The ceasefire that held since early April cracked open on Sunday and Monday as Iran and Israel traded strikes for the first time since the truce took effect — and a White House official told CNBC that Trump “underestimated the willingness of Iran to restart the conflict.” That is not a diplomat softening a message. That comment may be interpreted as a sign that policymakers underestimated the risk of renewed escalation .
The sequence matters. Iran fired missiles at Israel on Sunday. The IDF confirmed it had “identified that missiles were launched from Iran toward the territory of the State of Israel” and that “defense systems are operating to intercept the threat,” per CNBC’s reporting citing an IDF post on X.
Israel then struck back early Monday local time, announcing it had “struck military targets belonging to the Iranian terror regime in western and central Iran,” again per the IDF’s own X post.
By Monday morning, a fallen rocket was photographed half-buried on the outskirts of Jericho — the ground-level punctuation on a weekend of escalation.
Trump responded quickly to the developments , posting on Truth Social that both sides were “looking to do an immediate CEASEFIRE” and that “final negotiations on ‘Peace’ are proceeding, subject to ignorance or stupidity getting in its way,” according to CNBC. He had told Fox News on Sunday that the missile attacks are “certainly not going to help negotiations.” By Monday, he was on the phone with the Financial Times saying Netanyahu “won’t have any choice” but to accept whatever deal the U.S. negotiates with Iran, because the U.S. president “calls the shots.”
Public comments from Iranian officials appeared to contrast with the U.S. administration’s position . . An Iranian official linked to the talks told CNBC that “a deal with President Trump is no longer feasible at this stage.” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told journalists in Tehran that the U.S. was “responsible for the consequences of any escalation,” per the AP via CNBC.
The Iranian Parliamentary Speaker, MB Ghalibaf, framed the strikes as a response to an ongoing U.S. naval blockade and what he called violations of ceasefire terms in Lebanon — and warned that “American and regime bases and assets in the region” were now “legitimate targets.”
The Ceasefire Architecture Is Wobbling, Not Collapsing — Yet
Iran’s IRGC described Sunday’s operation as “a warning” and said “if aggressions are repeated, the responses will be broader,” per CNBC citing a statement to the New York Times. That phrasing — conditional, graduated — suggests Tehran is not yet committed to full re-escalation, but is signalling that the current path leads there. The White House anonymous official’s description of “no imminent off-ramp” and Iran’s “erratic behavior” placing Trump in “an incredibly challenging situation” is consistent with that reading.
Trump’s public posture — aggressive ownership of the peace process, insisting “things should move quickly” — creates its own calendar pressure. If a ceasefire is not re-established quickly, the gap between his Truth Social posts and reality becomes the story. Markets participants often monitor such gaps between expectations and developments
What This Does to Oil and Gold
For oil (USO, crude futures), the Middle East risk premium that had been fading as the April ceasefire held has a credible catalyst to return. Strait of Hormuz optionality — long dormant — comes back into the conversation when Iran explicitly flags U.S. and Israeli “assets in the region” as targets. The U.S. naval blockade Ghalibaf referenced adds a direct maritime dimension that was absent from prior flare-ups this cycle. The renewed tensions may prompt some market participants to reassess geopolitical risk exposure
Gold (GC=F) has historically benefited from precisely this kind of event: a geopolitical shock that was previously assumed resolved, now reasserting itself. The combination of sovereign-risk repricing, potential oil supply disruption, and demonstrated limits to U.S. diplomatic leverage is the backdrop gold has historically attracted attention during periods of geopolitical uncertainty.
Whether the move holds or fades depends almost entirely on whether a formal ceasefire is announced in the coming sessions — which remains genuinely uncertain given the Iranian official’s comment that a deal with Trump is “no longer feasible at this stage,” per Investing.com.
Crude and gold markets experienced elevated activity during Monday’s early session as participants assessed evolving geopolitical developments and uncertainty surrounding the diplomatic outlook.
The Counter-Case: Trump Has Done This Before
The structural counter to a sustained risk-premium move is Trump’s track record of rapid de-escalation. He has repeatedly stepped in with personal diplomacy at the last moment in this conflict cycle, and his framing — both sides “looking to do an immediate ceasefire,” final negotiations “proceeding” — is consistent with the pattern of public pressure followed by a quiet agreement.
If a ceasefire announcement lands in the next 24–48 hours, oil may retrace and gold could give back a portion of any spike. The duration and market impact of the current tensions remain uncertain
That said, the anonymous White House official’s admission that Trump “miscalculated” Iran’s willingness to re-engage militarily is harder to dismiss than a routine diplomatic denial. And an Iranian official explicitly saying a deal is “no longer feasible” is a qualitative shift that has not been walked back in the sourced reporting. The off-ramp, to use the White House’s own phrasing, is not obvious from the outside.
What’s Next
The immediate catalyst is whether Trump’s reported phone call with Netanyahu — which Axios said he made to urge Israel not to strike back before the retaliatory strikes occurred — produces any formal joint statement or renewed ceasefire framework. Any official communication from the White House, the IDF, or the Iranian Foreign Ministry in the coming hours could influence USO and GC=F rapidly in either direction.
For scheduled macro context, traders can track geopolitical calendar developments via Investing.com’s economic calendar and energy supply data via the EIA’s weekly petroleum report, which may provide additional insight into energy market conditions .
Market relationships tied to Middle East escalation — crude, gold, regional defence equities, USD safe-haven flows — are dynamic and may change over time as the diplomatic situation evolves. Past correlations between geopolitical events and commodity moves do not guarantee future performance.
Risk Disclaimer: Trading CFDs involves substantial risk and may result in the loss of your invested capital. CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money. Past performance is not indicative of future results. This content is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
