Not quite sure that this will be the end of the Islamic republic, after all, Persia/Iran has been around since Biblical times. Not sure exactly what the end goal is here and I wonder if Trump, himself even knows, since he has a history of changing on a daily basis. Is he just doing Bibi's bidding? After all he just said that ending Iran war will be ‘mutual’ decision with Netanyahu. So we kind of know who is really giving the marching orders here. And he met with Netanyahu several times over the past few months.
Most Americans, last I read: 75% of them, do not want a war with Iran, especially if it is for the greater expansion of Zionist Israel. Many will say that Iran is a terrorist country. I won't get into their history since the1920s that show how coups and regime changes by the U.S. have caused this, but there's plenty of info out there on it. One just has to do the research, of which I have linked lately @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/
So what's the real reason for going to war here. Netanyahu has claimed for 40 years or more that Iran has been getting close to getting nukes. Seriously?? By 40 years they would have had them by now. So that perspective is a crock. Besides, no one say "Jack" about Israel having nukes. Why is that? "Ok for me but not for thee". Same goes with any other country that already has nukes. Will we attack North Korea as well? Isn't it common sense that if a country that doesn't like you has nukes, you might want some too as a deterrent. Besides, according to the Trumpster we took all those capabilities out with last years strike.
So is this really a play against China, in Trumps bid to restore the U.S. empire and have global dominance? We are doing regime changes in Venezuela and now Iran, both exporters of oil to China. Perhaps this is the real go and has nothing to do with nukes and terrorism.
“Chris Wright may think there’s not an oil shortage now. Would he still think that if Iran’s oil spigot were permanently turned off?”
Perhaps. Unless he knows there is excess capacity available from other oil producing nations ready to pick up the slack. Given that 90% of Iran’s oil went to China, how big a lift is it?
And I believe whoever ends up in charge of Iran is going to preside over a declining nation that is relatively powerless. They will be on notice that any attempt to reconstitute their nuke program, rebuild their missiles and drones, fund terrorists, etc. will be met with another round of strikes.
No, but much of OPEC+s excess capacity resides in Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Russia, which is why Trump lifted sanctions for a month. Not sure what the sweet/sour crude mix is, but the Western world should be able to get what it needs and if China can’t, well, guess they need to figure that out.
"Unless he knows there is excess capacity available from other oil producing nations ready to pick up the slack. Given that 90% of Iran’s oil went to China, how big a lift is it?"
Iran's exports to China are 80% of Iran's exports, and 15% of China's imports—and China is the world's biggest oil importer.
In 2024 total global oil demand was assessed by the IEA at 104mb/d. China's oil demand was 17.5mb/d. China accounted for roughly 16.8% of total global demand. China's imports from Iran account for roughly 2.6% of total global demand.
But the devil is in the details. Iran exports both light "sweet" crude (meaning low sulfur content) and heavy "sour" crude (high sulfur content). Refineries are optimized for sweet or sour crude. Venzuela's crude is mainly sour crude, as is Canada's. Sweet crudes produce more gasoline and diesel, while sour crudes produce more bitumen and other heavier fractions.
When President Trump went into Venezuela and forced Venezuela to export oil to the US on US terms, refineries along the Gulf Coast optimized for sour crude could swap Canadian crude with Venezuelan crude, making Mark Carney the second biggest loser in Trump's Venezuelan affair after Nicolas Maduro.
Taking Iran's oil exports off the table would have similarly disruptive effects on global refining.
Excellent analysis, Peter. Much to think about.2 observations of mine.
When the bombing stops, will Iran be able to repair the damage to their petrochemical industry? Personnel with expertise and equipment along with finances will need to be obtained to repair the damage. Can they source it? I don’t see Iran having much of either.
Regarding the Iranian population effecting regime change; the ordinary people are disarmed and not able to effectively able to challenge the Basij militias and IRGC troops. Can they at least obtain small arms? Slim chance they could obtain "battlefield pickups"; even so, they need ammo.
What a ton of research you’ve done in order to get a clear picture of what’s going on - thank you, Peter! And of course, in this fog of war the only truth is “we don’t know - yet”. With so much speculation, rumor, and narrative, I appreciate your objectivity.
One thing I’m pondering is if Trump is going to deliberately allow oil prices to remain high until Cuba, China, or Zelensky are destabilized to the point of change. We’ll see!
Peter, if you have time, I’m interested in your assessment of what this Substack author wrote two days ago. Lawyer Jeff Childers is an unabashed Trump supporter and eternal optimist, as this post shows. Is he missing something?
Childers used an entire article to cover what took me three paragraphs, and missed the most relevant aspect of the China variable: impact on global supply.
If China loses Iran's oil exports it will in short order find the price of oil getting quite a bit more expensive, and for two reasons: 1) no more discounts on Iranian crude 2) Russia can't replace Iranian exports with its own discounted crude on the same timelines (even if Russia's own production infrastructure weren't being steadily diminished by Ukrainian drone strikes the travel time to Shanghai from Kharg island is quite a bit less than the travel time from Novorossiysk, Primorsk, or Ust-Luga). China would then have to bid against other countries for oil, even Persian Gulf oil.
China would bid up the price of oil, and not just for China. Global benchmarks are important because they provide an indicator of what everyone pays for oil, not just China. Forcing China into the global oil marketplace means adding at least a couple dollars to crude oil prices FOR EVERYBODY. That impacts developing countries. That impacts Europe. That impacts East Asia. That in turn impacts the United States, Venezuela, and even Brazil and Mexico.
Whether the sum of those impacts is good or bad is extremely problematic.
As for Childers' thesis on Zelensky and Putin, he's making the same mistake that every other pundit makes when it comes to Ukraine: Trump is playing poker, not chess, as is Putin and as is Zelensky. Childers' entire analysis on Ukraine collapses right there.
Childers has some interesting theories, but that's all they are—theories.
You are a dedicated, hardworking analyst to be taking the time to reply, Peter. Thank you, and I’ll try not to plunder your brilliant mind again until tax season is over!
I suspect Trump’s solution to the roiling of oil markets will be “drill, baby, drill”. World prices will soar - affecting China, Cuba, and others in ways beneficial to Trump’s strategies - but domestic price increases may be able to be kept to a minimum. Trump remembers how Carter implemented the wrong solutions and incentives to the domestic oil industry during the 1970s, resulting in a boom followed by a ten-year bust (which destroyed my own dreams of a career in exploration). His team is likely to come up with a more sustained market solution.This is the benefit of having leaders who are older and wiser!
Not quite sure that this will be the end of the Islamic republic, after all, Persia/Iran has been around since Biblical times. Not sure exactly what the end goal is here and I wonder if Trump, himself even knows, since he has a history of changing on a daily basis. Is he just doing Bibi's bidding? After all he just said that ending Iran war will be ‘mutual’ decision with Netanyahu. So we kind of know who is really giving the marching orders here. And he met with Netanyahu several times over the past few months.
Most Americans, last I read: 75% of them, do not want a war with Iran, especially if it is for the greater expansion of Zionist Israel. Many will say that Iran is a terrorist country. I won't get into their history since the1920s that show how coups and regime changes by the U.S. have caused this, but there's plenty of info out there on it. One just has to do the research, of which I have linked lately @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/
So what's the real reason for going to war here. Netanyahu has claimed for 40 years or more that Iran has been getting close to getting nukes. Seriously?? By 40 years they would have had them by now. So that perspective is a crock. Besides, no one say "Jack" about Israel having nukes. Why is that? "Ok for me but not for thee". Same goes with any other country that already has nukes. Will we attack North Korea as well? Isn't it common sense that if a country that doesn't like you has nukes, you might want some too as a deterrent. Besides, according to the Trumpster we took all those capabilities out with last years strike.
So is this really a play against China, in Trumps bid to restore the U.S. empire and have global dominance? We are doing regime changes in Venezuela and now Iran, both exporters of oil to China. Perhaps this is the real go and has nothing to do with nukes and terrorism.
“Chris Wright may think there’s not an oil shortage now. Would he still think that if Iran’s oil spigot were permanently turned off?”
Perhaps. Unless he knows there is excess capacity available from other oil producing nations ready to pick up the slack. Given that 90% of Iran’s oil went to China, how big a lift is it?
And I believe whoever ends up in charge of Iran is going to preside over a declining nation that is relatively powerless. They will be on notice that any attempt to reconstitute their nuke program, rebuild their missiles and drones, fund terrorists, etc. will be met with another round of strikes.
No, but much of OPEC+s excess capacity resides in Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Russia, which is why Trump lifted sanctions for a month. Not sure what the sweet/sour crude mix is, but the Western world should be able to get what it needs and if China can’t, well, guess they need to figure that out.
"Unless he knows there is excess capacity available from other oil producing nations ready to pick up the slack. Given that 90% of Iran’s oil went to China, how big a lift is it?"
Iran's exports to China are 80% of Iran's exports, and 15% of China's imports—and China is the world's biggest oil importer.
In 2024 total global oil demand was assessed by the IEA at 104mb/d. China's oil demand was 17.5mb/d. China accounted for roughly 16.8% of total global demand. China's imports from Iran account for roughly 2.6% of total global demand.
But the devil is in the details. Iran exports both light "sweet" crude (meaning low sulfur content) and heavy "sour" crude (high sulfur content). Refineries are optimized for sweet or sour crude. Venzuela's crude is mainly sour crude, as is Canada's. Sweet crudes produce more gasoline and diesel, while sour crudes produce more bitumen and other heavier fractions.
When President Trump went into Venezuela and forced Venezuela to export oil to the US on US terms, refineries along the Gulf Coast optimized for sour crude could swap Canadian crude with Venezuelan crude, making Mark Carney the second biggest loser in Trump's Venezuelan affair after Nicolas Maduro.
Taking Iran's oil exports off the table would have similarly disruptive effects on global refining.
Not all crudes are created equal.
Excellent analysis, Peter. Much to think about.2 observations of mine.
When the bombing stops, will Iran be able to repair the damage to their petrochemical industry? Personnel with expertise and equipment along with finances will need to be obtained to repair the damage. Can they source it? I don’t see Iran having much of either.
Regarding the Iranian population effecting regime change; the ordinary people are disarmed and not able to effectively able to challenge the Basij militias and IRGC troops. Can they at least obtain small arms? Slim chance they could obtain "battlefield pickups"; even so, they need ammo.
What a ton of research you’ve done in order to get a clear picture of what’s going on - thank you, Peter! And of course, in this fog of war the only truth is “we don’t know - yet”. With so much speculation, rumor, and narrative, I appreciate your objectivity.
One thing I’m pondering is if Trump is going to deliberately allow oil prices to remain high until Cuba, China, or Zelensky are destabilized to the point of change. We’ll see!
Peter, if you have time, I’m interested in your assessment of what this Substack author wrote two days ago. Lawyer Jeff Childers is an unabashed Trump supporter and eternal optimist, as this post shows. Is he missing something?
https://coffeeandcovid.substack.com/p/gentlemens-agreements-sunday-march?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
Childers used an entire article to cover what took me three paragraphs, and missed the most relevant aspect of the China variable: impact on global supply.
If China loses Iran's oil exports it will in short order find the price of oil getting quite a bit more expensive, and for two reasons: 1) no more discounts on Iranian crude 2) Russia can't replace Iranian exports with its own discounted crude on the same timelines (even if Russia's own production infrastructure weren't being steadily diminished by Ukrainian drone strikes the travel time to Shanghai from Kharg island is quite a bit less than the travel time from Novorossiysk, Primorsk, or Ust-Luga). China would then have to bid against other countries for oil, even Persian Gulf oil.
China would bid up the price of oil, and not just for China. Global benchmarks are important because they provide an indicator of what everyone pays for oil, not just China. Forcing China into the global oil marketplace means adding at least a couple dollars to crude oil prices FOR EVERYBODY. That impacts developing countries. That impacts Europe. That impacts East Asia. That in turn impacts the United States, Venezuela, and even Brazil and Mexico.
Whether the sum of those impacts is good or bad is extremely problematic.
As for Childers' thesis on Zelensky and Putin, he's making the same mistake that every other pundit makes when it comes to Ukraine: Trump is playing poker, not chess, as is Putin and as is Zelensky. Childers' entire analysis on Ukraine collapses right there.
Childers has some interesting theories, but that's all they are—theories.
You are a dedicated, hardworking analyst to be taking the time to reply, Peter. Thank you, and I’ll try not to plunder your brilliant mind again until tax season is over!
I suspect Trump’s solution to the roiling of oil markets will be “drill, baby, drill”. World prices will soar - affecting China, Cuba, and others in ways beneficial to Trump’s strategies - but domestic price increases may be able to be kept to a minimum. Trump remembers how Carter implemented the wrong solutions and incentives to the domestic oil industry during the 1970s, resulting in a boom followed by a ten-year bust (which destroyed my own dreams of a career in exploration). His team is likely to come up with a more sustained market solution.This is the benefit of having leaders who are older and wiser!