Click on the headline (link) for the full text.

Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage.

Oil price hits eight-month high on Iran-Israel war fears
Helia Ebrahimi, UK Telegraph
Tensions with Iran have pushed the oil price to an eight-month high above $121 a barrel, and there are fears it could hit $150 before the end of the year.
---
... Ian Taylor, [chief executive of Vitol the world’s largest independent oil trader], said the likelihood of an Israeli air strike on Iran had increased and was likely to push oil prices to $150 a barrel.

“I used to think this would never happen but everyone you speak to says the Israelis will have a go at striking at Iranian nuclear sites,” he said.

“The day that happens, you have to believe the Iranians throw a few mines in the Strait of Hormuz and for a few hours at least, or maybe more, I cannot see a scenario where prices would not be at that sort of level [$150 a barrel].

Suspicions over Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons capability have also provoked the US and Europe to ratchet up sanctions and impose tougher financial measures on Tehran. Western diplomats say sanctions aim to cut Iran’s oil revenues. Iran claims its nuclear programme limited to electricity generation - but this has not placated the international community, especially Israel.

The European Union declared it would embargo Iranian oil imports from July 1 - leaving about 500,000 barrels per day which need a new home. But Iran is defiant that it will find other customers to sell its oil to - and retaliated by ordering an immediate halt to oil sales to British and French companies.
(21 February 2012)

Iran Warns of Pre-emptive Action in Nuclear Dispute
Alan Cowell, New York Times
As tension grew in its nuclear dispute with the West, Iran was reported on Tuesday to have struck an increasingly bellicose tone, warning that it would take pre-emptive action against perceived foes if it felt its national interests were threatened, and laying down new conditions for oil sales.
(21 February 2012)

Iran Raid Seen as a Huge Task for Israeli Jets
Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times
Should Israel decide to launch a strike on Iran, its pilots would have to fly more than 1,000 miles across unfriendly airspace, refuel in the air en route, fight off Iran’s air defenses, attack multiple underground sites simultaneously — and use at least 100 planes.

That is the assessment of American defense officials and military analysts close to the Pentagon, who say that an Israeli attack meant to set back Iran’s nuclear program would be a huge and highly complex operation.
(19 February 2012)

Out of their own mouths
Dave Kimble, Online Opinion (Australia)
This is an excerpt of a report given to the Senate Armed Services Committee by the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, on 16 Feb 2012 and is the clearest indication that the US knows Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons program:

We assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons, in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so. We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons. ...

... So what is the difference between 'peacefully and legally enriching Uranium for nuclear reactors', and 'keeping one's self in a position to make the decision to make a bomb' ?

None that I can see.

Japan, for example, is in the same position (only more so, since it also reprocesses Plutonium), and yet the US doesn't think it necessary to impose sanctions on them.
Of course the Japanese have renounced nuclear weapons as evil, but then so has Iran.

The difference, of course, is that the US doesn't like Iran, and wants to bring about regime change. A more compliant Iran would de-nationalise their oil industry and open their economy to the west, giving huge opportunities for US oil companies and others to make more profits.

... Oil sanctions

So with the US relying only on sanctions to persuade the Iranians to not do what they already say they are not going to do, the question then becomes "How are the oil sanctions going ?"

The Europeans have agreed to apply the sanctions, although they need time to get other sources of oil in place. What they weren't counting on was Iran deciding to stop exports to Europe straight away. Although the Iranian measure has been passed by the Parliament, it hasn't been formally announced by the Government yet. Diplomatic language seems to imply that individual European Governments are to be asked if they intend to take part in the sanctions before deliveries are terminated. That way Iran cannot be accused of not honouring contracts, and there is even the possibility of splitting the Europeans.

Meanwhile Turkey is now relieved to say it is not part of Europe, and is not bound by European sanctions. It gets half of its oil imports from Iran, and has asked the US for an exemption from the sanctions.
(22 February 2012)
Suggested by EB contributor Michael Lardelli, who writes:

"In this article, Australia'a under-appreciated energy/environment knowledge warehouse Dave Kimble
points out the obvious regarding the USA and Iran. Dave first put the article up on his own Peak Oil Australia website."

Ring of Iranian Bases Threatens US
Juan Cole, Informed Comment
I had grabbed an earlier version of this graphic off a Democratic Underground bulletin board from 2005. It made the point that the United States, which professes itself menaced by Iran, rather has Iran encircled by military bases. I have tried to update the map a bit, though this area is a moving target and the map no doubt isn’t perfect. It is expressive enough, however, of the reality. Iraq and Uzbekistan no longer have American bases, but the US military now has a refueling station in Turkmenistan.

Some critics complained that forward operating bases are not much of a base. But actually, this map vastly understates the case. It shows only a few of the estimated 450 US military bases and outposts in Afghanistan, e.g. And it does not show drone bases, of which the US has 60 around the world.

Iran has 150 billion barrels in petroleum reserves, among the largest reserves in the world, but they cannot be exploited by US corporations because of Israel lobby-inspired US congressional sanctions on Iran. US elites, especially Big Oil, dream of doing regime change in Iran so as to get access to those vast reserves. Likely the most important US objection to the Iranian civilian nuclear enrichment program is that it could give Iran “nuclear latency,” the ability to construct a bomb quickly if it seemed to Tehran that the US planned to attack. That is, the real objection in Washington to Iranian nuclear know-how is that it makes Iraq-style regime change impossible and so puts Iranian petroleum out of reach of Houston for the foreseeable future. This consideration is likely the real reason that Washington does not, so to speak, go ballistic about North Korea and Pakistan having actual nuclear warheads, but like to has a fainting spell at the very idea of Iran enriching uranium to 3.5 percent (a bomb takes 95%). North Korea and Pakistan don’t have oil.
(18 February 2012)

Top Ten Ways Iran is Defying US, EU Oil Sanctions and How You are Paying for It All
Juan Cole, Informed Comment
It wasn’t supposed to be like this, the Neocons assured us. Iran would soon be on its knees because of ever more stringent US sanctions on Iran. But Iran just cheekily sent two warships through the Suez Canal to dock at the Syrian port of Tartous. The old Mubarak government in Egypt might not have allowed such a thing, but the Arab Spring has brought to power an Egyptian government eager to demonstrate its independence from Washington.

Brent crude just hit $121 dollars a barrel, the highest in 8 months and a remarkable figure in the absence of a crisis like the Libyan War (responsible for the last big spike). In part, the markets are jittery at the news that Iran is cutting off oil deliveries to the UK and France (Iranian petroleum accounts for only 1 percent of UK imports, and 4 percent of French ones). The Europeans will just find other suppliers or will end up buying Iranian oil through third parties, so the announcement isn’t that significant, but oil traders are a jittery lot. The oil sanctions plan foisted on the United States by Israel and the US Israel lobby pledged that the sanctions would not put the price of oil way up. But in fact, they have contributed to higher prices in part because of speculation on war talk.

As prices in February hit a historic high for this time of year, presaging perhaps $5 a gallon gasoline this summer in the US, Iran is still sitting pretty. The fragile European and US economies, however, may take a hit from higher transportation costs (the US will likely see a fall in summer travel and internal tourism). The same Republicans who complain that President Obama hasn’t been hard enough on Iran are cynically planning to campaign against him on his having caused higher petroleum prices, ignoring the role of sanctions on Iran and tensions with that country in the price run-up! I hate to say it but I told you so.

So what has allowed Iran to fight back against the draconian US-Israeli-European sanctions regime?

10. US and European Union financial sanctions look set to cut Iran profits on its petroleum by roughly 10 to 15 percent by raising transaction and insurance costs. But Iranian saber-rattling about the Straits of Hormuz, for instance, along with Israeli and American warmongering rhetoric, has caused a 10 to 15 percent increase in petroleum prices on speculation over hostilities. That is, from Iran’s point of view the negative effects of the sanctions on oil profits have been cancelled out by the positive effects of the war talk.
(20 February 2012)