Oil steadies with Ukraine peace talks, US rate decision in spotlight

Short Url
Updated 09 December 2025
Follow

Oil steadies with Ukraine peace talks, US rate decision in spotlight

  • “Oil is keeping to a tight trading range until we get a better idea of which way the peace talks will go,” Waterer said
  • Some analysts were watching for clues on supply in the next International Energy Agency report

LONDON: Oil prices steadied on Tuesday after falling 2 percent in the previous session, with investors keeping a close eye on peace talks to end Russia’s war in Ukraine, concerns about ample supply and a looming decision on US interest rates.
Brent crude futures edged 22 cents higher, or 0.4 percent, to $62.71 a barrel at 1145 GMT. US West Texas Intermediate crude gained 20 cents, or 0.3 percent, at $59.08 a barrel.
Both contracts fell by more than $1 a barrel on Monday after Iraq restored production at Lukoil’s West Qurna 2 oilfield, one of the world’s largest.
Ukraine will share a revised peace plan with the US after talks in London between its President Volodymyr Zelensky and the leaders of France, Germany and Britain.
“Oil is keeping to a tight trading range until we get a better idea of which way the peace talks will go,” KCM Trade chief market analyst Tim Waterer said.
“If the talks break down, we expect oil to move higher, or if progress is made, and there is a likelihood of Russian supply to the global energy market resuming, prices would be expected to drop,” he added.
According to sources familiar with the matter, the Group of Seven countries and the European Union are in talks to replace a price cap on Russian oil exports with a full maritime services ban in a bid to reduce Russia’s oil revenue.
Some analysts were watching for clues on supply in the next International Energy Agency report.

FOCUS TURNS TO IEA REPORT, FED DECISION
“The next (market) driver is likely to be the IEA monthly oil market report for December, released on 11 December, which it has predicted a record surplus in the oil market in 2026, highlighted in previous outlook reports,” said OANDA senior market analyst Kelvin Wong.
If the IEA continues to flag surplus risk in the oil market in its December report, WTI crude could drift downwards to test the range support zone at $56.80 to $57.50 a barrel, he added.
“(Brent) is being pushed toward the $60-line by the booming amount of oil at sea,” said SEB’s chief commodities analyst Bjarne Schieldrop. “The only reason why Brent crude hasn’t fallen faster and deeper is because of the US sanctions related to Rosneft and Lukoil.”
Also on the radar is the Federal Reserve’s policy decision due on Wednesday, with markets pricing in an 87 percent probability of a quarter-point rate reduction.
Lower interest rates typically are a positive driver for oil demand given the decrease in borrowing costs, though some analysts were cautious about how much impact this could have on oil prices for now.
“Although markets are largely invested in upcoming FED policy decision on Wednesday for a possible 25bp cut, something that could lend short-term support at the lower end of the $60–65 band, the broader price structure remains anchored by expectations of an oversupplied 2026 (oil market),” said Phillip Nova’s senior market analyst Priyanka Sachdeva.


Trump insists he struck Iran on his own terms

Updated 04 March 2026
Follow

Trump insists he struck Iran on his own terms

  • “We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene posted on X.
  • Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway”

WASHINGTON, United States: President Donald Trump and his team scrambled Tuesday to reclaim the narrative on why he decided to attack Iran, after his top diplomat suggested the US struck only after learning of an imminent Israeli strike.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio alarmed Democrats — who say only Congress can declare war — as well as many of Trump’s MAGA supporters on Monday when he said: “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action.”
“We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t pre-emptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties,” Rubio told reporters.
Administration officials quickly backpedalled, insisting Trump authorized the strikes because Tehran was not seriously negotiating an accord on limiting its nuclear ambitions, and the United States needed to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities.
“No, Marco Rubio Didn’t Claim That Israel Dragged Trump into War with Iran,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted Tuesday on X.
At an Oval Office meeting later with Germany’s chancellor, Trump went further, saying that “Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they (Iran) were going to attack first. And I didn’t want that to happen.”
“So, if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”

- Had to happen? -

Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway.”
“The president made a decision. The decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide... behind this ability to conduct an attack.”
Critics seized on the muddied messaging to accuse Trump of precipitating the country into a war without a clear rationale, without informing Congress — and without a clear idea of how it might end.
They noted that just two weeks ago, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressed Trump again in Washington to take a hard line, in their seventh meeting since Trump’s return to power last year.
Some Republican allies rallied behind the president, with Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, insisting that “No one pushes or drags Donald Trump anywhere.”
“He acts in the vital national security interest of the United States,” Cotton told the “Fox & Friends” morning show.
But as crucial US midterm elections approach that could see Republicans lose their congressional majority, Trump risks shedding supporters who had welcomed his pledge to end foreign military interventions.
“We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene, a top former Trump ally and a major figure in the populist and isolationist hard right, posted on X.