Brent Crude Surpasses $90 as Middle East Risks Escalate

Iranian parliamentary officials have publicly mentioned the possibility of reviewing nuclear doctrine and withdrawing from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) due to increased U.S. military pressure. While the rhetoric has intensified, interpretations suggest that it is more about external deterrence messaging than actual policy changes.

Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesperson for the Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, stated on July 8 that if the U.S. attacks Iran again, options for Iran could include withdrawing from the NPT and changing its nuclear doctrine. The news agency Shana reported that Rezaei indicated the withdrawal from the NPT could be on the agenda and that the parliament is prepared to discuss it.

Hossein Samsami, a member of the Iranian Parliament's Economic Commission, also stated on July 9 that Iran must change its nuclear doctrine because it is in a "war for survival." Reports from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and the Critical Threats Project (CTP) on the same day analyzed that the statements from some Iranian officials reflect an intention to deter further U.S. attacks.

The NPT is an international treaty aimed at preventing nuclear weapon development by non-nuclear-weapon states and maintaining the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection regime. If Iran actually withdraws from this treaty, the controversy over the transparency of its nuclear activities will increase, and negotiations over sanctions with the U.S. and Europe may be further limited.

However, it is important to distinguish between statements and policy decisions. Reuters reported on April 28 that the Iranian power structure during wartime is concentrating around a narrower security line centered on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Supreme National Security Council, and the office of the Supreme Leader. In this structure, statements from parliament members do not necessarily indicate immediate changes in nuclear policy.

The issue of nuclear inspections has also heightened tensions. The IAEA Board passed a resolution on June 10 demanding that Iran report its remaining enriched uranium stock and allow verification access for inspection teams. Reuters noted that this resolution could add pressure to negotiations between the U.S. and Iran.

In terms of timing, these statements are not isolated incidents. Rezaei also mentioned on July 3 that threats from Israel could justify a review of nuclear doctrine, and on July 8-9, he referred to the possibility of withdrawing from the NPT contingent on further U.S. attacks.

Market reactions to the tensions in the Middle East have been particularly evident in oil prices. From July 17 to 20, as risks in the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea increased, Brent crude surpassed $90 per barrel (approximately 125,000 KRW), and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) also rose to the mid-$80 range.

The Strait of Hormuz is a key passage for oil transport in the Middle East. Military tensions in the region often reflect in oil prices through insurance premiums, freight rates, and demand for stockpiling, even if there are no actual supply disruptions. Rising oil prices can, in turn, influence inflation expectations and interest rate trajectories, affecting investor sentiment towards risk assets.

The shock felt by Korean investors is also connected to this pathway. When energy prices rise, inflation and interest rate expectations can fluctuate, leading to increased discount rate burdens across risk assets, including stocks and cryptocurrencies. Previously, this publication reported that the stalemate in U.S.-Iran negotiations and rising oil prices acted as pressure factors on Bitcoin.

The short-term response of the crypto market has been more limited than that of oil. CoinDesk reported on July 9 that Bitcoin (BTC) was trading above $62,000 (approximately 85.87 million KRW), and Ethereum (ETH) only fell by 1.2% in a day. A report on July 12 indicated that BTC was trading around $63,800 (approximately 88.36 million KRW), with major cryptocurrencies showing slight movements compared to the tensions in the Middle East.

This indicates that geopolitical shocks are reflected in digital asset prices not directly, but through oil prices, inflation, and interest rate expectations. Even if news from the Middle East stimulates risk-averse sentiment, short-term price reactions are assessed to be influenced by liquidity conditions and U.S. interest rate outlooks.

Pressure from sanctions related to Iran continued into August. The U.S. announced on August 20 a strong sanctions policy against Iran, and oil prices rose again to a three-week high. This publication previously reported that the U.S. blockade of Iranian oil exports has expanded to the enforcement of sanctions on digital assets.

The stakeholders in this matter are clear. Iranian hardliners are amplifying messages to deter further U.S. attacks, while the U.S. and IAEA are pressuring for verifiable nuclear activities. Oil-importing countries and investors in risk assets bear the volatility of maritime transport routes and interest rate trajectories together.

What has been confirmed so far are the hardline statements from Iranian parliamentary officials, the IAEA's demand for uranium stock reporting, and the price reactions in the oil market. There has been no confirmation of changes in Iran's nuclear doctrine or decisions to withdraw from the NPT.