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 settles $105.30 with no fresh seizure

3 min read
09:17UTC

Brent crude settled at $105.30 on 25 April with intraday prints above $106 and a weekly gain of roughly 18%. The talks collapse alone is now the bullish driver, not fresh kinetics.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Brent at $105 has been repriced as the baseline; future incidents push from there, not from $67.

Brent crude settled at $105.30 on 25 April with intraday prints above $106 and a weekly gain of roughly 18% per The National 1. This is the second consecutive session above $105, 57% above the $67.41 pre-war baseline and a continuation from the $105.73 close on 24 April . No new IRGC seizure occurred on 25 April, and the dark-shipping picture from the Larak-Qeshm carve-out was unchanged.

The price moved on the absence of a diplomatic resolution rather than on a fresh provocation. That is a structural shift: the market has stopped treating each diplomatic failure as a temporary setback and is pricing the absence of a resolution track as the default scenario. The repricing matters because future seizures will now push the price from $105 rather than from $67, amplifying the economic shock of any tactical escalation. UK and European pump prices follow Brent with a one-to-two-week lag.

The options curve confirms the shift. With the baseline reset, any de-escalation announcement becomes disproportionately bearish rather than merely corrective, which makes the political incentive structure for Tehran and Washington asymmetric: Iran loses revenue floor on a deal, and US consumer pump prices ease only after a deal is concrete enough to clear forwards. Brent at $105 is the new floor, not a ceiling.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

The price of oil affects almost everything: petrol at the pump, heating bills, the cost of goods moved by truck or ship. The benchmark price for much of the world's oil is called 'Brent crude', named after a North Sea oil field. Before the Iran war began, Brent was around $67 a barrel. On 25 April it closed at $105.30. That is a rise of nearly 57%, and it happened in under two months. Oil markets usually react strongly to specific events (a ship seized, a factory bombed). What is significant about Saturday's price is that nothing new happened: no IRGC boarding, no strike, no military escalation. The price stayed above $105 purely because traders stopped believing the war would end soon. When the diplomacy collapses and traders update their expectations, prices move even without a physical event.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Each Islamabad channel failure narrows the oil market's probability distribution around a near-term diplomatic resolution. When Islamabad 3 collapsed via Trump's Truth Social post, traders priced the event harder than a formal diplomatic postponement would have warranted, because a social-media cancellation carries no institutional machinery for reversal.

The ceasefire is nominally in force, but CENTCOM's interdiction count reached 33 on 25 April while the naval blockade continues. Traders have concluded that a nominal ceasefire does not translate to resumed Hormuz commercial transit. Until a deal explicitly addresses the blockade, the $38/bbl structural premium over the pre-war baseline persists regardless of individual daily incident counts.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    European and Asian central banks running quarterly inflation assessments in May will incorporate $105+ Brent into their forecasts, likely deferring planned interest rate cuts by one to two quarters.

  • Risk

    Goldman Sachs's $120 Q3 severe scenario becomes the base case rather than the tail risk if both the Islamabad diplomatic track and the AUMF congressional track fail before 1 May.

First Reported In

Update #79 · Islamabad 3 collapses; Witkoff grounded, talks stall

Al Jazeera· 25 Apr 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.