As I have feared, forecast and written about, the price of oil is beginning to rise significantly, as this chart from the Financial Times shows:

It would appear that oil traders have now come to terms with the fact that a number of parallel realities exist.
The first is that there is no prospect of peace in the Middle East for the time being. There is, as I predicted, a performative stand-off instead. The scale of military action is very limited, as I suggested was likely. However, the consequences of the threats each party is making are very clear. The Strait of Hormuz is closed to most traffic. There is very little likelihood of it reopening anytime soon, as neither party to this war has an obvious incentive to change its stance. That oil shortages will continue for some time is becoming very apparent. By “some time”, I mean many months, at a minimum, with the situation getting worse before it can possibly get better.
The second is that, as people are increasingly aware, the knock-on consequences are severe, with shortages appearing across all sorts of industries and supply lines. The Financial Times, for example, this morning carries a headline suggesting that shipbuilding is now feeling the pinch from war-driven paint and lubricant shortages. That was not high up on my previous list of concerns, but it matters. It impacts the well-being of all who work in that industry, and, as ever, there are wider consequences that follow.
Third, those knock-on effects are now becoming very apparent. We are facing multiple crises, and without action, they will be very much worse than they need to be.
That there is going to be more inflation is inevitable.
That there is nothing that can be done about this by increasing interest rates is also certain.
That fiscal action to address this issue is required should now be obvious to everyone, although I suspect those in the Treasury have had no such thoughts as yet. That, unless Labour is planning such action, we are bound to be heading for a recession, at least, should be obvious.
And, in these circumstances, bringing pressure to bear by imposing sanctions on Israel, and maybe even the USA, is now a basic requirement if the absolutely disastrous consequences of this war are to be averted. It is already likely to be catastrophic as things stand. It could be cataclysmic if no action is taken to put pressure on both the USA and Israel. In the interests of people across the world, governments now have a duty to address this, wholly unnecessary, ideological, authoritarian-initiated, neo-fascist-driven war. If they choose not to, they will be complicit in the human disasters that will follow.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:

Buy me a coffee!

Of course, no pressure will be applied We have politicians who have been groomed by the US and Israel, and are inherently conformist in thought. This is a real-time train wreck, and most PMC are still blissful oblivious.
Interesting to see whats happening in ship building.
The potential consequences of delays and shortages in the shipbuilding industry are playing out at the moment with an increasingly elderly Caledonian MacBrayne fleet suffering breakdowns and ever longer annual overhauls resulting in disruptions to services to the Scottish Islands and damage to their economies.
Spread that worldwide and the consequences could be interesting.
Not a criticism just a question: How the hell do you sanction a global hegemon? Good luck with that!
That is wny I have previously said we may need to rely on poeple in the US to effet chnage.
Leverage via Israel might also work
Agree with respect to rising threats. Ref the Uk and fiscal action- yes the “Treasury” (is there any left? treasure that is!) will do what it has been trained to do. What I found puzzling is this article:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/30/britain-economy-stuck-tension-bond-markets
It started off on the right note (extract: “In theory that dilemma should not exist, because a government that issues its own currency has no limits on what it can spend. In practice, though, governments submit to the discipline imposed on them by the financial markets”)……….never asking the question why? if the 1st sentence is true then the 2nd begs the question why? & yes, Reeves is a creature of the banking establishment – but I would have thought in the article it would have neen nice to “lay an alternative table”…the possibilities if the gov of the day said: this is what we are going to do & stuff you bond markets. Perhaps “editorial constraints” would have kicked in @ that point? 🙂
There will be a blog in the morning.