Speaking after a consultative meeting of Arab and Islamic foreign ministers in Riyadh, bin Farhan accused Tehran of premeditated hostile actions against its neighbours, both directly and through regional proxies, and urged it to halt further escalation.

“This pressure from Iran will backfire politically and morally and certainly we reserve the right to take military actions if deemed necessary,” he told a news conference.

Saudi Arabia’s defence ministry said it intercepted and destroyed four ballistic missiles targeting Riyadh, with debris falling near a refinery south of the capital. Interceptors were seen launched near the venue hosting the diplomatic gathering as ministers from countries including Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Qatar and Syria convened.

The strikes marked a significant moment in the conflict, with residents in Riyadh reporting blasts and receiving warning alerts for the first time since hostilities began.

Saudi authorities say the kingdom has faced hundreds of missiles and drones since the start of the conflict, the vast majority of which have been intercepted.

The escalation follows Iran’s vow to target oil and gas infrastructure across the Gulf after what it described as an Israeli strike on its facilities in the South Pars gas field.

Attacks on Wednesday affected energy sites in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, raising concerns over global supply disruptions.The widening conflict, now in its third week, has already driven oil prices higher and unsettled energy markets as critical infrastructure comes under repeated threat.

Saudi Arabia and Iran restored diplomatic relations in 2023 after years of rivalry that saw them support opposing factions across the region.

Bin Farhan said Riyadh still preferred diplomacy but warned that continued Iranian actions could eliminate any remaining basis for trust.

“If Iran doesn’t stop immediately, I think there will be almost nothing that can re-establish trust,” he said.

The offer was made by China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, with spokesperson Chen Binhua saying “peaceful reunification” would provide stronger protection for Taiwan’s energy and resource security under what he called the backing of a “strong motherland.”

The proposal comes as governments worldwide scramble to secure alternative fuel supplies following disruptions to shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz, a key artery for global oil and liquefied natural gas flows.

Taiwan, which previously sourced about one-third of its liquefied natural gas from Qatar and imports no energy from China, has said it has secured alternative supplies for the coming months, including from the United States, its main international backer.

President Lai Ching-te said energy supplies for the near term were assured and that additional U.S. gas imports would begin from June, according to a statement from his Democratic Progressive Party.

China has long framed economic and security incentives as part of its strategy to persuade Taiwan to accept unification under its “one country, two systems” model, which no major Taiwanese political party supports.

Chen said Beijing was willing to provide “stable and reliable energy and resource security” to improve living conditions for people in Taiwan, reiterating a narrative that closer integration would bring material benefits.

Taiwan’s government, which rejects China’s sovereignty claims, has consistently maintained that only the island’s people can determine its future.

The energy proposal comes against the backdrop of heightened geopolitical strain, with the Middle East conflict triggering volatility in global energy markets and prompting countries across Asia to reassess supply security.

China, the world’s largest oil importer, has also taken domestic measures to safeguard supply, including restricting fuel exports in recent days, according to reports.

Beijing has never renounced the use of force to bring Taiwan under its control, though it has repeatedly stated a preference for peaceful unification.

The latest offer underscores how energy security has emerged as a central element in cross-strait dynamics as global supply disruptions reshape strategic calculations.

Speaking to reporters at the White House during a St. Patrick’s Day visit by Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin, Trump said allied governments had expressed support for U.S. and Israeli actions but were unwilling to provide direct military assistance.

Trump noted that several allied countries had indicated they had no immediate plans to deploy naval forces to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime corridor through which roughly one-fifth of global oil supplies pass.

The comments followed calls by the U.S. administration for international support to maintain shipping access after Iran responded to joint U.S.-Israeli strikes with drones, missiles and naval mines that have effectively hindered tanker traffic.

Despite the criticism, Trump said he had “nothing currently in mind” when asked whether Washington would retaliate against allies for their stance.

“I think NATO is making a very foolish mistake,” Trump said. “Everyone agrees with us, but they don’t want to help.”

Earlier in the day, Trump struck a different tone on social media, stating that the United States no longer needed NATO assistance due to what he described as “Military Success” in the ongoing conflict, now in its third week.

In that statement, he also singled out non-NATO partners Japan, Australia and South Korea, without elaborating on their roles.

Trump has previously raised the possibility of withdrawing the United States from NATO, though he did not revisit that position in his latest remarks.

The standoff over the Strait of Hormuz has heightened concerns about global energy supplies, as disruptions in the narrow waterway can have immediate implications for oil markets and shipping routes.

The reluctance of NATO allies to engage militarily underscores divisions within the alliance over involvement in the conflict, even as diplomatic backing for U.S. actions appears to remain intact.

The restriction, imposed last week and expected to remain in place until at least the end of March, aims to prevent domestic shortages in China, the world’s largest oil importer, according to market sources.

The move curtails exports that were valued at about $22 billion last year.War disruptions amplify supply strainEven before the export curbs, Asian refiners were seeking alternative crude supplies as the conflict in the Middle East disrupted flows from the Gulf.

Several refineries in the region, a key supplier of fuel to Asia, have shut operations as shipping through the Strait of Hormuz was halted.

The combined impact has intensified competition for available cargoes, leaving import-dependent economies exposed to supply shocks.

Australia, Bangladesh and the Philippines, which rely heavily on Chinese refined fuel exports, are expected to face immediate challenges in meeting demand.

China accounted for roughly one-third of Australia’s jet fuel imports last year and about half of supplies to Bangladesh and the Philippines in 2024.

China ranks as Asia’s fourth-largest exporter of refined, or “clean,” fuels after South Korea, India and Singapore, and plays a pivotal role as a swing supplier when regional demand fluctuates.

Analysts say the sudden halt in exports leaves limited room for other suppliers to compensate. “The remaining Asian exporters simply do not have the spare volumes to replicate China’s role as the region’s swing supplier,” Kpler analyst Zameer Yusof said.

Benchmark refining margins in Singapore, known as “cracks,” are expected to continue rising as markets adjust through higher-priced replacement cargoes or reduced demand.

Fuel prices across Asia have climbed sharply. Diesel derivatives rose to $150 per barrel on March 17, while jet fuel swaps reached $163 per barrel, up from about $92 before the war, according to LSEG data.

Gasoline traded at $139.80 per barrel on Monday, compared with $79.30 on February 27.The tightening market is already affecting downstream sectors. Vietnam has warned airlines to prepare for potential flight cuts from April due to fuel shortages linked to export restrictions.

China’s Foreign Ministry said on Monday that military action in the Middle East should cease and that Beijing is willing to work with other countries to ensure energy security.

The conflict, now entering its third week, has shut down shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime corridor through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas passes, sending oil prices higher and raising fears of renewed global inflation.

Israeli military spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani said the military had detailed operational plans covering at least the next three weeks, with additional scenarios prepared for a longer campaign.

“We want to make sure that they are as weak as possible, this regime, and that we degrade all their capabilities, all parts and all wings of their security establishment,” Shoshani told reporters.

The Israeli military has framed the campaign as focused on degrading Iran’s ballistic missile infrastructure, nuclear facilities and broader security apparatus. Officials say thousands of potential targets remain inside Iran.

Iran launched drone attacks targeting regional sites, temporarily shutting down Dubai airport and striking a key oil facility in the United Arab Emirates, according to reports cited by regional authorities.

The incidents underscored the widening regional impact of the conflict, which has drawn concern from energy markets and governments reliant on Gulf shipping lanes.

Air traffic at Dubai airport was briefly halted following the drone threat before operations resumed.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has become one of the most significant economic consequences of the war.

The narrow waterway between Iran and Oman handles roughly 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments, making it one of the most strategically important energy chokepoints in the world.

The disruption has already pushed oil prices upward and intensified concerns among policymakers about inflationary pressure on global economies.

U.S. President Donald Trump called on Sunday for an international coalition to help reopen the shipping route, warning that the NATO alliance could face a “very bad” future if members fail to support Washington’s efforts.

Allies responded cautiously, expressing support for diplomatic initiatives to restore navigation through the Strait while signaling reluctance to commit to military action.Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said Tehran had not requested a ceasefire and had exchanged no messages with Washington, according to Iran’s semi-official Student News Network.

Meanwhile, Iran’s Mehr news agency reported that overnight Israeli strikes killed five people and wounded seven others in Markazi province in central Iran. The report said attacks struck a residential area on the outskirts of Arak city and a residential building in Mahallat county.

Israel has said its campaign remains focused on military and strategic infrastructure linked to Iran’s security apparatus.

David Sacks, who serves as the White House crypto and artificial intelligence adviser, made the remarks during an appearance on the “All-In Podcast,” describing the current moment as an opportunity for the United States to step back from the conflict.

“This is a good time to declare victory and get out,” Sacks said, adding that U.S. operations had degraded Iran’s military capabilities. He also said Washington should look for what he described as an “off-ramp” to prevent further escalation.

Sacks said avoiding a prolonged conflict would require diplomatic efforts aimed at reducing tensions. “If escalation doesn’t lead anywhere good, then you have to think about how do you de-escalate,” he said. “De-escalation involves reaching some sort of ceasefire agreement or negotiated settlement with Iran.

”The remarks marked a rare public call from a prominent figure within Trump’s administration for an exit strategy from the war, which has intensified regional tensions since late February.

The United States and Israel launched attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, triggering retaliatory strikes from Iran and its ally Hezbollah against Israel and other targets across the Middle East.

The fighting has rattled global financial markets and pushed oil prices higher amid concerns that wider hostilities could disrupt energy supplies from the region.

Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations said more than 1,300 people have been killed in Iran as a result of U.S. and Israeli attacks.

Israeli authorities say Iranian strikes have killed 12 people in Israel.The U.S. military has reported seven service members killed since the conflict began.

In a social media post, Trump said U.S. forces had “totally obliterated every MILITARY target” on the island while deliberately leaving oil export infrastructure intact. Kharg Island, located about 16 miles (26 km) off Iran’s coast, handles roughly 90% of Iran’s oil exports.

The president said the decision not to strike oil facilities could be reconsidered if Iran or other actors interfere with the “Free and Safe Passage of Ships” through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime route through which roughly a fifth of global oil supply moves.

Iran has been attacking vessels in the waterway during the conflict, halting most commercial shipping traffic and intensifying volatility in energy markets.

Kharg Island lies roughly 300 miles (483 km) northwest of the Strait of Hormuz and serves as Iran’s principal crude export terminal. Satellite imagery reviewed by tanker monitoring service TankerTrackers.com showed multiple very large crude carriers loading at the island earlier this week.

Despite escalating military tensions in the Gulf, Iran has continued shipping crude from Kharg. Between Feb. 28, when the conflict began, and Wednesday, exports ranged between 1.1 million and 1.5 million barrels per day.

Other Gulf producers have temporarily halted shipments because of security concerns linked to Iranian attacks on shipping routes.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump declined to provide a timeline for the conflict’s conclusion.

“I can’t tell you that,” the president said. “I mean, I have my own idea, but what good does it do? It’ll be as long as it’s necessary.

”Oil markets have fluctuated sharply in recent days as investors reacted to shifting signals from Washington about the duration and scope of the conflict.

The United States is sending additional military forces to the Middle East as tensions with Iran escalate around the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump also said Iran had “no ability to defend against U.S. attacks,” urging Iranian forces to lay down their arms.

The confrontation has raised concerns among energy analysts and governments about the risk of a prolonged disruption to global oil supply, with the International Energy Agency previously warning that the conflict could trigger one of the largest supply shocks in modern energy markets.

Writing in the Saudi-based outlet Arab News, Egyptian journalist and analyst Abdellatif El-Menawy said the conflict has exposed the limits of American power, the reach of Israeli military deterrence and Iran’s enduring role in the regional balance, while simultaneously revealing vulnerabilities in the Gulf’s security architecture.

The war, he argued, may prolong the Middle East’s crises rather than produce the stable “new Middle East” often invoked in policy debates.

The United States’ strategic thinking surrounding the conflict reflects an assumption seen during the Iraq war era that weakening a hostile regional power could pave the way for a more favorable political order.

.Under this logic, military pressure on Iran’s leadership and infrastructure was expected either to weaken Tehran to the point of strategic retreat or trigger domestic unrest that could alter the country’s political trajectory.

But Iran’s position in the region extends beyond the structure of its government, he argued. The country has established institutions, a complex social structure and networks of influence across several parts of the Arab world.

Because of those factors, analysts say the collapse or severe weakening of Iran could introduce additional instability rather than immediately stabilize the region.

The war has already expanded beyond limited strikes, with Iranian attacks targeting Israel, U.S. military installations and other strategic locations across the Gulf region, according to the analysis.

The conflict’s effects have also spread into global economic systems, particularly energy markets and maritime shipping routes.

Oil infrastructure across the Gulf has faced rising risks, with key pipelines, refineries and export terminals in countries including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Iraq and Bahrain placed under heightened security pressure as hostilities intensify.

At the same time, the Strait of Hormuz one of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints through which roughly one-fifth of global oil trade passes has come under renewed scrutiny amid the conflict.

Any disruption to shipping through the strait could quickly reverberate through oil prices, insurance markets and international trade flows, analysts note, underscoring the region’s continued strategic significance to the global economy.

The broader implication, is that the Middle East’s geopolitical stability cannot be separated from the vulnerabilities of the global energy system.

The conflict has also raised questions in the Gulf about the long-standing security model built around U.S. military protection.

For decades, American bases in the region were viewed primarily as deterrents against external threats. However, the current conflict has highlighted how those same installations can also become targets during periods of confrontation.

This concern has roots in earlier regional shocks, including the 2019 attack on Saudi oil facilities that temporarily disrupted global oil supply and raised doubts about the effectiveness of external security guarantees.Such developments have already encouraged Gulf states to diversify their diplomatic and strategic relationships.

A notable example came in March 2023, when Saudi Arabia and Iran agreed to restore diplomatic relations in a deal brokered by China. The agreement was widely viewed as part of a broader effort by Gulf states to reduce regional tensions while balancing relations among major global powers.

Despite such diplomatic efforts, the current war has underscored the limits of de-escalation initiatives in a region shaped heavily by geography and military positioning.

As long as U.S. bases remain in the Gulf and Iran perceives those deployments as a strategic threat, regional states will remain exposed to confrontation regardless of their diplomatic preferences, analysts say.

Even if Iran emerges weakened from the conflict, the country is unlikely to disappear from the Middle East’s strategic landscape.

Instead, Tehran may rely more heavily on asymmetric strategies that aim to raise the costs of confrontation for its adversaries.

These strategies could include leveraging maritime chokepoints, economic pressure points and regional alliances to challenge what Tehran views as an American-led security structure.

Iran has historically used such methods as part of a broader deterrence approach that extends beyond conventional military confrontation.The evolving dynamics also raise questions about Israel’s role in the region.

Israel is widely viewed as having demonstrated strong intelligence and airpower capabilities through strikes deep inside Iranian territory. Yet military superiority does not necessarily translate into a stable regional order under Israeli leadership.

Accordingly a weakened Iran could in some ways heighten concerns among Arab states about the emergence of a more assertive Israel.The resulting regional balance may therefore resemble a complex triangular dynamic involving a militarily capable Israel, an injured but resilient Iran and Gulf states with substantial economic resources but growing security uncertainty.

Beyond the Middle East, the conflict also carries wider geopolitical implications.A prolonged confrontation with Iran could absorb American military and diplomatic attention, potentially creating opportunities for rival powers such as Russia and China to expand influence in other regions.

Some analysts have also warned that a shift in U.S. focus toward the Middle East could affect Washington’s ability to manage simultaneous international crises.For now, however, the conflict’s long-term consequences remain uncertain.

While the war has challenged assumptions about the durability of the existing regional order, analysts say it has not yet produced a clear alternative.Instead, the emerging picture is of a Middle East entering a period of greater fluidity, where established security arrangements face new tests and geopolitical alignments continue to evolve.

The Philippines, which holds the rotating ASEAN chairmanship this year, is hosting an economic ministers’ retreat while foreign ministers are scheduled to convene virtually on the same day to discuss the widening crisis and its implications for Southeast Asia.

Philippine Trade Undersecretary Allan Gepty said the conflict’s economic impact would feature prominently in discussions, particularly as energy prices and logistics disruptions ripple through regional economies.“The concern is a given,” Gepty told reporters, noting that ASEAN governments could not ignore the potential effects on inflation, employment and supply chains.

Joint strikes by the United States and Israel on Iran launched nearly two weeks ago have killed around 2,000 people and disrupted global energy markets and transportation routes, according to officials cited in the discussions.

The conflict has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic maritime chokepoint through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas shipments pass, sending crude prices above $100 per barrel and triggering volatility in global markets.

Several Southeast Asian economies depend heavily on crude oil and LNG imports from the Gulf, raising concerns over fuel costs and energy security if disruptions persist.

The Philippines imports a significant portion of its oil from the Middle East, while a halt in liquefied natural gas exports from QatarEnergy has tightened regional supply conditions.

Authorities in Manila have shortened the government work week to conserve fuel, and President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has asked Congress for authority to suspend fuel excise taxes to cushion rising costs.

Elsewhere in the region, Vietnam cut retail fuel prices overnight after a recent easing in global crude benchmarks but warned volatility could persist amid ongoing supply disruptions.

Earlier this month, Thailand halted energy exports to all countries except Laos and Myanmar in an effort to safeguard domestic supply.

ASEAN foreign ministers have described the escalation of the conflict as “particularly regrettable” and called for an immediate cessation of hostilities, urging all sides to exercise restraint, protect civilians and resolve differences through dialogue in accordance with international law.

Regional officials say coordinated policy responses will be essential to manage the economic shock if disruptions to energy supplies and trade routes continue.

“It is important that our actions and responses to the ongoing conflicts must be synchronised,” Gepty said.

Finance Minister Wale Edun convened the country’s Economic Management Team to assess how rising geopolitical tensions could affect crude oil prices, capital flows and logistics costs, the ministry said in a statement.

Officials said instability linked to the conflict is already pushing up global crude prices, with concerns centred on possible disruptions near the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical oil shipping routes.

The ministry said higher oil prices could translate into increased domestic costs for fuel, diesel, cooking gas and fertiliser, potentially placing additional pressure on households and businesses.

Authorities warned that prolonged instability in the Middle East could also intensify inflationary pressures and raise living costs.

Government officials said they are closely tracking a range of economic indicators, including crude price movements, exchange-rate pressures, capital flows, fiscal risks and foreign reserve levels.

The review comes as policymakers weigh potential spillover effects from global market volatility on the country’s financial stability.

The finance ministry said Nigeria entered the period with strengthening macroeconomic fundamentals, citing gross domestic product growth of 4.07% in the fourth quarter of 2025.

Authorities said policies would remain under review to protect households and businesses while maintaining investor confidence as global market conditions evolve.