INVESTIGATION: Oil below $75 — how the US-Iran deal is reshaping Moscow's war

Introduction: The drop that changes everything

A week of record lows

In one week of June 2026, the global oil market underwent a spectacular transformation. On June 22, 2026, Brent crude fell to 77.90 USD, a decline of 3.3% — breaking below 80 USD for the first time since the start of the Ukrainian conflict. Three days later, on June 25, WTI (West Texas Intermediate) plunged 4.3% to 70.05 USD — its worst single-day decline in three months.

Brent returns to its pre-war level — below 75 USD per barrel — after having exceeded 115 USD in April 2026. In a matter of weeks, the market erases months of tension-driven expectations. Goldman Sachs lowers its Brent forecast for the fourth quarter of 2026 from 90 to 80 USD. This is not a technical correction — it is a paradigm shift.

The US-Iran deal as the primary trigger

The triggering factor is the diplomatic agreement between the United States and Iran. The US Treasury grants a 60-day waiver on Iranian oil and petrochemical sanctions, valid until August 21, 2026. This diplomatic gesture opens the door to a partial return of Iranian oil to the global market — adding millions of barrels to an already rising supply.

For the IMF, which noted on June 25, 2026 that "energy and commodity prices are falling after the Iran deal but normalisation will take time", the dynamic is underway but incomplete. For Putin's Russia, whose war budget depends directly on oil revenues, this dynamic is an ongoing catastrophe.

The anatomy of the fall: cumulative factors

OPEC+: the third consecutive increase

OPEC+ approved a production increase of 188,000 barrels per day (bpd) for July 2026 — the third consecutive increase since March 2026. This figure may seem modest on a global market of 100 million bpd, but it adds to previous increases to create a progressive supply pressure that weighs on prices.

The OPEC+ decision to continue increasing production reflects diverging interests within the cartel. Saudi Arabia seeks to recapture market share lost during reduction periods. The UAE needs revenues to fund its economic diversification plans. Russia is structurally incapable of reducing production below its minimum field-exploitation capacity.

The Iranian return and its implications

The return of Iranian oil to the global market is the most significant variable. Iran holds the world's fourth-largest proven oil reserves. Under the maximum sanctions of Trump 1.0, its production had fallen from approximately 4 million bpd to under 2 million. It has partially rebounded since, but a substantive agreement — with full sanctions removal — could add 1 to 2 million additional bpd.

The 60-day waiver valid until August 21, 2026 is a taster — a signal that normalisation is possible. Markets immediately priced in this forward-looking signal by lowering prices. That is the logic of futures markets: they anticipate not just the present but the possible.

The impact on Russia: war revenues in free fall

Urals crude under double pressure

For Russia, the fall in global prices is amplified by a "double penalty" effect. Russian crude — notably Urals and ESPO (Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean) — already trades at a significant discount relative to Brent prices, due to Western sanctions and the G7 price cap of 60 USD per barrel.

When Brent falls from 115 USD to under 75 USD in a few weeks, the price Russia actually receives collapses disproportionately. According to Inbox EU/Argus Media data of June 24, 2026, Russian Urals/ESPO crude fell 20% in one week. On a national budget that depends 30–40% on oil revenues, this represents a considerable financial haemorrhage.

The war budget shrinks

The Russian war machine is expensive. Convergent estimates place Russia's 2026 military spending between 120 and 150 billion USD — over a third of the total federal budget. This machine is largely financed by hydrocarbon export revenues. When those revenues fall 20% in a week, war financing becomes problematic.

Russia has reserves — the National Wealth Fund (NWF) — but they have been massively drawn down since 2022 to offset the effects of sanctions. According to various estimates, these reserves have shrunk considerably. The combination of falling prices, sanctions, and reserve depletion creates a growing budgetary constraint on Putin's capacity to sustain his war effort's intensity.

Oil geopolitics: who wins, who loses

The clear winners

The fall in oil prices has clear winners. Net oil-importing countries — Europe, Japan, South Korea, China, India — see their energy bills decrease, freeing up economic resources. For European economies that suffered from the price surge since 2022, this normalisation is a welcome relief.

Ukraine benefits indirectly: falling Russian oil revenues mechanically reduce Moscow's capacity to fund its war machine. Every dollar less in Russian coffers is one less dollar available to buy ammunition, drones, and military components. This is passive economic warfare — but it produces real effects on the battlefield.

The losers beyond Russia

The losers are not limited to Russia. Gulf states — Saudi Arabia above all — see their revenues fall, complicating their ambitious economic diversification programmes. Venezuela, Iran itself (paradoxically), Algeria, Libya — all hydrocarbon producers absorb the impact of falling prices.

For oil companies that had massively invested in new extraction capacity anticipating durably high prices, the fall to 70–75 USD calls into question the profitability of some projects — notably American shale, which has a higher marginal cost. This investment slowdown could prime a price rebound in 12 to 18 months.

Revised forecasts: Goldman Sachs and the IMF speak

Goldman Sachs revises downward

Goldman Sachs — one of the most influential financial institutions in oil market forecasting — lowered its Brent forecast for the fourth quarter of 2026 from 90 to 80 USD. This 10-dollar revision, significant, reflects integration of new data: the US-Iran deal, the third OPEC+ increase, and a slowdown in global demand.

Goldman Sachs's revision is an important signal for financial markets. It indicates that the bank does not expect a rapid price rebound — that the downward pressure is structural, not cyclical. For Russian actors hoping for a quick recovery in prices, this is bad news from an institution whose forecasts carry benchmarking authority.

The IMF: slow normalisation

The IMF, in its comments of June 25, 2026, notes that "energy and commodity prices are falling after the Iran deal but normalisation will take time." This cautious wording reflects uncertainty over the deal's durability — a 60-day deal that could be extended or abandoned depending on the evolution of Iranian nuclear negotiations.

The "slow" normalisation mentioned by the IMF suggests prices will not quickly return to pre-deal levels. The direction is clear — toward stabilisation at lower levels — but the path will be gradual and potentially volatile. For economic planners who must forecast Russia's oil revenues, this uncertainty is itself unfavourable to Moscow.

The Iran deal: a complex geopolitical transaction

What the United States obtains

The 60-day waiver on Iranian oil sanctions is not a free gift. It is part of a broader diplomatic transaction between Washington and Tehran — whose precise contours are not entirely public. What the United States obtains in return is probably linked to Iranian nuclear negotiations, Middle East de-escalation gestures, or concessions on drone deliveries to Russia.

This transaction is morally ambiguous — Iran remains a destabilising power in the Middle East and has supplied Shahed drones to Russia to bomb Ukrainian cities. But American foreign policy is pragmatic: if granting Iran a petroleum waiver reduces Russian revenues and lowers energy prices for allies, Trump will calculate that it serves American interests.

The Ukrainian calculation

For Ukraine, the US-Iran deal is a double-edged weapon. On one side, it reduces Russian revenues — a positive effect. On the other, it benefits Iran — the drone supplier that has killed thousands of Ukrainians — by allowing it to sell its oil. Zelensky is a prisoner of this logic: he benefits from Russia's financial weakening, but at the cost of the partial rehabilitation of one of his direct enemies.

This paradox illustrates the complexity of proxy warfare as Ukraine experiences it. Its allies make geopolitical decisions that partially serve its interests and partially contradict them. That is the price of a coalition-supported war — partners retain their decision-making autonomy, even when their decisions are painful for those they claim to support.

The impact on the war's endgame strategy

Financial pressure as a negotiating lever

The fall in Russian oil revenues creates financial pressure that could, in theory, modify Putin's strategy. A regime seeing its resources dwindle is a regime more open to diplomatic compromise — at least that is the theory behind the economic exhaustion strategy.

But this theory has limits: Putin has demonstrated Russia's ability to adapt its economy to war conditions — growing militarisation, import substitution, administered economy. Falling oil prices complicates his situation — it does not necessarily force him to negotiate. A dictator who fears military defeat more than economic crisis will not capitulate under financial pressure alone.

What WTI at 70 USD means for 2026–2027

If prices stabilise around 70–80 USD per barrel for the rest of 2026 and into 2027 — consistent with Goldman Sachs's revised forecasts — Russian oil revenues would be significantly reduced relative to the Russian federal budget's projections. Those projections were made anticipating higher prices.

A growing Russian budget deficit in this scenario would force difficult choices: cut social spending (politically risky), cut military spending (unacceptable to the war logic), or continue drawing on NWF reserves until exhaustion. Each of these scenarios has implications for the sustainability of Russia's war effort in 2027.

Alternative producers and the new oil geography

North America as a key variable in the oil balance

The fall of Brent below 75 USD cannot be analysed without considering the role of American oil production. The United States has been the world's leading oil producer since 2018, with shale oil capacities that respond more quickly to price signals than traditional producers. At 70–75 USD per barrel, some American shale projects become marginally profitable — which mechanically limits the decline.

This dynamic creates a structural asymmetry in the market: prices too low slow investment in American shales, reducing future supply and priming a price rebound in 12 to 18 months. Oil markets are cyclical by nature — the question for Russia is whether it can hold on financially during this low cycle before a potential price rebound.

What low prices mean for Ukraine's European allies

For European economies that import massively, the fall of Brent to 75 USD is an economic relief. Energy bills that had exploded since 2022 are progressively normalising. This economic improvement reinforces European governments' political capacity to maintain their support for Ukraine — it is easier to maintain sanctions when their economic costs diminish.

The double dividend for the West is therefore: fewer revenues for Russia AND less economic pain for allies. This is not a strategic coincidence — it is the result of a deliberate policy combining sanctions, energy diversification, and diplomatic management of oil markets via the US-Iran deal. Economic warfare has its own momentum logics.

Conclusion: The oil war continues behind the scenes

A decisive economic front

This investigation confirms that the fall of oil below 75 USD is not a simple market event — it is the manifestation of a multi-front economic war where the US-Iran deal, OPEC+ decisions, Western sanctions, and market dynamics combine to exert growing financial pressure on the Russian war machine.

Brent at 77.90 USD on June 22, WTI at 70.05 USD on June 25, the 20% fall in Urals/ESPO in one week, Goldman Sachs's downward revision — figure after figure, economic reality is catching up with Putin. He can ignore moral condemnations. He can produce propaganda about military successes. But he cannot ignore his own budget statistics.

Ukraine's long game

For Zelensky and Ukraine, this oil investigation illustrates a strategic reality: the war is also being won on non-military fronts. Western support, economic sanctions, financial pressure on oil revenues — all of this contributes to the final objective. Ukrainian resistance is remarkable — but it benefits from Western economic support that takes forms even Russian strategists had not fully anticipated.

The oil price drop will not win the war on its own. But it contributes to reducing the financing capacity of Russian aggression — meaning potentially fewer missiles, fewer drones, fewer munitions over time. In a war of attrition, every constraint counts.

Signed Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency box

Sources and data

This investigation rests exclusively on the dated sources listed below. All figures cited — 77.90 USD, 70.05 USD, -3.3%, -4.3%, 115 USD in April 2026, 80 USD Goldman Sachs forecast, 188,000 bpd OPEC+, waiver until August 21, 2026, 20% fall Urals/ESPO — come directly from the sources without modification or extrapolation.

The columnist has no access to real-time market data or confidential sources in the oil sector. His analysis is that of an observer of public sources, not a financial analyst or trader.

Position

The columnist supports Ukraine and considers any economic factor that reduces Russian aggression's financing capacity to be positive. He acknowledges the ambiguities of the US-Iran deal and its implications for Ukraine. The editorial passages in italics are personal opinions. The columnist has no financial interest in the oil markets or companies cited.

The analysis of Russian budget scenarios is an analytical construct based on public information — precise figures for the Russian budget and NWF are partially opaque and may diverge from available estimates.

Sources

Primary sources

Reuters — Brent falls more than 3% after US-Iran peace talks — June 22, 2026

Rzzro — WTI crashes 4.3% on demand fears and OPEC+ — June 25, 2026

Secondary sources

US News / IMF — Energy prices fall after Iran deal but normalisation will take time — June 25, 2026

Anadolu Agency — Lower oil prices after US-Iran accord could turn the tide against Moscow — June 25, 2026

Al Jazeera — Oil prices back to pre-war levels on rising Middle East supply — June 25, 2026

Inbox EU / Argus Media — Russian oil exports, Urals/ESPO -20% in one week — June 24, 2026