big success. I know this is more or less a repeat of my post above

Of course, I could be wrong in my theory and we'll still be here in 6 months... I certainly wouldn't be placing any bets on polymarket (unlike some!)

 

[The Ham]

That's certainly the most obvious reading. But note how the escalatory actions are coming from the US, yet we know for a fact that Trump is desperate to end the conflict. That doesn't add up.

My interpretation is the Strait of Hormuz is probably settled, likely with pressure on Iran from countries like China; and the US are using their own blockade as leverage toward their final settlement. The US can remove the blockade at any time when they want energy prices to fall, so keyed before the midterms to present a big success. I know this is more or less a repeat of my post above

Of course, I could be wrong in my theory and we'll still be here in 6 months... I certainly wouldn't be placing any bets on polymarket (unlike some!)

The thing is (and unless he's for his advisors this may trip him up) is it will take time for oil to start getting to the places it's needed before things can return to normal.

That means ensuring that aviation has enough jet fuel for there not to be many if any cancellations of flights or overly excessive price increases for travel for Thanksgiving (whist the end of November compared to the Midterms such are at the start of November is close enough that most plans are likely to be fixed).

Also prices may take a bit of time to reduce, given the randomness of what Trump does, as countries are likely to try and restore their strategic oil reserves as soon as possible (effectively extra demand) and so prices may reduce but not back to pre war levels.

I also suspect that there's some damage to the polls already baked in and it's just a case of how much.

 

[Annetts key]

Even if the Strait of Hormuz was opened to all shipping today, it would likely take over six months for the prices of oil and other good to reduce back to approaching prewar levels.

 

[Cdd89]

Even if the Strait of Hormuz was opened to all shipping today, it would likely take over six months for the prices of oil and other good to reduce back to approaching prewar levels.

Are you sure about that? I would raise a few counterpoints:

• The price is mostly expectation based.
• Since the market price is global, oil only needs to reach its nearest customers to cause a global fall in the price from all sources.
• If assured that future supply is secure, countries would feel better about releasing more strategic reserves, which has a more immediate effect than refilling.

I don't see prices going down below pre-war levels, both due to uncertainty and the inflation element, but I do see them approaching pre-war levels if something long-term seems to have been achieved.

Cynically, this may be why the US admin wasn't happy with Iran's unilateral opening: it would have meant a significant decrease now, but still elevated going into the midterms and with a longer tail as final details were worked through. Trump wouldn't get credit for a slow drop in oil prices.

 

[Annetts key]

Are you sure about that? I would raise a few counterpoints:

• The price is mostly expectation based.
• Since the market price is global, oil only needs to reach its nearest customers to cause a global fall in the price from all sources.
• If assured that future supply is secure, countries would feel better about releasing more strategic reserves, which has a more immediate effect than refilling.

I don't see prices going down below pre-war levels, both due to uncertainty and the inflation element, but I do see them approaching pre-war levels if something long-term seems to have been achieved.

Cynically, this may be why the US admin wasn't happy with Iran's unilateral opening: it would have meant a significant decrease now, but still elevated going into the midterms and with a longer tail as final details were worked through. Trump wouldn't get credit for a slow drop in oil prices.

Maybe, but here's a view from the EIA (https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/):

Crude oil price forecast. The Brent crude oil spot price averaged $103 per barrel (b) in March, and we expect it to peak in the second quarter of 2026 (2Q26) at $115/b before easing as production shut-ins slowly abate. We maintain a risk premium on crude oil prices throughout the forecast period as we expect uncertainty around future supply disruptions to keep prices above pre-conflict levels. We forecast the Brent crude oil price will fall below $90/b in 4Q26 and average $76/b in 2027. This price forecast is highly dependent on our assumptions of both the duration of conflict in the Middle East and resulting outages in oil production.

 

[Cdd89]

Maybe, but here's a view from the EIA (https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/):

Thanks, that's a very fair and well sourced response!

I don't disagree with their analysis, nor am I equipped to do so, but I would note a few assumptions they are making that are not guaranteed.

The first is that the current pricing reflects a risk premium rather than purely a supply/demand constraint, but that is arguably a hangover from Iran keeping the Strait closed whereas it's now more the US doing so. (Iran's statements seem - dare I say it - reasonable in comparison; which wasn't the case on 6 April when their report was produced!) That means that any reopening would feel more assured and long-term, as the US has the ability and motivation to project a stable long-term decision.

Second is that other countries, such as the US, are producing huge amounts of oil, supply which doesn't vanish overnight just because the Strait reopens. Iran and the Gulf states in particular will be desperate for cash once it reopens.

Third is that the higher price of oil right now is causing mid-term demand reductions, eg flight bookings / miles driven, or triggering permanent changes like people switching to electric. My theory is that these behaviours will rebound more slowly or in some cases never as compared to a glut of oil becoming available on the market.

As above, given that I am a layperson I don't wish to overstate the credibility of my arguments. But I do see a possible sequence of events that result in a quicker rebound, even if we disagree as to their likelihood!

 

[najaB]

As above, given that I am a layperson I don't wish to overstate the credibility of my arguments. But I do see a possible sequence of events that result in a quicker rebound, even if we disagree as to their likelihood!

One issue that may work against a quick decline in prices is that nations who are currently burning through their strategic reserves will want to refill them as quickly as possible - just in case any settlement is short-lived.

 

[edwin_m]

Iran has hit some of the oil and gas production facilities in other Gulf states, which could put those out of action for some time. So exports are still likely to be limited even if neither side is blockading.

 

[JohnofWessex]

What about Urea produced in the Gulf?

Its missed the window when it is needed to apply to crops so we will see the impact in the autumn with a drop in yeilds

 

[brad465]

May the hubris of this regime be its ultimate downfall:

Israeli soldiers punished over vandalism of Jesus statue in Lebanon

Two soldiers will be removed from combat duty and receive 30 days of military detention, Israel's military says.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Israeli soldier who hit a statue of Jesus with a sledgehammer in Lebanon and the soldier who photographed the incident will receive 30 days of military detention, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has said.
The IDF also said the two soldiers - who have not been named - would be "removed from combat duty" following an inquiry.
Another six soldiers who were at the scene and failed to intervene or report the incident will be dealt with separately, it added.
The incident in the village of Debel in southern Lebanon prompted widespread condemnation after an image of it was widely shared online this week. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he was "stunned and saddened" by what happened.
In its statement on Tuesday, the IDF said an inquiry into the incident had "determined that the soldiers' conduct completely deviated from IDF orders and values" and expressed "deep regret over the incident".
It also said IDF troops had replaced the damaged statue "in full co-ordination with the local community" a short while ago.
It stressed that its operations in Lebanon were directed "solely" against the Iran-backed group Hezbollah "and other terrorist groups, and not against Lebanese civilians".

Locals had said the statue was on a crucifix outside a family home on the edge of Debel, one of the few villages where residents have remained during Israel's war with Hezbollah.
The head of Debel's congregation, Father Fadi Flaifel, told the BBC after the incident: "We totally reject the desecration of the cross, our sacred symbol, and all religious symbols.
"It goes against the declaration of human rights, and it doesn't reflect civility."
He claimed similar incidents had happened before.
Among those to condemn the incident was the US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee - the representative of Israel's most important ally - who called on Monday for "swift, severe, and public consequences" following the "outrageous act".
Netanyahu had expressed regret for the incident "and for any hurt this has caused to believers in Lebanon and around the world".

 

[Ediswan]

May the hubris of this regime be its ultimate downfall:

Israeli soldiers punished over vandalism of Jesus statue in Lebanon

Two soldiers will be removed from combat duty and receive 30 days of military detention, Israel's military says.

www.bbc.co.uk

This is a bit like some fare evasion cases. We are invited to believe that the time they got caught was the first time they offended.

 

[brad465]

This is a bit like some fare evasion cases. We are invited to believe that the time they got caught was the first time they offended.

Or the tax fraud Al Capone was done for was his most serious offence.

 

[Cdd89]

I wonder how many more cycles of "escalate the conflict to raise the price of oil" → "announce that a settlement is imminent" we have to endure before certain people deem themselves to have made enough money and we can actually get back to normal.

 

[dgl]

I wonder how many more cycles of "escalate the conflict to raise the price of oil" → "announce that a settlement is imminent" we have to endure before certain people deem themselves to have made enough money and we can actually get back to normal.

Until the rouse stops working would be my guess, it's hardly like Trump and his mates give a damn.

 

[brad465]

I wonder how many more cycles of "escalate the conflict to raise the price of oil" → "announce that a settlement is imminent" we have to endure before certain people deem themselves to have made enough money and we can actually get back to normal.

When the next round of oil futures expires in about a fortnight and the price of oil shoots up around $40 a barrel. The insider traders will make a killing then the US govt will quickly try and reach a settlement before the subsequent riots get out of hand.

 

[najaB]

When the next round of oil futures expires in about a fortnight and the price of oil shoots up around $40 a barrel. The insider traders will make a killing then the US govt will quickly try and reach a settlement before the subsequent riots get out of hand.

I think the populace are getting a bit too restive at the moment with gasoline being above $4/gal, so I wouldn't be surprised if they manage to reach an agreement in the next couple of days. Even if they do it will likely take a month or two for prices to fall to acceptable levels.