Iran attacks tankers off the Strait of Hormuz: oil tops $100 again — risks to markets and security
After the IEA's decision to release 400 million barrels of oil, Iran stepped up attacks on ships and infrastructure. Prices jumped — we explain why this matters for energy stability, security costs and the global economy.
By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik
March 12, 2026 · 2 min read
Incidents and market reaction
On Thursday morning oil prices rose nearly 10% and topped $100 a barrel, Reuters reports. The surge followed a series of Iranian attacks on tankers and oil facilities — some strikes occurred outside the Strait of Hormuz, where shipping risks are usually concentrated.
According to open-source data, since the start of the regional escalation the number of vessels damaged or attacked in the Strait of Hormuz area has reached at least 16. Iranian maritime kamikaze drones also struck two tankers in Iraqi waters; Iraqi oil ports temporarily suspended operations, local officials said. Bloomberg adds that Oman moved ships out of the key Mina al-Fahal terminal as a precaution.
Context: the IEA decision and Tehran’s response
On March 11 the International Energy Agency (IEA), whose members are the largest consuming countries, recommended releasing 400 million barrels from strategic reserves to blunt the rapid rise in prices. This is the largest intervention in the history of the oil market.
"It appears to be a direct and harsh response by Iran to the International Energy Agency's announcement…"
— Tony Sycamore, IG Group analyst
"Prepare for oil at $200 a barrel, because its price depends on the regional security you have destabilized"
— spokesperson for Iran’s military command
In plain terms: the release of reserves was meant to restrain fuel costs, but at the same time it reduced a geopolitical lever for those who rely on high prices. Part of Tehran's reaction looks like an attempt to restore that lever of pressure by attacking export supply chains and infrastructure.
Why it matters — market and security implications
The risks are not confined to the "energy" column: increased oil price volatility raises logistics and shipping insurance costs and amplifies inflationary pressure on the global economy. It also has indirect geopolitical consequences: higher energy bills push partner countries' budgets to reassess priorities — notably in defense and humanitarian spending.
What could happen next: if attacks continue to escalate into a systematic campaign against shipping and storage, the market should expect prolonged volatility. Alternative routes, higher ship insurance premiums and supply disruptions could keep prices above pre-war levels.
Reuters and Bloomberg are already reporting the events; the analyst community is unanimous that the current cycle is not simply a trade shock but an element of a regional strategy of influence.
Summary
This is not just about how much gasoline will cost next week. Attacks on export chains are a pressure tool that has a direct effect on price and complex indirect consequences for policy and budgets. The ball is now in the international partners' court: can they reduce risks to trade and energy security without further escalating the conflict?
