Saad al-Kaabi Says He Repeatedly Cautioned U.S. Officials and Industry Leaders About Risks of Strikes on Iran.

As Qatar assesses the damage from an Iranian strike that crippled part of the world’s largest liquefied natural gas complex, the head of QatarEnergy says he had long cautioned that attacks on Iranian energy sites would invite retaliation across the Gulf.

Saad al-Kaabi, who serves as both QatarEnergy’s chief executive and the country’s energy minister, told Reuters he repeatedly warned oil and gas executives — including partners such as ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips — as well as U.S. officials about the dangers of escalation.

“I was always warning,” al-Kaabi said, describing near-daily reminders that energy facilities must be kept off-limits to avoid catastrophic fallout.

The U.S. Department of Energy referred questions to the White House, which said the administration anticipated short-term disruptions during operations in Iran.

The warnings proved prescient. Three weeks into the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, missile and drone attacks have damaged tankers and refineries across the Gulf. The most significant impact has been at Qatar’s Ras Laffan Industrial City, the backbone of global LNG supply.

Al-Kaabi said the strike knocked out 17 percent of Qatar’s export capacity and could disrupt deliveries to Europe and Asia for up to five years. Two of the complex’s 14 liquefaction trains were critically damaged. “The cold boxes are gone,” he said, referring to the massive cooling units that chill gas into liquid form for export.

The consequences extend beyond current exports. Qatar’s multibillion-dollar North Field expansion — designed to increase liquefaction capacity from 77 million to 126 million tons per year by 2027 — has been halted. Around 10,000 workers were evacuated within 24 hours of the attack, and operations remain suspended. Al-Kaabi expects delays of months, possibly more than a year.

The strike followed an Israeli attack on Iran’s South Pars gas field, which Tehran shares with Qatar. Al-Kaabi said he had no prior warning of that escalation. “President Trump said he didn’t know. So do you think we would know?” he said.

Beyond LNG, the economic ripple effects are spreading across the Gulf. Tourism has stalled, airlines are disrupted and trade flows through regional ports have slowed sharply. “This has taken the whole region back 10 to 20 years,” al-Kaabi said.

For global energy markets, the episode underscores a new reality: even limited strikes on critical infrastructure can reverberate for years, reshaping supply chains and strategic calculations long after the missiles stop.

EU Urges Early Storage Action After Iran Strike on Qatar LNG Hub Sends Markets Surging.

The European Union is urging member states to begin filling gas storage sites early for next winter, warning that escalating conflict in the Gulf risks tightening global supply and pushing prices higher.

Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen wrote to EU governments on Saturday, calling on them to act “as early as possible” to avoid a late-summer rush that could further inflate costs.

He also proposed lowering the bloc’s mandatory gas storage target from 90 percent to 80 percent of capacity, with flexibility for further deviations under difficult market conditions.

The move follows Iran’s missile attack on Qatar’s Ras Laffan Industrial City — one of the world’s largest liquefied natural gas (LNG) hubs — in retaliation for Israeli strikes on Iran’s South Pars gasfield. State-owned QatarEnergy said the assault knocked out roughly 17 percent of the country’s export capacity and could disrupt output for up to five years.

Although Asia absorbs around 80 percent of Qatar’s LNG exports — including major buyers such as China, Japan and India — Europe is unlikely to remain insulated. The war has complicated tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a key transit route for global energy shipments, intensifying competition for available cargoes.

Since the start of the US-Israeli war on Iran on February 28, EU natural gas prices have jumped more than 30 percent. The spike accelerated after the reciprocal attacks on South Pars and Ras Laffan, amplifying fears of prolonged supply disruption.

Jorgensen sought to reassure member states that Europe’s supply position remains “relatively protected” for now, thanks in part to increased LNG imports from the United States after the bloc cut dependence on Russian energy following the invasion of Ukraine.

But he cautioned that as a net energy importer, the EU remains vulnerable to global price volatility.

The bloc’s storage mandate — requiring countries to maintain high reserve levels to safeguard winter heating and electricity demand — has become a central pillar of post-Ukraine energy security.

Officials now fear that surging global prices could complicate refilling efforts and expose the region to renewed market shocks.

Oil markets are also reflecting the strain, with prices climbing more than 50 percent since the conflict began.

For Europe, the lesson is clear: even limited physical disruption in the Gulf can ripple quickly through global energy systems. The strategy now is simple — fill early, spread purchases over time and avoid being caught short if tensions deepen.

Middle East Conflict Forces OPEC+ and Asian Importers to Rethink Energy Security as Hormuz Risk Surges.

The world isn’t running out of oil. It’s running out of certainty.

The Middle East crisis has done more than rattle oil markets. It is quietly rewriting the doctrine of global energy security.

Missile and drone strikes across Gulf energy hubs have pushed the Strait of Hormuz — the transit point for roughly 21% of global petroleum liquids — from theoretical risk to active fault line.

Tankers are hesitating. Insurance premiums are climbing. Shipping queues are growing. The chokepoint is no longer background anxiety; it is the story.

Brent crude briefly surged above $119 a barrel before easing, while Middle East physical benchmarks spiked far higher, signaling a tightening that futures markets alone cannot explain.

The shock is less about destroyed production than about disrupted movement. Ports, airspace, insurance markets and tanker logistics have all become embedded in a conflict zone.

On paper, the world still has oil. Forecasts project mid-decade supply surpluses, with rising output from the United States, Brazil and Canada. But paper balances do not move cargo.

Around one-fifth of global oil and LNG still flows through Hormuz. Even partial disruption strands millions of barrels per day, overwhelming alternative pipeline routes from Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

This gap between spreadsheet surplus and deliverable supply has introduced a durable war premium. Freight costs are rising. Replacement barrels are more expensive. European diesel and jet fuel benchmarks have jumped. Markets are recalibrating around access risk, not just production capacity.

That shift is also transforming OPEC+. The group is no longer acting merely as a price manager. With most spare capacity concentrated in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, it now plays a quasi-stabilizing role in a corridor-constrained market.

Recent modest output adjustments were less about adding barrels and more about signaling control.

Yet spare capacity cannot escort tankers or neutralize naval threats. Maritime security has become as critical as upstream investment. European powers have hesitated to engage militarily, even as Washington offers escorts.

Asian importers, heavily exposed to Gulf crude, are quietly reassessing diversification strategies, insurance frameworks and emergency reserves.

The crisis underscores a structural reality: energy security is no longer defined only by how much oil exists underground. It hinges on whether it can travel safely through increasingly militarized sea lanes.

The emerging doctrine is stark. Control over shipping corridors, insurance credibility and geopolitical deterrence now matters as much as control over oil fields themselves. In this new order, the scarcest commodity is not crude — it is assured access.

Defense Minister Says U.S.-Israeli Military Campaign Will Intensify “Significantly” in Coming Week.

Israel’s defense minister has warned that joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran are set to escalate sharply in the coming days, signaling a new and potentially more destructive phase of the war.

In a statement released Saturday, Israel Katz said the intensity of military operations against what he described as the “Iranian terror regime” and its supporting infrastructure would “rise significantly” beginning Sunday.

“This week, the intensity of the strikes to be carried out by the [Israeli military] and the U.S. military against the Iranian terror regime and the infrastructure on which it relies will rise significantly,” Katz said.

The remarks come as the conflict enters its fourth week, with both sides expanding targets beyond initial military objectives. U.S. and Israeli forces have already conducted thousands of strikes aimed at degrading Iran’s missile-launch capabilities, aerospace units and defense-industrial facilities.

Iran, in turn, has launched ballistic missiles and drones at Israeli territory and Gulf energy infrastructure, escalating the confrontation beyond bilateral hostilities and into regional economic pressure.

Katz’s warning suggests that the campaign may shift toward broader infrastructure targets or deeper penetration into remaining Iranian military strongholds. Analysts say such an escalation could further strain regional defenses and heighten the risk of retaliatory strikes across the Gulf.

Washington has not yet detailed the scale of the next phase, but U.S. defense officials have indicated that operations remain focused on preventing Iran from rebuilding its missile and nuclear capabilities.

With oil prices elevated and diplomatic efforts stalled, the announcement underscores that de-escalation appears distant. Instead, both militaries are preparing for intensified operations — and a widening impact across the region.

U.S. Weighs More Warships and Possible Kharg Island Move as Gulf Conflict Expands.

Oil surges. Missiles fly. Allies clash — with words and warships.

President Donald Trump has lashed out at NATO allies, branding them “cowards” for refusing to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, as Washington reportedly prepares to send additional warships and thousands of troops to the Middle East.

In a social media post, Trump accused European partners of benefiting from American military action against Iran while declining to share the burden of securing one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints. “Without the U.S.A., NATO IS A PAPER TIGER!” he wrote, arguing that reopening the strait would be “a simple military maneuver.”

The rhetoric comes as U.S. media report that the Pentagon is considering options that include occupying or blockading Iran’s Kharg Island — a small but strategically vital export terminal responsible for roughly 90% of Iran’s oil shipments. Any such move would carry significant risks, placing American forces within range of Iranian drones and rockets in a confined coastal environment.

The Pentagon has already deployed the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, a rapid-response force of about 2,200 marines, aboard the USS Boxer, which departed earlier than scheduled. Officials have not disclosed specific mission parameters.

The conflict continues to widen. Iranian drone strikes reportedly hit Kuwait’s Mina al-Ahmadi refinery, while U.S. and Israeli forces struck Iranian cargo vessels in Gulf ports. Explosions were heard in Dubai as air defenses intercepted incoming rockets. In Israel, missile warnings sounded over Jerusalem.

Iran’s military has issued direct threats against U.S. and Israeli personnel worldwide, warning that “tourist and entertainment centres” could become unsafe. Meanwhile, energy infrastructure across the Gulf has been repeatedly targeted, sending oil and gas prices sharply higher.

Trump has previously said he had no intention of putting “boots on the ground,” yet the shifting posture — from expanded naval deployments to potential control of Iranian export facilities — signals how fluid the strategy remains.

British and other European leaders have expressed reluctance to join offensive operations, calling instead for de-escalation. Public opinion in several NATO countries remains skeptical of deeper involvement.

As the fourth week of war approaches, the strategic picture is increasingly complex. Washington is pushing to secure maritime trade and apply pressure on Tehran’s energy lifeline. Allies are wary of escalation. Iran continues to strike back.

The Strait of Hormuz remains partially paralyzed — and the political divide between the United States and some of its closest partners is now as visible as the military standoff in the Gulf.

From reluctance to runway access — Britain shifts its stance.

Starmer Approves Use of RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia for Operations Targeting Iranian Threats in Hormuz.

The British government has authorized the United States to use military facilities in the United Kingdom and its overseas territories to carry out strikes against Iranian missile sites targeting shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, marking a significant shift in London’s posture toward the widening conflict.

A Downing Street statement said ministers met Friday to assess the escalating crisis and confirmed that the agreement includes “U.S. defensive operations to degrade the missile sites and capabilities being used to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz.”

Prime Minister Keir Starmer had previously signaled reluctance to deepen Britain’s involvement. Earlier this week, he said the UK would not be drawn into a broader war and initially resisted a U.S. request to use British bases, citing the need for legal clarity.

That position evolved after Iran launched strikes affecting British allies in the region. London has now permitted U.S. forces to operate from RAF Fairford in England and from Diego Garcia, a strategically vital joint U.S.-UK base in the Indian Ocean.

President Donald Trump had publicly criticized Starmer in recent days, accusing Britain of not doing enough to support Washington’s campaign. On Monday, Trump described some allies as “greatly disappointing” and singled out the UK, once calling it “the Rolls-Royce of allies.”

The British government framed its decision as part of collective self-defense efforts to protect global shipping lanes, through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil supply flows. Officials emphasized that the authorization is limited to operations aimed at degrading missile capabilities threatening maritime traffic.

Despite the move, Downing Street reiterated its call for “urgent de-escalation and a swift resolution to the war.”

Public opinion in Britain remains cautious. A YouGov survey found that 59 percent of respondents oppose the U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran, reflecting unease over deeper involvement in another Middle East conflict.

By granting access to its bases while continuing to press for de-escalation, London is attempting to balance alliance commitments with domestic skepticism — a tightrope that may grow harder to walk as the conflict intensifies.