What Happened
On Wednesday, September 17, 2026, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf posted a message on X, referencing the Taylor equation, a formula used by central banks to determine interest rates. Ghalibaf, who has served as a lead negotiator in talks between Tehran and Washington over the past six months, wrote, “Let’s see if a hike could open SOH or produce a single barrel,” referring to interest rate hikes and the Strait of Hormuz. He further asserted, “You can’t 25bp [basis points] a chokepoint,” adding, “It’s SOH risk premium, and We set it.” Hours after Ghalibaf’s post, the US Federal Reserve announced an increase in its benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points, marking the first such increase in three years. This event occurred amidst an ongoing conflict, launched by the US and Israel against Iran on February 28, during which Ghalibaf has frequently used financial arguments to critique the Trump administration's handling of the war.
The Pentagon had previously conceded earlier this week that Iran’s missiles and drones have been responsible for downing dozens of US aircraft, damaging or destroying hundreds of US buildings at Middle East bases, and depleting billions of dollars worth of military equipment inventories. Ghalibaf's social media activity is consistent with his past behavior; in March, he commented on markets and energy prices, and last month, he posted a graphic titled “Make America Hungry Again” with US food insecurity statistics, playing on former President Trump’s campaign slogan.
What the Evidence Establishes
The evidence establishes a clear, albeit indirect, link between geopolitical tensions involving Iran and US monetary policy decisions. Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG Group, stated that “The Iran war, indirectly, is a huge driver of last night’s hike, though no one wants to admit it.” He elaborated that “The energy spike has combined with the rise in yields to drive the Fed into a corner with no way out.” Susannah Streeter, chief investment strategist at the Wealth Club, corroborated this, noting “no denying” that Iran’s retaliatory actions in the Gulf region have “intensified concerns about energy supplies and led to hotter inflation forecasts.” She added that “The ongoing geopolitical turmoil and elevated crude prices certainly were key issues behind the Fed’s decision to hike rates.”
Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh, in his speech following the rate hike, explicitly acknowledged the influence of global events, stating that “renewed fighting between the US and Iran, which has pushed up petrol prices, helped convince Fed officials to support higher rates.” He concluded, “There’s no hiding from hot spots around the world.” While the Taylor equation is a recognized economic model linking interest rates to inflation and the output gap, experts confirm it serves as a benchmark rather than a strict rule. Policymakers at the US Federal Reserve consider a broader array of economic factors, including Trump’s tariffs, the energy shock from the US-Israeli war with Iran, and significant investment in the artificial intelligence sector, all of which contribute to inflationary pressures.
Where the Accounts Conflict
A primary conflict arises from Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf’s assertion that Iran “sets” the Strait of Hormuz (SOH) risk premium and, by extension, influences US interest rates. Ghalibaf’s post on X, stating “It’s SOH risk premium, and We set it,” directly implies a level of control over US monetary policy. However, market analysts and economists largely dispute this direct control. Susannah Streeter of the Wealth Club explicitly stated that while Tehran has “arguably had an influence on some of the forces feeding into US monetary policy, particularly through the impact of the conflict on oil supplies and prices, it is not ‘setting’ US interest rates.” She emphasized that the US Federal Reserve responds to a much broader set of economic conditions and that “the decision on where to set interest rates ultimately rests with the Federal Reserve, and there are plenty of other data points policymakers use.”
Another divergence in accounts is observed in the framing of the event. Al Jazeera characterized Ghalibaf’s post as a “spectacular bit of agitprop from Iran,” highlighting Iran’s “impressive ability to needle its US opponent.” In contrast, an operative Telegram feed, referencing Alex Jones, framed the situation as a “vindication” of prior predictions that a war with Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz would lead to increased inflation, interest rates, and fuel prices, culminating in a “Global Energy Crisis.” While both acknowledge the impact of the conflict, their interpretations of Ghalibaf’s intent and the broader implications differ significantly, with one focusing on strategic messaging and the other on a fulfillment of specific prophecies.
Context and Stakes
The recent events unfold within the context of an ongoing military conflict between the US and Israel against Iran, which commenced on February 28. This conflict has already resulted in significant military and economic costs for the US, including downed aircraft and damaged bases, as conceded by the Pentagon. The Strait of Hormuz, a critical global waterway, has been effectively blocked by Iran for international shipping, creating a substantial “SOH risk premium” that directly impacts global energy prices. Historically, geopolitical instability in the Middle East has a direct and immediate effect on crude oil markets, leading to price spikes and inflationary pressures worldwide.
The stakes are high for both the US and Iran. For the US, persistent energy-driven inflation, exacerbated by geopolitical hot spots, complicates the Federal Reserve’s mandate of maintaining price stability and maximum employment. The Fed’s decision to raise interest rates, the first in three years, reflects the gravity of these inflationary pressures, which are also influenced by factors like Trump’s tariffs and heavy investment in the artificial intelligence boom. For Iran, Ghalibaf’s economic messaging serves as a strategic tool to demonstrate Tehran’s capacity to inflict economic pain on Washington, potentially influencing US policy or public opinion regarding the ongoing conflict. The ability to leverage control over a critical chokepoint like the Strait of Hormuz provides Iran with significant, albeit indirect, economic leverage on the global stage.
What to Watch Next
Observers should closely monitor the rhetoric from Iranian officials, particularly Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, for further economic commentary or direct challenges to US monetary policy. Given his established pattern of using social media to comment on markets and energy prices, additional posts linking Iranian actions to global economic indicators are probable. Any explicit threats or actions regarding the Strait of Hormuz would immediately escalate global energy prices and intensify inflationary pressures, forcing a more aggressive response from central banks worldwide. The frequency and tone of these communications will indicate Iran's ongoing strategy to exert economic influence.
Furthermore, the US Federal Reserve’s upcoming statements and minutes from its Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meetings will be crucial. Chairman Kevin Warsh’s acknowledgment of global “hot spots” suggests that geopolitical developments, especially those impacting energy markets, will remain a significant conditioning variable for future interest rate decisions. Analysts will scrutinize these communications for any shifts in the Fed’s assessment of inflation drivers and its willingness to implement further rate hikes. The trajectory of crude oil prices, particularly Brent and WTI benchmarks, will serve as a real-time indicator of market sentiment regarding the stability of Middle Eastern energy supplies and the effectiveness of Iran’s strategic leverage. Any sustained increase in oil prices above current levels would signal continued market concern and likely prompt further hawkish monetary policy considerations.
Bottom Line
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf’s public statements, linking the Strait of Hormuz to US interest rates, underscore Iran’s strategic use of economic messaging amidst an active conflict with the US and Israel. While Ghalibaf’s claim that Iran “sets” US interest rates is not supported by economic analysis, the evidence clearly establishes that Iran’s actions, particularly those affecting the Strait of Hormuz, significantly contribute to global energy price volatility. This volatility, in turn, fuels inflationary pressures that the US Federal Reserve must consider when setting monetary policy. The recent 25 basis point rate hike by the Fed, the first in three years, was explicitly influenced by renewed fighting between the US and Iran and the resulting increase in petrol prices, as confirmed by Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh.
Therefore, while Tehran does not directly control the US federal funds rate, its geopolitical maneuvers in the Middle East exert a tangible, indirect influence on the economic conditions that shape the Federal Reserve’s decisions. The ongoing conflict and Iran’s ability to disrupt critical shipping lanes ensure that energy prices remain elevated, complicating the Fed’s efforts to manage inflation. This dynamic highlights the interconnectedness of geopolitics and global finance, demonstrating how regional conflicts can have far-reaching economic consequences, even for major economies like the United States.
DECLASSIFIED SOURCE: Al Jazeera - News (via Real-time Signal Upgrade)
No comments yet. Start the conversation.