“The Market No Longer Panics With Every Conflict”: Manuel Sutherland Debunks Oil Myths in Times of War

Economist and university professor Manuel Sutherland has released a revealing analysis of the current state of the oil market in the context of rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East.

In exclusive remarks to The Daily Pulse, the expert dismantled the notion that every military conflict triggers an irreversible spike in oil prices, while also warning about the energy fragility of importing nations and the urgent need to invest in clean energy.

“Oil crises like those in 1973, 1979, 1990, or 2003 no longer have the same impact,” Sutherland explained, referring to the historic price surges that shook the world in the past. “Back then, these crises would send oil prices jumping from $2 to $6, from $9 to $16… they were truly massive leaps. Now the situation is very different.”

The economist argues that one of the key factors neutralizing such impacts is the current level of oil production and storage. “There’s a major global oil oversupply. Out of the 102 or 103 million barrels consumed daily, probably 4 or 5 million are in surplus. That backup capacity helps cushion any immediate effects of conflicts.”

This was recently evident in the clashes involving Iran, Israel, and the United States. “Oil prices initially rose between 4% and 6% in the first days of the conflict, but then fell again. On Monday, June 23 alone, there was a significant drop of between 4% and 7% in Brent and West Texas prices,” he noted.

For Sutherland, the market’s reaction sends a clear message: “The market doesn’t believe this conflict is going to escalate significantly, nor that it will create severe uncertainty around oil supply.”

the energy decisions made today could be decisive for tomorrow’s economic balance.

The U.S.: A Producer That Also Fuels Uncertainty

Traditionally seen as the largest consumer and importer of oil, the United States now plays a more complex role. “It is practically the top producer, having overtaken Saudi Arabia,” Sutherland points out. “Its production exceeds 11 or 12 million barrels a day, and it has even reached 14 million.”

However, this energy power does not necessarily translate into stability. “Trump’s policy, in my modest opinion, is rather erratic, quite volatile, and a source of uncertainty,” the economist stated. “It changes from one day to the next and lacks continuity. This has negatively impacted market stability.”

According to Sutherland, diplomacy is key: “The United States should make significant efforts to prevent escalation and use its foreign policy to contain instability.”

Strait of Hormuz: The Critical Chokepoint Everyone Fears

One of the most sensitive hotspots is the Strait of Hormuz, through which nearly 20% of the world’s oil flows. “It’s a key chokepoint. Its narrowest part is only 33 kilometers wide,” he warned. “Iran’s parliament has called for its closure, but many analysts believe that won’t happen.”

Closing Hormuz would unnecessarily escalate the conflict and could lead to severe U.S. sanctions, even affecting countries like China. “Seventy percent of the oil that passes through there is headed for Asia,” he noted. “China is not in a position to endure such a major oil price hike, especially with an economy already hit by tariffs and struggling with internal overproduction.”

Nevertheless, Sutherland does not rule out that, if such a closure were to occur, “oil prices could rapidly climb to $100 or $120 per barrel,” although he considers that scenario unlikely.

Closing Hormuz would unnecessarily escalate the conflict and could lead to severe U.S. sanctions.

Renewable Energy: A Strategic and Urgent Way Out

Beyond the immediate effects on oil, Sutherland emphasizes that this crisis could mark a turning point for investment in alternative energy. “If the conflict escalates and significantly worsens, it’s quite likely that investments in renewables will grow substantially,” he says.

According to his analysis, the appeal of these sources is not just environmental, but strategic: “They are geopolitically safer and allow countries to shield themselves from market volatility and supply difficulties.”

This reasoning makes even more sense for countries dependent on energy imports. “Each geopolitical crisis puts their economy, exchange rate, reserves, and ability to manage external shocks at risk,” he noted. That’s why Sutherland suggests that such countries rethink their energy matrix and invest in renewable sources like wind, solar, biomass, or even tidal energy.

“This crisis is likely to push those countries toward that path as a way to protect their economies,” he concluded.

 Countries rethink their energy matrix and invest in renewable sources.

A New Energy Map

Manuel Sutherland’s analysis offers a sober and structural perspective on a world where oil no longer reacts to conflict with the same panic as before, but where geopolitical tensions still shape the course.

In this context, the energy decisions made today could be decisive for tomorrow’s economic balance.

While oil holds its ground, societies must adapt. Because if one thing is clear, it’s that energy security is measured not just in barrels, but in long-term vision.