M. Juan Szabo [1] y Luis A. Pacheco [2]
Published Originally in Spanish in LA GRAN ALDEA
July so far has seen a string of high-impact political and economic events. On Monday the 6th, the Dow Jones Industrial index topped 53,000 points; on Friday the 10th, SK Hynix, the world's largest maker of memory chips for AI, debuted on the Nasdaq in the largest foreign IPO in U.S. history, raising $26.5 billion.
On Wednesday the 8th, the ceasefire in the Middle East collapsed, and from Ankara, President Trump declared it “over” and ordered strikes on 90 targets in Iran. Iran retaliated against U.S. installations in Kuwait and Bahrain, and on Thursday, the 9th, Brent crude prices rose 5.4%. Afterward, according to Trump, Iran’s regime called to negotiate a deal; oil prices retreated, and financial markets recovered lost ground.
The temporary breakdown of the U.S.-Iran ceasefire and the resumption of diplomatic contacts—though without a formal commitment to end hostilities—revived uncertainty in the oil and natural gas markets. After several weeks of price declines that had brought crude back to pre-conflict levels, geopolitical tension once again added a risk premium to energy markets.
In Russia’s war against Ukraine, things are not going well for Moscow, at least on the energy front. Its crude output is declining, and its refining and export system has been severely damaged by Ukrainian strikes, causing fuel shortages in the domestic Russian market.
Against this backdrop of uncertainty in the oil market, the International Energy Agency (IEA) released its monthly report on July 10, reiterating its pessimism about the recovery of global oil demand.
The NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, was marked by a deep divide between the Alliance’s institutional agenda and President Trump’s unpredictable behavior, which analysts dubbed “a dual summit” or a summit “running on parallel tracks.” Even so, the alliance’s 32 members managed to sign a brief, concise final declaration, unanimously reaffirming their ironclad commitment to collective defense under Article 5 of the treaty (“one for all and all for one”).
In sum, it was a turbulent week of extreme volatility—so intense that it even pushed to the background news of the burial of Ayatollah Khamenei in Mashhad, without the presence of his son, the new Supreme Leader.
Geopolitical Fundamentals
International attention returned to the conflict in the Persian Gulf, undermining the optimism generated by June’s Memorandum of Understanding. On July 7, 8, and 12, following Iranian attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. struck targets in Iran. To underscore how seriously it took this breach of the truce, the U.S. Treasury Department revoked the temporary licenses it had granted for the sale of Iranian crude and set July 17 as the deadline for winding down transactions, once again throwing transit through the Strait of Hormuz into doubt. As the week closed, Qatari mediators traveled to Tehran, and Donald Trump said that although the initial ceasefire had ended, both countries would continue negotiating to avoid a prolonged conflict.
This latest military exchange appears to reinforce the notion that Iran’s leadership is divided over negotiations and that a faction within it seeks to keep the conflict going. That can also be inferred from the massive ceremonies held for the funeral of the assassinated Ayatollah Khamenei and his immediate family. Although he did not appear in person, the new Supreme Leader issued a message vowing revenge against the United States. President Trump wasted little time responding that his armed forces had orders to strike Iran hard should such revenge materialize.
The state of global supply reflects the adverse effects of the Russia-Ukraine war, in which Ukraine has managed to damage key parts of Russia’s refining and export infrastructure. This has translated into lower crude exports, a ban on diesel and gasoline exports, and the need to import these fuels from India. As a result, crude production and exports have declined—without even factoring in European sanctions and the pursuit of the “shadow fleet” of tankers Russia uses—and supplying the domestic fuel market has become costly.
IEA REPORT
The International Energy Agency (IEA), in what appears to be a campaign to undermine confidence in the hydrocarbons industry, published its forecasts for the rest of 2026 and extended into 2027. The most controversial finding is its forecast of a 1.0 million-barrel-per-day (mb/d) drop in oil demand in 2026, which would mark the first annual contraction since the 2020 pandemic. According to the IEA, global consumption will fall to an average of 103.46 mb/d, the result of demand destruction following the Persian Gulf crisis.
The report notes that in June, global crude production rebounded strongly, rising by 4.1 million barrels per day following the Middle East truce. However, it warns that the recent escalation is worsening the outlook and threatens the surplus projected for next year—which is, at the very least, contradictory. The Strait of Hormuz is once again effectively in dispute.
The report also states that while supply remains volatile, markets for refined products such as gasoline and diesel remain very tight due to damage to Middle Eastern infrastructure and recurring Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian refineries. As a result, refining margins hit four-year highs, which in turn has drawn accusations of speculation from the White House.
Fuel shortages and higher fuel prices hurt global industrial activity very unevenly, depending on the product and the region. Asian economies dependent on imports suffered the sharpest contraction, and derivatives such as naphtha and LPG recorded the steepest declines.
Consumption in OECD countries in the Americas has held steady, buoyed by the strength of the U.S. economy. Global crude supply will fall by about 3.7 million barrels per day, partly due to a reduction in Russian output to 8.9 million barrels per day caused by Ukrainian attacks on its refineries. A partial reopening of Hormuz allowed Gulf producers to restart their fields in June. According to the agency, if the truce holds, the market could see a supply surplus again in 2027. The report also projects a decline in global natural gas demand. Lower available supply is keeping international prices under pressure. LNG exports from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates fell nearly 80% following Iran’s attacks.
In our view, the IEA is once again showing a somewhat biased analysis, ignoring the mitigating effect on prices of inventory drawdowns and China’s opportunistic policy of balancing the market by temporarily reducing its demand and drawing down its strategic reserves as a complementary, situational tactic. It also ignores India’s plans to boost its strategic reserves and the plans of the U.S. and Japan to replenish their own strategic stockpiles. The agency interprets supply constraints as demand destruction, which it then uses to project a crude oil surplus in the markets. This report is highly likely to be revised before the end of 2026.
The key news items affecting sustained crude supply are as follows:
● The Strait of Hormuz is once again at the center of concerns over global oil supply—not because Iran has formally closed it, nor because of nightly bombing throughout the area surrounding the strait, but because most tankers and cargo ships have chosen to avoid crossing it, disrupting the regional supply chain.
● The Ukrainian military struck the tanker Yasa Polaris with a drone. The vessel, chartered by major U.S. oil company Chevron, was en route to the Russian port of Novorossiysk on the Black Sea; the attack forced the ship to abandon its cargo of Kazakh-origin CPC Blend crude and sail toward the Turkish coast.
● China has lifted restrictions on exports of refined fuels, allowing state refineries as well as one private refinery to resume shipments abroad this month, Reuters reported, citing anonymous sources.
● The Russian government announced a one-month ban on diesel exports aimed at curbing runaway domestic prices following Ukrainian strikes, removing about 500,000 barrels per day of exports and pushing European diesel prices to a 15-year high of $60 a barrel.
● State-owned QatarEnergy has completely halted its plans to quickly restart liquefied natural gas (LNG) production at the Ras Laffan complex. The decision follows a projectile attack on the Qatari LNG carrier Al Rekayyat in the Strait of Hormuz. The incident shows that navigation through this maritime chokepoint remains critically unsafe.
● Turkey and Iraq will sign a one-year agreement in the coming days to keep open the pipeline carrying crude from northern Iraq to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, Turkish Energy Minister Alparslan Bayraktar said Thursday. The decades-old agreement governing exports through the pipeline expires on July 27.
● In a rather curious development, Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director, said the European Union should lift its current moratorium on Arctic drilling, an area where Norway has been pushing to drill.
● In Venezuela, the much-touted production increase will not be achieved this year, given the priority need for aid and reconstruction to assist the many disaster victims, as well as the poor execution of the so-called “opening to private capital.”
● As this report went to press, Iran had declared the Strait of Hormuz closed once again following renewed U.S. airstrikes.
Price Dynamics
Oil and gas prices trended sharply upward at the start of the week. Crude posted a weekly gain of 4% to 5%, driven by the collapse of the U.S.-Iran ceasefire and the precarious fuel situation in Russia's domestic market. This pushed refining margins higher and, indirectly, put upward pressure on crude. As a result, Brent crude closed around $76/bbl, while West Texas Intermediate (WTI) closed near $71.4/bbl.
Natural gas prices remained elevated due to electricity demand linked to heat waves and the urgency of rebuilding inventories ahead of next winter.
In Europe, the broad rise in energy prices dragged down major stock markets and heightened fears of persistent underlying inflation.
VENEZUELA
TRAGEDY HINDERS NEEDED TRANSFORMATION
As expected, the country’s humanitarian crisis has been compounded by the devastating effects of the double earthquake that struck in late June 2026. Authorities updated the tragic death toll, confirming at least 4,490 dead, more than 16,740 injured, and nearly 18,000 people left homeless. In recent days, the window for finding survivors was declared closed, and several international rescue teams have begun withdrawing. At the same time, heavy machinery is now being used to clear and process the rubble.
According to experts, the central coast is entering a phase of high public-health risk, with a strong likelihood of disease outbreaks that the country’s health institutions are not prepared to handle. The state’s shortcomings are being offset by foreign aid, mainly from the United States, with roughly 2,000 troops handling aid logistics.
On the political front, the most significant development is the legal turning point in the country’s complex transition following the removal of Nicolás Maduro earlier this year: the 180-day period of temporary presidential absence provided for in the Constitution has now elapsed. Delcy Rodríguez, who took over as “acting president,” faces strong challenges from the opposition, which denounces what it calls a consolidation of an illegitimate de facto regime. Compounding this irregular situation, the White House maintains an uncomfortable silence on the transition plan, and voices are beginning to emerge seeking to build a leadership to fill the vacuum left by the absence of María Corina Machado.
Venezuela’s already weakened economy faces enormous financial pressure due to earthquake damage to infrastructure. Reconstruction costs are estimated at more than $30 billion, which would partly compete with the funds needed to revive the hydrocarbons industry and renegotiate the country’s debt. Regime spokespeople formally urged the international community and the United Nations this week to release blocked sovereign assets and resources held abroad (including gold held in the United Kingdom) to fund emergency relief efforts.
The interim government appears unprepared for an emergency of this scale, and rather than coordinating outside help, has shown signs of disorder that have hindered rescue and healthcare response efforts. Even so, public spending rose and strained financing mechanisms, largely funded by oil revenue that the U.S. Treasury channels to Venezuela’s Central Bank (BCV), which remains a “black box.” It should be noted that, due to lower international oil prices, the amounts received in the coming months may be smaller than those seen in June and July 2026.
The government accelerated its bolívar devaluation policy to unify the official and intervention exchange rates, which temporarily helped narrow the gap with the parallel rate. During the week, however, dollar demand caused the parallel rate to spike again. As a result, inflation remains a problem the regime appears unable to solve.
The Pseudo-Opening Imposed From Washington
In the oil sector—key to the second phase of the Trump-Rubio plan—the most significant development was the signing and publication of the Regulations to the Organic Hydrocarbons Law. This text supplements the amended Organic Hydrocarbons Law and attempts to regulate its implementation. The Venezuelan executive branch has presented this legal document as a historic instrument to revitalize the sector and attract foreign capital. However, economists and legal experts have raised criticism and pointed to significant limitations in its real capacity to revive the oil industry.
The main objections and limitations identified by experts can be grouped as follows:
1. Persistent state discretion and opacity: analysts warn that, while the reform modernizes the fiscal framework, the regulation reaffirms the excessive state discretion already flagged in the law itself. On key issues such as dispute resolution and the granting of tax benefits, the lack of clear rules undermines the predictability that international corporations require.
2. The regulation preserves structural barriers to private investment. Constitutional and oil-industry lawyers, including José Ignacio Hernández, argue that the text continues to impose operational and institutional restrictions on private capital. Despite announcements of an opening, the regulatory design maintains disabling oversight and grants the public administration full control over the entire energy value chain, limiting operators’ real autonomy.
3. Although the regulation introduces some positive changes—such as authorizing a more direct crude-marketing model and differentiated taxation schemes based on risk—the industry criticizes labeling this “regulated commercial flexibility,” when in practice companies must comply with strict coordination requirements under the Annual National Marketing Plan and depend on authorizations to acquire the diluents needed for extra-heavy crude directly.
4. The 29-page regulation published in the Official Gazette drew attention for not mentioning PDVSA even once, even though the new framework’s structure still relies on the presence of a state entity or a joint venture with majority state ownership. In any case, this regulation erases whatever trace of autonomy the state company still had.
5. The regulation establishes the mechanism for calculating applicable “government takes” rates and for remitting the corresponding amounts to the treasury. However, the scheme makes it difficult to separate royalty amounts from Integral Tax amounts because the tax bases differ between the two calculations. In addition, the mechanism for classifying fields by nature (Greenfield and Brownfield) and by production status creates a somewhat rigid, discretionary structure that, in some cases, is unattractive to investors.
6. The regulation also enshrines the right to maintain the economic balance of contracts, but severely limits opportunities to seek a review of contract terms. The development plan approved at the outset becomes a straitjacket that could well turn into the operator’s guillotine, since punitive measures remain highly discretionary with the ministry.
7. Finally, it fails to establish institutional machinery capable of allocating blocks or assets competitively and transparently. This matters because, beyond the letter of the law and the regulation, it remains unclear which government body will manage the many powers this regulation grants.
Our preliminary review indicates that some progress has been made, but overall the measure falls far short of encouraging private investment. It is, rather, an attempt to reinforce the same statism that we already know has not worked in this sector.
Oil Operations
Oil operations faced no major setbacks. Electricity availability was sufficient, and the earthquakes' aftermath did not affect the sector’s activity.
Weekly production averaged 947,000 barrels per day (947 Mbpd), distributed geographically as follows:
West: 267
East: 111
Orinoco Belt: 569
TOTAL: 947
Joint ventures operating under OFAC licenses and the new contracts established under the recently amended Organic Hydrocarbons Law—under which the private minority partner is now contracted as “Operator”—are currently producing the following volumes:
Chevron: 261 Mbpd
Repsol: 50 Mbpd
M & P: 31 Mbpd
Other joint ventures in the Orinoco Belt closed in June with the following average output:
Sinovensa: 98 Mbpd
PetroRoraima: 32 Mbpd
PetroMonagas: 92 Mbpd
PetroCedeño: 74 Mbpd
Domestic refineries processed 264 Mbpd of crude and intermediate products, yielding 82 Mbpd of gasoline and 79 Mbpd of diesel.
In the petrochemical sector, no changes were reported at the El Tablazo and Morón complexes. At the same time, the José Complex continues operating the same plants, albeit at a reduced level due to a lack of natural gas.
Exports are expected to be lower than in June due to the drawdown of inventories accumulated in January.
Because of lower crude prices in international markets, the average price of the Venezuelan basket fell significantly, to an estimated $66.3/bbl.
[1] International Analyst
[2] Nonresident Fellow, Baker Institute

