ConflictClarifier

ردیاب بحران ایران-خلیج فارس ۲۰۲۶
CC
Events Archive
strikeApr 14, 2026

Hopes for Iran peace talks progress; bank earnings ahead - what’s moving markets By Investing.com

Summary

Gold firms, dollar softens amid reports of momentum in U.S.-Iran peace talks Investing.com - Futures linked to the main U.S. indices inch up, while oil prices dip, with optimism surrounding reports of potential forward momentum in talks to permanently end the Iran war. But a U.S. blockade of Iranian ports extends into a second day, further crimping oil shipping through the vital Strait of Hormuz waterway. A flood of big-name U.S. bank earnings is in focus, while luxury titan LVMH notes an impact to sales from the conflict in the Middle East. 1. Futures tick up U.S. stock futures pointed higher on Tuesday, bolstered by hopes for progress in negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, while investors were also gearing up for a slew of major bank earnings. By 03:17 ET (07:17 GMT), the Dow futures contract had inched up by 51 points, or 0.1%, S&P 500 futures had gained 10 points, or 0.1%, and Nasdaq 100 futures had risen by 72 points, or 0.3%. The main averages on Wall Street advanced in the prior session, as initial disappointment that a weekend round of talks between Washington and Iran did not yield an immediate agreement faded. U.S. President Donald Trump also said the White House had been contacted by Iranian officials who wanted to "make a deal," adding that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. "[W]hile the meeting was certainly disappointing, it was hardly catastrophic, and if one looks closely, Trump seems to be pivoting aggressively away from kinetic escalation," analysts at Vital Knowledge said in a note. They said their view of the conflict is "relatively sanguine," although the "economic fallout from what’s already occurred" could be "significant." At the same time, a U.S. blockade of Iranian ports came into effect on Monday, potentially further restricting already shuttered oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz. The International Energy Agency has warned that oil prices, which have fallen but remain well above levels before the start of the joint U.S.-Israeli assault on Iran in late February, may not yet be factoring in the severity of the supply shock. 2. U.S. blockade enters second day Tehran has hit out at the U.S. blockade, which media reports said has been supported by 15 American warships, as an "act of piracy." British maritime officials noted that access has been restricted for vessels attempting to enter or depart Iranian ports, as well as in coastal areas in the Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman and sections of Arabian Sea. Yet diplomatic efforts have appeared to gain some traction. The U.S. and Iran have continued to engaged with one another and there has been some forward motion toward a permanent ceasefire deal, Reuters reported. Pakistan, which has emerged as a key mediator between the U.S. and Iran, has also offered to host a second round of discussions prior to the end of the ongoing two-week ceasefire, according to reports. The first talks were held in Islamabad last weekend. Elsewhere, Israel and Lebanon are due to begin direct peace talks in Washington on Tuesday. Air attacks by Israel on Iran-aligned Hezbollah targets in Lebanon have been a key sticking point threatening the fragile halt to hostilities between the U.S. and Iran. 3. Oil slips But the prospect of at least some progress toward a lasting peace, and the lifting of restrictions on travel through the Strait of Hormuz, was enough to push oil prices back down below $100 a barrel. Brent crude futures, the global benchmark, had fallen by 1.5% to $97.88 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude futures declined by 3.4% to $95.78 a barrel. The outlook for crude is murky. In its first assessment of the impact of the Iran war released on Monday, OPEC slashed its forecast for world oil demand in the second quarter by 500,000 barrels per day. However, the decline was less than other projections, and OPEC made no change to its full-year outlook, suggesting that the producer group expects oil consumption to rebound later in 2026. 4. Bank earnings flood ahead Attention now turns to the earnings calendar, with a slew of Wall Street lending giants are scheduled to report on Tuesday. JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup are set to unveil quarterly returns before the start of U.S. trading, followed by peers Bank of America and Morgan Stanley on Wednesday. Analysts have been anticipating that results from these banks will be aided by solid trading activity and investment banking fees, even as the specter of economic uncertainty caused by the Iran war lingers. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon warned earlier this month that the conflict risks sparking oil and commodity prices shocks that could keep inflation elevated and drive interest rates higher than current market estimates. On Monday, Goldman Sachs reported a 19% jump in first-quarter profit, thanks to volatile markets which underpinned a record three-month period at its trading and banking units. 5. LVMH flags Iran war impact In Europe, shares of LVMH sank in early dealmaking after the Dior parent flagged that the conflict in the Middle East has trimmed at least 1% from total group sales, denting optimism that the $400 billion luxury sector may be able to continue a nascent recovery. Global quarterly sales at LVMH, the group behind high-end brands like Louis Vuitton and Bulgari jewellery, rose by 1%, missing estimates for an increase of 1.5%, according to Visible Alpha estimates cited by Reuters. LVMH’s finance chief Cecile Cabanis warned that "[w]hat we see today is still that demand is very much down" since disruption to shopping activity in the Middle East following the outbreak of the Iran war. Peer Kering, the owner of the Gucci label, is now set to report after the close of European markets on Tuesday.

Actors involved

USIsraelIranProxy

Sources

  • Scott KanowskyBy Scott Kanowsky

    Gold firms, dollar softens amid reports of momentum in U.S.-Iran peace talks Investing.com - Futures linked to the main U.S. indices inch up, while oil prices dip, with optimism surrounding reports of potential forward momentum in talks to permanently end the Iran war. But a U.S.

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranUN
1 source

The US and its allies Britain, France and Germany are pushing other countries on the UN nuclear watchdog's board to pass a resolution next week reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for the first time in 20 years, diplomats said on Friday. If passed, the resolution would follow up on one adopted on June 12 of last year declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for not fully cooperating with an investigation into uranium traces found at undeclared sites.

The US launched an air war against Tehran on February 28 in which, together with Israel, it destroyed or badly damaged Iran's uranium-enrichment facilities. Iran has not let International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors return to the bombed sites since then or verify what remains of its stocks of enriched uranium, some of which was enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.

Resolution would be culmination of standoff over IAEA's access to nuclear sites A resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation board reporting Iran to the Security Council would also be the culmination of a standoff over IAEA access to those sites, since the board has passed two resolutions in the past year demanding Iran declare its enriched uranium stocks and grant the IAEA full access to verify them.

A draft text for the resolution has yet to be formally submitted to the board and negotiations between countries over the exact wording are ongoing, diplomats said. A draft is usually formally submitted early in the week of a board meeting. As a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has the right to develop nuclear technology, including enrichment, for peaceful purposes.

Iran says it would never produce nuclear weapons. It is, however, the only country to enrich to 60% without making a bomb. The amount it has enriched to that level is "a matter of serious concern" to the IAEA. The IAEA believes well over 200 kg of that highly enriched uranium has survived the bombardments and is held in a tunnel complex at Isfahan and at the Natanz facility.

Location: Jerusalem
strikeUnverifiedUSIranChina
1 source

The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on the Turkish bank Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi, alleging it facilitated the transfer of Iranian oil revenues into cash and gold. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated these measures are part of "Operation Economic Outcast," an initiative launched following more than six months of conflict to pressure Iran.

Location: Iran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranEURussiaChinaUkraineHamas
1 source

Rabobank reported that geopolitical developments, including Russian statements regarding potential peace talks in Ukraine and US-Iran hostilities, continue to dominate market sentiment, though analysts noted these claims remain unverified. The bank also cited unconfirmed reports that South Korea may deploy forces to the Strait of Hormuz and that Israel has stated regime change in Tehran is a primary objective, while noting that Ukrainian media reports of an impending northern Russian offensive lack independent verification.

Location: Tehran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaUkraine
1 source

The White House is now apparently using Russian tactics to convince the American public that the war in Iran is not, in fact, a war. When asked by reporters at the White House on Thursday whether the most intense sustained air campaign by American forces since the invasion of Iraq would be over by the midterms, Vice President JD Vance replied: “I wouldn’t call it a war.

” Vladimir Putin said much the same thing when he invaded Ukraine. Russia was not fighting a war either, the Kremlin insisted; it was merely conducting a “special military operation.” If that comparison strikes you as shocking, consider the contours of the two conflicts.

A vastly more powerful military launched a punishing offensive against a smaller, less well-equipped adversary, inflicted enormous damage without achieving a decisive resolution, and then found itself drawn into a longer, grinding conflict with no clear way out.

The motivations behind the wars may be different, and they’re playing out in different theaters, but the pattern is eerily similar. Now, so too is the attempt by those in power to control how the public understands, and even what it is allowed to call, the obvious war unfolding in front of them.

If This Isn’t a War, What Is? Let us take a moment to assess what exactly has happened since February 28, when the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury. The opening U.S.-Israeli attack killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, along with the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, the defense minister and various other senior officials.

According to the U.S. military’s own accounting, the first 38 days of major combat operations involved more than 10,200 sorties and 13,500 strikes. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) says those attacks damaged or destroyed more than 85 percent of Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval defense industrial base, while knocking out 82 percent of its air-defense missile systems.

The U.S. sent carrier strike groups and warships into the region, later imposing a military blockade on Iranian ports. Meanwhile, American and allied air defenses intercepted more than 6,000 Iranian attack drones and 1,500 ballistic missiles fired at U.

S. forces, Israel and American partners across the Middle East. More than 50,000 U.S. service members remain deployed across the region. The fighting has killed 18 U.S. service members and at least 8,000 people across Iran, Lebanon, Israel and the Gulf states.

More than 750 U.S. service members have been wounded. Last month, during a lull in the fighting, the U.S. Treasury unveiled a sanctions package likened to an “economic D-day” that is designed to make Iran an “economic outcast” and cut the adversary off from all available forms of economic support.

In the announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent openly declared that Iran had been “at war against America” for 47 years. This week, the shooting resumed; the U.S. hit targets in and around the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran blasted missiles at targets in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Iraq.

All this from an administration that almost exactly a year ago launched a rapid rebrand of the Defense Department into the “Department of War”. No boots on the ground, though, so it’s not a war, right? Tell It Kind of Like It Is Even the very best snake-oil salesman would have a hard time convincing people that the war in Iran isn’t a war.

So why is JD Vance even trying? Well, if there’s one thing politicians understand better than anyone, it’s the importance of language and rhetoric. Words have immense power; a well-written speech can unite millions of people, and a catchy slogan like Make America Great Again can come to represent an entire political philosophy.

But war is a pesky word. For one, it implies there will eventually be a winner and a loser. It also brings with it certain expectations—and some very difficult questions. What is the objective? How many people will die? When will it end? And, perhaps most dangerously of all: was it worth it?

Those are not questions the White House wants Americans to be asking. Trump built a substantial part of his political identity around ending, rather than beginning, America’s “endless wars.” When Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding in June, the White House presented it as proof that Trump’s America First approach could deliver peace without another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict.

Then the hostilities started again. Earlier this week, Trump shared a Truth Social graphic declaring that “Hormuz Oil Volumes are BACK!”, saying 18 million barrels a day were once again leaving the Strait, compared with 20 million before the war. No independent commodity tracking company or energy analyst appeared to verify Trump’s claims.

But most Americans won’t be checking tanker-tracking dashboards. What they’ll care about is the cold, hard fact that diesel hit a new record price this morning, soaring to an average of $5.85 a gallon for the first time ever. Gasoline is $4.15 a gallon on average, compared with $3.

20 at this time last year, according to AAA. The numbers on the sign at the gas station and the price on the grocery receipt aren’t affected by Trump’s tall tales, but they’ll surely affect how Americans vote at the midterms. When viewed in this light, Vance’s attempt to discourage reporters from “call[ing] it a war” begins to make sense.

A war is something that we want to end. It tends to result in a winner and a loser. And its worth is up for debate at all times. A different kind of engagement that doesn’t quite meet the threshold of war—say, a special military operation—is not exposed to the same kind of scrutiny.

Vance effectively made that case himself. “When you ask, ‘When will this end?’ You’re asking me a question like, ‘When will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?’” he said. By that logic, there is no American war—only recurring Iranian provocations that require American military responses.

That’s exactly the logic applied by Putin to Ukraine and supposed expansion of NATO. Putting the Toothpaste Back in the Tube U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly invoked the War Powers Resolution to challenge Trump’s authority to keep fighting Iran without specific congressional authorization.

The law generally gives a president 60 days after U.S. forces enter “hostilities” to secure congressional approval or bring those hostilities to an end. That makes the pauses in fighting hugely important. When the original 60-day deadline arrived in May, Trump told Congress that the temporary ceasefire reached in April meant the hostilities that began on February 28 had ended.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued that the War Powers clock could “pause, or stop” when the shooting did. That position is disputed by legal experts, but its political utility is obvious. If every new outbreak of fighting can be treated as a separate skirmish, rather than part of one continuous war, the administration can argue that a fresh 60-day clock starts each time.

Vance’s insistence that there is no continuing “war” fits neatly for an administration that has already tried to divide six months of conflict into separate periods of hostilities, interrupted by ceasefires and pauses. This brings us back to Moscow.

The Kremlin’s own linguistic trick was also about making one sprawling war sound smaller, more limited and more manageable than it really was. From the very beginning of the invasion, Putin described the war as a special military operation. Only after two years of grinding warfare did Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov openly declare Russia to be in a “state of war”—and even then, he said the transformation had occurred because the “collective West” had joined the fight against Russia.

Vance is playing a similar game, but in reverse. Only now—with soaring fuel prices, mounting casualties, concerns over the military’s munitions stockpiles, and midterm elections on the horizon—is the conflict no longer a war. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, though, and the American people aren’t stupid.

Vance and the White House may discover in November that voters are perfectly capable of recognizing a war, even when the vice president doesn’t want to call it one.

Location: Iran