'Escalation is coming': Middle East on edge as new Israeli-US attack on Iran looms

The article points to several signs that Washington and Israel may be preparing to resume direct attacks on Iran. US diplomats are preparing for possible embassy evacuations, while Israeli fighter jets are conducting sorties near the Iranian border. Regional Arab and US officials describe escalation as a question of when, not whether.

Political and military statements reinforce that assessment. Senator Rick Scott said the United States must keep working toward eventual regime change. UN Ambassador Mike Waltz said the president and US Navy could maintain a blockade of Iranian ports for the foreseeable future. Those comments suggest preparation for sustained pressure, not a brief operation.

The ceasefire that stopped most direct fighting in April remains fragile. A 14-point agreement signed in June was never implemented. The article says both sides still face an unbridgeable gap over Hormuz, Iran’s nuclear issue, and the Houthis, leaving renewed conflict increasingly likely.

The memorandum of understanding was a 14-point agreement signed by the United States and Iran in June. Its stated purpose was to advance a settlement after direct fighting had largely stopped under an April ceasefire. The article does not list all 14 points, but it says experts viewed the agreement as granting Iran sweeping concessions.

Implementation failed because the Trump administration could not accept the agreement’s terms. Former negotiator Aaron David Miller described a vast gap between the two sides. Iran was unwilling to change its positions on the Strait of Hormuz, the nuclear issue, or the Houthis to the extent Trump needed to claim a political victory.

Neither government felt weak enough to compromise. The resulting deadlock left the ceasefire fragile and the settlement unfinished. US pressure continued through a blockade, while Iran kept resisting key demands. The article presents this unresolved disagreement as a major reason renewed fighting may follow.

The Strait of Hormuz is a strategic waterway through which Gulf energy shipments move. In this confrontation, it has become both an economic bottleneck and a military flashpoint. Iran wants to impose fees on vessels using the strait, while the United States has imposed a blockade against Iran and conducted tit-for-tat strikes there.

Gulf states located inside the strait are trying to keep exports moving. They use a shuttle system in which state-owned boats carry oil to larger tankers waiting in the Gulf of Oman. The United States says its navy escorts these vessels, but the arrangement is expensive. Iran’s attacks on vessels have also pushed shipping rates higher.

The strait therefore connects local military decisions to wider economic pressure. Iran can threaten traffic, while the United States can restrict Iranian exports and protect allied shipments. The article says at least 27 ships were attacked this month, the highest monthly figure since March.

The disruption has spread well beyond isolated attacks at sea. At least 27 ships were attacked during the month covered by the article, the highest number since March. Shipping rates have soared as Iran attacks vessels and the United States maintains a blockade against Iranian ports.

Energy exporters have found workarounds, but they are costly. Saudi Arabia is sending oil through the Red Sea and bypassing the Houthis. Gulf states inside Hormuz are using state-owned shuttle boats to transfer oil to larger tankers in the Gulf of Oman. The United States says its navy escorts these movements, adding further expense.

Supply volumes have partly recovered, but prices remain high. Regional oil and product exports reached pre-war levels last week, according to Kpler data, though experts cautioned that the figures may reflect a short burst. Since the June memorandum, Brent rose 43 percent, diesel 35 percent, and gasoline less than 10 percent.

A new US-Israeli attack could widen the conflict across the Gulf. Iran has threatened to bomb trillions of dollars in US-linked data centers and AI facilities, as well as energy installations and airports. Those threats would put civilian infrastructure, commercial operations, and regional transport under direct pressure.

Shipping could also become more dangerous. The article says Iran would likely respond to renewed bombing with more aggressive strikes on energy infrastructure. It is already attacking vessels in and around the Strait of Hormuz, while the United States uses naval escorts to protect allied shipments. A wider war could leave the US with fewer resources to maintain that escort system.

The likely market effect is prolonged price pressure. Regional exports have recovered in volume, but Brent is already 43 percent higher than when the memorandum was signed. Gregory Brew says energy prices will stay elevated if direct bombing resumes, especially as supply routes and infrastructure face new risks.

Gulf countries are vulnerable because their energy exports depend on routes and facilities affected by the confrontation. Even without openly joining the war, they face risks to ports, airports, energy installations, and data centers. Iran has threatened infrastructure linked to the United States across the Gulf, making neutrality difficult to maintain.

The Gulf states are already spending heavily to keep exports moving. Saudi Arabia is routing oil through the Red Sea to avoid the Houthis. Other Gulf states are using state-owned boats to shuttle oil through Hormuz to tankers in the Gulf of Oman. The United States says its navy escorts these vessels, but the article notes the system carries a high cost.

These measures reduce disruption without removing danger. Iran can attack ships or infrastructure, while a US blockade and military response can escalate pressure. Higher shipping costs and oil prices then affect Gulf economies even when export volumes recover. The article describes the situation as potentially devastating for the Gulf.

The article shows how fighting at a narrow waterway can spread through the global economy. Oil supply depends on routes through and around the Gulf. When vessels are attacked or ports are blockaded, traders fear reduced or delayed supplies. That fear can raise prices even when total export volumes recover.

The mechanism is visible in the Gulf’s workarounds. Saudi Arabia sends oil through the Red Sea, while other Gulf states use shuttle boats to move cargoes from Hormuz to larger tankers in the Gulf of Oman. US naval escorts help protect the system, but they are expensive and require military resources. Attacks increase insurance and shipping pressure as well.

The current figures show the effect. At least 27 ships were attacked this month. Brent rose 43 percent after the memorandum, while diesel increased about 35 percent. If direct bombing resumes, Iran may strike energy infrastructure more aggressively, and energy prices are expected to remain elevated.