Iran Turns Embargo Tables: To Pass Law Halting All Crude Exports To Europe

Tyler Durden's picture

In what is likely a long overdue move, Iran has finally decided to give Europe a harsh lesson in game theory. Instead of letting Euro-area politicians score brownie points at its expense by threatening to halt imports and cut off the Iranian economy, the Iranian government will instead propose a bill calling for an immediate halt to oil deliveries to Europe. The move, with most reports citing the Iranian news agency Mehr, has come about in response to the EU agreement to impose sanctions against Iran, which were announced earlier this week. And why not? After all if Europe is indeed serious, sooner or later Iran will be cut off but in the meantime experience significant policy uncertainty, which is precisely what the flipflops on the ground need. The one thing that Europe, however is forgetting, is that all that whopping 0.8 Mb/d in imports will simply find a new buyer.Quickly.

So with China, India and Russia already having bilateral agreements with Iran in place, we are confident that said buyer will have a contract signed, sealed and delivered within an hour of the proposed bill's passage. Furthermore, as SocGen speculated, the fact that Europe will be even more bottlenecked in its crude supplies (good luck Saudi Arabia with that imaginary excess capacity), and which just may force the IEA to release some more of that strategic petroleum reserve (and thus give JPM some more free money on the replenishment arbitrage) will send Brent to $125-150 - something which Iran will be delighted by. That is of course unless some "experts" discover that Iran may or may not have a complete arsenal of shark with fricking nuclear warheads attached to their heads (despite what Paneta has already said) which gives the US the green light for a full blown incursion, which in turn will send oil over $200, and the world economy into a global coordinated re-depression.

From Spiegel:

"If this bill is passed, the government will be forced to stop selling oil to Europe before the actual implementation of their sanctions," said Emad Hosseini, spokesman for the Iranian parliament's energy commission, reportedly said. The bill is set to become law on Sunday.


The EU sanctions allow for oil deliveries from Iran until July 1. Any pre-empting of this timescale by Tehran could prove problematic for countries like Italy, Greece and Spain, who would need to urgently find new suppliers.


China, meanwhile, a major importer of Iranian oil, has also criticized the EU sanctions. The Xinhua news agency quoted the Chinese Foreign Ministry on Thursday as saying: "To blindly pressure and impose sanctions on Iran are not constructive approaches."


Many members of the EU are now heavily dependent on Iranian oil. Some 500,000 barrels arrive in Europe every day from Iran, with southern European countries consuming most of it. Greece is the most exposed, receiving a third of all its oil imports from Iran, but Italy too depends on Iran for 13 percent of its oil needs. If this source were to dry up abruptly, the economic conditions in the two struggling countries could become even worse.


Already on Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned of the economic consequences of the EU's planned embargo. Stopping deliveries from the world's fifth largest producer could drive up the price of oil by 20 to 30 percent.

Perhaps instead of doing its best at crippling the world energy markets, and crushing the global economy, Europe should stick to bailing itself out, and other activities in which it has extensive experience.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
gravedestruction's picture

Min Max principle ZHez...

jcia's picture

I thought I would never say this... but I am sorta proud of Iran. This constant political bullying has gone full retard. Good job on fucking them first.


Max Hunter's picture

How dare those brown people stand up for themselves.  We are powerful people in the West and we demand that you consider our needs and our fake morals above all others..

Vampyroteuthis infernalis's picture

Here is the beef I have with the idea that an embargo is going to hurt Europe at all.

First, the world is awash in oil due to the fact that the futures market is being manipulated by Bernanke et al. This is causing oil producers to turn on the taps full bore even when no demand exists. The oil lost to Europe will easily be picked up by stockpiles elsewhere. Europe has nothing to fear.

Second, by having inflated oil prices this helped Iran's thuggish government stay in power. Stopping the European exports and forcing them to barter for oil will actually drive down the prices India, Russian and China will pay for oil through true supply and demand. Who will lose, IRAN.

wanklord's picture

False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time.

Expose the wicked intentions the Zionist warmongers and the Soetoro administration have in mind of igniting a war in the Persian Gulf. The phrase these misanthropes hate most nowadays is called FALSE FLAG since ordinary people are becoming aware of its meaning. Israeli submarines deployed in the Sea of Oman will sink an American warship that happens to be navigating close to the Strait of Hormuz – an attack to subsequently be blamed on Iran. Most likely one of these IDF/Navy submarines (Type 800 Dolphin class) is already operating in the Sea of Oman:

INS Dolphin

INS Livyathan

INS Tekumah

Watch this video clip titled “USS Enterprise False Flag!! ”

and that’s exactly what Israel demanded to the Obama administration: an old US Navy warship (in this case the USS Enterprise, pretty soon to be decommissioned) sent to the Persian Gulf.

Besides that, the following documentary produced by Univision titled "Submarino Israelí en operación secreta" (Israeli Submarine on a secret assignment) is targeting the Spanish-speaking masses living in the United States. This video clearly illustrates Israel's intentions of provoking an incident in the Sea of Oman in order to justify an American assault against the Islamic Republic.


Another plausible way by which Barry & Associates (including the Zionist warmongers) could justify a war against the Islamic Republic of Iran is by staging another FALSE FLAG ATTACK on continental United States: a controlled nuclear explosion (dirty bomb) targeting a major urban concentration that may kill dozens of thousands of civilians. This operation will be carried out by the CIA in partnership with Israel’s Mossad and British MI6 to subsequently be blamed on elements of Iran’s IRGC.

Educate the masses about the meaning of FALSE FLAG operations.

Instant Wealth's picture

Israeli sailors in German submarines sinking American warships.

Wow ...

CompassionateFascist's picture

Might be, but probably not using a carrier. Too valuable to lose via a FF. A lesser vessel - frigate, destroyer - would serve as well.

john39's picture

enterprise is due for decommission.  it is old and obsolete...  but decommission of a nuclear carrier is expensive.   hmm...  maybe if we....

Money 4 Nothing's picture

...under false pretenses of war? Great idea! I forgot all about that Pearl Harbor deal. Done!

Sunshine n Lollipops's picture

Israeli sailors in German submarines sinking American warships.

And all financed by . . . . . . well, you know. That bunch.

frostfan's picture

Did I miss something?  Has this already happened?  Aside from the delusional minds/commenters at ZH?

Azannoth's picture

There are a few countries that posses Submarines that can get close enough to a US fleet to do damage and get away undetected, Iran is NOT 1 of those countries

Falcon15's picture

An Exocet missile, fired from beyond the visible horizon can easily sink a carrier. Automated point defense systems aside, it only takes ONE missile to sink a carrier. Well, gee, what do you know, Iran is a country with Exocet technology. Hmmm. My father always said there is more than one way to skin a cat. It does not have to be a sub, they just sink a damn vessel, hell just fire at one and damage it...USS Stark anyone?

lolmao500's picture

it only takes ONE missile to sink a carrier.

Bullfucking shit.

Falcon15's picture

Really? Oh, pray tell, regale us with your vast naval wisdom, Admiral. 2 Excocets ripped the SHIT out of a frigate - the USS Stark. One Exocet, with a 325 pound warhead ripped a ten-by-fifteen-foot hole in the warship's steel hull on the port side before ripping through the crew's quarters. The resulting fire rushed upward into the vessel's combat information center, disabling the electrical systems. The second missile plowed into the frigate's superstructure.

Aircraft carriers have an ARMORED magazine and an ARMORED fuel store. The rest of it is about as armored as your typical cruise liner. the hull thickness is only enough to maintain structural integrity. You obviously forget or DID NOT KNOW what one missile did to the USS Forrestal. and that was an ACCIDENT.

One well placed missile will end a carrier.


I see your bullfucking shit and raise you FACTS.

V in PA's picture

In today's world, FACTS don't mean bullfucking shit. Just look at the market.

Falcon15's picture


I am talking real world. Not skittle shitting unicorn, rainbows, and hopium fueled markets.

Rossalgondamer's picture

Didnt you mean, "One well-placed McCain..."?

trav7777's picture

Stark didn't sink. Idiot

Falcon15's picture

No it did not. It was also hit high on the port side. I stated implicitly, idiot, well placed. Learn to read in public school did we? Simple things like language escape you today?

sun tzu's picture

You obviously don't know how aircraft carriers are built these days. You'd need a missile big enough to split the carrier in two in order to sink it. Don't forget the carrier also has anti-missile defenses. There are a dozen support ships with Phalanx and other technologies to protec tthe carrier. 

UP Forester's picture

Hmm.  Seems I remember the same said about a certain White Star ship....

earleflorida's picture

Ref: #1__ Israeli Port__#2 Jordanian Port__ #3 Iranian Port

Ps. ~ 450k bpd - making-up ~ 18% -/-of Iranian oil exports goes to Europe


JoBob's picture

There are a few countries that posses Submarines that can get close enough to a US fleet to do damage and get away undetected, Iran is NOT 1 of those countries.


Neither is Israel.

Laddie's picture

The poster George Washington did a great series on this topic. Think back to the Lavon Affair and the assault on the USS Liberty, both were designed to be blamed on Egypt.

Thinking to sway US opinion.

Both parties, Democrat and Republican are firmly in the grasp of the LOBBY. Save for Ron Paul there isn't anyone willing to stop this. They've all sold out.


The Heart's picture

Brother Wank,

You have hit the nail on the head here. Search the term Israel False Flag and see what comes up. Keep searching over and over as more and more is written about these unholy evil zionist things that cause the false flag events for the globalist population reductionist banksters. Let the zionist babalonians know we know how they operate and so does EVERYONE ELSE!

Turn off the zio-media propaganda machine today. Americas greatest enemy is the lame stream media that daily bombards the nation with evil deceitful lies and dis/mis-information that misleads the people like leading the lemmings off the cliff of ignorance. If fox news told everyone to jump off the cliff, they are so dumbed down now, they probably would. This is the harshest evil war that has ever been declared against the American people and we are losing it. Most of the nation gets it's news from fox and if they were to tell the truth for a week, we could turn around almost every evil in the world, starting with the apartheid zionist govt of isreal and ZOG here in the usa.


Good works wank!!



Pladizow's picture

Iran has been mis-treating its oil for years, so America must liberate it.

Max Hunter's picture

It's official.. We need to free the shit out of them!

Pladizow's picture

By "them", do you mean barrels?

flattrader's picture

Oddly, price of crude doesn't seem to give a damn.

Falcon15's picture

Oddly the price of crude is being manipulated on false assurances that Saudi Arabia can with their VAST oil reserves (lie) make up for any short falls. Gee, a manipulated commodity, novel idea that.

TruthInSunshine's picture

I do not want Iran, let alone another country, to acquire nuclear weaponry. Nuclear weaponry exponentionally raises the human misery and environmental consequences of warfare in a world where political and military leaders are no more rational or sane than most others, and they may succumb to bouts of being less so in high pressure/stress situations.

HOWEVER, I also do not support preemptive military "strikes" on any nation (if there was a certainty that a nation was going to act aggressively towards another, a military stike to prevent such activity would not be preemptive, but responding to die that were already cast), because 'surgical strike' is a mere slogan, devoid of reality, that military hawks devise to sell their actions as more palatable options to the public, given the snake oil salesmen that they and the politicians enabling them are.

Aside from the Madison Avenue marketing of killing humans for whatever 'in the name of,' even assuming that preemptive military strikes don't result in heavy human casualties, they inevitably raise the risk of follow-on events that cascade out of control, that even IBM's Watson can't accurately predict.

I am neither a hawk nor a dove.

I am flummoxed and vexed.

*Getting back to the core point, if Iran refuses to ship oil to any country, continent or company, isn't that entirely their right? Certainly this can't be framed as a provocative gesture used by politicians to try and further justify/twist the case that this is an act of military escalation, especially at a time when the west has launched a full-on assualt on Iran's central bank and economy, which we would characterize as full warfare if done to us.

prains's picture

I am flummoxed and vexed.


so is the pentagon but for a different reason, they know they don't have military capacity to fight this one without having to push all their chips into the pot....china....russia...etc

and they might come out the other end in orange jumpsuits


three words.....hubris, operation barbarossa.........(history tends to repeat itself) ok eight words

cranky-old-geezer's picture



and they might come out the other end in orange jumpsuits

...or turned to crispy critters from a million degree fireball over DC.

Falcon15's picture

There is more than enough military capacity in the region. France and the UK have thrown their hats in the ring, as it was French and British naval vessels that escorted the USS Abraham Lincoln through the Strait of Hormuz. French and British battle groups, as well as other NATO assets are being ramped up as we speak, just in case.


Two words: false flag

A false flag event against any allied power at this time would ostensibly remove political and economic pressures from the US, since they will not have "fired a shot in anger" but are instead "retaliating for an act of war committed against us or an ally". This would put China and Russia on a delicate balance point. Why? If they back an "aggressor state" against those who are seeking to quickly and for the "common good" resolve the military issue, they will be setting themselves up for an immediate counter stroke. This is not chess, it is not checkers, hell, it is not even poker. This is a straight up Russian slap fight. Last drunken Cossack standing wins.

Randall Cabot's picture

Operation Barbarossa was pre-emptive, the Bolsheviks were preparing to invade Western Europe but Hitler stroke first.

akak's picture


That's certainly a new one on me! 

Not that I would put such desires beyond the uber-monster who was Stalin, but seriously, WTF?  Do you have ANY factual references to back up such a wild assertion?

mc225's picture

There was a 'Viktor Suvorov' who was claiming this. Also, Paul Carell wrote that the KGB archives which were made public in 1989 indicated this. A lot of people think Carell is a hack; but maybe he was correct about the KGB archives. In the actual campaign, (if memory serves) there were a disproportionate number of T-34 and KV tanks encountered by the Axis on the Southern front, which might indicate that the Soviets had been massing their best armor for a pre-emptive strike on the Romanian oilfields.

UP Forester's picture

Or it could be that that was the closest place to where they were built.

Seems to me they didn't trust anyone, especially someone with a funny mustache and a penchant for killing Slavs, and moved their factories south and east....

Element's picture

Oh come on!  It is hardly surprising the Soviets deployed lots of tanks considering the entire world had just watch aghast as Blitzkrieg became a household term of common conversation, minutes beforehand.

What were they supposed to do, just pretend a massive super-slick highly-mobile and very aggressive and well as horrendously-effective battle hardened-armoured divisions without compare were sitting right next door?

What would you have done?

Randall Cabot's picture



Suvorov wrote many books about the outbreak of the Nazi-Soviet War in 1941 and circumstances that led to it. The first such work was with many others to follow. Suvorov's provocative idea is that Joseph Stalin originally planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the "Icebreaker") against the West. For this reason Stalin provided material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing his Red Army for an offensive against Nazi Germany and further against all of Western Europe. Suvorov argued that Hitler had no choice but to direct a unexpected preemptive strike at the Soviet Union, what we know today as Operation Barbarossa. In the end, Stalin was able to achieve some of his objectives by establishing Communist regimes in Eastern Europe and Asia. However this victory according to Suvorov was unsatisfying to Stalin, as he intended to bring Soviet domination to the whole continent of Europe.


Snidley Whipsnae's picture

Of course he has no facts to back it up. Stalin was so stunned whe Barbarosa was kicked off by the Nazis that he went into hiding for about a week. Stalin thought that he would be executed by his comrades for missing all the warnings that had come from Churchill about an impending Nazi invasion. Instead, his staff of comrades were scared shitless and looked to Stalin for leadership.

Read 'The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich'... written by William Shirer. The book covers the period 1933-1945. Shirer was a foreign correspondent stationed in Berlin for much of the period and attended may Nazi gatherings and reported on them in real time. He also chronicled the meetings between the Nazi high staff and leaders of various countries that would become allies or enemies later on.

On the day that operation Barbarosa kicked off, Russian supply trains loaded with commodities were passing German troops heading into Russia. Do you think Stalin would have been honoring trade agreements if he knew he was going to be attacked?

To claim that Stalin was planning an attack on Nazi Germany is pure bull shit. Read your history, moron.

Randall Cabot's picture

You rely on a book endorsed by the New York Times for your history? Take a deep breath. Ok, Stalin was preparing to attack so of course he was surprised that the Germans attacked first. The fact that you cite Shirer reveals you're clueless.

earleflorida's picture

It will be the end-of-all, regarding the "Islam World" -  respect for western culture will disintegrate overnight if the US joins in the battle - the Arab spring in all its fury will turn toward their Muslim brethren as comrades in arms - all because of, "God's Chosen [Peaceful/ Obliging Dirty Dozen] Tribes"!


Seer's picture

Sadly, this is how the story/debate is framed, with a totally incorrect premise, and we just move on from there...

Iran is aiming to produce civilian-use nuclear stuff, you know, like electricity.  Seems that this idea was firmly planted in their heads way back in the 1950s but the US!  And, really, it's perfectly rational that they'd want to not use precious oil up and keep it for producing revenues (via export): of course, there's really NOTHING rational about nuclear shit anyway... (only sets things up for some massive failure, and ALL systems will eventually fail).

Element's picture

And let's not forget that Iran is an extraordinarily seismically active region.

The Heart's picture

Hello Element,

Always good to receive your Light brother.

Yes, can you say HAARP is NOT used as a lethal clandestine weapon of mass destruction against Iran by the babylonians and ZOG? (zionist owned govt)

What is the Highest priority? The Sun. Next, war to distract the nations from the bankster takeover and destruction of the old world and to kill off billions of breathers and useless eaters. Start a new monetary system and crawl out of the bunker/rat holes a hundred years later to claim what is left of a world that will no longer support any life at all.

An illusionist says, watch my hand up here, as he pick-pockets you with his other hand down there.