Connect with us

Diplomacy

UK energy security at risk as Iran conflict drains critical gas reserves

Published

on

Britain faces a mounting economic crisis as the protracted conflict in Iran threatens to destabilize the nation’s energy security and fiscal health. While the war’s onset was marked by diplomatic friction with Donald Trump over access to British military bases, the deepening struggle now risks pushing the United Kingdom toward a financial precipice.

According to reports in The Times, Britain’s gas infrastructure is under unprecedented strain, with dwindling supplies from the Middle East leaving the nation with as little as two days’ worth of gas stocks in storage.

Compounding the crisis, the UK is currently paying the highest energy prices in Europe—a 6% premium over its continental neighbors—a disparity analysts attribute directly to the rapid depletion of strategic reserves. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains paralyzed, while Qatar has suspended production at Ras Laffan, the world’s largest liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility, following a series of drone strikes.

On Monday, Brent crude surged past $100 per barrel as traders braced for supply disruptions expected to last several weeks. Domestically, British petrol prices began an upward climb last week, signaling immediate inflationary pressure on consumers.

The Island’s gas primarily sourced from Europe

Britain remains heavily dependent on cross-channel infrastructure, with pipelines from Europe accounting for 30% of the nation’s total energy requirements over the past week.

While the risk of immediate blackouts has not yet materialized, the convergence of restricted Middle Eastern supply and a potential European cold snap could turn the current reserve deficit into a full-blown emergency. Data from the transmission operator, National Gas, reveals a precipitous drop in UK gas reserves, falling from 18,000 GWh three months ago to just 6,700 GWh. While this downward trend mirrors seasonal patterns, stocks are significantly lower than the 9,000 GWh recorded during the same period last year.

Current levels represent less than two days of supply if pipeline imports were to cease. A similar volume is currently held as LNG. Should a cold wave coincide with continued Middle Eastern volatility, prices are expected to spike, forcing Britain to pay a substantial premium to secure necessary imports.

The vulnerability of the British consumer is stark; internal data suggests that without government intervention to subsidize household bills, the average annual price cap would have soared to £4,279 in 2023.

Increasing significance of North Sea fields and Norway

In February, National Gas advised ministers that because Britain maintains significantly lower reserves than most European peers, the government must take urgent measures to fortify future supply—including North Sea production—and accelerate the development of storage capacity.

The impact of rising wholesale costs will soon reach the public. Although the Ofgem energy price cap is set to fall to £1,641 for the average household in April, the benefit will likely be short-lived. Cornwall Insight, an energy research consultancy, forecasts that the cap for a typical dual-fuel household will rise by 10% to £1,801 when the next adjustment takes effect in July.

Businesses, which do not benefit from the domestic price cap, are even more exposed. Many are expected to face immediate tariff hikes, with the majority likely to pass these increased operating costs directly to consumers.

Meanwhile, North Sea production continues its structural decline. The state-owned National Energy System Operator has issued a formal warning regarding a “new risk to gas supply security,” noting that if the transition to green energy remains sluggish or if a single major gas infrastructure component fails, Britain may lack sufficient supply to meet its needs by 2030.

National Gas maintains that the government must “protect existing storage capacity and facilitate expansion” to build the resilience necessary to withstand shipping delays, market shocks, or extreme weather events.

Gas storage issues could plague the British government

Mike Foster, Chief Executive of the Energy and Utilities Alliance (EUA), noted that successive administrations were warned about the inadequacy of gas reserves more than a decade ago.

“A lack of investment has left the UK vulnerable, and the responsibility lies with previous leadership,” Foster said. He added that while the country still benefits from significant North Sea resources—both domestic and Norwegian—which together meet approximately 80% of national demand, the system remains fragile.

Foster emphasized that facilities like Rough, Britain’s largest gas storage site which has faced threats of closure, provide a critical safety net. “Without these facilities, the system becomes far more susceptible to global shocks, such as the current instability in Ukraine and Iran,” he noted.

National Gas offered a more measured assessment, stating: “Britain’s gas storage levels are largely in line with what we expect for this time of year and are at similar levels compared to the same period last year. Storage represents only a small component of Britain’s diverse gas supply mix. Most of our gas is sourced from the UK Continental Shelf and Norway, bolstered by LNG, interconnectors with mainland Europe, and storage.”

Government denies “two-day supply” claims

A government source dismissed the narrative that Britain is down to its final two days of gas, labeling the figures “dubious calculations.”

“This assumes that storage is the only form of supply and simply divides storage stocks by daily demand,” the source said. “Gas markets do not function that way. Storage represents a relatively low % of the supply mix at any given time.”

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero echoed this sentiment, stating: “The claim that Britain only has access to two days of gas supply is categorically untrue. We have a diverse range of energy sources and remain confident in our security of supply. As we transition to more secure, clean, and domestic energy, gas will continue to play a vital role in our resilient system. We are working with the sector to ensure the gas system is fit for the future, including maintaining security of supply under even the most improbable scenarios.”

Starmer warns: Protracted war will deepen economic impact

Addressing the conflict in Iran, Prime Minister Keir Starmer acknowledged that the longer the hostilities continue, the greater the potential damage to the UK economy.

“The government’s duty is to move forward, to look ahead, and to cooperate with others,” the Prime Minister said. “The Chancellor is in daily contact with the Governor of the Bank of England, collaborating across departments to assess and monitor risks. We are speaking with international partners about what more we can do together to mitigate the impact on our people and businesses.”

Starmer added that recognizing the necessity of this work is vital, as the public and businesses will feel the weight of the situation the longer it persists. He characterized the government’s role as one of “getting ahead of the situation, assessing risk, and collaborating on a response.”

While Starmer suggested the energy cap would shield households from the worst of the economic turbulence, he admitted that businesses would be “rightly concerned” and are watching developments with apprehension.

When asked if Donald Trump’s military actions risked a global conflict, the Prime Minister responded: “We must find a way to de-escalate the situation. Much of our discussion is focused on how we can find a path to de-escalation and ensure this does not spiral further.”

Starmer also asserted that the UK economy is in a stronger position now than it was in 2022, when the war in Ukraine triggered an initial energy price shock.

American and British troops defend jointly

The Prime Minister confirmed that the US is currently utilizing British airbases in relation to the Iran conflict, noting that “at every level,” there is daily intelligence cooperation and contact between London and Washington.

“In the region, our military personnel and US personnel are co-located at the same bases,” Starmer said. “Both the US and the UK are working together to protect those bases. In terms of the relationship, the work we must do together continues as you would expect.”

However, Starmer emphasized that decisions regarding Britain’s “best interests” remain solely the prerogative of the British Prime Minister, citing this as the “fundamental principle” guiding his decisions on Iran.

Chancellor under pressure to scrap fuel tax hike

Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves is facing intense political pressure to cancel a planned fuel tariff increase scheduled for September. The hike would occur as the government withdraws a temporary relief measure introduced four years ago, leading to higher costs for petrol and diesel.

In an interview with the Press Association, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch signaled she would challenge the government in Parliament to extend the 5p cut in fuel tariff.

“In last week’s spring statement, Rachel Reeves indicated the 5p cut would only last until September,” Badenoch said. “Given world events, we must extend this relief. Tomorrow, we will vote to keep the fuel tariff as low as possible. These measures are what truly help reduce the cost of living for people.”

A policy document dated February 26 regarding fuel tariff rates states: “Alongside other measures announced in Budget 2025 to address the cost of living, this measure continues to support drivers by freezing current fuel tariff rates until the end of August 2026. Rates will gradually return to March 2022 levels by March 2027, preventing a 5p increase in March 2026 when the cut was set to expire. The planned inflation-linked increase for 2026-2027 is also being cancelled. This measure will save the average driver £49 in 2026-2027 compared to previous plans.”

Housing Minister: Our economy is resilient to shocks

Housing Minister Steve Reed acknowledged the scale of the economic uncertainty but maintained that the British economy is robust enough to weather the storm.

“Britain cannot control crises happening across the planet that affect our country,” Reed told ITV’s Good Morning Britain. “What we can control are our own circumstances.”

While admitting the long-term costs of energy prices remain unknown, Reed argued: “Having a more stable economy means we are in a better position to weather these storms. We will, of course, continue to monitor the situation closely.”

Interest rate cuts may be deferred

The sharp rise in oil prices is forcing financial markets to reassess the trajectory of British interest rates.

“A sustained move for Brent crude above $100 effectively acts as an inflationary tax,” said Jonathan Raymond, investment lead at Quilter Cheviot. “This increases business costs, squeezes real incomes, and risks keeping headline inflation above target for longer.”

Market data released Monday shows investors now expect the Bank of England to maintain the base rate at 3.75% through the end of the year, with some predicting a hike to 4% by June. Prior to the escalation in Iran, the probability of a rate cut at the Bank’s March 19 meeting was estimated at 80%.

Current market pricing indicates a 99% probability that rates will remain unchanged at the next meeting, with no cuts anticipated for the remainder of 2026.

Global markets also expect the European Central Bank (ECB) to hike Eurozone rates this year to combat oil-driven inflation. Money markets have fully priced in a quarter-point increase by July. Bloomberg reports that swaps now indicate a 70% chance of two 25-basis-point hikes from the ECB this year, a sharp increase from the single hike priced in as recently as Friday.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves remains in “daily” consultations with the Bank of England, according to the Prime Minister, as the government seeks to manage the fallout from the ongoing energy crisis.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Iran rejects Turkish foreign minister’s comparison of regional policy to Israel

Published

17 hours ago

on

13/07/2026

By

Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei strongly criticized Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s recent statements comparing Iran’s regional actions to those of Israel, calling the comparison “astonishing and incorrect” during his weekly press conference.

In a comprehensive briefing on Monday, Baghaei addressed a wide range of foreign policy developments and regional security matters, including relations with Türkiye, the current state of diplomatic understandings with the United States, and Iran’s nuclear program.

“Hakan Fidan’s comparison is astonishing and incorrect”

When asked about Fidan’s assertions regarding Iran and his comparison of Iranian actions to those of the Israeli government, Baghaei sharply rejected the assessment.

“It is astonishing that a figure of Mr. Fidan’s standing would make such an unwarranted comparison,” Baghaei said. “He knows very well that the Israeli regime is expansionist by nature and seeks to harm the entire region, including Türkiye. How they arrived at such a bizarre comparison remains a major question for us.”

Baghaei asserted that Iran maintains no proxy forces in the region and argued that Israel represents the only true proxy entity in the Middle East. “We ask our Turkish friends to align their analyses with existing realities and to avoid repeating analyses that serve the exploitative interests of the Israeli regime,” the spokesperson added.

The remarks follow recent statements by Fidan, in which he addressed the ongoing conflict involving Hezbollah and Hamas, describing them as Iranian proxies in the region.

“We need to return to a situation where the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every nation is fully recognized,” Fidan had stated. “Iran has long claimed to pursue a preventive security policy by maintaining proxies in these countries, just as the Israelis occupy the rest of the region as part of their own security.”

“The Islamabad Agreement has entered a crisis phase”

Responding to a question regarding the status of the Islamabad Agreement, Baghaei stated: “There is no doubt that this agreement has entered a crisis phase.”

While emphasizing that Iran approaches all negotiations with seriousness and precision, and fulfills its commitments in good faith once an agreement is reached, Baghaei accused the opposing party of failing to honor its pledges.

“They were so eager to breach the agreement that they did not even allow the one-month period specified in Article 5 regarding the Strait of Hormuz to run its course. They began backsliding from the very first days,” Baghaei said. “Looking at the 14 articles of the memorandum of understanding, the Americans dismantled different components of the agreement within this short timeframe. We have maintained from the beginning that it is a matter of ‘commitment for commitment.’ As long as the other party fulfills its obligations, we will remain committed to ours.”

“We reject the IAEA’s request to access damaged facilities”

Asked about the request by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi for inspectors to return to Iran and visit damaged nuclear facilities, Baghaei delivered a flat rejection, stating that the request would not be granted.

Addressing separate reports regarding satellite imagery of nuclear facility reconstruction, Baghaei noted that he had not yet seen the satellite images in question and therefore declined to comment.

“We will not allow the Strait of Hormuz to be threatened by the US”

Commenting on maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz and allegations that the United States is providing military escorts to 20 vessels, Baghaei reiterated Iran’s opposition to the presence of extra-regional forces.

Baghaei stated that regional security can only be achieved without foreign intervention, through consultative mechanisms among regional countries. He added that the US military presence is a source of insecurity in the region.

“We will not allow the Strait of Hormuz to become an area of threat against Iran’s interests,” the spokesperson said. “We made genuine efforts to ensure navigation security, but the US was the party that undermined the process. The claims regarding vessel escorts demonstrate that the US is continuing its interventionist and aggressive policies in the region.”

Regarding the interpretation of Article 5 of the memorandum of understanding, Baghaei stated that the text is clear and leaves no room for interpretation.

He noted that provisions designating the management of the strait to Iran, in consultation with Oman, were included in the text to protect Iranian interests. He added that the US is attempting to establish parallel routes by provoking regional countries, which he warned causes environmental issues and jeopardizes maritime safety.

“The declaration by the three European countries is null and void”

Referring to a joint declaration issued by France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, Baghaei dismissed the statement as entirely invalid, accusing the European nations of attempting to distort facts.

He stated that the actions of the US and Israel are the source of instability and harm in both the region and the wider world, adding that such declarations do not contribute to any resolution.

Addressing claims made by the French Foreign Minister, Baghaei added that French officials should cease attempting to assume roles in matters that do not concern them.

“We have not conditioned cooperation with Afghanistan on recognition”

Baghaei provided details on a recent visit to Afghanistan by Alireza Jalalzadeh, the Deputy Foreign Minister for Consular Affairs, noting that discussions were conducted within the framework of consular affairs and people-to-people relations.

Highlighting that Iran shares a border of more than 900 kilometers with Afghanistan, hosts a large number of Afghan migrants, and maintains extensive commercial ties, Baghaei said: “We have not conditioned the official recognition of the Afghan administration on the cooperation necessary for the interests of both countries. The recognition process is a legal procedure, and a decision on this matter will be made when the time comes.”

“We do not make decisions on behalf of Lebanon”

Rejecting allegations that Iran is interfering in the internal affairs of Lebanon and Oman, Baghaei said: “We do not make decisions on behalf of anyone. The inclusion of Lebanon’s name in the memorandum of understanding demonstrates Iran’s sense of responsibility toward maintaining international security. In the first article of the text, we emphasized the need to end the war on all fronts, including Lebanon. This is not a matter of decision-making; the decision belongs to the Lebanese people.”

Addressing international pressure regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah, Baghaei stated that the Lebanese people are best positioned to understand the value of the resistance’s weapons in protecting their sovereignty, and that any decision on the matter rests solely with them.

“Trump’s claims are false”

Baghaei denied claims made by former US President Donald Trump regarding Iran’s conduct during nuclear negotiations.

“Lying has become a behavioral pattern and an addiction for the US,” Baghaei said. “The talks held in Muscat on Saturday focused exclusively on the Strait of Hormuz. We attempted to establish a mechanism to ensure the safe passage of vessels through Omani mediation, but this outcome was not reached due to pressure exerted on Oman.”

He added that alleged assassination plots against Trump were never a subject of negotiation.

“The death of Lindsey Graham will not grieve free people”

When asked to comment on the death of US Senator Lindsey Graham, Baghaei remarked:

“The Angel of Death is just. One cannot expect the peoples of the region to mourn a figure who built his life philosophy on aggression, war, and terror, and who boasted of being the greatest supporter of genocide. The death of this aggressive senator will not grieve the heart of any free person.”

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

NATO leadership sees no evidence of Russian preparations for attack on Baltics by 2030

Published

18 hours ago

on

13/07/2026

By

The military and political leadership of NATO sees no evidence that Russia is preparing for a potential attack on the Baltic states by 2030, according to a report by The Times, citing a senior alliance source.

“I see absolutely no sign that Russia is interested in engaging in any conflict with NATO,” the high-ranking source told the newspaper. The official added that they had no intention of speculating on the date of a potential conflict, as some other officials within the alliance have done.

The Times noted that rhetoric suggesting an open military conflict between NATO and Russia could begin in 2030 is primarily being used to mobilize the resources of the alliance’s member states. The report stated that this framing aims to encourage members to meet a defense spending target set at 5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035. Speaking to the newspaper on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Ankara, Martin O’Donnell, spokesperson for the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), said that allies currently have a “window of opportunity” to build up the capabilities already agreed upon.

Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has previously stated that the militarization of Europe would require Russia to take additional measures to guarantee its national security.

As the implications of these developments continue to play out in the military arena, Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda announced on July 9 that NATO leadership has converted the mandate of the Baltic air policing mission from air patrol to a combat footing.

The day before this decision, leaders attending the NATO summit in Ankara pointed to the “long-term threat Russia poses to Euro-Atlantic security and stability” in a joint declaration.

NATO has repeatedly expressed concerns over a potential conflict with Russia. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has urged member states not to be “naive” about threats coming from Russia and to increase their defense spending. Similarly, the commander of the German Army, Christian Freuding, asserted on June 12 that his country must “be ready for a Russian attack” by 2029 or sooner, stating, “We must be ready for war.”

In contrast, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko claimed in a June 22 interview with the Izvestia newspaper that NATO and the European Union are preparing for a military conflict with Russia on the horizon of 2030. Grushko noted that from a military perspective, there is now little difference between NATO and the EU regarding aggressive ambitions toward Moscow, and that their main objective is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.

The Moscow administration has repeatedly emphasized that it has no intention of attacking Europe. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that there are no geopolitical, economic, or military reasons to fight the alliance. Nevertheless, Putin has also stated that “all NATO countries are virtually at war with Russia.”

Last year, representatives of NATO countries approved a declaration agreeing to raise military spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. Under this target, 3.5% of spending is projected to go directly to the military budget, while 1.5% is to be allocated indirectly to defense through cybersecurity and the modernization of highways.

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Zelenskyy announces sweeping Ukrainian cabinet shakeup as Prime Minister Sviridenko resigns

Published

18 hours ago

on

13/07/2026

By

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has announced a sweeping structural overhaul of the government, confirming that a new prime minister will soon take office.

Following the announcement, the Ukrainian leader held a series of meetings over a two-and-a-half-hour period with potential candidates positioned to succeed Yulia Sviridenko as prime minister.

“Political strategy is changing”

Writing on his Telegram channel, Zelenskyy announced that the structure of the cabinet of ministers will change and that Sviridenko, who is stepping down from her post, will be assigned to a new role.

The Ukrainian president stated that the country is renewing its political strategy. Under the new approach, specific individuals with extensive experience will be put in charge of each priority foreign policy direction to implement agreements reached at the leadership level and to meet the expectations of the Ukrainian people.

Approximately one hour after Zelenskyy’s statement, Sviridenko confirmed her departure from the post of Prime Minister of Ukraine via a message on social media.

Thanking the president for his high valuation of her work, Sviridenko stated that she and Zelenskyy had discussed future steps.

Sviridenko began her career in the Ukrainian government in 2019 as Deputy Minister of Economy. Between 2020 and 2021, she served as deputy head of the presidential office, during which time she participated in negotiations regarding the Donbas.

In November 2021, she assumed control of economic management as First Deputy Prime Minister. In the spring of 2025, she signed a resource agreement with the US on behalf of Ukraine.

Zelenksyy proposed that Sviridenko lead the government in July 2025, and the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s parliament, approved her candidacy with 262 votes in a session held on July 17, 2025.

Prior to Sviridenko, Denys Shmyhal had led the cabinet since March 2020. He currently serves as the Minister of Energy.

Priority targets of the new cabinet established

Zelenskyy outlined the primary areas of focus for the renewed government, listing relations with the US—specifically licensing agreements for the production of Patriot systems and security cooperation—as top priorities.

Other core objectives include the European anti-ballistic missile project, the European Union accession process, relations with neighboring states—particularly Poland and Hungary—cooperation with the Middle East, the Gulf countries, and China, as well as relations with international organizations.

The Ukrainian leader also stressed the need to strengthen operations along the front lines and border regions, increase weapons supplies, complete winter preparations, accelerate the transformation of state-owned enterprises, and implement agreements reached with partners regarding the reconstruction of Ukraine.

Who could succeed Sviridenko as prime minister?

The last major reshuffle in the Ukrainian government took place a year ago, with Sviridenko assuming the premiership in July 2025.

Under Ukrainian law, the candidate for prime minister must be proposed by the majority coalition in the Verkhovna Rada.

Once appointed, the prime minister submits the majority of the cabinet members to parliament for approval.

Russian President Vladimir Putin previously stated that the only legitimate power in Ukraine is the Verkhovna Rada. According to Putin’s assessment, the only authority qualified to participate in peace talks is the speaker of the Ukrainian parliament, asserting that Zelenskyy lacks legitimacy and therefore has no authority to sign any document.

According to a report by the Ukrainska Pravda newspaper, citing sources familiar with the matter, potential candidates being considered for the premiership include:

  • Sergiy Koretskyy, Chairman of the Board of Naftogaz and Director of Ukrnafta
  • Denys Shmyhal, Minister of Energy
  • Mykhailo Fedorov, Minister of Defense
  • Ihor Terekhov, Mayor of Kharkiv

Zelenskyy announced that he met with all of these officials, as well as Ukrainian Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko, during the day.

Sources familiar with the matter who spoke to RBC-Ukraine stated that the president’s decision to renew the government came as a surprise to many. The sources informing the publication also put forward Koretskyy’s name for the premiership.

Sources speaking to Bloomberg also pointed to Koretskyy alongside Shmyhal. The agency reported that both Koretskyy and Shmyhal possess extensive experience in the energy sector, which partially explains their candidacy to succeed Sviridenko.

Meanwhile, Verkhovna Rada Deputy Yaroslav Zheleznyak reported that the parliamentary vote on the prime minister’s resignation could take place on July 13 or 14.

Zheleznyak stated that following this vote, the entire government will function in an interim capacity, with Shmyhal temporarily leading the administration in his capacity as deputy prime minister.

According to information shared by Zheleznyak, Sviridenko will become Ukraine’s new ambassador to the US. The Financial Times also reported, citing two sources, that the outgoing prime minister will be appointed to this post.

Zelenskyy stated that he had offered Sviridenko the opportunity to head a new and important direction in relations with a key partner, though he did not share specific details regarding which country or organization this would involve.

Subsequently, a report by the Interfax-Ukraine agency, citing sources, stated that Olga Stefanishyna, who currently serves as Ukraine’s Ambassador to the US, wishes to end her diplomatic service due to personal reasons.

Stefanishyna has held the post for less than a year, with Zelenskyy having signed the decree for her appointment in August 2025.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey