LONDON: Energy and oil market analysts, speaking to Independent Arabia, unanimously described the surprise Israeli military strikes on Iranian targets as creating an “instantaneous market shock.”

Amid escalating geopolitical tensions, the latest military confrontations between Israel and Iran are propelling crude oil prices into dramatic territory, rekindling fears of energy crises that have historically destabilized global markets.

This unprecedented escalation sparks immediate questions about energy market disruptions, petroleum price movements, and short-term risk premium adjustments — including the possibility of crude breaching the $100 per barrel threshold.

Conversely, with reports confirming that Iranian oil refining and storage facilities remained undamaged, this factor may help cushion the shock to global petroleum markets.

Crisis background and market impact

These significant developments emerge precisely as markets were starting to digest the International Energy Agency’s “Global Energy Review 2025,” which forecast a deceleration in oil demand growth stemming from the worldwide shift toward renewable energy and electric vehicle adoption.

However, Israeli attacks on Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility and additional military targets have completely reversed these projections, aggressively thrusting supply disruption concerns and price escalation back into the spotlight.

Analysts portrayed the strike as “converting the Iranian standoff from a political matter into actual combat,” propelling oil prices higher by 7 percent to 13 percent in the steepest single-session increase since March 2022. Subsequently, Brent crude exceeded $78 per barrel as West Texas Intermediate advanced past $73.

International warnings and notable statements

These incidents align with global warnings and prominent declarations from US President Donald Trump, who acknowledged that the American leadership possessed advance intelligence about Israeli attacks on Iran, while stressing Washington’s detachment from the operations.

Trump cautioned Tehran about its nuclear ambitions, declaring: “We will not allow Iran to possess nuclear weapons... but we do not want a new war in the Middle East.”

Such pronouncements intensify the complexity of circumstances, revealing that Washington maintains vigilant oversight, while seeking to circumvent direct participation in hostilities that could trigger catastrophic repercussions for the world economy.

Throughout history, the Iranian matter has remained among the most convoluted subjects in global politics, where atomic weapon concerns merge with financial and geopolitical calculations.

Momentary shock or open conflict?

Energy and oil market analysts, speaking to Independent Arabia, unanimously described the surprise Israeli military strikes on Iranian targets as creating an “instantaneous market shock,” heightening concerns that current tensions might spiral into full-scale warfare in one of the globe’s most critical oil-producing areas.

Industry experts verified that crude price movements in the upcoming phase will hinge on three primary elements: Tehran’s likely retaliation strategy, major powers’ diplomatic stances, and whether military activities persist in the short and intermediate timeframes.

Market analysts pointed out that dramatic price spikes mainly represent “uncertainty premiums” tied to geopolitical instability, which could stay heightened while hostilities continue. This premium constitutes the additional cost petroleum purchasers bear to hedge against possible supply interruptions.

They observed that escalating geopolitical threats result in increased uncertainty premiums, pushing prices higher despite the absence of real supply constraints.

Although undamaged Iranian oil processing and storage infrastructure serves as a significant stabilizing element, analysts contend that direct strikes on Iranian petroleum facilities would have triggered instant supply cuts, accelerating prices to substantially higher territory.

They stressed that present price rises reflect anticipated future threats rather than genuine supply deficits thus far, offering the market some operational room. Put differently, the market currently confronts the prospect of oil supply interruptions rather than actual losses, constraining the scale of price increases that would have occurred had petroleum installations been specifically attacked.

Reciprocal attacks

Petroleum sector expert Kamel Al-Harami considers it challenging to forecast precise oil price targets amid present conditions, citing the potential for Middle Eastern warfare or Iranian supply interruptions affecting global markets in Asia, particularly China, India, and Japan.

Al-Harami observed that although OPEC maintains spare capacity surpassing 5 million barrels per day, crude prices jumped $7 within a 24-hour period, hitting $73 per barrel. He characterized this surge as merely the initial phase of additional gains, speculating whether values might climb to $80 or potentially $90 per barrel.

Al-Harami noted that any pricing above $65 per barrel would favor American shale operations and stimulate enhanced sector investment. He underscored that greater increases would arise from expanding warfare consequences and mutual attacks between Israel and Iran, potentially encompassing other Gulf Arab countries, thus “commencing the actual calamity.”

Strong blow to sentiment

IG market specialist Tony Sycamore described the escalation as “a major hit to market confidence” throughout financial sectors generally, not limited to energy trading, forecasting significant capital flight from risk investments by week’s close. He observed that market participants are watching for “potential Iranian reprisals,” which might shape trading patterns in upcoming sessions.

Supply concerns
Strategic analyst at Pepperstone Ahmed Aseeri explained that current price increases reflect a combination of immediate supply concerns and expectations of gradually escalating tensions, unlike previous Iran-Israel tension rounds that usually ended quickly or through international containment pressures.

Contagion spread

Phillip Nova Singapore market analyst Priyanka Sachdeva verified that Iran’s preparation for military reprisals amplifies dangers, extending beyond supply interruptions to include prospects of geopolitical spillover affecting neighboring oil-producing nations, possibly driving crude prices back to heights not witnessed in 10 years.

Production disruption

Lipow Oil Associates President Andy Lipow outlined that crude prices might surpass $100 per barrel should any Gulf petroleum production installations face disruption, although he emphasized the baseline projection presumes leading nations will work to limit escalation and avoid further deterioration.

Major doubts

XM Australia’s CEO Peter McGuire depicted “Israeli-Iranian conflicts” as producing “considerable anxiety” spurring market fluctuations, explaining that oil values react predominantly to imminent supply vulnerabilities compared with other elements.

Price projections

Natasha Kaneva, JPMorgan’s global commodities strategy chief, projected possible price crests at $120, though she balanced this by saying that markets could tumble to $40 if additional supplies materialize and demand weakens. Geopolitics maintains its dominance.

Broader conflict and worst scenario

JPMorgan detailed in a latest research analysis that the gravest outcome entails possible hostilities spreading to encompass oil supply interruptions from surrounding states, including endangering maritime transit via the Strait of Hormuz.

JPMorgan specified that this hard-line possibility holds approximately 7 percent likelihood, implying prices might achieve “explosive” growth propelled by international market alarm if the area deteriorates into extensive conflict.

Despite such warnings, the bank retained fundamental projections for Brent petroleum in the 60s per barrel territory for the remainder of 2025, expecting area and worldwide powers to suppress escalation, followed by approximately $60 in 2026.

Future scenarios

As regional geopolitical strain escalates, market observers concentrate on potential developments that might determine global crude price directions. If leading powers including the US and EU intervene to ease hostilities and forestall military reprisals between Iran and Israel, prices would likely diminish progressively toward pre-tension benchmarks. This pathway hinges on diplomatic effectiveness and immediate crisis management, which JPMorgan endorses in its fundamental outlook.

Alternatively, if Iran strikes back forcefully or hostilities broaden to encompass Iranian oil installations or Strait of Hormuz transit, petroleum prices could climb beyond $100-120 per barrel within global energy market pandemonium. This scenario might worsen should obstruction of the Strait of Hormuz happen, which JPMorgan characterized as the direst possibility, cited by Andy Lipow and Priyanka Sachdeva as realistic.

Three key factors to monitor

Against this backdrop of tensions, markets demonstrate limited potential for immediate calm, particularly as the Iranian challenge represents one of the most convoluted international political crises spanning over two decades. While investors endeavor to absorb ongoing developments, the short-range objective involves “stability” over inflated values. Hence, three principal indicators should be watched to determine pricing patterns:

First, Iran’s response style: Will it remain token or threaten supply continuity? Analysts regard Tehran’s reaction approach as the decisive factor influencing market trends in coming days.

Second, global powers’ effectiveness: Will they manage to shield the area from regional conflict? International mediation efforts need to serve crucial roles in limiting escalation and preventing progression toward wider confrontation.

Third, futures trading patterns: Do they demonstrate “sustained crisis” or “momentary surge” characteristics? Oil derivative contracts will deliver clear indications of market projections for extended timeframes. If pricing sustains long-term increases, this signals markets foresee continuing instability; if levels stabilize, this reflects perception of current turbulence as fleeting.

Broadly speaking, geopolitical dynamics will maintain control over petroleum markets in the near future, but if balance fails, effects will reach beyond energy to global price indices and economic development, with possible return to $100 pricing, potentially shadowing the entire world economy.

KARACHI: While Pakistan’s automobile manufacturers are still parsing the government’s new financial plan, industry experts on Friday said proposed International Monetary Fund (IMF)-mandated reforms, such as the rationalization of trade tariffs, could erode long-standing protections for local industry.

Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb said the government plans to reduce the overall tariff regime by more than four percent over the next five years to steer the country toward an export-led growth model in line with the IMF program.

Under the National Tariff Policy 2025-30, the government aims to abolish additional customs duties (ACDs), regulatory duties (RDs) and provisions under the Fifth Schedule of the Customs Act, 1969. The goal is to simplify Pakistan’s tariff structure by reducing it to four duty slabs ranging from 0 to 15%.

The IMF-backed reforms are expected to lower Pakistan’s weighted average tariff by 3.2% points to 7.4%, said Shafiq Ahmed Shaikh, an automobile industry expert and former general manager of Pak Suzuki Motor Company Ltd.

“These tariff cuts will reduce protection to the auto industry along with reduction of the cost of vehicles,” he said. “It is a very sensitive point for industry… [and] must be discussed with the stakeholders for good, long-term and acceptable solutions.”

PARA-TARIFFS

Abdul Waheed Khan, spokesperson for the Pakistan Automotive Manufacturers Association (PAMA), said regulatory duties are designed to protect local industry and discourage unnecessary imports.

“The ACD too should gradually be abolished because such para-tariffs are not good,” he told Arab News.

Para-tariffs are taxes and duties levied in addition to standard customs tariffs, such as ACDs and RDs. While often introduced to curb imports or raise revenues, they are controversial because they can create complexity, raise costs and distort trade policy.

Pakistan’s federal budget also proposes raising the sales tax on 850cc small vehicles to 18% to bring parity between petrol or diesel-powered cars and hybrids.

“This would increase the cost of vehicles for middle income groups,” said Khan of PAMA, which represents the local operations of Honda, Suzuki, Toyota and 16 other manufacturers.

“This is not good for our Made-in-Pakistan policy as small vehicles will go costlier at a time when people’s disposable incomes are already not so good,” he continued, declining further comment on the budget.

CARBON LEVY

Pakistan’s automobile market, long dominated by Japanese firms like Honda, Toyota and Suzuki, has recently seen new entrants, particularly Chinese and Korean electric vehicle (EV) manufacturers like BYD, SAIC and Kia, operating through joint ventures.

“The existing industry will face good competition from EV and as we know, the future is of Electric Vehicles specially from China,” Shaikh, the automobile industry expert, told Arab News.

As one of the countries most affected by climate change, Pakistan also plans to introduce a carbon levy of up to Rs10 ($0.04) per liter on petrol, diesel and furnace oil over the next two years.

The move is intended “to discourage excessive use of fossil fuels and provide financial resources for climate change and green energy programs,” Finance Minister Aurangzeb said in his budget speech earlier this week.

Shaikh dismissed suggestions that the levy would raise car prices, arguing that consumers would instead begin shifting to EVs.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif also announced plans to impose differential taxes on the sale and import of vehicles based on engine size to promote the adoption of two- and three-wheeled EVs and reduce oil imports and pollution.

Syed Asif Ahmed, general manager of marketing at MG Motors, said the “industry is seeking clarity on recent budget.”

He noted that while the finance bill was silent on hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), social media was abuzz with reports that the government may raise the sales tax from eight % to 18 % next year.

“If true, this will jeopardize the huge investment done by almost all automakers on HEV,” Ahmed said.

The MG Motors executive also warned against reduced regulatory duties on used cars and commercial imports under schemes meant for returning expatriates.

“[The] used cars importers are abusing the gift, baggage and transfer of residence scheme for commercial trading,” Ahmed said.

CAR SALES

While stakeholders have voiced concerns over policy shifts, vehicle sales continue to show signs of recovery.

Passenger car sales rose 31% in May to 11,119 units, while cumulative sales from July to May in the outgoing fiscal year increased 32% year-on-year to 94,388 units, according to PAMA data.

“[The] growth is supported by a more stable macroeconomic environment, lower interest rates, easing inflation and improving consumer sentiment,” said Myesha Sohail, an analyst at Topline Securities Ltd., in a recent research note.

Sohail expects this momentum to continue into the next fiscal year, driven by lower interest rates and a pipeline of new models across combustion, hybrid and plug-in hybrid categories.