ConflictClarifier

מעקב משבר איראן-המפרץ 2026
CC
Events Archive
strikeMar 17, 2026

US drivers see gas prices jump to their highest level since 2023 as the Iran war drags on

Summary

NEW YORK (AP) — The Iran war has rattled the global flow of oil, with steeper fuel costs already straining households worldwide. And in the U.S., drivers are now facing the highest prices they've seen at the pump in nearly two and a half years. According to motor club AAA, the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline jumped to $3.79 on Tuesday, up from $2.98 consumers were paying before the U.S. and Israel launched the war with joint attacks against Iran on Feb. 28. The last time gas prices were as expensive as they are now was in October 2023. “It’s pretty hard. I mean, times are tough for everybody right now," Amanda Acosta, a Louisiana resident, told The Associated Press while filling up her car's tank this week. “I’m getting way less gas and paying way more money.” She isn't alone. Pain at the pump has been one of the most immediate economic impacts of the conflict, because the price of crude oil — the main ingredient in gasoline — has soared and swung rapidly in recent weeks, due to ongoing supply chain disruptions and cuts from major producers across the Middle East. Brent crude, the international standard, was trading at over $102 a barrel on Tuesday, up from roughly $70 just weeks ago. And benchmark U.S. crude is now going for nearly $96 a barrel. Many eyes are on the White House. Before the war, President Donald Trump once bragged about keeping gas prices low. But he's since pivoted to try and paint high oil prices as a positive outcome for the U.S. In a post on his social media site last week, Trump said that, because the U.S. is now largest crude producer in the world, “when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money.” Companies that supply oil benefit from higher prices. But steeper costs always pinch consumers' wallets — and today's rising prices arrive as many households continue to face wider cost of living strains. It could also push up already stubborn inflation, at least in the short run, and potentially hammer the economy more significantly if steep costs drag on. Experts say that that could apply more pressure on the Trump administration, particularly as affordability continues to stay at the top of voters' minds. Drivers see impact of higher fuel prices "I just want all of it to end. I just want to get out of there, out of Iran," said Meghan Adamoli, a New Jersey resident who was among customers filling up at a Multani station on Tuesday. While Adamoli said she can personally “roll with the punches” when it comes to gas prices, she knows that a lot of others can't. Dan Bradley, a flatbed truck driver from Pennsylvania, said he's felt the rising prices for both his work and personal vehicles. Beyond regular gasoline, the U.S. average for diesel topped $5 a gallon on Tuesday, per AAA, up from about $3.76 before the conflict started. “It sucks when you’re filling up,” said Bradley. “What are you going to do, not get gas?” Meanwhile, Texas resident Clay Plant said that rising oil costs is good for the economy of his town, Lubbock. He noted that he sees more people work as drilling picks up. “It’s kind of a good sign for us in west Texas,” Plant said. “I look at it as my friends and family get to eat and they get to go to work.” Search for more supply and uncertainty ahead The U.S. is now a net exporter of oil — and other parts of the world that rely more heavily of fuel imports from the Middle East, notably Asia, have seen more stark energy shocks amid the war. But that doesn’t mean America is immune to price spikes. Oil is a commodity traded globally. And most of what the U.S. produces is light, sweet crude — but refineries on the East and West coasts are primarily designed to process heavier, sour product. As a result, the country also needs imports. The road ahead is uncertain, and prices could worsen if the war drags on. Amid the war, Iran has effectively halted nearly all tanker movement in the key Strait of Hormuz, cutting off a vital passageway where roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil once sailed through on a typical day. That’s also led to cuts from some major producers in the region, because their crude has nowhere to go. And Iran, Israel and the U.S. have all struck oil and gas facilities. All of this has left countries scrambling for more supply. Last week, the International Energy Agency pledged to release 400 million barrels of oil available from its member nations’ stockpiles. Trump, who previously downplayed the need to tap into reserve oil, later confirmed that the U.S. would pull 172 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as part of the IEA’s effort. The administration also announced it will temporarily free up Russian oil from U.S. sanctions for its war on Ukraine. Still, analysts say these efforts will be a short-term bridge. Refineries buy crude oil in advance, and it takes time for new supply to trickle down to consumers. And while steep crude costs is the top driver of gas prices today, a handful of other factors are also on the table. U.S. gas prices typically tick up a bit at this time of year, as more drivers hit the road and the warming weather brings a shift to “summer blend” fuel, which is more expensive to produce than winter blend. As always, some states also have pricier averages than others, due to factors ranging from nearby refinery supply to differing tax rates. On Tuesday, California had the highest average of over $5.54 per gallon, while Kansas had the lowest of about $3.21. Experts warn that all of this could eat into wider spending. As consumers pay more to cover necessities like gas, many households — particularly those that are middle or low income — will be forced to cut their budgets in other places, explains Francesco D’Acunto, a finance professor at Georgetown University. More expensive fuel also trickles into other sectors, from transporting groceries to household utility bills. These combined inflation shocks, and overall high uncertainty during times of war, also “makes many houses and consumers freeze,” D’Acunto added. He said that could cause some to hold off on bigger financial decisions — like buying a car or house — farther down the road. “So potentially even that will have such an effect on the overall economy.” ________ AP Journalists Stephen Smith in Madisonville, Louisiana, Geoff Mulvihill in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, and Mingson Lau in Claymont, Delaware, contributed.

Actors involved

USIsraelIranRussia

Sources

  • WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS, AP Business WriterBy WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS, AP Business Writer

    NEW YORK (AP) — The Iran war has rattled the global flow of oil, with steeper fuel costs already straining households worldwide. And in the U.S., drivers are now facing the highest prices they've seen at the pump in nearly two and a half years. According to motor club

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