Skip to content
Foundations rebuilt, and the first new thing is here: search across every topic, entity, and event.Try search
Iran Conflict 2026
11JUN

Brent jumps 7%, rial hits record low

2 min read
09:17UTC

Brent crude spiked almost 7% intraday to $97.47 on 1 June after Iran suspended talks, settling at $94.98; the rial hit a record 1,746,000 to the dollar as Lloyd's held its Hormuz war-risk line.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Oil and the rial both moved on Iran's walkout, yet Lloyd's kept Hormuz war-risk locked.

Brent Crude, the global oil benchmark, spiked almost 7% intraday to $97.47 on Monday 1 June once Iran suspended talks, its highest since the $98.83 Bandar Abbas bounce on 26 May , yet it settled lower at $94.98, up 4.2% on the day, as the Lebanon ceasefire pared the gain 1. The jump came on a formal Iranian diplomatic act, not a missile, so the risk premium now tracks the negotiating table rather than the battlefield. A 7% move translates to roughly 12 to 15p a litre for UK drivers within a fortnight.

The Iranian rial hit a record 1,746,000 to the dollar on Iran's open market by 2 June, from 1,705,000 on 31 May , a 2.4% depreciation in two days that accelerated after the suspension 2. Imported food, medicine and fuel cost more in rial overnight, and for Iranians on fixed wages savings erode in days. The same Iranian act split the two markets: Brent rallied while the rial fell, because traders read deal-breakdown risk where ordinary Iranians read a worsening economy.

Lloyd's of London kept its Hormuz war-risk designation unchanged , holding the two-market split that has run since the conflict began. Lloyd's Joint War Committee can de-list the strait of Hormuz only on a UN Security Council resolution or a government certification letter, a structural trigger no sentiment can shift; futures, by contrast, price the odds of a press release. So crude can rally on a thaw while marine insurance stays frozen, because the two answer to different triggers.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Two different markets were tracking the same conflict on 1 June and reached opposite conclusions. The oil futures market, where traders bet on the price of crude oil, drove Brent crude up by nearly 7% when Iran suspended talks, then back down when the Lebanon ceasefire was announced, ending the day 4.2% higher. Oil futures respond to headlines within minutes because traders can buy or sell in seconds. Lloyd's of London, founded in London in 1688, runs the specialist market that insures ships against war damage. It left its high-cost 'war-risk' designation on the Strait of Hormuz unchanged, as it has throughout the conflict. Lloyd's cannot de-list Hormuz just because a ceasefire looks possible; it needs a formal UN Security Council resolution or a government certification letter. None has arrived. The result is that oil traders think the risk is easing while the insurers who cover the actual ships think nothing has changed. The Iranian rial (Iran's currency) fell to a record low of 1,746,000 per dollar on Iran's open market by 2 June. That means ordinary Iranians buying imported food, medicine or electronics face rapidly rising prices, regardless of what diplomats are negotiating.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The Lloyd's/futures split has a specific institutional cause: Lloyd's Joint War Committee operates on the basis of 'listed areas' that require a formal government certification process to de-list. That process requires either a UN Security Council resolution certifying the end of hostilities, or a letter from a government with jurisdiction over the area.

Neither the US government, which runs the blockade, nor Iran, which controls the strait, has issued such a letter. With Russia and China vetoing any UNSC resolution, the bureaucratic unlock is structurally blocked for the duration of the conflict. This is not risk-model inertia; it is a deliberate institutional design that was built after the 1988 Tanker War specifically to prevent Lloyd's from being repriced by political headlines rather than verified security conditions.

First Reported In

Update #115 · Iran moves first, Trump moves by phone

CBS News· 2 Jun 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
Oil markets / Lloyd's underwriters
Oil markets / Lloyd's underwriters
Futures markets priced CENTCOM's strikes-complete statement as a de-escalation signal and pushed Brent down 1.7 per cent to $94.71, even as the IRGC declared Hormuz closed. Lloyd's war-risk premiums held elevated because institutional de-listing requires a UN Security Council resolution that Russia and China have just shown they will block.
Pakistan (mediator)
Pakistan (mediator)
Interior minister Mohsin Naqvi carried dual civilian and military letters to Mojtaba Khamenei in Tehran on 6-7 June with no public response. The IRGC's Hormuz closure on 11 June shows the corps is acting independently of the channel Pakistan is using, making the mediation structurally unable to produce a binding commitment without direct IRGC access.
Russia and China
Russia and China
Russia and China voted against GOV/2026/40 at the IAEA Board, following through on the blocking position coordinated with Grossi in Geneva on 5 June; both states continue to oppose Western institutional pressure on Iran at every multilateral venue.
E3 and IAEA (UK, France, Germany)
E3 and IAEA (UK, France, Germany)
The E3 co-sponsored IAEA resolution GOV/2026/40, adopted 21-3-10 on 10 June, demanding Iran disclose 440.9 kg of unaccounted HEU and admit inspectors to four denied facilities. The 10 abstentions and Russia-China noes leave any Security Council referral without a viable enforcement path.
IRGC / Iran military command
IRGC / Iran military command
The corps declared Hormuz closed to all traffic on 11 June and claimed two vessels struck, overriding the MoU its own civilian negotiators were pursuing through Pakistan. The closure order used the Persian Gulf Strait Authority apparatus to convert a toll mechanism into a military prohibition.
Trump administration / CENTCOM
Trump administration / CENTCOM
CENTCOM completed a second day of strikes on Tehran, Sirik and Minab, rejected the IRGC Hormuz closure as inconsistent with observed transit, and said strikes were complete. Hegseth framed the bombing explicitly as the negotiation: the method is coercive deal-making with no stated pause threshold.