Jim Geraghty of National Review Online assesses the Trump administration’s approach to Iranian oil.
In February 2025, President Trump announced his campaign of “maximum pressure” on Iran, including orders to “implement a robust and continual campaign, in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury and other relevant executive departments or agencies (agencies), to drive Iran’s export of oil to zero, including exports of Iranian crude to the People’s Republic of China.”
Back in November, the U.S. Treasury Department announced new sanctions on a network of front companies and shipping facilitators that bankroll the Iranian armed forces by selling crude oil. …
… Then the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran began, the Iranians fired drones and missiles at oil tankers and port facilities and refineries, and deployed at least a few mines. Oil prices jumped from about $58 per barrel to between $90 and $98 per barrel, and gas prices in the U.S. started to rise drastically.
And then Friday, the Treasury Department abruptly changed direction:
“Today, the Department of the Treasury is issuing a narrowly tailored, short-term authorization permitting the sale of Iranian oil currently stranded at sea. At present, sanctioned Iranian oil is being hoarded by China on the cheap. By temporarily unlocking this existing supply for the world, the United States will quickly bring approximately 140 million barrels of oil to global market. …”
… The world uses about 102 million barrels of oil per day, so un-sanctioning the 140 million barrels at sea was unlikely to make a dramatic or lasting change in oil prices. But, at least in theory, every little bit of additional supply on the market helps. …
… It was entirely right for conservatives to object to the Obama administration sending $1.7 billion in cash to the Iranian regime as part of a deal with Iran. But if you don’t like sending $1.7 billion in cash to the mullahs, you shouldn’t shrug at the consequences of the war that end up putting more money into the hands of the regime.
