Core Viewpoint - Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba is closely monitoring the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran, which could severely impact Japan's energy supply [1] Group 1: Energy Dependency - Japan's energy supply is highly reliant on oil imports from the Middle East [1] Group 2: Political Actions - Ishiba had planned to discuss this issue during the upcoming NATO summit, but Japanese government officials have stated that he has canceled related travel plans [1]

Group 1 - On June 13, Israel launched a military attack on Iran, causing significant reactions in the international oil market, with Brent crude oil futures and WTI prices both surging over 7%, marking the largest daily increase since the Ukraine crisis began [1] - The geopolitical tensions in the Middle East are expected to heighten the risk of oil supply disruptions, with the potential for Iran to block the Strait of Hormuz, which handles about 20% of global oil transport [1] - Major investment banks and energy institutions have revised their oil price forecasts, indicating that while prices may spike due to immediate events, they are likely to return to fundamental supply-demand dynamics in the long term [1][2] Group 2 - Goldman Sachs noted that despite high short-term risk premiums, major oil-producing countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE have nearly 3 million barrels per day of spare capacity, suggesting that prices may retreat to the $75 to $78 per barrel range after an initial spike [2] - Morgan Stanley highlighted that the recent price surge is primarily due to heightened tensions and risk hedging, with global refining margins significantly narrowing compared to last year, indicating insufficient downstream demand to support sustained high prices [2] - The International Energy Agency (IEA) warned that uncertainties in Middle Eastern energy security could pose significant challenges to global energy supply-demand balance in the second half of the year [3] Group 3 - Shell has indicated a shift in energy investment strategies from a "high return" logic to a "high safety" logic due to geopolitical risks, with plans to accelerate project developments in Africa and Brazil to mitigate concentration risks [3] - Saudi Aramco has assured that it can increase production by 500,000 to 1 million barrels per day within 48 hours if the market experiences panic, aiming to stabilize expectations [3] Group 4 - The long-term challenge of ensuring energy supply security is complex, particularly for energy-importing countries, which need to diversify energy imports and establish strategic reserves to buffer against price volatility [4] - The international oil market may experience a new normal characterized by "larger fluctuations and low-level oscillations," with a supply slightly exceeding demand likely to persist [4]

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese government expresses deep concern over the escalation of regional conflicts due to Israeli attacks on Iran, emphasizing the need for immediate measures to de-escalate tensions and return to dialogue for resolution [1] Group 1 - The Chinese government is worried about the potential disruption of energy supplies from Iran due to the Israel-Iran conflict [1] - The spokesperson calls for all parties involved to take urgent actions to cool down the situation [1] - The focus is on preventing further regional turmoil and creating conditions for a return to negotiations [1]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the significant impact of Trump's tariff policies on U.S. crude oil exports to China, which have dropped to zero, marking the largest decline since 2020, with exports decreasing by over 4% [1][3]. Group 1: U.S.-China Oil Trade Dynamics - China has not imported any crude oil from the U.S. for two consecutive months, indicating a major shift in trade relations influenced by tariff policies [1][3]. - The cessation of U.S. crude oil imports by China is a direct response to high tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, which has led China to seek alternative energy sources [1][5]. - Despite a temporary reconciliation between the U.S. and China, concerns over the unpredictability of U.S. policies have led China to avoid reliance on U.S. oil [3][10]. Group 2: Strategic Energy Independence - China is actively working to reduce its dependence on U.S. energy supplies, seeking to expand energy trade with other countries, particularly in the Middle East and Russia [5][8]. - The halt in U.S. LNG imports by China, which began earlier in the year, reflects a broader strategy to mitigate risks associated with U.S. energy pressure [5][7]. - China's proactive measures to secure energy supplies demonstrate its preparedness against potential U.S. energy sanctions, as evidenced by its historical avoidance of U.S. LNG imports during Trump's first term [5][7]. Group 3: U.S. Energy Supply Threats - The U.S. has threatened to cut off oil supplies to China, which imports a significant volume of crude oil daily, but these threats have been countered by Russia's willingness to supply oil to China [8][10]. - The unpredictability of U.S. trade policies, including recent sanctions against Chinese companies, raises concerns about the reliability of U.S. energy as a trade partner [10].

Group 1 - The EU is considering a quota system to fully ban imports of Russian natural gas by the end of 2027, providing legal grounds for companies to terminate long-term contracts [1][2] - The quota will apply to all member states and is expected to have binding force similar to sanctions [2][4] - The EU aims to first ban all new contracts and stop existing transactions in the spot market by the end of 2025, with a gradual termination of long-term contracts by 2027 [2][3] Group 2 - Reducing dependence on Russian gas will open opportunities for US suppliers to deliver more liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe [3] - The EU has been cautious about imposing sanctions on gas imports due to opposition from Hungary and Slovakia, which still rely on Russian gas [4] - There is a strong majority among member states supporting the gradual phase-out of Russian gas, although concerns about legal grounds for contract termination persist [4]