Peskov Blames Gulf Crisis for Oil Shock as Saudi Pipeline Attack Deepens Supply Risks

The oil shock described by the Kremlin has two connected but distinct causes: Russia’s own refining disruption and a broader security crisis affecting Gulf production and shipping. Dmitry Peskov argued that instability in the Gulf was removing major volumes of oil from international circulation and rapidly worsening market conditions, while welcoming President Donald Trump’s call for Ukraine to stop striking Russian diesel infrastructure. 1

What Peskov said

Peskov’s central point was that the Gulf conflict was the principal driver of the wider energy-market disruption. He said that a large amount of oil was falling out of the market, with potentially serious consequences for the global economy. 16

That framing matters because it separates the Kremlin’s assessment of the global market from Russia’s immediate fuel problem. Ukraine’s attacks on Russian oil infrastructure have reduced fuel production and contributed to shortages inside Russia, but Peskov attributed the broader international dislocation mainly to Gulf instability. 13

Why Russia restricted petroleum-product exports

Moscow’s export restrictions were intended to preserve domestic diesel availability after strikes on refineries disrupted Russian refining capacity. Reporting at the time said the restrictions added to pressure in diesel markets, while Russia faced worsening domestic fuel shortages and rationing in some areas. 23

Trump publicly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to stop targeting Russian diesel facilities, arguing that the strikes were contributing to a shortage that was affecting the wider world. Peskov said the Kremlin welcomed calls to halt attacks on what it characterized as civilian economic infrastructure. 14

The Kremlin did not, however, commit to reciprocal restraint against Ukraine’s economic infrastructure. 15

Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline shutdown

Saudi Arabia temporarily shut its East-West crude pipeline after multiple drone attacks in the Riyadh and Madinah regions. Saudi officials said the drones originated in Iraq, although it was unclear who carried out the attacks.

The roughly 1,200-kilometre pipeline moves crude from Saudi Arabia’s eastern oil-producing region to Yanbu on the Red Sea. That makes it strategically important during disruption at the Strait of Hormuz because it offers a route to export markets that does not require tanker transit through the strait.

Saudi Arabia described the closure as a precautionary measure. The available reporting established the temporary shutdown, but the duration of the outage and its ultimate effect on physical supply were uncertain. Estimates of repair time varied, with one report citing sources who suggested it could take as long as five to six weeks, while others expected a quicker restart.

Peskov said the pipeline disruption alone had removed more than 4% of global supplies from the market. That was the Kremlin spokesman’s assessment; the more firmly established facts are that the route was shut temporarily and that it was a key bypass around Hormuz. 5

Why simultaneous route disruptions amplify the shock

The pressure is not confined to one pipeline. The IEA said Gulf exports in August were estimated at about 13 million barrels per day, nearly half their pre-war level. Increased flows using routes that bypass the Strait of Hormuz and U.S. military escorts helped limit crude losses, but refined-product and LPG exports remained sharply lower, while flows through Hormuz were still severely constrained.

At the same time, attacks and insecurity in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait have added risk to Red Sea shipping. The IEA linked the supply deficit to the Hormuz shutdown, attacks in the Bab el-Mandeb, reduced Iranian exports, and other supply disruptions. 18

Together, these disruptions reduce the market’s flexibility:

• Hormuz constraints limit the primary maritime outlet for Gulf oil.
• The East-West Pipeline outage weakens Saudi Arabia’s main overland alternative to the Red Sea.
• Bab el-Mandeb insecurity raises risks for ships using the Red Sea route toward the Suez Canal and European markets.

The effect is not merely fewer barrels available for sale. It also means fewer dependable routes, higher insurance and freight costs, and less ability for producers and buyers to work around a closure elsewhere.

The market response: oil and tanker rates surged

Oil prices moved sharply higher as attacks on shipping increased fears of an extended supply disruption. Brent settled at $101.21 on September 9, then rose 6.34% on September 10 to settle at $107.63 after touching an intraday high above $108.

Shipping costs also surged. The rate for VLCC supertankers carrying oil from the Gulf of Oman to China reached about Worldscale 450, equivalent to roughly $11.50 per barrel, according to Baltic Exchange data cited by Reuters. Reuters reported it as a record for that rate since its introduction earlier in 2026.

Higher freight costs can compound high crude prices for importers, particularly when alternative shipping routes are longer or tankers must account for greater security risk.

The IEA’s outlook points to a prolonged disruption

The IEA forecast that global oil supply would fall by 5.7 million barrels per day in 2026, a deeper decline than it had projected previously. It said normal Gulf supply was unlikely to recover fully before 2027. 17

That outlook underscores the difference between a short-lived price spike and a sustained supply problem. A durable recovery would require safer and more reliable flows through the Gulf and Red Sea routes, as well as restoration of disrupted production and export infrastructure.

For now, Peskov’s comments capture only one side of the story: the Gulf crisis is central to the global market shock, while Russia’s export restrictions are a domestic supply-protection response to damage to its own refining system. Both developments tighten diesel availability, but they operate through different channels. 12