Brent crude surged to $113 a barrel as escalating tensions between Iran, the US, and Israel threaten global energy supplies and raise fears of a major Middle East conflict.

Brent crude surged to $113 a barrel as escalating tensions between Iran, the US, and Israel threaten global energy supplies and raise fears of a major Middle East conflict.

Brent crude surged to $113 a barrel as escalating tensions between Iran, the US, and Israel threaten global energy supplies and raise fears of a major Middle East conflict.

Brent crude touched $113 a barrel this week, a five-month high, as the prospect of a fresh war with Iran returned ahead of the US midterm polls and Israeli parliamentary elections. Yesterday, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed to have disabled seven commercial vessels in a single day. Four, it said, caught fire during ship-to-ship oil transfers and three struck naval mines. Washington disputed the claim and maintained that US naval escorts have kept commercial energy exports moving. President Donald Trump nonetheless invoked wartime powers under the Defence Production Act to fund and accelerate domestic petroleum output.

Further worsening the situation, Houthi forces in Yemen launched missile and drone strikes on Saudi targets, causing casualties at King Fahd International Airport in Dammam and starting fires at Aramco facilities. The US State Department has ordered non-emergency diplomatic staff and their families out of Saudi Arabia. Aramco told employees at its Dhahran headquarters to work remotely and began negotiating overseas storage deals to shield crude reserves from regional strikes. Producers are now hedging against the very region they supply.

Tehran has meanwhile announced a change to its military plan. Senior IRGC officials describe an "offensive and asymmetrical" doctrine that abandons the old habit of delayed, calibrated retaliation. Any foreign strike on Iranian soil, they say, will draw immediate counter-strikes and pre-emptive operations against regional targets. Under a declared policy of "zero red lines", security chiefs warned that the next round will not spare economic assets in Gulf states. 

Energy installations, undersea communication cables, data centres and artificial intelligence infrastructure are all named as targets. The aim is to dismantle the economic architecture that sustains Western military operations. Iran claims a 1.5-fold increase in missile stockpiles, sharper guidance and the imminent deployment of a high-yield conventional weapon it calls the "father of all bombs". US bases across the region, it warned, will come under direct attack if Washington keeps escorting tankers.

That posture seems to be a response to what the US and Israel are planning. Target lists reportedly cover Iranian nuclear sites, ballistic missile and drone arsenals and state energy infrastructure, with operations widely expected after the American vote. 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeated that the threat can be removed permanently only by toppling the Iranian regime, and has directed his military and intelligence branches accordingly. Reports that Washington halted an Israeli strike set for October 10 were countered by sources who said Israel was never preparing one that day, though troops remain on high alert. The US has positioned three aircraft carrier strike groups, thousands of Marines and advanced air assets. Joint US-Israeli exercises over Iraq and flights near the Iranian border suggest preparation for a sustained campaign rather than a single blow.

The politics at home are less settled. Peter Thiel, the billionaire investor and Republican megadonor, has privately voiced deep scepticism about the campaign. Surging pump prices and stubborn inflation have eroded patience beyond the donor class. Trump conceded that military action carries an electoral "price to pay" but insisted that stopping Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is a paramount security requirement. Surveys show a majority of Americans want relief from foreign war spending, yet a committed minority would accept dearer fuel if it ended Iran's nuclear ambitions. Administration officials and congressional candidates now face harder questions about the domestic cost.

Intelligence assessments indicate that Russia and China have supplied enabling support and targeting intelligence for Iranian strikes on US regional bases. In response, the US Treasury and Greek officials are pursuing maritime law firms and corporate networks that facilitate illicit oil shipments, while European and Middle Eastern foreign ministers gather in Istanbul to coordinate crisis containment. 

Talks between Washington and Tehran have stalled on two points: Iran's right to enrich uranium under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and enforcement of the US naval blockade. Tehran proposed a seven-day framework to restore commercial transit through the Strait of Hormuz in return for sanctions relief, unfrozen assets and an end to port blockades. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio replied that Washington will reject any deal leaving Iran a path to nuclear weapons capability. Analysts warn that a deadlock of this kind makes a third major conflict highly likely. A prolonged war of attrition, legal and economic experts note, could block the Strait of Hormuz entirely, push oil to historic highs, wreck power infrastructure and desalination plants and force the world economy into deep recession.