Gas Prices Surge 29 Percent Since Iran War Began

Objective Facts

Oil and natural gas prices spiked Wednesday following reports of the first attacks on Iranian production facilities in the war, including the world's biggest natural gas field. The incidents mark a major escalation in the conflict, which has so far largely spared Iran's energy infrastructure. The nationwide average price has risen by 86 cents in just 18 days – a 29% jump – in one of the fastest spikes for gas prices on record. The Israeli officials said the strike was coordinated with and approved by the Trump administration. A U.S. Defense official confirmed that. Also on Wednesday, Iran launched fresh strikes on Israel, vowing revenge for the killing of two top Iranian leaders this week, including security chief Ali Larijani.

Left-Leaning Perspective

Democrats criticize President Trump's handling of the Iran war, blaming him for rising gas prices and airline fares, and accusing Republicans of downplaying the impact. In interviews, statements and in a flurry of social media posts, Democrats have sharpened their arguments — repeatedly linking Trump's decision to enter the Iran conflict to the price spikes, while accusing Republicans of downplaying their impact. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who is widely viewed as a potential 2028 presidential candidate, excoriated Trump in an op-ed column published Tuesday. "This country does not want to see more dead Americans. Americans don't want higher gas prices, which will spike at the pump because of this stupid conflict," he wrote. California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote Monday on the social platform X, "Taking a victory lap on 'LOWEST EVER' gas prices, then calling Americans 'FOOLS' for worrying about his war with Iran raising prices? Donald Trump is a con man with no plan and failing the American people." In an interview on CNN earlier in the day, Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-Mass.) chalked up the disconnect between Trump and the public on gas prices to "arrogance." "You have the president of the United States telling the American public they're fools if they don't want to pay more at the pump," he said. With control of Congress at stake in November's midterms, the party has come together to oppose Trump's Iran policy and point to the economic turmoil as proof that Republicans haven't kept their promises to bring down everyday costs. Dietrich said the past two weeks show the Trump administration has failed at long-term planning. "They're flying by the seat of their pants, and the rest of us are paying the price," he said.

Right-Leaning Perspective

President Trump is downplaying concerns about rising gas and oil prices that have been badly exacerbated by the war in Iran. Both the president and members of his Cabinet have described rising prices as a "small price to pay" to achieve their goals in Iran. "Ultimately, once the military objectives are completed and the Iranian terrorist regime is neutralized, oil and gas prices will drop rapidly again, potentially even lower than before the strikes begin. As a result, American families will benefit greatly in the long-term," she said. Trump called it putting Iran "out of business." Trump called it putting Iran "out of business." Trump also argued that rising prices are good for the country since it has a lot of oil producers who benefit from higher prices. Despite the political risk of gas prices' rising because of the war, some Republicans credit Trump for taking action against Iran. "Trump did what was in the best interest of America despite the political headwinds higher oil prices will create," said Dan Eberhart, a Republican donor who owns an oilfield services company called Canary. Other Republicans argue it's too early to predict how oil prices will ultimately impact the midterms, noting it will depend on the war's duration. "I think the fact that oil prices are elevated but not outside of the zone where the economy can function mean that there's really not going to be a long-term or even a midterm political implication to this."

Deep Dive

The war in Iran that began February 28, 2026, has created a genuine economic shock with widespread political ramifications. The Strait of Hormuz blockade eliminates roughly one-fifth of global oil supply daily, a constraint no domestic U.S. oil production can remedy because oil trades on global markets. The latest escalation—Wednesday's coordinated U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran's South Pars gas field, the world's largest—added new fears about supply disruption just as markets had stabilized after earlier price spikes. The rapid increase is on par, on a percentage basis, with the gas price shock during Hurricane Katrina. What each side gets right: Democrats are correct that Trump previously campaigned on low gas prices as an achievement and has now faced a genuine reversal through his military decisions—creating real political vulnerability in a midterm year. Republicans are right that a 29% surge, while sharp, remains manageable economically (below 2022 peaks) and that geopolitical threats from Iran's nuclear program and blockade capacity pose legitimate national security concerns. Where each falls short: Democrats omit that global market dynamics constrain domestic policy solutions, and they underestimate some Americans' willingness to accept costs for strategic outcomes. Republicans downplay the immediate household burden on working families and the risk that prolonged conflict could undo inflation progress, potentially harming their midterm prospects regardless of long-term vindication. Unresolved questions include whether the Strait remains closed long enough to sustain these price levels into the midterm elections, whether allies will commit to joint Hormuz operations (so far rejected), and whether competing narratives—"temporary war cost" versus "broken economic promises"—will dominate voter messaging. The political stakes are clear: a short, resolved conflict may vindicate Trump's gamble; a prolonged conflict could hand Democrats the midterm advantage they're already priming for.

OBJ SPEAKING

← Daily BriefAbout

Gas Prices Surge 29 Percent Since Iran War Began

Mar 18, 2026
What's Going On

Oil and natural gas prices spiked Wednesday following reports of the first attacks on Iranian production facilities in the war, including the world's biggest natural gas field. The incidents mark a major escalation in the conflict, which has so far largely spared Iran's energy infrastructure. The nationwide average price has risen by 86 cents in just 18 days – a 29% jump – in one of the fastest spikes for gas prices on record. The Israeli officials said the strike was coordinated with and approved by the Trump administration. A U.S. Defense official confirmed that. Also on Wednesday, Iran launched fresh strikes on Israel, vowing revenge for the killing of two top Iranian leaders this week, including security chief Ali Larijani.

Left says: Democratic critics of the Iran war have said surging gas prices are just one of the reasons they are concerned about the strikes. Many of them have said neither the conflict nor the byproduct of a gas-pump squeeze matches the "America First" slogan Trump has promoted as his brand for more than a decade.
Right says: The Israeli official said it was aimed at signaling to Iran that if it continues disrupting oil supply through the Strait of Hormuz there could be an escalation in the targeting of its energy facilities and a worsening of the economic crisis in the country. "It was a signal of what could come next," the Israeli official said.
✓ Common Ground
Fuel prices have long been one of the most politically sensitive economic indicators because they among the most visible costs consumers face. Voices across the spectrum recognize that gas prices directly affect voter behavior and public opinion.
The near-shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz means that around 20 million barrels of crude and oil products, about a fifth of world oil supply, are choked off from the global market every day. Both sides acknowledge the geopolitical and economic severity of the supply disruption.
Some voices on both left and right agree that the Trump administration should have had clearer communication about consequences and duration. Some days he says it's just to get a nuclear deal. Some days, he says he wants a Venezuela deal. Some days it wants to implode the regime. And that lack of clarity, in my view, has been deeply detrimental because if you don't know what it is that you're trying to achieve, then you're putting both the U.S. military and our partners in very difficult positions.
Objective Deep Dive

The war in Iran that began February 28, 2026, has created a genuine economic shock with widespread political ramifications. The Strait of Hormuz blockade eliminates roughly one-fifth of global oil supply daily, a constraint no domestic U.S. oil production can remedy because oil trades on global markets. The latest escalation—Wednesday's coordinated U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran's South Pars gas field, the world's largest—added new fears about supply disruption just as markets had stabilized after earlier price spikes. The rapid increase is on par, on a percentage basis, with the gas price shock during Hurricane Katrina.

What each side gets right: Democrats are correct that Trump previously campaigned on low gas prices as an achievement and has now faced a genuine reversal through his military decisions—creating real political vulnerability in a midterm year. Republicans are right that a 29% surge, while sharp, remains manageable economically (below 2022 peaks) and that geopolitical threats from Iran's nuclear program and blockade capacity pose legitimate national security concerns. Where each falls short: Democrats omit that global market dynamics constrain domestic policy solutions, and they underestimate some Americans' willingness to accept costs for strategic outcomes. Republicans downplay the immediate household burden on working families and the risk that prolonged conflict could undo inflation progress, potentially harming their midterm prospects regardless of long-term vindication.

Unresolved questions include whether the Strait remains closed long enough to sustain these price levels into the midterm elections, whether allies will commit to joint Hormuz operations (so far rejected), and whether competing narratives—"temporary war cost" versus "broken economic promises"—will dominate voter messaging. The political stakes are clear: a short, resolved conflict may vindicate Trump's gamble; a prolonged conflict could hand Democrats the midterm advantage they're already priming for.

◈ Tone Comparison

Left-leaning outlets employ sharper, more accusatory language—characterizing Trump's messaging as hypocritical ("victory lap" on low prices before raising them) and his judgment as reckless. Right-leaning voices adopt a more measured, strategic tone, framing price increases as temporary costs inherent to difficult decisions and emphasizing long-term benefits. Republicans stress stability and competence; Democrats stress broken promises and negligence.

✕ Key Disagreements
Whether gas price increases are acceptable tradeoff
Left: Democratic critics of the Iran war have said surging gas prices are just one of the reasons they are concerned about the strikes. Many of them have said neither the conflict nor the byproduct of a gas-pump squeeze matches the "America First" slogan Trump has promoted.
Right: Members of his Cabinet have described rising prices as a "small price to pay" to achieve their goals in Iran.
Duration and severity of price impacts
Left: A prolonged increase in oil prices also threatens to undo progress on inflation as its effects trickle through the economy. Progressives warn of long-lasting economic damage.
Right: Trump predicted that gas prices would soon go down when asked by The Hill what his message was to Americans worried about energy costs. "Well, I think your gas prices, as soon as that's over, are going to come tumbling down along with everything else," Trump said.
Whether the war itself was justified
Left: Donald Trump is pressing forward with his illegal and unpopular war of choice with Iran. Progressives characterize it as a discretionary decision without sufficient cause.
Right: The military conditions for a durable settlement – Iranian missile capacity too degraded to rebuild quickly, nuclear infrastructure inaccessible, proxy networks fragmented – are being created right now. Supporters argue the military objectives justify the conflict.
Responsibility for price increases
Left: Democrats, who have been highly critical of the war, have pointed to the increase in gas prices as evidence the Trump administration and Republican majorities in Congress are failing to deliver on promises to lower the cost of living.
Right: The White House in recent months has leaned into low gas prices to argue that the administration is making energy more affordable. "President Trump has been clear that these are short-term disruptions. Ultimately, once the military objectives are completed and the Iranian terrorist regime is neutralized, oil and gas prices will drop rapidly again, potentially even lower than before the strikes begin."