Post

Regarding the lack of effective information between the US and Iran so far, Iran confirmed yesterday that it has received feedback from the US. Now it has reached the stage where both sides need to weigh the pros and cons. Actually, for the US and Iran, it has been said before that the peace faction and the hardline faction are key points that the senior leadership on both sides need to balance. Resuming negotiations is easy; what is more difficult is how to create a reason to portray oneself as the victor. #伊朗收到美国反提案，美伊分歧仍在 Currently, media reports reveal that earlier this week, while the US and Iran were communicating in the US, Iran did not give up attacks and interference in the Strait of Hormuz, and on the US side, there were reports that Rubio once expelled the Iranian delegation. Regardless of whether the Rubio incident is true, it shows that the hardliners within both the US and Iran are difficult to suppress. So I actually think Iran's current silence is a good thing; not vetoing the US proposal means the senior leadership is weighing the pros and cons, looking for an opportunity to return to negotiations with the posture of a winner. On the other hand, it should be noted that the media has repeatedly reported this week that energy output from the Strait of Hormuz has returned to pre-conflict levels, but Brent prices have not effectively dropped. Obviously, the pricing logic of the energy market = supply environment + capital pricing + geopolitical risk premium. If energy output from the Strait of Hormuz has truly returned to pre-conflict levels, and the US-Iran situation has reached the stage of Iran's feedback, why is Brent pricing still so high? The answer is simple: the market's confidence in energy output returning to pre-conflict data + confidence in the US-Iran situation remains insufficient. Personally, I am somewhat skeptical about the so-called energy output having returned to pre-conflict levels.