Symbolic imageBrent tops $100 as Red Sea attacks force Saudi crude onto longer routes
Brent crude closed above $100 a barrel on 23 July for the first time since late May, after Houthi attacks on two Saudi oil vessels in the Red Sea added a second disrupted chokepoint to the already blocked Strait of Hormuz. Saudi Arabia is rerouting exports through the Suez Canal, a detour that roughly doubles fuel costs per voyage to Asia. Asian equities fell after a US sell-off, and analysts warn of a renewed inflation impulse.
What happened
Brent crude, the benchmark for more than two thirds of global oil, rose above $100 a barrel on Thursday 23 July, its first move past that level since the end of May, as reported by Le Monde and The National. The National put Thursday's gain at 7 per cent, taking Brent to a two-month high of $102; Le Monde calculated a 33 per cent increase against the level a month earlier, when Washington and Tehran had signed a memorandum of understanding meant to lead to peace. Prices gave back part of the move on Friday: Brent eased 3.88 per cent to settle at $96.78 and West Texas Intermediate fell 3.12 per cent to $89.31, having been down as much as 5 per cent during the session. Even so, Brent ended the week up nearly 10 per cent and WTI about 8.3 per cent, following a 16 per cent weekly jump the week before. The immediate trigger, described in the same terms by both outlets, was the Houthi movement's claimed attacks on two Saudi oil cargo ships in the Red Sea, three days after it threatened a maritime embargo against Saudi ports. The Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of global supply normally passes, was already heavily obstructed. Daily Sabah, citing Reuters, reports that transits through Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb this year are running at roughly one third of 2023 volumes. The New York Times reports Asian stocks falling after a US sell-off driven by oil prices, rising borrowing costs and technology-sector worries.
The camps
The Houthi movement presents the attacks as the execution of a declared maritime embargo on Saudi Arabia and has been striking ships carrying OPEC members' crude, according to Le Monde and The National; Le Monde describes the group as an ally of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Washington's response, as reported by The National, was a warning from President Trump that 'major military punishment' would follow if the attacks on shipping continue. Riyadh's answer has so far been logistical rather than rhetorical: Daily Sabah reports it is moving shipments to the Suez Canal after the Red Sea workaround became unsafe. The sources contain no statement from Tehran on the shipping attacks or on the collapse of the peace track, and no Saudi government comment; the Iranian position is therefore not directly documented here.
The view from outside
Outlets outside the fighting frame the episode mainly as a macroeconomic event. The National, based in the UAE, quotes Equiti Group strategist Noureldeen Al Hammoury saying that sustained prices above $100 would feed through to transport, manufacturing and food costs, slow recent disinflation and make it more likely that major central banks hold rates higher for longer. It notes that US consumer inflation slowed more than expected in June as energy prices retreated during a temporary US-Iran ceasefire, and that Federal Reserve officials, after holding rates steady last month, have signalled their next move could be an increase. The same analyst argues markets so far propped up by artificial-intelligence optimism and corporate earnings could reprice broadly if oil stays high while activity slows. Turkey's Daily Sabah, carrying Reuters reporting, treats the story as a shipping-cost problem and details the arithmetic of the detours.
What's new
The new element is the loss of the fallback route. Saudi Arabia had already shifted most of its exports from the Gulf to the Red Sea in February, when the US-Iran war disrupted Hormuz; this week's attacks removed that option, pushing the kingdom toward the Suez Canal, a channel it has not used as its main export outlet for decades, according to Daily Sabah. Because most Saudi buyers are now in Asia rather than Europe and the United States, tankers face a far longer voyage: 19 days from Yanbu to Taiwan via Bab al-Mandeb against 48 days on the alternative routing around Africa, per Kpler and LSEG data. Reuters calculations using LSEG data put the extra fuel bill at about $2.87 million per voyage versus $1.26 million, with a further $1 million in Suez transit fees. Energy Aspects says large tankers must cross the canal half empty and top up in the Mediterranean, with partial unloading into the 320-kilometre Sumed pipeline from Ain Sokhna to Sidi Kerir, which can move up to 2.5 million barrels per day out of total Saudi exports of about 7 million.
What could happen next
If attacks on shipping continue and the threat to Bab al-Mandeb hardens, the rerouting costs described by Reuters would become a standing surcharge on Saudi barrels reaching Asia, keeping a risk premium in the price and testing the capacity limits of the Suez and Sumed corridor. Should tensions ease, The National's cited analyst expects that premium to unwind relatively quickly, which would restore the disinflation seen in the June US inflation data. A third path runs through policy rather than shipping: sustained prices above $100 alongside slowing activity could push central banks that had been preparing to cut toward holding or raising rates, and shift equity markets away from the technology-driven optimism the same outlet describes as having supported them.
Houthi movement: Claims the attacks on two Saudi oil vessels as enforcement of an announced maritime embargo on Saudi ports and targets ships carrying OPEC members' crude.
Saudi Arabia: Issues no reported public response but reroutes exports again, this time through the Suez Canal, after the Red Sea workaround became unsafe.
United States: Threatens 'major military punishment' against Iran and the Houthis if attacks on shipping continue.
Iran: Described by Le Monde as the Houthis' ally and named by Washington as a target of possible retaliation; no Iranian statement appears in the available sources.
Also involved