(Lack of) US Iran Peace Agreement Part 5

[OnePeppyFatball]

Part 5

I had a look at the news last night to see if any updates to the story. After TopPocket posted about the bail. Nowt new really, as expected. But then I had a look to see if there was a thread here. AND IT WAS TOTALLY BONKERS.

Fair enough. It's the interweb. And the interweb is bananas.. But recognizing so many of the names there, I also felt a sort of sadness in a way. Because there was only, and is only, a paragraph of news on the facts of it, and there were so many of the "Reform fans" not only getting those wrong, but they were adding all sorts of things. Many were absolutely adamant that no matter what, it had to be made about small boats. Evil Islam or whatever.

And I have debated many of them on here In what I thought were good faith discussions. But they are not posting in good faith. Because no matter what facts, figures, logic is presented to them, their world model is the only one permissible. And if anyone tries to present facts etc, then that person is part of the conspiracy.

You forgot that today it's not THE truth, but MY truth. The unwillingness to be corrected, or learn from someone taking the time to explain things, runs like a stream through MN. Speculation and incorrect assumptions - there's a lot of it about.

I appear to have breached MN talk guidelines by mentioning trolls? No idea why, so in future I will use the Vulcan mind meld.

.

I didn't see your post that got deleted but troll hunting is against site rules (if that is what you were doing).

I mentioned that there was a sub-reddit about the proliferation of trolls on MN in answer to @RedTagAlan's post about behaviour on the Reform threads. So no, definitely no troll hunting from me. Unless simply mentioning that sub-reddit exists constitutes troll hunting?
🤔

I wouldn’t have thought so. Don’t know 🤷🏼‍♀️

Your post disappeared almost instantly as tho' it had triggered the automatic spam filter

MN used to be very sensitive about Reddit and deleted posts about it - but I've not seen that for a long time

There's been some recent stuff on Site stuff about the M N trolls sub-reddit so maybe the 'sensitivity' is back - in which case this post will get deleted too

Thank you @Efacsen I think that this is quite possibly what happened.

Oh sweet summer child, at least you engaged in good faith and your integrity (and patience!) is intact.

It's like we've discussed before, having discernment and being able to see the bigger picture and notice patterns is a skill a lot of people no longer possess.

I'm guessing that some of us were taught to see all sides (my teachers deliberately made us argue for things we were against) it could be uncomfortable but made for robust conversations and intellectual growth.

Mideast oil exports rebound in September as Saudi Arabia boosts shipments

Crude oil exports from key Middle East producers rebounded in September to 16.328 million barrels per day (bpd), the highest since the US-Israeli war on Iran started in late February, data from Kpler showed on Monday, as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates boosted exports.

The rebound came following a recovery in exports via the Strait of Hormuz, which were set to hit about 9.719 million bpd this month, as Saudi Arabia diverted oil exports from the Red Sea port of Yanbu following attacks that damaged its East-West pipeline, the preliminary data showed.

While exports from the region - which includes Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Iran - have rebounded, they were still about 3.2 million bpd down from 19.513 million bpd in February, according to Kpler.

The tally includes cargo transits via the Strait of Hormuz including ship-to-ship transfers in the Gulf of Oman, shipments from the UAE's Fujairah and Oman terminals outside the Strait of Hormuz and exports via the Red Sea.

"Kpler estimates Middle East crude exports at just under 80% of pre-conflict levels," it said in a Monday note.

Top regional exporter Saudi Arabia was on track to ship about 5.4 million bpd this month, rebounding from 2.446 million bpd in August, the data showed.

www.reuters.com/business/energy/mideast-oil-exports-rebound-september-saudi-arabia-boosts-shipments-2026-09-28/

@Twiglets1 ,

I think that is quite interesting. I have read the same in the WSJ. It seems that the U.S is now pretty much controlling the strait, and that also workarounds are being found. I guess, conversely, maybe Iran is holding off as they are closer to a deal than is known in public. Either way, a lot more oil is coming out.

I thought I would attach an interesting article and chart on long term oil prices:

https://inflationdata.com/articles/inflation-adjusted-prices/historical-oil-prices-chart/

The long term average inflation adjusted oil price is $63/barrel. We are around 50% above that now. In terms of shocks, however, we are nowhere near the peak, which was in excess of $200/barrel.

Of course, we also have a refining squeeze, so things like diesel will be far more affected.

Agreed. I saw a headline about it in WSJ but was behind a paywall so I Googled it and found the same story reported in Reuters and a few other sources.

Also saw this on X from Economy Middle East today

Gulf oil exports have rebounded to 23.3 million barrels per day over the past week, returning to their 2025 average as producers and shipping companies adapt to prolonged regional disruptions, according to Goldman Sachs.

The bank said the recovery was driven by higher exports through the Strait of Hormuz and increased use of ship-to-ship transfers. Its estimate also includes so-called “dark exports” from vessels operating with location transponders switched off.

Interesting article.

I think what is missing though is the cost of the workarounds. The industry is motivated by profit. So it always seeks how to get lowest costs, but the highest price for sale.

Here is some daft oversimplified numbers to explain my thinking. Lets say there is a peacetime cost of $50 per unit to the refiners. No profits or demand or anything here. Just hypothetical cost.
$50 from underground to refiners. And lets say we can break that down to that $50 being composed of $30 to get out of the ground, $20 to deliver to Refiners.

Something happens. The delivery part is blocked. So no oil. So we get work arounds for delivery. And now instead of $20 delivery, lets say it is $40.

Now we have $30 out of ground + $40 delivery = $70 to refiners,

So how do we get back to the $50 cost as it was pre event ?

To me, any workarounds add cost. Because if they were the cheapest way of doing it, then they would be the steady state method.

A bit like Canadian sand tars. VZ oil was tapped. Thick and heavy. The companies built the refineries for it on the US gulf coast. To minimize delivery cost. The Chavez happened, and VZ oil was mostly cut. So the refiners changed to Canadian sand tar. Very similar to VZ oil. And it goes through their refineries ok. But now there is a workaround involved. Because they have to train tanker the oil from Canada to the gulf. And that is expensive, so they spend billions building pipelines from Canada to the gulf. and now it is steady state, but likely more expensive than ship tankers from VZ to the Gulf.

Then Trump, he "captures" VZ oil, and says to the oil companies, use my VZ oil now. The oil companies say no. Because they spent billions on pipelines, and they have a predictable steady state. They need security guarantees re VZ oil, Trump can't give them, and also Trump wants them to spend billions more fixing the VZ oil wells, when they just spent billions on pipes.

On the math not mathing for Trump et al, Ghalibaf tweeted this:
"Trajectory of Stress on the House:

Ω(t)=Weight/Capacity+Iran Levers

Weight↑=(MaturityWall↑+PileOnDebt↑)×Yields↑+YieldVelocity↑

Capacity↓=FedRoom↓×(FedParkingLot↓+Growth?+ForeignBuyers↓+DealersCapacity↓)

Iran Levers↑=Energy↑+Bonds↑+OnFed↑

Ω(t0)<Ω(Nov)<Ω(2027)"

To my creative left brained self it looked like gobbledygook. So I asked AI to analyse the meaning and these are the results:

"This expression outlines a geopolitical and macroeconomic risk thesis published by Iranian politician Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, modeling systemic financial pressure on the United States ("the House"). The formula, $\Omega(t) = \frac{\text{Weight}}{\text{Capacity}} + \text{Iran Levers}$, argues that structural burdens on the global financial system are accelerating while underlying liquidity buffers are shrinking, with geopolitical pressure points projecting an increasing risk trajectory through November 2026 and into 2027. [1, 2, 3]

1. Macroeconomic "Weight" (Systemic Burden)

Maturity Wall: Corporate, real estate, and sovereign debt require refinancing.
Pile On Debt: US gross national debt has surpassed $40 trillion.
Yield Velocity: Rapid yield acceleration directly spikes interest expense. [1, 4, 5, 6, 7]

2. Liquidity "Capacity" (Systemic Absorption)

Fed Parking Lot: The Fed's Overnight Reverse Repo (ON RRP) facility has depleted to near zero.
Foreign Buyers: Official foreign long-term Treasury inflows have significantly cooled.
Dealer Capacity: Regulatory limits constrict primary dealers from holding massive debt supply. [8, 9, 10, 11, 12]

3. "Iran Levers" (Geopolitical Shocks)

Energy Premium: Potential Strait of Hormuz disruptions risk escalating global oil prices.
Bond Volatility: Heightened Middle East conflicts directly amplify high-yield credit spreads. [3, 13]

4. The Trajectory Baseline
TimelineSystemic Stress Variable (Ω)Core Macro Drivers
t₀ (Present)
Baseline Friction
Shrinking liquidity buffers and continuous Treasury issuance.
Nov (November 2026)
Near-Term Acceleration
Seasonal energy demands and short-term funding pressures.
2027
Peak Refinancing Crest
Hard collision with the $4.3 trillion corporate debt wall.
The model concludes that a structural mismatch occurs in 2027. High funding demand meets lower passive institutional liquidity. Geopolitical triggers can severely exacerbate this underlying fiscal vulnerability. [1, 2, 3, 10, 12, 13]

[1] https://www.reuters.com
[2] https://x.com
[3] https://x.com
[4] https://www.jec.senate.gov
[5] https://www.lplegal.com
[6] https://doubleline.com
[7] https://www.linkedin.com
[8] https://www.federalreserve.gov
[9] https://www.federalreserve.gov
[10] https://www.prereason.com
[11] https://tipswatch.com
[12] https://www.axios.com
[13] https://www.consulting.us

Donald Trump has said he will decide very soon whether to “blow up” Iran or make a peace deal, after Tehran said it had received an official US response to its proposal to end the war.

Trump had publicly rejected Iran’s peace deal offer just days earlier. But on Wednesday, Iranian officials suggested the two sides largely differed over the timeline for its implementation.

Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi presented the US response to president Masoud Pezeshkian at a cabinet meeting, government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani told the state-run IRNA news agency.

Pezeshkian said: “We will make every effort to bring the agreement to fruition and will firmly stand up for the rights of the Iranian people. “The agreement must now be based on a win-win strategy.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-us-war-live-trump-threats-peace-talks-oil-prices-b3059448.html

Realistically, there is no need for Trump to "blow up" Iran while the economic sanctions are working and oil is getting through the SoH.

So reading between the lines, it looks to me like the second option - making a peace deal - is very much on the cards. And both sides appear to want it.

And it's encouraging that Pezeshkian is talking about a "win win strategy" which hints at a more collaborative approach where both sides will make some gains (as well as losses of course) from the agreement. Which was always going to be the case of course, but it's good to see some realism in the rhetoric.

@Twiglets1 ,

‘So reading between the lines, it looks to me like the second option - making a peace deal - is very much on the cards. And both sides appear to want it.’

Any normal person on either side will want a peace deal.

However, I think the Iranians are very split. I suspect Peveshkian would do a deal tomorrow and, checking with AI, the deal that Iran had offered has been accepted at the highest level. But any negotiations around it are fraught with difficulties, as he cannot make concessions without going back to Khameini et al.

The problem is that there is a massive trust deficit on both sides. There is no way the U.S will withdraw on a promise of the straits opening in 7 days. And the Iranians won’t open the strait with the U.S fleet still in position. It is a catch 22.

And the nukes have been pushed to one side, with neither side seeming to know what they really want.

On the plus side, as you said, more oil is moving and Iran is practically losing a lot of their leverage. If Trump accepts a reasonable compromise, I suspect the Iranians will go for it now, before they lose all the leverage.

And then there are the optics of the deal vs the mid terms…

An aside. Quote "And then there are the optics of the deal vs the mid terms…"

Is this an advert for the positives of democracy, or a statement on a downside of democracy ?

I am disagreeing with you on that line newbut. to me it just raises an interesting ideological point.

@RedTagAlan ,

I think I will quote Churchill here:

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time’.

I also don’t think Trump is really a good example of a democratic leader (understatement). He spends most of his time undermining democracy and then tries to win the people over when he really has to through cynical sloganeering and use of social media.

Democracy isn’t, at least in the short term, a shield against charlatans.

https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/u-s-pressure-campaign-leaves-iranian-tankers-stranded-in-asian-waters-ba7bc23a?st=JjPA7E&reflink=article_copyURL_share

As we were discussing, Iran are under serious pressure now. Retrospectively, it amazes me how many just turned a blind eye to sanctions.

@RedTagAlan ,

Maybe a subject for another thread, but I think that you (and I, and others on this thread) like to think of tough problems from first principles.

It seems that, in the modern world, so much is so global and so long term, that nations democracies with short term electoral cycles are not doing as well as they have historically.

Things like AI, energy, global warming, tech monopolies, the super rich etc etc need global solutions over decades, not short term solutions over 3-5 years. I think that it why China, in some ways, is outperforming democratic societies.

I don’t have any solutions here…..well, not realistic ones. Maybe we need a real existential threat to humanity to work together meaningfully. In a way we do have those in AI and climate change (never forgetting nuclear annihilation) but they are slow and hard for people to visualise

@BelleHathor That personal attack came out of nowhere. Two posts only and you feature in both.🤔