Connect with us

Diplomacy

Global economy faces protracted war inflation despite fragile Iran-US ceasefire

Published

on

While the military dimension of the conflict in Iran appears to have reached a temporary standstill, its impact on global prices remains pervasive. Economists project that the disruptions to the global oil supply, which have persisted for over a month, will continue to trigger volatility across the broader economy.

According to data cited by NerdWallet, fuel prices have surged by more than 40% since February and are not expected to decline in the near term. Airfares have also recorded significant increases during this period. New price hikes across diverse sectors, including food, apparel, and electronics, are deemed likely in the coming months, adding further pressure to already persistent inflationary trends.

The escalation began on February 28, following the launch of strikes by the US and Israel. Iran responded by closing the Strait of Hormuz, a critical transit point for global oil supplies and other essential commodities. Prior to the attacks, Brent crude, the global oil benchmark, was trading at approximately $80 per barrel; it subsequently surged past the $100 mark as the conflict intensified.

The White House has maintained an inconsistent stance regarding its objectives and the anticipated duration of the war, though it has exchanged rhetoric with Tehran regarding a potential conclusion to the hostilities. Tensions reached a critical peak when US President Donald Trump established a Tuesday deadline for a ceasefire agreement, threatening to strike Iranian infrastructure and destroy an entire “civilization” should no deal be reached.

Less than two hours before the expiration of Trump’s deadline on Tuesday night, a two-week ceasefire was secured to allow for continued negotiations toward a long-term agreement. During this pause, Iran agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. However, the ceasefire has had an unstable start. On Wednesday, Iran accused the US of violating the terms of the agreement, citing continued Israeli strikes in Lebanon.

Following the announcement of the ceasefire on Tuesday night, oil prices retreated sharply to approximately $95 per barrel, while US equity markets rallied.

Despite this localized relief, analysts warn that the de-escalation may be temporary and that the economic consequences of the conflict are already deeply embedded. The impact of elevated oil prices is diffusing through the global economy, as international shipping, manufacturing, and food production remain heavily dependent on petrochemicals and natural gas. Consequently, rising energy costs are expected to drive up the price of food, commercial goods, and daily necessities, further straining household budgets already diminished by years of inflation.

The economic fallout of the war is compounded by the ripple effects of tariffs that were in place prior to the start of hostilities. On March 2, shortly after the initial strikes, the Yale Budget Lab published an updated assessment regarding the impact of tariffs on consumer prices. The report found that the costs of imported consumer goods passed on to buyers ranged from approximately 40% to 76% for “essential goods” such as electronics and clothing, and between 47% and 106% for “durable goods” like motor vehicles and household appliances.

The current inflation rate in the US stands at 2.4% according to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), with the next update covering March scheduled for release on April 10. Inflation has remained between 2.3% and 3% over the past year, down significantly from the 40-year high of 9% recorded in June 2022.

Analysts at Wells Fargo, in a report dated March 23, cautioned against drawing extreme conclusions from early data. The note recalled that tariffs proposed by the president last April were viewed by some as a guaranteed trigger for an economic recession that ultimately did not materialize. While analysts noted that the surge in crude oil prices will likely drive global consumer price inflation, they suggested that political and economic constraints would probably shorten the duration of the war. The note added that while the risk of extensive structural damage to Persian Gulf energy infrastructure remains, it is believed both sides would prefer not to destroy the resources that provide nearly all of the region’s revenue.

Concurrently, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) stated that the war in Iran will test the resilience of the global economy. An OECD report released March 26 forecasts that inflation in the US will average 4.2% in 2026, reflecting higher energy prices due to oil market disruptions. The report warned that a protracted conflict in the Middle East could trigger an even more severe price shock.

Recession risks grow

According to investment banking firm Macquarie Group, if the ceasefire fails to hold and the war continues into June, there is a 40% probability that oil could reach $200 per barrel. An increase of this magnitude could push consumer prices even higher, rattle markets, and drive an already fragile economy toward a recessionary cliff.

Daniil Manaenkov, an economist and US forecasting expert at the University of Michigan, stated that if oil prices remain between $150 and $200 per barrel for one or two months, a recession becomes highly probable.

Evidence suggests this breaking point could arrive sooner than anticipated. Consumers tend to alter spending habits when concerned about high prices or job security. Manaenkov noted that consumers are already dining out less, opting for cheaper store-brand products, and reducing travel. This decline in spending could slow growth and pull the economy closer to a recession.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) echoed these concerns in a March 30 blog post, warning that a prolonged conflict could drive up prices and slow economic growth worldwide. IMF analysts noted that the duration of the war, its potential expansion across the Middle East, and the resulting damage to infrastructure and supply chains will determine the extent of economic devastation in the coming days, weeks, and months.

Key products and services facing price increases

Manaenkov noted that it can take six to 12 months for rising energy prices to fully filter through to all other consumer costs. While gasoline prices are high, the primary driver of overall cost increases is diesel fuel. Because the majority of freight transport relies on diesel, when those prices rise and remain elevated, almost every other sector follows.

Manaenkov described the process: “The timeline typically starts with an energy response, followed by an impact on shipping costs, then consumer products, and finally the services sector. While the impact on services is weaker than that seen in energy prices, it can still be quite significant.”

The areas likely to see price increases as a result of the war in Iran include:

All goods requiring diesel transport: Diesel fuel powers trucks, freight vehicles, construction equipment, agricultural machinery, and maritime vessels. As the cost of operating these vehicles rises, additional costs are added to all production materials and finished goods. According to AAA data, diesel prices have increased by approximately 50% since the start of the war, reaching $5.67 per gallon on Wednesday.

Air travel: Airlines operate on jet fuel, and costs have already risen sharply. In response, carriers have begun increasing ticket prices. Some companies are reportedly planning to cancel flights to save on fuel costs, which will increase competition for remaining seats and drive travel prices higher.

Food: Food production is facing multiple simultaneous pressure points from high prices. Beyond the diesel required for farm machinery and delivery trucks, fertilizers represent a major challenge. Nitrogen-based fertilizers require liquefied natural gas, while phosphate fertilizers—made from urea, ammonia, and sulfur—are critical for the production of staples such as wheat, corn, rice, and fruit. Approximately one-third of seaborne fertilizer passes through the Strait of Hormuz. If farmers cannot access affordable fertilizer now, they may be unable to plant sufficient crops during the spring season, eventually resulting in higher prices.

Plastics and packaging: Plastic production requires oil and natural gas. With approximately 85% of Middle Eastern polyethylene exports passing through the Strait of Hormuz, the price of raw materials for plastics is expected to rise. This affects water bottles, credit cards, furniture, household goods, food containers, automotive parts, and anything sealed or wrapped in plastic.

Synthetic clothing: Most modern apparel is produced from petrochemicals, including polyester, nylon, spandex, and fleece. The garment industry, particularly fast-fashion manufacturers, depends on synthetic fibers sourced through supply chains passing through the Strait of Hormuz. As raw material costs rise, fabric costs will follow, impacting garment prices.

Technology and electronics: This industry is facing dual disruptions. The Strait of Hormuz is a critical shipping route for graphite raw materials essential for lithium-ion battery production, while helium gas is required for semiconductors, fiber optics, and medical devices. Supply disruptions could increase the price of smartphones, laptops, electric vehicles, energy storage systems, and diagnostic medical equipment such as MRI machines.

All aluminum products: Gulf nations provide approximately 9% of the global aluminum supply. These countries also account for 21% of US unrefined aluminum imports and 13% of processed aluminum imports. Aluminum is a fundamental material for construction, vehicles, aircraft, power transmission, and appliances; export delays could raise the prices of construction products, industrial equipment, planes, and automobiles.

Automobiles: Increases in plastic and aluminum prices, combined with other supply chain disruptions, are likely to drive up vehicle costs. Manaenkov noted that production disruptions in South Korea or Japan could cause issues for US manufacturing, contributing to vehicle shortages and increasing prices for both new and used cars.

Vulnerability in oil flows

Even if the war concludes, shipping flows through the Strait of Hormuz may not return to normal immediately, and fuel prices in the US may not necessarily drop. Warnings persist that Iran could continue to exercise control over oil flows, keeping global and domestic fuel costs high. In other words, even if the US ends its intervention entirely, Iran retains the leverage to maintain economic pressure.

Manaenkov compared the situation to a plumbing system: “This is not like a faucet you just turn on and off. Once you stop pumping, you must expend significant resources to restart the flow.”

While the conflict is currently paused and traffic in the strait is slowly resuming, observers note that the war is far from over and unrest remains widespread across the Middle East.

On Wednesday, just hours after the temporary ceasefire with the US was established, an Iranian drone reportedly struck a pumping station on Saudi Arabia’s critical East-West pipeline. This pipeline, used to bypass the Strait of Hormuz, carries approximately 7 million barrels of crude oil per day from the Gulf to the Red Sea. The damage caused by the strike could further deepen the energy crisis.

Diplomacy

India’s Russian oil imports hit record high as Middle East tensions disrupt markets

Published

on

India is increasing imports of Russian oil and coal as supply chain disruptions and rising prices linked to tensions involving Iran reshape global energy flows.

According to a Reuters report citing data from analytics firm Kpler, shipments from Russia to India reached record levels in June.

Kpler estimates that Russian oil deliveries to India will rise to a record 2.55 million barrels per day in June.

That would surpass both the 2.13 million barrels per day recorded in May and the previous high of 2.16 million barrels per day registered in May 2023.

Russia’s share of India’s total oil imports in June is expected to come in at just under 50%. Before the outbreak of conflict in the Middle East, the figure averaged 23% during the three months preceding February 28.

India’s shift toward Russian crude followed the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran and a temporary suspension of sanctions on purchases by the administration of US President Donald Trump in an effort to increase market supply.

However, the sanctions waiver expired on June 17 and was not extended by the US Treasury Department.

Reuters noted that this could lead to a decline in purchases of Russian crude, although the outcome will depend on the willingness of Indian refiners and government officials to return to sourcing shipments from Middle Eastern suppliers.

According to Kpler forecasts, imports from Saudi Arabia are expected to remain at 349,000 barrels per day in June. That compares with an average of 832,000 barrels per day during the three months before the conflict.

A similar trend is visible in coal imports. Imports of Russian coal across all grades are expected to reach 3.16 million tonnes in June, compared with 3.27 million tonnes in May.

Both figures would rank as the second and third highest on record, respectively, behind the peak of 3.76 million tonnes registered in May last year.

Russia is also expected to overtake Australia in June to become the second-largest supplier of coal to India, the world’s second-largest coal importer after China.

According to Reuters, Russia is likely to maintain its role as one of India’s key coal suppliers. Future purchases of Russian oil, however, will depend on whether Washington moves to tighten sanctions against Moscow.

New Delhi says oil shipments will not be affected by sanctions

Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said in mid-June that the country had increased purchases of Russian oil since 2022 at Washington’s request in order to help contain global energy prices.

Jaishankar criticised US restrictions on Russian commodities and urged policymakers not to present such measures as matters of grand principle.

Sujata Sharma, a representative of India’s Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, also said in May that shipments from Russia were continuing and would do so regardless of US decisions concerning sanctions waivers.

Indian refiners reduced imports from Russia in 2025 and turned to suppliers in Saudi Arabia and Iraq amid pressure from the United States and threats of a 25% tariff on Indian goods.

However, Reuters data show that following the outbreak of war in the Middle East and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, Indian companies began increasing purchases of Russian crude again in early March.

Russia’s ambassador to New Delhi, Denis Alipov, said at the end of April that Moscow was prepared to supply as much raw material as India was willing to accept.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later confirmed that Moscow remained committed to its agreements on energy shipments to India.

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

EU, US and China intensify competition over Africa’s strategic minerals through Lobito Corridor

Published

on

Africa is becoming an increasingly intense arena of competition among China, the US and the European Union over access to strategic raw materials.

According to an analysis by German Foreign Policy, the Lobito Corridor, a rail link connecting the copper belt of Zambia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the Atlantic port of Lobito in Angola, is playing a pivotal role in that contest.

The infrastructure project is regarded as one of the flagship initiatives of the EU’s Global Gateway strategy and is also viewed by Washington, which is investing in the region, as a means of reducing dependence on China.

In the future, copper, cobalt, lithium and other raw materials essential for the production of batteries, electric vehicles, digital technologies and military equipment will be transported westward via this route.

The initiative builds on infrastructure originally constructed during the colonial era to facilitate the export of African raw materials.

Critics argue that the expansion of the Lobito Corridor perpetuates existing patterns of resource extraction under new conditions.

Global Gateway as a counter to the Belt and Road

The European Commission approved the Global Gateway programme in September 2021.

Under the programme, nearly €300 billion is to be invested in infrastructure projects across Africa, Asia, Oceania, Southeast Europe, and South and Central America by 2027.

The programme is widely viewed as a response to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

One of its central objectives is to diversify Europe’s imports of critical raw materials, particularly by reducing dependence on supplies from China.

During a visit to China in late May 2026, German Economy Minister Katherina Reiche of the CDU underscored the importance of secure access to critical raw materials and rare earth elements. This is the area in which Germany remains most dependent on China.

Colonial-era infrastructure remains intact

One of the clearest examples is the 1,300-kilometre Lobito Corridor, which runs from the edge of the Zambia-Southern Congo copper belt to the port of Lobito in Angola.

The core infrastructure of this trade corridor was established through the Benguela Railway, which was built as early as 1902 at the height of European colonial expansion. The railway extended eastward from the port city of Lobito through what is now Angola, providing access to the mineral-rich regions of southern Congo and Zambia.

In 1931, following completion of the initial railway line, the British mining and railway company Tanganyika Concessions transferred its 99-year concession rights to Portugal’s colony of Angola.

The concession expired in 2001, after which the infrastructure, previously controlled by Portuguese authorities, was transferred to the Angolan government.

By 2030, annual copper shipments through the route are expected to reach one million metric tonnes.

Both the EU and the US are relying heavily on the Lobito Corridor in an effort to counter China’s dominant position in Africa’s raw materials sector.

Estimates indicate that roughly two-thirds of global cobalt production originates in the Congo, where Chinese companies are particularly active in mining operations.

China also accounts for approximately 75% of global cobalt processing capacity.

The colonial-era rail line leading to Lobito is intended to redirect exports of copper, cobalt and other raw materials, which have until now largely been shipped eastward via Tanzania, toward western markets, enabling processing in Europe or North America rather than China.

Europe seeks to reduce dependence on China for the green transition

In addition to copper and cobalt, the region holds substantial deposits of lithium, coltan, nickel and rare earth elements, giving it significant economic importance.

These materials are used in electric vehicle batteries, stationary energy storage systems and alloys required for military aircraft production.

Until now, the EU has sourced much of these materials from China. Strategic investment in a new logistics hub in Luau, Angola, located along the Lobito Corridor, is intended to reduce that dependence.

The railway line along the corridor is already operated by a European consortium.

The consortium includes Swiss commodities trader Trafigura, Portuguese construction group Mota-Engil and Belgian rail company Vecturis.

However, the majority of the mines remain under Chinese control. In the Congo, 24 of the country’s 33 cobalt-exporting companies are Chinese-backed.

The Lobito Corridor is being developed through an EU-US partnership

EU efforts to secure influence over the Lobito Corridor are advancing in parallel with similar initiatives by the United States.

In early 2022, the US signed a memorandum of understanding with the EU and other G7 members to mobilise more than $600 billion for infrastructure projects worldwide over the following five years as part of the G7’s Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII).

The Lobito Corridor is one of five key trade, transit and development corridors in Southern Africa designed to improve transport efficiency.

During the administration of President Joe Biden, financing for the Lobito Corridor was launched under the G7’s PGII framework as a flagship project in cooperation with the Global Gateway initiative.

The EU also regards the expansion of the Lobito Corridor as a critical project and has committed more than €2 billion in funding.

That support could increase further. The next EU budget cycle beginning in 2028 envisages nearly doubling spending on development and external assistance, from €108 billion to €200 billion.

EU officials present the strategy as an effort to offer a more comprehensive approach to infrastructure financing than China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

‘America First’ in Africa

The US has pledged hundreds of millions of dollars for the expansion of the Lobito Corridor.

In the final quarter of 2025 alone, it provided $553 million in loans for the project’s expansion.

An additional $200 million in support came from the Development Bank of Southern Africa.

Unlike the Biden administration, which frequently described the initiative as development assistance, the second Trump administration openly characterises the project as an effort to weaken China’s influence, strengthen US control over critical raw materials and diversify supply chains.

For example, Frank Garcia, a former naval officer appointed in late May as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, praised the Trump administration’s continuing engagement on the continent.

Highlighting the Lobito Corridor in particular, Garcia said the project aligns key US interests in Africa with the “America First” approach.

Germany in Africa for the energy transition

Last autumn, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier travelled several kilometres on the newly restored railway line along the Lobito Corridor and described it as “a strategic infrastructure project of enormous economic importance.”

The German politician added: “Of course, this infrastructure connection also creates investment opportunities for European and German companies along its route.”

Portuguese construction company MCA is currently building solar energy parks in 60 municipalities across Angola at a cost of just under €1.29 billion.

The client is Angola’s Energy Ministry, while the German government is supporting the project through export credit guarantees.

Should Angola fail to meet its payment obligations, Germany would step in. A total of 95% of the project value is guaranteed by the Federal Republic of Germany.

In return, Angola agreed to allow German companies to participate in the project. For example, the battery storage system is being supplied by SMA Solar Technology, based in Niestetal near Kassel.

German solar technology provider Gantner Instruments Environment Solutions is supplying the digital control system.

Critics of the Lobito Corridor expansion warn that the project will primarily benefit the EU and the US.

In their view, the initiative promotes the export of African raw materials rather than strengthening intra-African trade.

Although the EU presents these measures as a development project aligned with African interests, critics argue that they ultimately represent a continuation of Western exploitation of African resources.

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

EU presses Türkiye for non-Russian gas supplies under future energy contracts

Published

on

The European Union is insisting that natural gas delivered to member states via Türkiye under new supply agreements must not be of Russian origin.

German Economy Minister Katherina Reiche said after an official visit to Ankara that “Türkiye understands that the EU attaches great importance to ending the supply of raw materials originating from Russia and accepts this reality.”

Reiche added that Turkish officials had made it clear that replacing supplies from Russia could not be achieved overnight, either economically or in terms of available alternative sources.

As of June 17, a ban on pipeline natural gas imports from Russia under short-term contracts signed more than a year ago entered into force across the European Union.

The measure was approved by the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament at the end of last year. In January 2025, EU member states also voted to phase out Russian gas completely by 2027. Under that decision, member states are required to verify the origin of gas supplies before authorizing deliveries.

Meanwhile, Swiss-based company Nord Stream 2 AG, the operator of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, has launched legal action challenging the regulation imposing the ban on Russian gas imports.

Türkiye, for its part, is continuing negotiations with Gazprom on natural gas supplies for the period after 2026, as existing contracts are approaching expiration.

Energy and Natural Resources Minister Alparslan Bayraktar previously said the parties had yet to reach agreement on potential shipment volumes and the duration of any new contracts.

In December 2025, Ankara extended by one year two agreements with Gazprom covering gas deliveries through the TurkStream and Blue Stream pipelines.

Türkiye is seeking to reduce Russia’s share of its gas supply mix. Russia’s share of Türkiye’s natural gas imports has already fallen below 40%.

As part of its energy diversification strategy, Ankara plans to replace part of Russian gas imports with supplies from the United States and Central Asia.

Bayraktar previously said that despite US calls to abandon Russian energy resources, Türkiye would continue purchasing natural gas from Russia.

“We cannot tell our citizens there is no gas available. We have agreements with Russia. Winter is approaching. We need gas from Russia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan,” Bayraktar said.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey