MOSCOW, March 3. /TASS/. An extended conflict around Iran may rattle oil markets, as Israel opens the second front by responding to an attack from Hezbollah. Meanwhile, the United States seems to be lacking a straightforward playbook for its Iran war. These stories topped Tuesday’s newspaper headlines across Russia.

 

Media: Prolonged conflict around Iran may rattle oil markets

Unless the military situation in the Middle East is resolved soon, oil prices may rise by another 30%, experts interviewed by Izvestia warn. Global oil supplies will soon fall sharply as navigation through the Strait of Hormuz has effectively stopped. As a result, demand for Russian crude is likely to grow, while the oil price discount could narrow, potentially boosting the ruble, the volume of reserves in the Russian National Wealth Fund and additional budget revenues. Alternatively, the warring sides may sign a peace deal in the coming weeks.

Experts interviewed by Izvestia say the conflict may either morph into prolonged hostilities or end within weeks, with a higher likelihood of the former scenario. According to political scientist and lecturer at the Faculty of Economics of RUDN University Farhad Ibragimov, the killing of Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic Ayatollah Ali Khamenei shows that the situation is unlikely to be resolved soon. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has already vowed retaliation for what happened.

Should restrictions on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and attacks continue, Brent could soar to between $100 and $120 per barrel by the end of the spring, with price fluctuations potentially exceeding $130 per barrel amid news about strikes on oil tankers or infrastructure.

Even though the scenario in which the conflict is resolved within weeks seems unlikely, experts say the spike in oil prices would be limited and short-lived, with prices rising to $85 per barrel. This may happen if Iran, which accounts for 3% of the global market, suspends exports. However, other OPEC+ countries could partially offset the volume, financial market expert Olga Gogaladze told Izvestia.

In addition, potential disruptions in Iranian oil supplies create preconditions for narrowing the Urals discount, which has reached $30 per barrel in recent months. Finam analyst Sergey Kaufman does not rule out that the discount will return to levels below $20 per barrel. Kirill Bakhtin, head of the Russian stock analytics center BCS World of Investments, told Kommersant that if the conflict lasts weeks, "demand for Russian oil will rebound, despite sanctions risks, while the oil price discount may fall to between $11 and $13 per barrel, a level seen soon after 2022." At the same time, demand for Russian LNG may also grow. "If Iranian strikes on Qatar lead to a halt in Qatari LNG exports at least in the medium term, this may force the EU to reconsider its ban on Russian LNG," Kaufman predicts.

 

Kommersant: Israel opens second front in response to an attack from Hezbollah

As the large-scale US-Israeli war on Iran entered its third day, the Islamic Republic significantly expanded the geography of its strikes. On March 2, Tehran struck energy infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and Qatar and damaged the US embassy building in Kuwait.

Despite casualties and damage caused by joint US and Israeli airstrikes, Tehran has been reluctant to make any concessions. Iran dismissed statements by US President Donald Trump who said that the Iranian side was looking to resume negotiations. "We will not negotiate with the US," Iran’s security chief Ali Larijani wrote on X on Monday.

On March 2, the Israeli military reported that after two days of confusion and indiscriminate attacks on a wide range of targets across the Middle East, Tehran had switched to well-planned strikes.

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin held four separate phone calls with the Saudi crown prince, the king of Bahrain, the UAE leader, and the emir of Qatar on March 2.

On Sunday night, after a long hesitation, one of Iran’s key allies decided to join the war as Lebanon’s Hezbollah fired several missiles and drones toward Israel for the first time since 2024. Following that, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced an operation against the Shia group. On the same night, the IDF killed top Hezbollah leader Mohammad Raad, among other senior commanders, as it carried out a targeted strike on his residence in Beirut. Lebanon responded by immediately banning Hezbollah’s military activities.

"The IDF was getting ready for the possibility of Hezbollah joining the hostilities," an Israeli military official told Kommersant. "Our troops deployed along the border in the northern theater command had been reinforced both in defensive and offensive terms. These preparations enabled a rapid and effective counteroffensive and guaranteed full operational protection for all scenarios," he added.

US military officials have expressed skepticism about whether the region will have enough weapons for a prolonged military operation. It takes two or three interceptor missiles to neutralize only one ballistic missile launched from Iran, they note. This will inevitably exhaust US resources in the event of a prolonged conflict, army experts warn.

 

Vedomosti: Trump lacks any clear strategy in his war against Iran

Days after the joint US-Israeli attack on Iran was launched, neither Washington nor West Jerusalem did specify how or when the war will end. US President Donald Trump, for one, has been making controversial statements that may indicate that the playbook for his operation against Tehran might be poorly planned.

In a video message posted on his Truth Social network, Trump announced his intention to continue the hostilities as long as it takes to achieve the goals set. And in a phone interview with The New York Times on March 1, he said the operation could last four to five weeks.

He also hinted that replacing the Iranian regime with one less friendly to the United States may be the direct outcome of the Iran war, like in the US invasion of Venezuela in early January. "What we did in Venezuela, I think, is the perfect, the perfect scenario," the US leader told the paper.

Later on Sunday, Republican Mike Turner, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, stated: "He [Secretary of State Marco Rubio] was very clear in the answer that we did not target [Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali] Khamenei and we were not targeting the leadership in Iran. So the aspect that the United States was not undertaking regime change is very important," the congressman told CBS News in an interview.

The United States has pursued a traditional goal of weakening Iran with a view to destabilizing the situation inside the country and destroying the government control structure, with a government change or fall of the regime being its maximum objective, Prokhor Tebin, director of the Center for Military-Economic Studies at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, told Vedomosti.

As to how long the hostilities may take, the expert doubts they would be intensive for long, firstly, because the sides have quite limited stocks of weapons or other long-term precision weapons and, secondly, because the United States is clearly not seeking a lengthy operation, including for political reasons. "In a scenario that would be ideal for the United States, Iran should exhaust its capability and will for proactive resistance quite soon, say, within a fortnight, but this could just as well fail to materialize," Tebin argued. If the United States and Israel see a severely weaker Iran, they could undertake a longer operation to achieve more decisive goals. At the same time, Iran may offer stronger resistance than previously, and then tensions will escalate but under conditions that would be unfavorable to the United States, the expert emphasized.

 

Izvestia: Russia demands that OSCE wrap up its programs in Ukraine

OSCE projects to support Ukraine should be stopped, Russian Permanent Representative to the OSCE Dmitry Polyansky told Izvestia. According to the diplomat, Switzerland has extended the mandate of the Special Representative of the OSCE Chairpersonship in Ukraine, Petr Mares, whose key task is to integrate Kiev into the EU and NATO, for another year.

"This special representative works on political instructions from those countries that have sponsored the extra-budgetary `Ukraine support program’. His activities do not require any consensus approval from all OSCE member countries, nor does he report to the OSCE’s decision-making bodies," Polyansky explained.

It is noteworthy that the OSCE runs these programs directly on Ukrainian soil to supply Ukrainian troops. According to the latest updates, in January, Ukraine was provided with equipment for chemical and radiological reconnaissance under the guidance of Mares. And last year, Ukrainian border guards were given gear for operations amid the use of chemical weapons along the same line.

Natalya Yeremina, a professor at St. Petersburg State University, told Izvestia that NATO countries may be preparing military operations in Ukraine under the guise of OSCE-led projects. The UK-and French-led coalition of the willing may deploy troops under the aegis of this organization, she maintained. "This is a way for NATO to consolidate on Ukrainian soil in order to continue anti-Russian activities, instead of stabilizing the situation. This is also understandable given the rhetoric of Western leaders, who have been making emphatically anti-Russian and even Russophobic statements," the expert noted.

The OSCE can become a platform for broader dialogue should the organization return to true neutrality and take the opinions of all parties into account, Moscow Pedagogical State University’s History and Politics Institute Deputy Director Vladimir Shapovalov told Izvestia. According to him, the OSCE had deviated from its original security mandate to become a resource for actively promoting Western narratives and organizing information attacks against Russia. Therefore, it is unlikely to serve as a venue for dialogue on Ukraine, he concluded.

 

Rossiyskaya Gazeta: Gold rising to new highs amid Middle East conflict

Gold prices have been growing against the background of the military conflict in the Middle East, and the precious metal could soon revisit its record high or even rise above it. And this momentum will not fade away even if the conflict ends any time soon.

On Monday afternoon, gold rose by approximately 3% per troy ounce to trade at $5,400. If the escalation lasts for another couple of days, gold prices could exceed the record high of $5,626.8 seen at the start of 2026, Vladimir Chernov, an analyst at Freedom Finance Global, forecasts.

According to him, even if the active stage of the conflict ends soon, the Iranian impact on gold will not disappear at once. "For the market is driven not only by the war, but also by growing uncertainty. The conflict aggravated the sense of vulnerability in the global security, energy and logistics system. And a mere statement about de-escalation will not remove that," the expert emphasized. However, a correction in gold prices could fall to $5,000-5,100 per troy ounce as the geopolitical situation stabilizes, Marina Nikishova, a lead economist at Bank Zenit, told Rossiyskaya Gazeta.

However, such episodes usually affect central bank behavior. "Regulators in developing countries and countries with high geopolitical risks have continued to add gold to their reserves for years rather than weeks. So, even if the hot phase ends soon, the risk premium for gold could persist for months, and any price correction will be shallow and lengthy," Chernov warned.

The gold market has long been on a rising trend supported by high demand from central banks, uncertainty around US debt sustainability and expectations of easing global monetary policy. Against this backdrop, the armed conflict serves as a catalyst for accelerated momentum, so the psychological level of $6,000 per troy ounce no longer looks like an extreme goal but rather is quite achievable in a relatively short time, Chernov argued.

TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in these press reviews