Iran's Foreign Ministry criticises Canadian PM Carney's comments justifying US President Trump's war-like statements against Iran

What has historically mattered for crude is the distinction between verbal escalation and physical disruption: the risk premium in oil has tended to build on threats to actual supply infrastructure or Gulf shipping, where freight rates and war-risk insurance are the transmission channel, and to fade when the exchange stays at the level of statements. The notable element here is the indirect chain, Iran objecting to a third country's leader endorsing US rhetoric, which reads as diplomatic signalling rather than a change in posture by any of the principals. The relevant follow-ons are whether Washington's language is matched by force posture changes in the region, and whether Tehran's response escalates beyond the foreign ministry to official threats around the Strait of Hormuz, the chokepoint through which a large share of seaborne crude transits. Absent that, episodes of this kind have tended to dissolve within a news cycle.