Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Iranian business still active in UAE despite US ‘Economic D-Day’: WSJ

Al Mayadeen | August 28, 2026

Iranian commercial and financial activity continues across Dubai despite Washington’s push to sharply restrict Tehran’s access to regional markets and financial networks, The Wall Street Journal reported.

According to the newspaper, Iranian banks, airlines, restaurants, and businesses remain active in the United Arab Emirates even after US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced what he called an “Economic D-Day” campaign aimed at countries and companies maintaining economic links with Iran.

Bessent had specifically demanded the closure of overseas branches of Bank Melli Iran, but the bank’s operations in Dubai appeared unchanged this week.

At one Bank Melli branch in Dubai’s old city, around a dozen tellers were continuing to serve Farsi-speaking customers, according to the report. Employees said they had received no instructions ordering the branch to cease operations.

“We put our trust in God on what happens next,” an Iranian bank employee said.

Bank Melli has operated in the UAE since 1969 and currently maintains two branches in Dubai.

US waves secondary sanctions

The continued activity comes despite the UAE Foreign Ministry announcing last week that the country was suspending trade, commercial exchanges, and financial transactions with Iran amid mounting US pressure.

Washington has warned governments and companies that continued dealings with Tehran could expose them to secondary sanctions.

“It is no longer acceptable to operate in the gray spaces of this conflict,” Bessent said. “These measures broaden secondary sanctions risk for anyone foolish enough to continue conducting business with this regime.”

Iranian economic networks remain embedded in Dubai

According to the WSJ, the gap between the public announcements and conditions on the ground reflects the depth of economic ties connecting Iran and the UAE, particularly Dubai.

Iranian businesses have operated in the emirate for decades, while hundreds of thousands of Iranians are believed to live in the UAE and use Dubai as an important gateway to international finance and trade.

Iranian airlines also continue to operate direct services between Iran and the Emirates. UAE carriers Emirates, Etihad, and FlyDubai are not currently flying directly to Iranian destinations, although some reportedly continue to use Iranian airspace.

The newspaper also found Iranian restaurants and cafes operating normally in Dubai, with Iranian residents interacting openly with Emirati customers.

Earlier restrictions eased

Some restrictions imposed earlier in the year appear to have eased as well.

During a broader crackdown in the spring, UAE authorities closed the Iranian Hospital and Iranian Club, temporarily restricted Iranian passport holders from entering or transiting the country and revoked visas belonging to some Iranian residents.

The hospital and club remain closed, but Iranians interviewed by the newspaper said widespread visa cancellations appear to have stopped and some previously withdrawn visas have since been restored.

Iranian residents are nevertheless preparing for the possibility of tighter financial restrictions. Some told the newspaper they could turn to the traditional hawala transfer system if formal banking links with Iran are eventually disrupted.

Severing Iran-UAE trade seen as difficult

Economic ties between the two countries are extensive.

Around $28 billion in trade passed between Iran and the UAE in 2024, according to World Trade Organization figures cited by the newspaper.

Neil Quilliam, an associate fellow at Chatham House, said the economic relationship cannot easily be dismantled.

“The Gulf Arab state economies are so closely integrated and intertwined with the Iranian economy, you can’t just simply sever economic trade and activity overnight,” Quilliam said. “The U.A.E., and Dubai in particular, have always managed to continue to do trade, even when the maximum pressure is on. Cutting off that trade will be cutting off their nose, basically.”

Dubai has also long been identified by US authorities as a major center for financial activity linked to Iran.

The UAE also hosts the second-largest number of individuals and companies sanctioned by the US Treasury over alleged Iran-related activity after China, according to Levitt.

Washington faces competing interests in UAE

The report noted that pushing Abu Dhabi to fully sever its economic relationship with Tehran could create complications for Washington because of the UAE’s broader strategic importance to the United States.

The Emirates hosts US military facilities, maintains close security relations with Washington, and was the first Gulf Arab state to sign the US-brokered “Abraham Accords” establishing formal diplomatic relations with “Israel”.

The country has also emerged as a major source of investment in US sectors including artificial intelligence.

Those interests give Washington incentives to preserve strong relations with Abu Dhabi even as it demands tougher enforcement against Iranian commercial networks.

For Emirati authorities, maintaining some economic channels with Iran may also be viewed as a means of reducing regional tensions.

“There will be some in the U.A.E. who say, ‘Whatever the price of calm, that is what we need to do,’ ” Levitt said. “Better to do that by allowing them to access banking and supply chains through our country than not,” he said of the Emirates’ thinking on Iran.

Dubai faces an additional economic calculation because, unlike oil-rich Abu Dhabi, its economy relies heavily on trade, finance, tourism, and international capital flows.

The WSJ report therefore suggests that despite Washington’s escalating sanctions threats and the UAE’s public commitment to restrict economic links with Tehran, deeply established Iranian financial and commercial networks in Dubai remain difficult to dismantle.

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Iranian business still active in UAE despite US ‘Economic D-Day’: WSJ

Iran vows response if US moves to seize its oil at sea

Al Mayadeen| August 27, 2026

Iran will respond swiftly and decisively to any US attempt to revive a mechanism known as “prize courts” to detain oil tankers and seize Iranian oil shipments, a senior Iranian security official stated on Thursday.

According to Nournews, the official said that if Washington uses the mechanism to detain Iranian oil tankers and confiscate their cargoes, the Islamic Republic of Iran would take “serious and swift measures” to impose reciprocal costs on US interests in the Gulf.

“If America is going to detain Iranian oil at sea and then confiscate it under the title of war prize, it must also be prepared to expose American interests to corresponding retaliatory measures,” the official warned.

The official said US interests in shipping, energy, insurance, finance, and Gulf-related infrastructure would not be insulated from the consequences of such action.

He added that companies and institutions involved in owning, financing, insuring, or operating US interests in the region have been identified and are being monitored.

Iran warns against escalation in Gulf

The official further stressed that Iran does not seek to harm regional trade or disrupt the activities of neutral states, but cautioned that this should not be mistaken for an inability to respond.

“If the Americans believe they can take advantage of the complexities of the maritime navigation network and intermediary companies to avoid bearing the consequences of their actions at the hands of Iran, they are mistaken in this belief,” the official said.

He added that, if necessary, Iran would establish a proportionate response for each level of US action.

“Beginning the organized detention and confiscation of Iranian oil will mean the beginning of a two-way process,” the official said, warning that “America cannot grant itself the right to confiscate while simultaneously expecting its interests in the Gulf to remain immune from any reciprocal response.”

The official stressed that the final decision on the nature and scale of any Iranian response would depend on the conduct of the other side. However, he warned that if Washington escalates its economic and maritime confrontation with Tehran, Iran also possesses the means to increase the cost of such a policy.

US reportedly weighs revival of ‘prize courts’

The warning follows reports by US media on Wednesday evening that the US Department of Justice is working to revive “prize courts,” an old mechanism that could allow Iranian oil tankers to be detained and their oil and other confiscated cargoes converted into US-owned assets.

According to Nournews, the seized cargoes could subsequently be sold, with the proceeds transferred to the US Treasury.

The reported move comes amid the economic war Washington waged against Tehran amid its inability to achieve its so-called objectives militarily.

August 27, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , | Comments Off on Iran vows response if US moves to seize its oil at sea

US Looks to Revive ‘Prize Courts’ to Seize Iranian Oil Tankers — Reports

Sputnik – 27.08.2026

The US Justice Department is preparing to revive long-dormant maritime “prize courts” to speed up the military capture of Iranian oil tankers and cargo as US property, Bloomberg reported.

The plan would allow the US to seize oil and other cargo from enemy or even neutral vessels, sell it, and transfer the proceeds to the US Treasury.

Aaron Reitz, a US attorney involved in the initiative, confirmed that the Justice Department is “now reviving” what he called an “ancient body of maritime law.”

The move is expected to face legal challenges, as prize courts have gone largely unused since the Spanish-American War of 1898 and have been dormant since World War II.

The plan comes as US forces have already illegally intercepted and seized multiple Iranian-owned or Iran-linked ships since imposing an unlawful blockade in April.

The US lectures the world about “freedom of navigation” — then digs up antique courts to “legalize” piracy against whoever it decides to bully next.

August 27, 2026 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , | Comments Off on US Looks to Revive ‘Prize Courts’ to Seize Iranian Oil Tankers — Reports

After 6 months of war, why aren’t oil prices even higher?

By Sam Fraser | Responsible Statecraft | August 25, 2026

For decades, the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz has been considered the ultimate doomsday scenario for global oil markets. So, when Iran effectively closed the Strait earlier this year in response to the joint U.S.-Israeli assault, many analysts warned that oil prices could skyrocket to record highs.

The logic was straightforward. Prior to the war, about 20% of the global oil supply transited the Strait. A loss of supply on this scale could easily have pushed oil prices to $150 or even $200 per barrel — but it didn’t. Instead, prices peaked around $120 per barrel in April and have largely stayed below $100 since June.

To understand the dynamics that have so far prevented an even higher price spike, and to get a sense of where oil supply and prices may be headed as the conflict drags on, I spoke with Rory Johnston, a leading oil markets analyst and the author of the Commodity Context blog. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Sam Fraser: Let’s talk about why we haven’t seen the $150-200 per barrel oil prices that you warned about early in the war. You’ve pointed to a few reasons, including China’s massive import cuts. As we understand it, what has China done with their oil imports and how have they managed it?

Rory Johnston: It’s a bit of a mystery. At this stage, what we know for sure is that China reduced its crude oil imports by over five million barrels a day, roughly 45% of their total pre-war import appetite. For China, there’s two endpoints of that crude oil balance: into a refinery or into storage. We know that China had been building up a massive volume of strategic reserves prior to the war.

Essentially half of the 5 million barrels a day reduction can be explained roughly by reductions in refining runs in China. The remainder is a question of balancing in and out of stockpiles. Some of it would’ve been likely a drawdown of less visible or underground stockpiles. And the other portion of it is the halting of that prior pace of stockpile building. The main debate is how much each of these factors is contributing. If, let’s say, 80% of that remainder is a halt to prior purchases that were building strategic stocks, that is a bearish outcome for oil prices because it means that Beijing doesn’t need to replace those volumes anytime soon. But if they are aggressively drawing down less visible strategic stocks right now, that’s a much more bullish interpretation because it means they can’t keep going on forever and they’re going to need to replace those stockpiles.

On the refined product side, they cut refining runs by about 2.5 to 3 million barrels a day. What are they doing with that prior flow of diesel, jet fuel, et cetera? And that’s where we start to get even more speculative. Above-ground storage tanks for refined products don’t have floating roofs. We can’t independently verify their fill.

It comes down to the apparent consumption and the apparent available supply of these fuels within China. For gasoline and diesel, each of those supplies have apparently fallen by about 20%, which is a stark reduction. There’s no evidence that people in China are just driving a fifth less. If they aren’t actually cutting back that much on consumption, where is the fuel coming from? Prior to the war, we suspected that China was also building strategic reserves of refined fuels. Again, we can’t verify that, but if they had built that up, they could be drawing it down. We’re then faced with that same question as in crude oil, how much of this is a cessation of prior stock building and how much of this is the drawdown of existing stock?

For reference, the last moment we saw anything like this in terms of apparent consumption collapse was COVID zero in 2022 when the country was entirely locked down.

Fraser: So we can say that stockpiles of refined products must exist, but we have no insight into their size or how much is being drawn down or how sustainable those drawdowns would be?

Johnston: Correct. There are mixed estimates, but I think they are at best estimates. It’s funny, I think in some ways the lack of verifiable data allows people to speak very confidently about what’s happening in China, because there’s no data to rebut virtually any argument. That’s just allowing people to run with it without any kind of real pushback.

Fraser: How have we seen the Chinese buying patterns change since the U.S.-Iran Memorandum of Understanding and since it collapsed?

Johnston: What we saw following the MOU was a surge of exiting cargoes from Hormuz. The vast majority of that seems to have routed towards China. What we saw was that, at the very bottom, Chinese crude oil imports fell to around 6 million barrels a day in June. And then those spiked back up to more than 10 million barrels a day in July, or at least that was the high point in July. Roughly a month later, those imports are back down around six. You’ve seen a rollover back to where we stood pre-MOU.

Fraser: Do we know how long this import suppression can continue?

Johnston:. Let’s say this has been entirely a drawdown of stocks, which seems implausible. Even then, they have more than a billion barrels of crude oil stocks that we know about for sure. If they want to support the market to their maximum ability, they can do that for months further. But in doing so, they would deplete the entirety of the energy security blanket they’ve spent almost two decades constructing.

Fraser: Let’s move on to the strategic petroleum reserve releases by the U.S. and other partners. To what degree have those been instrumental in keeping prices from going a lot higher?

Johnston: It’s part of the suite that the world has kind of engaged in to blunt those effects. This is the largest release of strategic stocks on record. Depending on the exact month you’re talking about, it has potentially been over 3 million barrels a day of incremental supply coming from OECD SPRs. Without that, the market would’ve been much tighter and we likely wouldn’t have experienced the same relief even with China’s import cut at the same time.

Fraser: Last week the U.S. SPR dipped under 300 million barrels. There’s a lot of discussion of what the physical limits on those stockpiles are given that they’re stored in salt caverns. They need a certain amount of fill to maintain structural integrity. Are we anywhere close to pushing up against the U.S. ability to continue drawing down from those stockpiles?

Johnston: I do not believe we are. I think that you have probably at least another 200 million barrels that can be readily drawn down. With the required fill level, absolutely it would be a massive issue if you just drew it down and left a vacuum in there. It would implode on itself. But they don’t do that. They one-to-one replace a barrel of crude oil extracted with a barrel of saturated brine. So theoretically it should maintain the same fill. The issue for SPRs is not necessarily fill level, but number of refill and empty cycles. It’s the actual up-and-down motion that disturbs and further erodes the walls and structural integrity.

I think that the SPR caverns can get below 100 million barrels of fill before we run into any issues.

Fraser: So if we continued the current rate of drawdown, that would take us well into next year.

Johnston: Correct.

Fraser: Over the course of the war, Trump or someone in his administration will make a statement about how diplomacy is progressing or about how much oil is coming out of the strait. And even if those are quickly disproven, there is a downward impact on prices. So why do these traders keep listening to Trump? Has there been a change in the reaction of markets over the course of this war?

Johnston: You definitely get smaller drawdowns to these kinds of jawboning attempts today than you would have, say, in March and April, where there are multiple days that you saw $15 to $20 per barrel reductions in the span of a day.

When you look at the history of oil, there’s a tendency on these geopolitical events to overdo it. That’s a natural kind of fear-driven phenomenon. In some ways Trump has short-circuited that normal behavior in oil markets. Because while you’re right that it’s never coming true, the price action is coming true. At the end of the day, for prices to go higher, you need traders to bid higher. And if they bid higher and they get blown out of the water and they lose their jobs, they’re going to be replaced by someone that doesn’t bid higher on geopolitical risk. It has successfully arrested the upside volatility. But if we keep getting tighter, markets will continue to respond higher; we just won’t get those runaway phenomena that we would’ve seen historically.

Fraser: Since the start of the war, we’ve seen Saudi Arabia and the UAE successfully use pipelines as an alternative route to get oil out of the Gulf. How much oil are those getting out at this point? And has the Houthi blockade of Saudi shipping in the Red Sea had a meaningful effect on this?

Johnston: The total volume coming out of Emirates at Fujairah and then the west coast of Saudi Arabia and the Red Sea rose to about 6-7 million barrels. It was about 2-3 million before, so that was an incremental change of 4-5 million barrels.

To your question with the Houthis, it has absolutely been having an effect. As soon as they started attacking Saudi ships, the entire Red Sea fleet went dark. Everyone turned off their transponders, making it much harder to verify flows out of Saudi Arabia. Verifiable transits of Saudi tankers through the Bab al-Mandab have gone functionally to zero. They still are probably getting some out, but we’re also seeing evidence of flows north into the Mediterranean. Pre-war flows here were around a million barrels a day, give or take. That’s jumped over the past week or two to around 2.5 million barrels a day, presumed Saudi flow.

Over the past two weeks, we’ve also seen Saudi Arabia begin loading tankers in the Gulf again, which they hadn’t done since the collapse of the MOU. And the question is, does Riyadh know something? Is something big going to break in the Hormuz negotiations? Or are they being forced back into the Gulf? You’re seeing reports now that they are participating in the Emirati-led shuttle trade, ship-to-ship transfers in the Gulf of Oman. It seems likely that some of that is displaced barrels coming back from the Red Sea. So Saudi Arabia is needing to diversify away from its diversification. There’s a poetic side to it.

Fraser: Pulling all these factors together, where are we left in terms of a kind of global supply shortage? And what kinds of price impacts can we expect if that persists over the next few months?

Johnston: It’s very hard to estimate global balance right now. My bet would be 2-4 million barrels a day undersupplied on a global basis.

The rub on top of that is that we now have a parallel crisis that’s emerging on the refining side of the slate. So even if we’ve sorted out what was happening on the crude oil side, we have the Ukrainian hammering of Russian refineries, the attacks in the Black Sea, the reduction in U.S. exports now that stocks have drawn down, and China is not exporting refined products either. All together this further tightens global refined product markets.

If this persists and we keep drawing down crude oil stocks, the crude oil price is going to keep rising. On top of that, we could see refined product prices independently going higher. So that’s just an amplification. For consumers, it’s refined product prices and not crude oil that are going to drive those economic issues.

Fraser: So even though these factors we’ve discussed have kept oil prices down so far, and the biggest of these can persist for a while, we could still be looking at those extremely elevated prices by a few months from now.

Johnston: Easily. We’re already feeling it. Refined prices are already at demand-destructive levels. It’s just a question of whether they are at sufficiently demand-destructive levels. It’s the same fundamental concern I would’ve had back in April, playing out on a much longer timeline and now more on the product side than the entire oil complex.

Sam Fraser is a writer based in New York City. He holds a Master’s in International Finance and Economic Policy from Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, where his studies focused on the changing global trade system. Previously, Sam worked as Senior Communications Associate and Publications Manager at the Quincy Institute.

August 25, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on After 6 months of war, why aren’t oil prices even higher?

Sanctioning the Dollar Iran Already Left: Why Bessent’s “Economic D-Day” Is Toothless

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | August 24, 2026 

There was one sentence in Scott Bessent’s Monday sanctions announcement that gave the whole game away. Anyone who launders money for the Iranian regime, the Treasury Secretary warned, “will be removed from the US dollar system.” He meant it as a threat of annihilation. It is, instead, a confession of the policy’s central weakness. The entire architecture of what Bessent has branded “Operation Economic Outcast” rests on a single assumption — that Iran and its trading partners need the U.S. dollar. They increasingly do not. And a threat to bar someone from the dollar system means nothing to a trade that has already walked out of it and into the Chinese yuan.

What Bessent actually announced

Strip away the “economic D-Day” theatrics and the substance is a secondary-sanctions framework: the United States threatens to punish any country or entity that refuses to sever economic ties with Iran, expands the categories of activity exposed to those secondary sanctions into five new fields — digital assets, technology, gold, aviation, and shipping — and designates roughly sixty individuals, entities, and vessels tied to nuclear and missile procurement, cyber operations, and oil smuggling. The mechanism of pain, in every case, is the same: exclusion from the dollar-based financial system that Washington polices through its control of dollar clearing, SWIFT messaging, and correspondent banking.

That is a devastating weapon against anyone who lives inside the dollar system. It is close to irrelevant against those who have deliberately built their most important trade outside it. And Iran’s lifeline — the oil trade with China — is now largely outside it.

The trade that runs on yuan

Follow the barrels. China is now the buyer of over 80 percent of Iran’s seaborne crude exports. Iran is shipping somewhere around 1.65 to 1.8 million barrels a day, almost all of it to the independent “teapot” refiners of Shandong, moved by a shadow fleet of more than 350 tankers using ship-to-ship transfers off Malaysia, Singapore, and the Sea of Oman, the cargoes routinely rebranded as Malaysian or Omani. And critically, the money for it increasingly does not move in dollars. Payment flows in yuan, routed through small Chinese banks and Hong Kong trading shells, settled in a growing volume of renminbi that bypasses the dollar clearing system entirely.

The plumbing for this is China’s Cross-Border Interbank Payment System, CIPS — the settlement network the People’s Bank of China launched in 2015 precisely to clear cross-border yuan transactions without touching the Western financial architecture. Its use has surged in lockstep with the war. CIPS processed on the order of $214 billion in March 2026, hit a single-day record of 1.22 trillion yuan — roughly $178 billion — across nearly 42,000 transactions, and saw its average daily value jump about 50 percent from February to March, a spike analysts tied directly to the Iran conflict and rising yuan demand in oil trade. More than five thousand institutions are now connected. These channels allow settlement without any intermediary US bank in the chain — which is the entire point.

Nor is this confined to China. Even Indian refiners buying rare cargoes of Iranian oil have settled the payments in yuan, routed through the Shanghai branch of an Indian bank, because Iran wants a currency that sidesteps the dollar sanctions channel. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard has reportedly begun demanding yuan or cryptocurrency for oil transactions outright. When Bessent adds “digital assets” and “gold” to his sanctions categories, he is chasing evasion routes Iran is already using by design, through a shadow system purpose-built to be untraceable.

You cannot freeze a yuan payment out of a dollar system it never enters. That is not a loophole in Bessent’s plan. It is the plan’s foundation, missing.

The market already delivered its verdict

The most eloquent judgment on these sanctions came not from a pundit but from the oil market itself. If traders believed Bessent’s “economic onslaught” would actually choke off Iranian barrels, crude would have spiked on the announcement. It did the opposite. Brent fell about 2.3 percent on August 24, sliding below $92, as investors concluded the measures were unlikely to remove Iranian oil from the market. A sanctions package advertised as an economic D-Day was met by the market marking the price of oil down. The traders who move real money on real supply read the announcement for exactly what it was: sound and fury aimed at a target the dollar can no longer reach.

The one tooth Bessent won’t bare

There is precisely one measure that could actually bite the yuan trade: sanctioning the major Chinese banks and the CIPS architecture that clear it — cutting large Chinese financial institutions out of the dollar system and forcing Beijing to choose. And that is the step Bessent, once again, announced but did not take. He warned that at least one major financial institution could face sanctions this week, and said China would not be exempt. A threat, not an action — the same threat that has hovered over this campaign for months and never descends, because executing it means a financial rupture with Beijing on the eve of a planned Trump-Xi meeting, and an oil-price shock Washington cannot afford heading into the midterms.

And even if he pulled that trigger, the trade is engineered to survive it. The yuan payments already move through small Chinese banks and Hong Kong front companies precisely so that the large, dollar-exposed institutions stay clean and the flow continues if a big bank is hit. The system was designed by people who assumed Washington would eventually come for it. Bessent is threatening to breach a wall its builders reinforced years ago.

Ten years of sanctions, and a larger economy

Step back from Monday’s announcement and ask the longer question: what has a decade of sanctions actually done to the size of Iran’s economy? Measured properly, it has grown.

The measure matters, because there are two ways to size an economy and here they tell opposite stories. In nominal dollars — the plane on which sanctions operate — Iran looks devastated: its dollar GDP is around $300 billion in 2026, and dollar income per head has been falling fast, because the rial has been pulverized and everything Iranian looks cheap when priced in a currency Iranians increasingly cannot obtain. But nominal-dollar GDP largely measures the exchange rate, not the economy. Measured by purchasing power parity — which values what Iran actually produces at the prices Iranians actually pay, stripping out the collapsed currency — Iran’s GDP has risen from roughly $1.4 trillion in 2015, when the JCPOA-era sanctions architecture was in force, to about $2.18 trillion in 2026, by the IMF’s reckoning the world’s twenty-third-largest economy. That is an expansion of more than fifty percent over the same decade of “maximum pressure” that was supposed to break it.

The caveat belongs in plain sight, not buried: part of that gain is simply more Iranians — the population has grown by roughly a sixth since 2015 — so per-capita output has risen far more modestly, and none of it means Iranian households feel richer, with inflation running near forty percent and the currency in ruins. Growth of the economy is not prosperity for the family. But that is a different claim from the one that matters for sanctions policy. A pressure campaign that can wreck a currency and still not shrink real output is a campaign that produces hardship without submission. Iran has now demonstrated exactly that across two sanctions architectures — the JCPOA snapback and its “maximum pressure” successors — and ten years of data. Bessent is adding a chapter to a book whose ending is already written.

The honest limits

This is a dollar bypass, not the death of the dollar. The greenback still makes up around 57 percent of global foreign-exchange reserves against roughly 2 percent for the yuan, and only a low single-digit share of cross-border trade settles in renminbi; CIPS remains far smaller than the SWIFT-and-CHIPS system it shadows. The claim here is narrow and it is enough: a determined seller like Iran, with a willing Chinese counterparty, can route its oil revenue around the dollar — not that the world has.

Nor are the sanctions literally costless to Tehran. The friction of operating in the shadows is real: Iran sells its crude at discounts of $14 to $17 a barrel below Brent, up from $8 in 2023, precisely because sanctions raise the risk and complexity of buying it; its fiscal break-even sits far above the price it actually realizes, and the rial has lost most of its value. Bessent’s measures will add a little more friction at the margin — another turn of the screw on the discount, another few front companies to replace.

But friction is not a chokehold, and a poorer Iran is not a compliant one. The sanctions make Iran’s oil cheaper and its economy more strained; they do not, and cannot, sever the yuan-denominated artery to China that keeps the oil flowing and the regime funded. That artery is the thing Bessent promised to cut, and it is the one thing his announcement does not touch.

Bessent has threatened to expel Iran and its partners from a financial system Iran has spent years leaving. The dollar guillotine is real, and it still falls with terrible force on anyone standing beneath it — but Iran’s oil trade stepped off the block and into the yuan, and every fresh round of dollar-weaponization only sharpens the incentive for others to follow. The measures announced Monday will generate headlines, a few dozen designations, and a marginal widening of the discount China already enjoys on Iranian crude. What they will not do is the thing they were sold to do: collapse Iran’s options and force it to heel. You cannot sever a lifeline that no longer runs through your hands. Bessent is standing guard at a door Iran walked out of a long time ago, threatening to lock it.

August 25, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Sanctioning the Dollar Iran Already Left: Why Bessent’s “Economic D-Day” Is Toothless

US unveils ‘economic onslaught’ against Iran

RT | August 24, 2026

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has announced new sanctions against Iran, and threatened to boot any country dealing financially with Tehran out of the US dollar system, in a bid to make Iran an “economic outcast.”

The new sanctions target nearly 60 entities, individuals, and vessels in multiple jurisdictions that allegedly trade in “illicit nuclear and missile technology” with Iran, aid Iran’s “cyber operations,” and move Iranian oil, the US Treasury Department said in a statement on Monday. More than a third of the sanctioned entities and individuals – 21 – are based in China.

The Treasury also said it had identified digital assets, technology, gold, aviation and shipping as areas for potential secondary sanctions.

Speaking at a press conference later on Monday, Bessent went further, announcing the beginning of “Operation Economic Outcast,” which he described as “an economic onslaught against Iran’s financial connections around the globe.”

Bessent explained that the US would penalize any country refusing to sever its economic ties with Tehran. “Any entity that facilitates money laundering on behalf of Iran will be removed from the US dollar system,” he said, adding “the clock just started ticking.”

Iran exports goods to 147 countries, and imports from 114, according to the most recent data from the World Bank. Asked how the US intends to force three quarters of the world’s nations to cease trade with Iran, Bessent said that US President Donald Trump phoned multiple world leaders over the weekend “with specific requests to cease their interactions” with Iran, and that every country had been given “a defined timeline” to comply with his demands.

Bessent refused to share any more details, telling reporters that “we’re not going to name names,” nor was he “going to set timelines.” Pressed on whether Washington expected China – which is Iran’s largest trading partner – to abide by the sanctions regime, Bessent did not give a definitive answer.

“We find that the best way to engage with countries is through quiet diplomacy. And we are level-setting with every country to tell them our expectations. We know who they are. They know who they are,” he replied, adding “no-one is above the reach of US sanctions.”

Bessent’s threats were shrugged off in Tehran. “Americans know that no one buys their bombast,” senior Iranian negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf wrote on X after the treasury secretary’s press conference.

“The United States is not in an economic position to further restrict its relations with other countries,”he explained. “Iran’s trading partners, both in the media and through messages sent to us, have made it clear that they don’t take these statements into account anywhere.”

Mohsen Rezaei, the head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, warned on Sunday that “not a single drop of oil will leave the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz” if the Gulf states join the US’ economic pressure campaign. If US President Donald Trump “wants to do something, we will retaliate in a seismic manner,” Rezaei added.

Last week, Trump threatened to inflict what he called “Economic D-Day” on Iran, after a 60-day window for negotiating peace with Tehran expired with no breakthrough. Trump ruled out a return to negotiations, but Pakistani Chief of Defense Forces Asim Munir arrived in Tehran on Monday in an attempt to revive the talks.

August 24, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , | Comments Off on US unveils ‘economic onslaught’ against Iran

Iran announces discovery of major gas field in southern Fars province

Press TV – August 23, 2026

Iran has discovered a major new gas field in southern Fars province, with recoverable reserves estimated at around 5.7 trillion cubic feet.

Speaking on state television on Sunday, Iran’s Petroleum Minister Mohsen Paknejad said the newly discovered field contains more than 7.5 trillion cubic feet of gas in total.

The recoverable volume, he added, is equivalent to about 15 years of production from phase one of the South Pars gas field.

The field, known as Takht-e, contains sweet natural gas, which has relatively low levels of sulfur compounds and is therefore expected to reduce development and operating costs, according to the minister.

Paknejad also said the discovery includes substantial quantities of gas condensate, a valuable hydrocarbon liquid produced alongside natural gas.

He put the value of the gas and condensate resources at tens of billions of dollars, saying the combined resources would create “a new source of wealth for the country.”

The minister further said that the government plans to move ahead to develop the field as quickly as possible, bringing its gas output into production and supplying it to industrial users and energy-intensive sectors.

The discovery could provide Iran with an additional source of natural gas at a time when the country is seeking to expand domestic production and meet growing demand from industry and the energy sector.

Iran has relied on domestic investment and expertise to develop its oil and gas fields since 2018, when the US imposed sweeping sanctions on the country’s energy sector.

August 23, 2026 Posted by | Economics | | Comments Off on Iran announces discovery of major gas field in southern Fars province

Ukraine’s External State Debt Explodes 24-Fold Since West-Fomented Euromaidan

Sputnik – 23.08.2026

Sputnik’s analysis of statistical data exposes the staggering math of Ukraine’s post-Maidan borrowing binge.

According to Ukraine’s Ministry of Finance, at the end of 2013 – amid the ongoing West-instigated protests and still before the overthrow of then-President Viktor Yanukovych – the country’s external state debt stood at the equivalent of $6.71 billion.

  • By June 2026, this figure had grown 24 times, amounting to roughly $166.04 billion
  • The country’s external debt continues to soar: in June of this year alone, it increased by $1.76 billion
  • External indebtedness currently accounts for 78.5% of total state debt

Statistical data previously examined by Sputnik shows that Ukraine’s overall debt – both external and domestic – has also ballooned since the end of 2013.

  • At that time, it stood at about $13.08 billion
  • By June 2026, the total debt had increased 16.2 times, exceeding $211.6 billion

The Ukraine regime has been scrambling to plug holes in the budget with external financing, yet Western aid packages come increasingly unwillingly to the corruption-mired regime.

August 23, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Economics | | Comments Off on Ukraine’s External State Debt Explodes 24-Fold Since West-Fomented Euromaidan

China will not play along with the US’ ‘reckless games’ on the Iran issue

Global Times | August 21, 2026

US President Donald Trump announced on August 19 local time that he would launch a so-called “economic D-Day” operation against Iran. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, in outlining the operation, described it as “economic warfare and isolation on an unprecedented scale,” adding that other countries “are either with us or against us.” When asked whether the new sanctions would involve China, Bessent urged China to “get with the program,” claiming that would do China “a big service.”

The US war against Iran has now entered its sixth month, with both sides now locked in a stalemate – unable to escalate the conflict further yet unable to reach a negotiated settlement. The so-called “economic D-Day” operation is less a new offensive launched by the US against Iran than it is yet another attempt by Washington to cut its losses as quickly as possible and extricate itself from the quagmire of the Middle East – a move to change tactics and keep gambling after military means have proven ineffective.

But it may well be heading in the wrong direction. Whether it is the ever-rising bills at US gas stations or the soaring energy and shipping costs in global markets, one thing is clear: Economic sanctions can concentrate pressure on a single country, but it is difficult to confine the costs to that country alone. War cannot solve problems, and sanctions only add fuel to the fire.

The so-called “either with us or against us” rhetoric, in a sense, exposes Washington’s strategic predicament: it “can no longer handle this mess on its own.” Ironically, while Washington has been spouting “bold rhetoric,” its circle of allies has remained silent on the matter. In fact, since the US’ war against Iran began, most US allies have been highly reluctant to go along with America’s radical strategy out of concern for the spillover effects of the conflict and the energy crisis. The reason is simple: for these countries, the Iran issue affects energy supply, shipping security, and inflationary pressures.

The US has set its own house on fire, yet it wants the whole world to help fan the flames, making the blaze even bigger – and in the end, it expects everyone else to foot the bill. Who would want to be such a patsy? The US has repeatedly labeled European nations “cowards” for refusing to join the war, further provoking a strong backlash from its European allies and creating a rare, deep‑seated rift in the alliance system.

If the US cannot even rally its own allies, it certainly cannot expect to boss China around. China has consistently opposed unilateral bullying and long-arm jurisdiction – not because China is Iran’s largest trading partner and maintains long-standing friendly relations with Iran, but because once this US logic is accepted, international trade would no longer be normal exchanges between nations. Instead, it would devolve into an absurd situation where the US unilaterally sets the rules and the flow of all goods must be approved by the US.

If the US can force China to cut ties with Iran today, will it be able to arbitrarily cut off all foreign trade with any country it regards as a “rival” tomorrow? If so, there is no doubt that the world would be reverting to the law of the jungle, where the basic rules of modern civilized society will cease to exist.

The Strait of Hormuz is a strait used for international navigation. Restoring safe and free passage through the strait as soon as possible serves the interests of all parties and is also the shared aspiration of the international community. But if the fact that “the Strait of Hormuz concerns a certain country’s interests” is used as a pretext to demand that this country unconditionally comply with Washington’s maximum pressure and trade bullying, that would not only put the cart before the horse, but also steadily deplete the US’ international credibility while exacerbating global energy volatility, high inflation, and market disorder.

Only a comprehensive ceasefire and the cessation of hostilities can fundamentally create the conditions for easing tensions, because the disruption of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz is itself a spillover effect of the US’ war against Iran. China has consistently supported all efforts conducive to a ceasefire and an end to hostilities. But ultimately, those who tied the knot must be the ones to untie it; this knot can and must be resolved by the parties directly involved.

America’s strategic predicament stems precisely from its obsession with the “big fist” and its inexplicable confidence that “there is always a way to force those who refuse to comply into submission.” If the US continues applying pressure at will, it will only be kept trapped for longer and sink deeper.

Simply expanding economic pressure will only prolong the conflict and increase the losses for all sides. The entire world can see this clearly. Not only will China not play along with the US’ “reckless games” on the Iran issue, but the international community will not stand with Washington either. From moral, legal, and practical perspectives, escalating unilateral sanctions has neither legitimacy nor feasibility.

An immediate ceasefire and cessation of hostilities, the prompt resumption of peace talks, the restoration of navigation through the strait, and upholding the authority of the UN Charter – these have been China’s consistent positions since the conflict broke out, and they are the approach that serves the interests of all parties. Only by abandoning the Cold War mentality of confrontation, setting aside the tool of maximum pressure, and returning to the proper track of dialogue and negotiation can Washington cut its losses in time and make a dignified exit.

August 22, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on China will not play along with the US’ ‘reckless games’ on the Iran issue

All Anti-Iranian US Sanctions Failed – Iran’s Foreign Minister

Sputnik – 21.08.2026

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that US sanctions against Iran had repeatedly failed, recalling threats made by former US President Barack Obama.

Araghchi commented on Obama’s October 2012 social media post in which the former president cited then-US Vice President Joe Biden’s promise to impose “the most crippling sanctions in the history of sanctions” against Iran.

“14 years ago: ‘Most crippling sanctions in history.’ Failed. 8 years ago: ‘Maximum pressure.’ Failed. 5 months ago: ‘Unconditional surrender.’ Failed. Today: ‘Most crushing economic operation ever.’ Bound to fail. We have seen this movie before. Same bull. Different bullies,” Araghchi wrote on X.

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump said that Tehran had not taken the opportunity to reach a deal with Washington, and that the United States was therefore launching a large-scale economic operation against the Islamic Republic.

Araghchi called the operation a distraction from the United States’ own crisis that would lead to an even greater defeat for Washington.

August 21, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on All Anti-Iranian US Sanctions Failed – Iran’s Foreign Minister

Russian Rail Corridor to Indian Ocean Could Outpace Suez Canal, Pakistani Senator Says

Sputnik – 21.08.2026

Russia–Central Asia–Indian Ocean rail corridor through Afghanistan and Pakistan could slash delivery times from 35 days to just five.

A proposed railway network linking Russia with Central Asia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan could unlock trade potential exceeding that of the Suez Canal, according to Pakistani Senator Mushahid Hussain.

Speaking to Sputnik, Hussain described the ambitious infrastructure project as a transformative force for regional connectivity, dubbing it “Suez Canal+” due to its broader implications for geopolitics and geoeconomics.

The remarks follow an announcement by Russian Deputy Prime Minister Marat Khusnullin, who confirmed that Russia, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan are exploring the extension of railways through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. “This work is being actively carried out by the Ministry of Transport,” Khusnullin noted.

A Revolutionary Shift in Regional Connectivity

Hussain emphasized that the project would provide Central Asian countries and Afghanistan with direct access through Pakistan to the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean, potentially uniting the region in unprecedented ways.

“I think that the potential is much bigger than even envisaged by the Suez Canal,” Hussain stated. “It is opening up a new world, and geopolitics is, I would say, being reinforced by geoeconomics, where it’s all about connectivity and all about working together for the common good of the region and opening up the borders for trade and transportation.”

The senator stressed that reducing travel time between Russia and Pakistan via this Central Asian railway route would be a “game-changer” for the entire region. Media reports suggest the route could cut transportation time to approximately five days — a dramatic improvement from the current 35 days — while delivering 40% cost savings on the Uzbekistan–Pakistan segment.

“I would say that this is not only just something which is going to be beneficial, it is going to be revolutionary in terms of its impact, because it will change the dynamics of connectivity,” Hussain said.

Benefits for Trade and Ordinary Citizens

The senator highlighted particular advantages for perishable goods, noting Pakistan’s agricultural exports including potatoes, mangoes, and citrus fruits destined for Russia and Central Asia. “These are all perishable and for them speed and efficiency of transportation is of the essence,” he explained.

Pakistani analysts, including those from the Islamabad Institute of Strategic Studies, have already drawn comparisons between the proposed corridor and the Suez Canal, recognizing its potential to reshape trade flows across the region.

Ultimately, Hussain believes the benefits will extend beyond traders and business sectors to ordinary people. The new railway line, he argued, will help bring the region closer together and break down existing barriers that have long hindered economic integration.

“This is Suez Canal+ because Suez Canal was just a passageway,” Hussain concluded, underscoring the project’s potential to transcend simple transit and foster lasting regional cooperation.

August 21, 2026 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Comments Off on Russian Rail Corridor to Indian Ocean Could Outpace Suez Canal, Pakistani Senator Says

China rejects US call to sever economic ties with Iran, says sanctions will not resolve war

Press TV – August 21, 2026

Beijing has rejected Washington’s latest demand that countries join a renewed campaign of economic sanctions against Iran, reaffirming that the escalating crisis requires political dialogue.

“Sanctions and pressure tactics are not the solution,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian told reporters on Thursday.

The rebuke came one day after the Trump administration issued an open call to allies and China alike to fall in line with what the president billed as the “most crushing economic operation ever taken against any country”—a boastful threat that came after Washington failed to achieve any of its war objectives military some six months after starting the aggression on Iran in late February.

Notably, the United States has yet to detail the full scope of its so-called operation, with US Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent punting further specifics to a Monday press conference—a delay that raises questions about the campaign’s actual readiness.

China calls on parties to act responsibly and stick to the political and diplomatic approach, added Jian.

Iran has strongly condemned the US campaign, with Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi describing Washington’s economic aggression as an attempt to divert attention from America’s own problems.

Araghchi pointed to America’s “unprecedented debt & surging interest costs” as Washington seeks to impose further economic pressure on Iran.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Thursday the latest US sanctions, announced on the anniversary of the 1953 coup against Iran’s democratically elected government, demonstrate Washington’s continued hostility toward the Iranian people.

“The new US sanctions are not only another indication of the continuation of 73 years of hostility by US policymakers toward the Iranian people, but also demonstrate the anti-human, lawless and hegemonic nature of the US government,” the ministry noted.

The ministry further condemned the sanctions for targeting the fundamental rights of Iranian citizens and violating international norms.

“Without a doubt, the US economic sanctions against Iran, which target the fundamental human rights of every Iranian citizen, constitute ‘economic terrorism’ and ‘crimes against humanity,’” it maintained.

Beijing’s rejection comes ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s planned September 24 visit to the White House, adding significance to China’s refusal to participate in Washington’s economic campaign against Tehran.

August 21, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on China rejects US call to sever economic ties with Iran, says sanctions will not resolve war

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »