Trump Asks Israel to Halt Strikes on Iran Energy Facilities Amid Rising Oil Prices

The Trump administration has asked Israel to halt further attacks on energy facilities in Iran, particularly its oil infrastructure, according to reports. This development signals a potential shift in the U.S. Approach to the escalating conflict in the Middle East, which has raised concerns about wider regional instability and global oil supplies.

Notice ALSO: Attack near school in Iran points to a Tomahawk, but Trump says Tehran also has that missile: Is it possible?

Israel launched strikes against fuel depots and refineries in Tehran during the early hours of March 7 and 8, triggering massive fires that created a dense, toxic cloud, obscuring the sky to the point where residents described the day as appearing like night.

The attacks coincided with a surge in global oil prices, briefly pushing the price of a barrel above $100 for the first time since 2022. This price increase reflects market anxieties about potential disruptions to oil supplies amid the ongoing conflict.

This marked the first instance since the war began on February 28 that the Trump administration has cautioned Israel, according to Axios.

The message from Washington was relayed to top Israeli political leaders, as well as the Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, according to Channel 12 Israel.

Sources for Channel 12 outlined three primary reasons behind the request. Officials reportedly argued that strikes on energy infrastructure ultimately harm the Iranian people, many of whom oppose the current regime and support the military campaign against it. Yet, there was concern that citizens could shift their support to the government if their livelihoods are further threatened. The U.S. Reportedly indicated that President Trump anticipates potential cooperation with a future Iranian government in the oil sector following the war, drawing parallels to a potential scenario with Venezuela. Finally, U.S. Officials expressed fears that Iranian retaliation could include large-scale attacks on oil and energy infrastructure throughout the Gulf, triggering a global economic impact.

A U.S. Source told Channel 12 that Trump views attacks on Iranian oil and energy facilities as a “last resort” option, to be used only if the Islamic Republic first attacks Gulf oil facilities.

Trump addressed the situation on Monday, warning that Iran would be hit “20 times harder” if it were to damage global oil supplies.

An Israeli official told Channel 12 that the U.S. Requested to be notified in advance of any future attacks on Iranian oil facilities.

Influential Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who supports the war, also criticized the Israeli strikes on Iranian fuel depots. “Please be careful about the targets you choose. Our goal is to liberate the Iranian people in a way that does not prevent them from starting a new and better life when this regime collapses. The Iranian oil economy will be essential to that effort,” Graham wrote on X.

Strategic Differences

International analyst Francisco Belaunde Matossian suggested that Trump’s unease with Israel over the attacks on Iranian oil infrastructure reveals strategic differences and a lack of coordination between Washington and the Netanyahu government in the conduct of the war.

Belaunde stated that the United States has not clearly defined its objectives for the offensive, contrasting with what he believes is a more defined strategy held by Israel. “This entire attack and this war seem to have started without clear objectives on the part of the United States. Washington’s statements have been quite contradictory regarding what it is actually seeking,” he said. The analyst believes this ambiguity reflects a lack of rigorous planning, which also explains the tensions with Israel when coordinating operations.

Conversely, he argued that the Israeli government “seems to have a pretty clear idea of its own objectives,” leading it to act more autonomously in some attacks, such as those targeting Iranian oil facilities.

The Oil Factor in Trump’s Concern

Belaunde indicated that the U.S. President’s concern could be linked to two central issues related to oil. The first is the immediate impact on international prices. “After the attacks, the price of a barrel began to rise, and that can create internal problems for Trump,” he explained. The second concerns a potential post-war scenario. According to the analyst, Trump might be considering preserving the Iranian oil industry if the United States eventually seeks to participate in its exploitation or reconstruction.

“If he is considering something similar to what he tried with Venezuelan oil, he needs the Iranian oil industry not to be destroyed, but practically intact,” he noted.

An Alliance with Potential Tensions

Belaunde also recalled that in Washington, there has been mention of the possibility that the United States was “dragged” into the conflict by Israel, an idea raised by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In that context, he considered it possible that the relationship between Trump and Netanyahu could face friction if Israel continues to carry out military operations without coordinating with the White House.

“It would not be surprising if Trump tries to force Netanyahu to unhurried down the war if he sees that the conflict begins to seriously affect him internally,” he said. The analyst reminded that despite its military capacity, Israel still depends in part on the supply of weapons from the United States, which gives Washington a tool of pressure. The U.S. Congress is currently evaluating new arms sales to Israel.

Iran Bets on Chaos in the Region

Regarding Iran’s response and threats regarding the vital Strait of Hormuz, Belaunde pointed out that the regime considers the conflict an existential threat and would be willing to harden its strategy if attacks continue. In that area, he explained that actions such as the threat to tankers and maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz are part of a long-planned strategy to generate international pressure.

“If the United States and Israel continue with the attacks, Iran will also harden its response and endeavor to create chaos in the region,” he indicated.

However, he added that Tehran could reduce the intensity of its actions if it perceives signals of retreat from its adversaries, although he warned that the decentralization of Iranian military command could make a rapid moderation of operations difficult.

In his opinion, that scheme—which grants greater autonomy to regional commanders—was designed precisely to guarantee the continuity of military responses even if the central command is affected by bombings and even eliminated.