Hello—Hello of Prince bin Farhan and Araqchi,  of unspecified time of the call and its duration, was otherwise the first publicly announced telephone contact between the two heads of diplomacy since the outbreak of the conflict between Israel and the US against Iran on February 28^th . Retaliating against American-Israeli actions, in the 40 days of the conflict, Tehran repeatedly hit targets on the Arabian Peninsula (https://www.instagram.com/reel/DW3jnspDi1d/).

As of Wednesday afternoon, the Ministry of Defence in Riyadh reported that the air defence of the Saudi Kingdom “intercepted nine drones in the previous few hours, without specifying either the locations or the targets” (https://www.ft.com/content/115eb832-9a62-424f-a893-57156ce8abf7?syn-25a6b1a6=1).

On the same day, a little earlier, the first report arrived that the key Saudi “East-West” oil pipeline (on the map, between the Abqaiq field in the east of the country and the Yanbu oil port on the Red Sea, about 1,200 kilometres long) was exposed to some kind of armed attack. Whether it was a drone strike, and eventually whose, is not stated in the carefully worded text of the London “Financial Times”’ article , which was the first to report on the incident.

By the way, in mid-March, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince bin Farhan told Iran that the attacks on its neighbours in the region had destroyed all confidence in Tehran. “Iran is no longer a strategic partner, it never was,” and it could have been “if it took a different course” (https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/gulf/2026/04/09/saudi-and-iranian-foreign-ministers-hold-first-call-since-start-of-iran-war/).

In those days, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi called on Saudi Arabia to evict US bases from its territory, remarking that Tehran only targets enemy targets, that is, that “Iran respects the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and considers it a brotherly nation.”

As of Wednesday, some kind of incident—officially unconfirmed, seems to have happened on the Saudi oil pipeline “East-West”. On the same day, ministers of foreign affairs of Saudi Arabia and Iran,  held a telephone conversation, which was not disclosed until a day later, on Thursday.

Is there something wrong about the attack on the only oil pipeline through which the Saudis can reliably deliver oil to customers in Asia at the moment?

*

No, it still doesn’t seem that “investors really want to believe in fairy tales” (https://www.ft.com/ontent/57f1c55a-7eab-4a3e-83d5-c8e228b7e99d?syn-25a6b1a6=1) as Katie Martin, a columnist for the London “Financial Times” tries to understand the stock market players’ actions, who have been literally reacting since February 28^th  to any announcement and statement of the 47^th President of the USA.

“Markets really do still respond to the president’s pronouncements”—a  sentence from the text entitled “Trump’s tales are still muddling markets”  is the reason for our question here. : “What happens when/if the world’s stock markets stop reacting to Donald Trump’s statements”? More precisely, to the announcements of the current president of the USA, the leader of the world’s largest economy, the commander-in-chief of the world’s strongest army?

As things stand now, the US-Israel conflict against Iran is far from a “fairy tale”, and does not yet portend a happy ending, whatever that might be for the opposing actors in the ongoing war drama in the Persian Gulf. Whether the “end” could happen soon, and what it might look like, is quite uncertain. Maybe even scary.

How petro-markets are to relate to the latest threats of US President Donald Trump to the Iranians like “open the fucking Hormuz Pass, you crazy bastards, or you will live in hell” (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/trump-iran-war-weapons/686685/)?

Or, the other:”Peace deal on Monday-Tuesday, or I will blow up the whole country” (https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/trump-says-iran-deal-possible-by-monday-or-tuesday-threatens-to-blow-everything-up-if-talks-fail/3892760) ?

Leaving aside later reactions of Tehran, Pope Leo, international humanitarian organizations… the direction of the next move of the world stock markets tomorrow, Monday, April 6, seems to be known in advance.

Namely, in the setting of the Bretton-Woods global order, world markets are not in a position to distrust the US president.

It is therefore not a “fairytale”, but a fundamental setting of the global order with key addresses in Washington since 1944. In that setting, Donald Trump is the president of the USA (in his second term) elected by an overwhelming majority of voters, who at the end of February, in alliance with Israel, led America into a war against Iran.

International stock markets by default respect the systemic position of the US president in the current global order.Hence the fairy-tale nightmares after Trump’s war declarations these days, some of which literally eclipse those of the day before.

Stock markets, even in the case of such contradictory presentations of the White House’s war course, are in no position to ignore Trump’s messages: many dollars and a handful of other factors are in this long and fabulous game.

On the other hand, how could stock market “ignorance” manifest itself in the event of a war led by America?

Thus, when the President of the USA announces that the American army could soon return the Iranians to the “Stone Age, where they belong” (https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.7151916), the stock market as soon as tomorrow will connect it to the assessment of the further supply of oil and gas to the world… Previously, the actors of the global oil trade should somehow imagine a trip “to the Stone Age”…

Considering all that is happening in the Persian Gulf now, perhaps the recent, separate estimates by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, and Wood Mackenzie—that a barrel of oil could cost as much as US$200 ( https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/11/irans-irgc-says-not-one-liter-of-oil-will-get-through-strait-of-hormuz;

https://www.woodmac.com/blogs/the-edge/boiling-a-frog-could-oil-prices-test-us$200bbl/)

 – were shy after all?

*

The world’s petro-exchanges are now flooded with signals that the hostilities in the Hormuz Strait zone could lead to an “apocalyptic” deterioration in the further supply of oil to the global market, erasing, at least for now, any glimmer of hope that the conflict between Israel and the US against Iran could soon end.

“There is a ‘big, big risk’ that petro-infrastructure in the Strait of Hormuz could be damaged this coming weekend…For example, Iran’s Kharg Island (area 20 square kilometres) (on the photo), which is a key export petro-terminal” — Bjarne Schieldrop, chief analyst at “Scandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (SEB) warned today (March 13)( https://www.rigzone.com/news/analyst_warns_of_big_big_risk_for_oil_over_weekend-13-mar-2026-183201-article/.

According to Schieldrop, “If (petro-facility on Kharg Island) is damaged, we would have a longer supply shortage, far beyond Trump’s announced of ‘two more weeks’ .It will make the spot price spike higher …”.

On this line of consideration of possible scenarios for the development of the war that began on February 28, the US investment bank JP Morgan on March 9, pointed out that “if the US and Israel seize Kharg Island, oil production in Iran would stall…triggering further attacks from Tehran on regional petro-infrastructure” (https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-shock-worsen-should-us-israel-seize-irans-kharg-island-jp-morgan-says-2026-03-09/).

The storage capacities on the island of Kharg normally amount to about 30 million barrels: while there are now about 18 million barrels in the tanks there (a quantity equivalent to 10-12 days of export under more normal circumstances).

It is uncertain whether an invasion of Kharg is really being prepared, even this weekend.

Meanwhile, news is coming out of Washington that US Defense Secretary Pete Hegsett has approved a request from US Central Command to deploy a Marine Expeditionary Force, which typically includes several warships and 5,000 troops. (https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/us-israel-iran-war-news-2026?mod=WSJ_home_mediumtopper_pos_1).

A day earlier, Mojtaba Khamenei, the new supreme leader of Iran, emphasized in a written message that he insists on a further “blockade” of the Hormuz Strait  (https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/oil-holds-above-100-stocks-030351605.html).

Kharg Island is 25 kilometres off the coast of Iran, and about 483 kilometres northwest of the Strait of Hormuz.

For the world price of oil, “apocalypse now” might start right there … this weekend.

*

Kamal Kharazi, a foreign policy adviser of the Iran’s supreme leader of the supreme leader of Iran, has a vision of ending the ongoing war between Israel and the US against Iran (since February 28), which does not include diplomacy, but violent economic pressure on “other countries”.

“I don’t see any more room for diplomacy… There is no room unless the economic pressure increases to the point that other countries would intervene to guarantee an end to the American and Israeli aggression against Iran,” Kharazi said this week in an exclusive interview with CNN (https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/09/middleeast/iran-long-war-kamal-kharazi-interview-intl).

US television company states that Kharazi suggested that the countries of the Persian Gulf and other countries must put pressure on the US to end the war.

In the meantime, Iran came out with an expanded list of “legitimate targets”, among which Tehran now includes the offices and installations of “Microsoft”, “Google”, “Palantir”, “Nvidia”, “Oracle”, international banks, cloud-infrastructure in Israel…(https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/11/iran-declares-us-israeli-economic-banking-interests-in-region-as-targets).

This is likely to upset the hosts of foreign mega-businesses in the Arabian Peninsula. But, apart from the energy importers directly affected by the suspension of exports through the Strait of Hormuz, who else could be among the “other countries” mentioned by Kharazi in the CNN interview?

Perhaps the answer should be sought on the south-western edges of the Arabian Peninsula, from where the first news about the significant manoeuvres of the pro-Iranian rebel movement Ansar Allah in the northwest of Yemen comes (https://jewishrhody.com/stories/iran-war-leaves-yemens-houthis-between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place-analysis,145058).

In line with the possible development of the situation, the National Emergency Crisis and Disaster Management Authority of the United Arab Emirates (NCEMA) denied the claims of the Yemeni Houthis that they had fired a cruise missile in the direction of the UAE airspace, more precisely towards the “Barakah” nuclear power plant, which otherwise provides 25 percent of the country’s electricity needs (https://www.sabanew.net/story/en/25788).

On the other hand, the Houthis have already issued a threat that with the new war situation over the Persian Gulf, they could close the narrow sea passage of Bab-el Mandeb, in the south of the Red Sea, between Arabian peninsula and the Horn of Africa (on the map). Normally 10-12 percent of global maritime trade (measured by cargo weight and cargo value) on the East-West maritime route, passes through Bab el-Mandeb (https://isdo.ch/analysis-of-maritime-geopolitics-on-early-2026-the-red-sea-factor/).

It is uncertain whether the Houthis are capable of implementing a  “blockade” of Bab el-Mandeb, joining that way with Iranian “ramp” over the Hormuz Pass.

The global economic consequences of a such “double red traffic light” already seem unimaginable.

At this moment, the world public can only hope for the imminent end of the conflict between Israel and the USA against Iran: one of the reasons for this anxious belief is the fact that some actors vow to achieve their ultimate goals by fighting to the “last drop of blood”. (https://iranpress.com/content/315830/iran-army-chief-vows-defend-honor-until-last-drop-blood).

Who would declare “the end”, and what the “megdan field” over the Persian Gulf (on the map) would look like after that, seems completely uncertain for now to many, not only the increasingly nervous energy traders, or the first neighbours on the already shaken Arabian Peninsula.

As things stand now, US President Donald Trump’s assessment on Monday that the war is “very complete” seems unclear if, for example, one takes into account the scope of US military operations the very next day in the area of ​​the Strait of Hormuz (https://www.theguardian.com/news/2026/mar/11/us-iran-strait-of-hormuz-mine-boat-attacks).

As well as Israeli army’s actions today (Wednesday March 11^th ) in western Iran (https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-889553). But also  with simultaneous Iranian missile strikes on Dubai International Airport and targets across the Persian Gulf (https://www.ttnews.com/articles/iran-targets-oil-facilities).

Could a “little excursion” – as the US president described the attack on Iran at the beginning of the week (https://fortune.com/2026/03/10/trump-says-iran-war-end-soon/) ,  turn into a historic test of the endurance of the participants?

And if so, then what profiles of “endurance”?

At least two signals indicate at this moment that the conflict between Israel and the USA against Iran could last for a while.

On the one hand, there is the “disappointment” of US President Donald Trump with the election of Mojtaba Khamenei as supreme religious leader of Iran (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/9/trump-slams-mojtaba-khameneis-appointment-as-iran-projects-defiance).

By the way, Mojtaba Khamenei was elected as the supreme leader of Shiite Iran, after the assassination of his father, the supreme leader and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed on the first day of the Israeli-US attack on Iran on February 28. It seems that Mojtaba Khamenei was at that time, also wounded in the legs (https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/new-supreme-leader-mojtaba-khamenei-injured-in-war-but-safe-says-iran-presidents-son-2880277-2026-03-11).

For the sake of understanding the war amphitheatre, Shi’ism is “one of two, or three main directions (currents), denominations in Islam” (Rade Božović, Vojislav Simić, Rečnik Islama, st.191, 2010). In that Islamic community, “Ayatollah” is: “‘God’s sign’, in Shia Islam, a high spiritual title that is awarded to one of the 12 chosen believers of Allah or mujdehid, authoritative experts of the faith… The title of Ayatollah has been awarded since the last century by authorities-jurists … who are connected to the famous Shia schools in Qom, Tabriz or Mashhad…” (ibid, p. 31).

A question could be asked here: how to understand last week’s statement of US President Donald Trump that he “must be involved in the selection process” of the next Iranian leader (after the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei)? (https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-says-he-needs-be-involved-selecting-irans-next-leader-axios-reports-2026-03-05/).

Whether Donald Trump understands the enemy in the current conflict with Iran is the subject of a series of analyses these days (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-03-10/iran-war-trump-doesn-t-know-his-enemy-that-gives-iran-an-edge; https://www.indrastra.com/2026/03/trump-sees-short-war-in-iran-tehran-is.html).

Trying to resolve that dilemma, the focus is mainly on insights into the profiles of military arsenals, strategies and tactics… Looking at those other differences between the actors of this war over the Persian Gulf, may just bring a part of the solutions to the puzzle about the possible length of the current war over the Persian Gulf.

If, in the meantime, a generally acceptable “diplomatic messiah”—a conciliator—does not appear.

That missing, could be a signal that the war “time bomb” over Persian Gulf , could continue to be ticking…

The arena of war threats in the Near and Middle East, and the escalation of military “sparks” along the Baltic and North Sea, cross each other  days in the waters of the Strait of Gibraltar (on the photo, satellite photo) and its Atlantic-Mediterranean surroundings, signalling  potential new dynamics in that region.

An example of a possible “close encounter” scenario occurred last week, when the USS aircraft carrier “Gerald R. Ford” approached Gibraltar from the Atlantic with an accompanying strike group of ships, accompanied by at least one ship of the Spanish Navy (frigate Santa Maria). “Gerald R. Ford” by the way was on the move from the Atlantic — where until recently participated in the US mission in the “case of Venezuela”, in the direction of the Eastern Mediterranean or Suez, it has not yet been specified. (https://www.twz.com/news-features/supercarrier-uss-gerald-r-ford-has-crossed-into-the-mediterranean).

In the meantime, in the waters of the Central and Western Mediterranean from the beginning of February until recently,  the Russian military cargo ship “Sparta IV” (known for the transport of particularly fragile cargo, including weapons systems and ammunition)- was moving quite mysteriously (https://www.unionesarda.it/en/sardinia/the-russian-ship39-s-strange-route-off-the-coast-of-sardinia-nato-monitors-its-movements-uarw2dh7).

As recently as January, “Sparta IV” sailed in the Mediterranean Sea together with another Russian ship “Mys Zheaniya” and the tanker “Kama” accompanied by the destroyer “Severnomorsk” of the Russian Navy, and since then it has been under NATO monitoring. There was also speculation that a Russian Kilo-class submarine was in the vicinity during the same period (https://maritime-executive.com/article/russian-military-cargo-ship-continues-mysterious-maneuvers).

Be that as it may, the “group” split up at some point. Then, in the middle of the month, “Sparta IV“, traveling in the direction of Gibraltar (according to announcements for Kaliningrad in the Baltic), suddenly changed course, “oscillating” for five days along the eastern coast of Sardinia. Then, “Sparta IV” turned off the transponder, and after a few days, surfaced not far from the territorial waters of Spain.

All this time, the Italian, French, Spanish and British Navies kept “Sparta IV” close look on it, since the movement of Russian Navy ships in the Mediterranean Sea has been quite frequent of lately (https://www.itamilradar.com/2026/02/14/sparta-iv-reappears-off-spain-after-ais-blackout/).

Then, “Sparta IV” again “oscillated” there, remaining always in international waters, but not far from the territorial waters of Spain. Technical failure? Bad weather? Something else?

Vigilant observers have not found out even to this day – when that ship has already passed through Gibraltar. After crossing on Atlantic, “Sparta IV” continued to “oscillate”, this time not far from the territorial waters of Portugal, at the height of the city of Nazare.

Military—naval congestion around Gibraltar becomes noticeable.

“Greece will become an energy hub,” emphasized Ambassador Guilfoyle in the fall. “We want to show that Greece can become an energy hub that will help us oppose Russian and Chinese interests. What we are looking for is energy independence, which will strengthen national defence and national security,” Guilfoyle added on that occasion. As a reminder, Guilfoyle mentioned the Greek port of Alexandroupolis (on the photo), about 300 kilometres east of Thessaloniki, last July in her presentation before the US Senate (https://greekherald.com.au/news/kimberly-guilfoyle-vows-to-deepen-us-greece-ties-in-defense-energy-and-trade/).

The strategic importance of the port of Alexandroupolis—the last city in Europe on the way to the Orient, in the new phase of development of energy cooperation between the USA, Greece and Europe, was exclusively confirmed to the Belgrade “Politics” at the beginning of January by Konstantinos Sifnaios, vice president and CEO of “Gastrade” S.A., a Greek company for natural gas and construction-technical business founded in 2010, with the vision that the wider region cannot and should not depend on one source of energy or one energy route. (https://www.politika.rs/sr/clanak/722149/srbija-ce-transportovati-tecni-gas-preko-aleksandrupolisa).

It is not surprising, therefore, that these days in Alexandroupolis, Ambassador Gilfoyle  started an extensive tour of getting to know Greece on the ground (https://www.voria.gr/article/periodeies-ana-tin-ellada-xekina-i-gkilfoil-thessaloniki-kai-alexandroypoli-oi-protes).

Alexandroupolis was chosen as the starting point of the US Ambassador’s tour of Greece by no chance, since near the capital of the border area of ​​Evros, there is a floating FSRU unit “Gastrade” from where the export of US LNG to markets in Ukraine and Bulgaria has already started via the “Vertical Corridor”.

In the meantime, a meeting regarding the Vertical Corridor expansion plans is scheduled at the headquarters of the US Department of Energy on February 24, which, according to announcements, will bring together regulators, network operators, companies from the private sector and, for the first time, representatives of the European Commission.

Dr. Abbas Araghchi, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran set out yesterday—over Strait of Ormuz, to Muscat. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/iranian-foreign-minister-heads-to-oman-for-nuclear-talks-with-us/3821850).

Witkoff and Araghchi will lead a historic round of indirect negotiations between the United States and Iran on the “nuclear issue” according to earlier announcements by the official Tehran. And this time, despite earlier announcements by Washington that this time there should be other topics on the agenda, at least that’s what the “Jerusalem Post” states.

The first step? A concession? The outcome will still be widely evaluated on both sides, in the region, but also around the world.

In the meantime, US President Donald Trump has previously emphasized that in the case of Iran, he can give priority to diplomacy, even among other options. (https://www.ynetnews.com/article/q3hoxgv6t).

On the other hand, Tehran now seems very interested in the upcoming dialogue (regardless of the still unspecified form of “indirect” exchange of opinions).

“This diplomatic dialogue is conducted responsibly and with the aim of achieving a fair, acceptable and respectful understanding regarding the nuclear issue,” Ismael Baghei, spokesman for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, announced yesterday. (https://www.saba.ye/en/news3641668.htm).

According to Baghei: “At the same time, we bear the responsibility not to miss any opportunity to use diplomacy to protect the interests of the Iranian people and maintain peace and stability in the region.”

How much room there is for optimism, that the high emissaries of Washington and Tehran will reach a mutually acceptable agreement this time, is uncertain.

Be that as it may, Muscat once again showed that it has been a kind of “diplomatic magnet” for Americans, Iranians, and a number of other influential actors for some time.

For example, Oman, in the arena of highly divided parties, once publicly supported Egypt’s peace talks with Israel in 1977 and the negotiations at Camp David in 1978. As far back as 1980, Muscat was the first Arab capital to enter into a delicate military agreement with America.

Former CIA director William Burns, in his book “Back Channel”, revealed how much role Oman’s mediation played in the signing of the West’s nuclear deal with Iran in 2015. According to Burns, Iranian officials sent a message through Oman back in 2012 to suggest the first meeting in Muscat to the US.

How much the skills of the diplomats of the “Switzerland of the Middle East”—as Oman is seen by many, will be able to bring Witkoff and Araghchi closer this coming weekend, looks like the “million dollar question.”

It is hard to imagine what future direction the relations between Washington and Pretoria could take when Leo Brent Bozell, the newly appointed US ambassador to South Africa starts working in the country of the Cape of Good Hope.

Namely, in the middle of January, the official Washington and Pretoria brought, the already strained relations since last year, to a new “ice”, after the joint military and naval manoeuvres of several members of “BRICS plus”, and under the leadership of China, held in the territorial waters of the Republic of South Africa (January 10-16). Who all from the “BRICS plus” composition sent (only) officers—observers, and who sent warships to Simons Town (on the photo)—the leading military base of the South Africa , whose corvettes (and some other very advanced naval vessels) then remained anchored there until January 16, and whose sailed to the Atlantic for gunnery exercises… was carefully monitored in those days, all over the world https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20260108-chinese-iranian-warships-in-south-africa-for-exercises

A big mystery even today is how exactly it happened that three warships of Iran found themselves in Simons Town those days?

More precisely, what did Cyril Ramaphosa, the President of the Republic of South Africa, thought about the arrival of Iranian warships and what did he do about it? Vincent Magwenya, President Rampoza’s spokesman insists that the South African leader demanded (without specifying, from whom?) that Iran’s participation in naval drills be cancelled (China seems to have sent invitations), in order to protect “our national interests”. Meanwhile, the US embassy in Pretoria lashed out, accusing the government of Cyril Ramaphosa—aka the leader of the African National Congress, South Africa’s leading party—of “choosing to support a regime that brutally represses its people and engages in terrorism.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/28/world/africa/south-africa-iran-navy-drills-trump.html

Be that as it may, Iranian warships were sighted in the military harbour at Simons Town in those days. After a great storm arose, Ramapoza ordered an investigation into the circumstances under which the Iranian ships found themselves in Simons Town, but it is not yet clear how far that review has gone.

In that fog, the South African government ordered on Friday, January 30, Ariel Seidman, the chargé d’affaires of the Israeli embassy, ​​to leave the Cape of Good Hope country within the next 72 hours, stating that “the decisive action follows a series of unacceptable violations of diplomatic norms and practices that represent a direct threat to the sovereignty of South Africa…” (https://www.intellinews.com/south-africa-expels-israeli-charg-d-affaires-prompting-retaliation-against-ambassador-in-ramallah-423290/

On the same day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Gideon Saar decided – that “after South Africa’s false attacks against Israel on the international stage and the unilateral, baseless step taken against Israel’s Chargé d’Affaires in South Africa – that South Africa’s high diplomatic representative, Minister Sean Edward Bienevelt, is persona non grata”. Beinvelt was too given 72 hours to leave—from … from Ramallah – where he was by the way the South African envoy to Palestine—Israel

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/853412-south-africa-israel-continue-diplomatic-row-expel-each-others-envoys.html

Now that these days—as expected, Leo Brent Bozell, the new US ambassador, will officially arrive in Pretoria, relations between Washington and Pretoria could become even more “dynamic”.

By the way, Bozell was always an opponent of any negotiations with the African National Congress, which at that time – in the eighties of the last century, was led by the legendary Nelson Mandela, convinced that it was a “pro-communist, pro-terrorist organization” headed by a “mythologized figure”. (https://www.rfi.fr/en/africa/20260110-leo-brent-bozell-iii-new-us-ambassador-to-south-africa)…

By the way, after the December decision of the USA to – during the one-year presidency The G20 excludes the Republic of South Africa from the work of that group, the official Pretoria first announced that it will fight for its place and role in the G20. These days, the official Pretoria temporarily suspended the membership of the Cape of Good Hope country in the G20 for 12 months. https://www.rfi.fr/en/africa/20260127-south-africa-confirms-temporary-withdrawal-from-the-g20-as-us-takes-the-helm-1.

Launch is optional. As well as the disembarkation of troops. At first, a credible threat is sufficient, such as: “Right now we have a lot of very large, very powerful ships sailing toward Iran, and it would be great if we didn’t have to use them” (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/hegseth-tells-trump-pentagon-is-prepared-iran-2026-01-29/)

World petro-exchanges react to such a message from US President Donald Trump by lightning-fast raising the value of the risk-premium (7$-10$), almost at the same pace as they did earlier this month, first regarding the “Venezuela case” and then the “Greenland case”.

At an almost similar pace, today (January 30^th ) the petro-exchanges sharply reduced the values ​​of barrels (which otherwise rose to record highs the day before, primarily due to geopolitical reasons): “Brent” to around 70.03 US dollars, and light Texas oil WTI to around $64.70 (https://www.threads.com/@channelnewsasia/post/DUIcmBijts4/oil-slides-as-trump-signals-dialogue-with-iran-over-nuclear-programme-utm)

This time, primarily due to the announcement of the 47th president of the USA that, despite all the manoeuvres of the US naval “armada” in the direction of the Strait of Hormuz, he is still taking into account a certain possibility of … dialogue with Iran.

According to the Times of Israel, when asked if he had held talks with Iran in the past few days or if he planned to do so, Trump replied: “I have and I plan to.” (https://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-confirms-talks-with-tehran-is-reportedly-mulling-raids-by-troops-on-iranian-facilities/)

Talks between the USA and Iran are already taking place somehow, somewhere…?!

How much can the world’s oil traders relax on this occasion? (In addition to all the other complicated factors that affect the price of a barrel at the moment: from Kazakhstan to Oklahoma…).

The answer is uncertain, after this month, a barrel of Brent—defying the expectations of Wall Street experts—achieved its biggest monthly jump since January 2022, and  WTI its record high since July 2023 (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-30/oil-s-year-of-the-glut-begins-with-an-unexpected-price-surge)

 On Wall Street, many expected the price of a barrel of “Brent” to hover around $50 in 2026, now the bet is already widely open that the barrel will reach prices above $90.

What could prevent such a jump in the price of a barrel?

One of the encouraging signals of “missile descent” is the already mentioned indication by the US president Trump about …a dialogue with Iran.

The second, perhaps, is the restrained announcement by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi today in Istanbul about the road to … talks between Tehran and Washington. https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/irans-top-diplomat-plans-talks-us-129701337

“We are ready for fair and equal negotiations,” he said. “For such negotiations, arrangements must first be made, both regarding the form of the conversation and the venue, as well as regarding the topic of the conversation,” said Araghçhi.

Muscat? Istanbul? Ankara?… The world’s oil traders will have to set up new observatories for the movement of the “Persian rocket”…