NextFin News - Brent crude climbed past $106 a barrel on Thursday as two opposing forces collided in the same trading session: Washington and Tehran explored a phased deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, while Houthi attacks on Saudi facilities and the restart of the kingdom's Red Sea export lifeline kept Saudi oil supply at the highest level of the seven-month war. The split move - prices pared gains as diplomacy headlines crossed the tape even as missiles flew toward Yanbu - captures the market's central dilemma: the war premium is being squeezed from both ends, and neither side is winning cleanly.
Brent futures for November ended the day above $106.50 a barrel after earlier exceeding $108, a more than 3 percent jump, before easing to $105.77 in early Asian trade on Friday. West Texas Intermediate gained $2.45, or 2.7 percent, to $94.61. Both benchmarks rose about 5 percent at their session highs before giving back part of the advance on reports that Washington and Tehran were discussing a possible reopening of the strait. Even so, Brent's settlement was its highest since September 15, and WTI had fallen about 13 percent over the previous six sessions before Thursday's rebound.
The Two-Sided Shock: Diplomacy Pulls Down, Bullets Push Up
The Thursday price action was a live demonstration of oil's two competing narratives. On the supply side, Yemen's Houthi rebels said they launched missile and drone attacks on a "sensitive target" in Riyadh and on facilities belonging to Saudi Aramco in the Red Sea city of Yanbu, operations the group said "achieved their objectives successfully" in a statement carried by the Houthi-run Yemen News Agency. Saudi-led coalition forces said they intercepted six ballistic missiles fired toward the kingdom. Saudi authorities did not confirm whether the attacks caused damage or casualties, and Aramco - which supplies roughly 10 percent of global oil demand - did not respond to inquiries outside regular business hours.
On the demand-and-diplomacy side, US and Iranian negotiators in New York, meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, are exploring a phased path out of the nearly seven-month conflict that would involve Tehran reopening the Strait of Hormuz and Washington lifting its economic blockade of Iran, according to people close to the talks. The strait has become the central bargaining chip: Iran wants relief from the blockade that is choking its economy, while Washington wants free passage for ships on the global oil supply route now blocked by Tehran.
"One way forward would be to solve the crisis in stages. The first would be to end the blockade and reopen Hormuz," a senior Iranian official said on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.
That sequencing matters for traders because it defines the order of concessions. If Iran moves first on Hormuz before sanctions relief is locked in, the supply-side risk premium can evaporate quickly. If Washington moves first, the opposite happens. The market is pricing the middle path - and that is why a 5 percent intraday spike can shrink to a 3 percent close within hours.
Saudi Arabia's Red Sea Lifeline: A War-Time Supply High Built on One Pipeline
The more consequential story beneath the price tape is what Saudi Arabia is doing to stay in the market. On September 22, three people briefed on the matter said Saudi Arabia had restarted operations at its East-West Pipeline and could resume exports from the Red Sea port of Yanbu, with the line pumping at a low rate. Drone attacks had forced the kingdom to shut the pipeline on September 13, halting crude loadings at Yanbu. By Tuesday, one cargo bound for China was scheduled to load from the Red Sea port, according to shipping data.
Before the disruption, the pipeline - also known as Petroline - had been moving around 4 million barrels a day to Yanbu on the Red Sea coast, the kingdom's main alternative export route when shipping through the Strait of Hormuz becomes risky. Its restart is what allows Saudi supply to hold at its highest level of the war even as the kingdom's own crude production has collapsed.
The production numbers are stark. Saudi crude output plunged to 6.238 million barrels a day in August, down 1,897,000 barrels a day from 8.135 million in July - a nearly 23 percent monthly drop and the lowest monthly average the kingdom has maintained since 1990, according to OPEC's Monthly Oil Market Report. The decline came despite OPEC+ plans to raise output during the month. Yet Saudi Arabia still supplied 7.1 million barrels a day to the market in August, according to its direct communication with OPEC - roughly 900,000 barrels a day more than it produced.
That gap is the quiet story of this war: the kingdom is drawing on inventories to keep its customers supplied while its wells sit largely idle. Inventory draws are a bridge, not a foundation. They buy time for the pipeline restart to take hold, but they cannot sustain a 7-million-barrel supply pace indefinitely if production stays near 6.2 million.
The vulnerability is geographic. Saudi Arabia has shifted its exports to the Red Sea coast because of the blockage of Hormuz earlier in the war, but that has concentrated its entire non-Gulf export capacity into a single loading complex fed by a single overland pipeline. Yanbu is now a single point of failure. The September 10 drone attacks on the East-West line - launched from the territory of Iraq close to the Iranian border - proved how quickly that concentration can turn into a shutdown. Before the war, Brent traded at about $72 a barrel; early in the conflict it hit a high of $119. The distance between those two numbers is the price of Saudi Arabia's export geography.
The Cyclical Bridge and the Structural Bottleneck
Here is the call the market has not fully separated. Two forces are at work, and they point in opposite directions across time horizons.
The cyclical leg is the inventory bridge and the diplomatic window. Inventory draws are by definition mean-reverting: they fill back up once production recovers or demand softens. A phased US-Iran framework, if signed, would also be cyclical in its price effect - the Hormuz risk premium that spiked to $119 can unwind as fast as it rose, because it was priced on the fear of closure rather than on a permanent loss of capacity. This is the normalization argument, and it is powerful in the weeks around the November 3 US midterm elections, when both Washington and Tehran face political incentives to show a deal.
The structural leg is the geography. No diplomatic agreement moves Yanbu, duplicates the East-West pipeline, or hardens a single loading complex against drone attacks launched from Iraqi territory near the Iranian border. Before the conflict, roughly 20 million barrels a day of crude and products moved through the Strait of Hormuz in 2025. Saudi Arabia's workaround - pump west overland and load at one Red Sea port - solves the strait but creates a new chokepoint. That is a regime change in the kingdom's export network, not a fluctuation. It will not self-correct until Riyadh builds redundant routes or secures the corridor, a multi-year project that no ceasefire accelerates.
Getting this distinction right is what separates a trade from a trap. Betting on $80 oil prices the cyclical leg and ignores the structural one. Betting on a permanent $120 premium prices the structural leg and ignores the inventory bridge. The market is doing neither cleanly - which is exactly why it is stuck between $95 and $110.
The Phased Deal: Why Both Sides Hold the Knife
The diplomatic track is real, but its odds are not. Dennis Ross, a former US negotiator on Iran, said he saw only a 30 percent chance of an agreement being reached before the US midterm elections on November 3 - though he noted both sides may have stronger reasons to make a deal before the vote than after. A deal before the midterms could benefit President Donald Trump, as reopening Hormuz could ease tensions in the Gulf, contain oil prices and help bring down politically sensitive US gasoline prices. After the vote, Ross said, Trump may face fewer constraints and be more willing to intensify pressure or consider military options.
"The blockade is what's really squeezing the Iranians. It's strangling them," Ross said.
Yet the White House is signaling no urgency. A White House official said Iran is "desperate for a deal," that President Trump "holds all the cards and will make whatever decision is best for the United States," and that the US was in a "very strong position" with control of the Strait of Hormuz and an Iranian economy that was "collapsing." Trump has said he thinks the US and Iran could reach a deal after the November 3 midterm elections. A senior European official said the Iranians "have a very long list of demands."
That list, and the leverage behind it, is the obstacle. Washington controls the economic pressure hurting Tehran most; Tehran controls access to the energy chokepoint. Neither wants to surrender leverage without extracting something tangible. Regional sources said Tehran was willing to drop a demand for payment of transit fees to use the Strait of Hormuz from the main agreement and put it in a side attachment instead, as ending the blockade had become the more urgent priority. Any arrangement would be temporary, not a formal abandonment of Iran's position.
The distrust is earned. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Thursday that he hoped Washington would return to their Memorandum of Understanding on ending the war, which lapsed in mid-August without a peace deal, before the November elections. An earlier understanding collapsed in July. Trump has said he thinks a deal could come after the midterms - a timeline that gives both sides room to maneuver but leaves the market guessing through the most politically sensitive weeks of the year.
Behind the Iranian stance is a recognition of the economic cost of prolonged confrontation, but also a readiness for more war. "Our fingers are on the trigger," the senior Iranian official said. "The Americans know what they need to do but, because of their excessive demands, the chances of diplomacy resolving this are extremely low."
What the Market Has Priced - and What It Hasn't
The conventional read is straightforward: a Hormuz deal is bearish for oil, Houthi attacks are bullish, and the net is a volatile range between $95 and $110 for Brent. That framing is too shallow. The second-order effect runs through Saudi Arabia's inventory bridge and through the independence of the Houthis from direct Iranian command.
First, a deal on Hormuz does not reopen the Red Sea. The Houthis have declared a maritime embargo against Saudi Arabia as a new front in the conflict, and their attacks have continued regardless of the state of US-Iran talks. Saudi crude and condensate loadings from Yanbu fell to a six-month low in August - Vortexa estimated 3.2 million barrels a day, while Kpler put them at just 1.5 million barrels a day - because tankers switched off their AIS signals to reduce exposure. Even if Tehran orders restraint, the Houthis' operational autonomy means the Red Sea risk premium does not unwind on the same timeline as the Hormuz premium.
Second, the inventory draw is a clock. Supplying 7.1 million barrels a day while producing 6.238 million means the kingdom is running down stockpiles at roughly 900,000 barrels a day. At that pace, a full quarter of drawdown represents around 80 million barrels - meaningful, but finite. If the East-West pipeline cannot be restored to a sustained high rate, Riyadh faces a choice it has so far avoided: either cut exports and cede market share, or push production higher and expose more infrastructure to attack.
Third, the US naval escort operation shows how thin normal flow has become. On September 1, the US military escorted up to 40 commercial vessels carrying about 18 million barrels of oil through the Strait of Hormuz - roughly 90 percent of a normal prewar day's flow, and the highest one-day wartime peak since the conflict erupted more than six months ago. That a single escorted convoy approaching normal daily volume counts as a wartime record tells you how far throughput has fallen. The International Energy Agency says flow through the strait has slowed to a trickle since the war began.
"Relative to the post-war trend, these levels remain elevated and reflect the reality that critical supply routes and facilities are still vulnerable," said Tim Waterer, chief market analyst at KCM Trade in Sydney. "Diplomatic efforts on the sidelines of the UN are providing some counterweight, but until there is clearer evidence of a durable de-escalation, the upside bias remains in place."
June Goh, a senior oil market analyst at Sparta Commodities in Singapore, put the floor simply: oil would likely stay above $100 a barrel as long as the war on Iran continued. "With no clear resolution in sight, the gap in oil inventories globally is getting wider," Goh said.
The Counter-Thesis: This Is the Beginning of Normalization
The strongest case against a sustained war premium is that the physical system is already healing faster than the politics. The East-West pipeline is back online. Yanbu loadings have resumed. Saudi Arabia is still supplying 7.1 million barrels a day to the market - more than it produced - which means global buyers are not being rationed. The US-Iran talks are the most serious diplomatic track since the MoU lapsed, and both sides have economic reasons to close: Tehran's economy is under a blockade described by one former negotiator as strangling, and Washington faces gasoline prices that move directly through to voters before November 3.
Under this view, Thursday's spike above $108 is the last gasp of the war premium, not its consolidation. Once a phased framework is signed, the Hormuz premium - the larger of the two risk components - should unwind quickly, and Brent should gravitate back toward the $80s, with the Red Sea premium persisting as a smaller, contained add-on.
The answer is that this normalization case is directionally right but temporally fragile. The pipeline is pumping at a low rate, not full capacity. The East-West line has already been forced shut this year by drone strikes, and Houthi attacks have targeted infrastructure around Yanbu and the Jazan refinery. The MoU already lapsed once, in mid-August, without a peace deal. And the Houthis remain a wildcard whose attacks are not switched on and off by a US-Iran handshake. A phased deal reduces the probability of a catastrophic Hormuz closure; it does not eliminate the attritional risk that has kept Brent above $100.
The falsifying signal is specific: if Brent settles below $95 for five consecutive trading sessions after a signed Hormuz framework - and if Yanbu loadings are confirmed above 3 million barrels a day for two consecutive weeks - then the war premium is unwinding faster than this analysis assumes, and the normalization thesis wins. Until both conditions print, the burden of proof sits with the doves.
Outlook: Who Benefits, Who Is Exposed, and What Breaks the Trade
The mechanism cashes out into an asymmetric map of winners and exposed parties across three time horizons.
In the short term - days to weeks - volatility is the only certain trade. Every headline from New York cuts one way and every missile report cuts the other, which favors options sellers of extreme moves and punishes directional spot positions. Energy equities with Middle East exposure and tanker rates benefit from the fear of disruption; refiners and consumer economies absorb the cost.
Over the medium term - through the November 3 midterms - the path depends on whether diplomacy produces a signed framework. Base case: a phased deal is announced before or shortly after the vote, Brent ranges between $95 and $110, and the inventory draw slows as the East-West line ramps up. Upside case: talks collapse, Houthi attacks intensify against Yanbu or Ras Tanura, and Brent retests the $115-$120 zone. Downside case: a durable framework is signed, Hormuz reopens to escorted traffic, and Brent breaks below $95 toward the mid-$80s as the strait premium fully unwinds.
In the long term, the structural lesson is what outlasts the price cycle. The war has revealed that Saudi Arabia's export resilience rests on a single overland pipeline to a single Red Sea port - a concentration that no diplomatic deal changes. Whether the premium fully fades depends less on Washington and Tehran than on whether Riyadh diversifies its exit routes and hardens Yanbu's defenses. That is a multi-year project, and until it is visible, the market will keep a floor under the war premium.
What to watch, in order: first, whether Saudi authorities confirm damage from Thursday's Yanbu attacks; second, whether Yanbu loadings sustain above 3 million barrels a day through October; third, whether the US-Iran talks produce a signed framework before November 3; and fourth, whether Brent can hold above $100 without fresh attack headlines. If the pipeline holds and a deal lands, oil's war chapter closes. If the pipeline is hit again, no deal will be enough to bring prices down.
The market is not pricing peace or war - it is pricing the gap between a pipeline that has restarted and a diplomacy that has not yet signed. That gap has a price, and right now it is $106.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
