The global economy is entering a “dangerous time” like never before as Middle East tensions remain elevated, said S&P Global’s vice chairman Daniel Yergin.

Since the Israel-Hamas conflict began on Oct. 7 of last year, the oil market has experienced minimal disruptions, with prices remaining under pressure as a result of increased U.S. production and weak demand from China. However, this sentiment has been shifting. Oil prices spiked last week on fears that Israel could target Iran’s oil industry in retaliation for Tehran’s ballistic missile attack, with industry analysts raising concerns about a genuine threat to supply.

“The Israelis have not concluded what they’re going to do in terms of a strike — that’s under discussion,” U.S. President Joe Biden told reporters at a White House press briefing last week, adding that he discouraged Israel from striking Iranian oil facilities.

Last week, both oil benchmarks saw their biggest weekly gain since March 2023. During Asia trading on Tuesday, global benchmark Brent slipped 1.77% to $79.50 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate traded 1.83% lower at $75.77 per barrel.

Yergin told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia” that he expects Israeli retaliation will not just be a replay of last April, but something “much stronger.”

In April, Iran and Israel came to blows but ultimately avoided a full-scale war. Iran fired hundreds of ballistic missiles and drones at Israel in retaliation for an attack on an Iranian diplomatic facility in Syria.

When asked if the global economy is on the precipice of another supply shock resulting from Middle East tensions, Yergin said it’s a precarious time for markets.

“I think it’s a very dangerous time, one that we haven’t seen,” he said. 

Additionally, while Yergin maintained that it is not certain whether Iranians have operational nuclear weapons, that is still “certainly in the backdrop,” particularly through the lens of the Israelis.

“The betting is that the Israelis would not attack, try to attack, the nuclear facilities at this time. But a few months from now, a few weeks from now, whatever it is, Iran would have the capacity — it’s thought — to deliver a nuclear weapon, and that raises the stakes,” he said, likening the moment to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

That said, Israel is a lot more concerned about Iran’s nuclear facilities than the Iranian oil industry, said Pavel Molchanov, managing director of investment services firm Raymond James. Iran’s nuclear program has progressed to a stage where, in approximately one week, the country could potentially enrich enough uranium for five fission weapons, according to estimates by Iran Watch, a website published by the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control.

“The worst-case scenario would be something that Iran can do on its own, which is a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. So this is not directly related to Israeli airstrikes or missiles. 

The strait, between Oman and Iran, is a vital channel where about one fifth of global oil production flows daily, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. It is a strategically important waterway linking crude producers in the Middle East with key markets across the world.

The inability of oil to traverse through the strait, even temporarily, can increase shipping costs, lead to considerable supply delays and ratchet up global energy prices, with some surmising that a worst-case scenario could prompt oil prices to surge above $100 a barrel.

An escalating conflict in the Middle East has thrust the world’s most important oil artery back into the global spotlight.

The Strait of Hormuz is widely recognized as a vital oil transit chokepoint. Situated between Iran and Oman, the waterway is a narrow but strategically important channel that links crude producers in the Middle East with key markets across the world.

In 2022, oil flow in the Strait of Hormuz averaged 21 million barrels per day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). That’s the equivalent of about 21% of the global crude trade.

The inability of oil to traverse through a major chokepoint, even temporarily, can ratchet up global energy prices, raise shipping costs and create significant supply delays.

For many energy analysts, an event where there is a blockade or a significant disruption to flows via the Strait of Hormuz, is seen as a worst-case scenario — one that could prompt oil prices to climb far above $100 a barrel.

“The worst case could well be if Israel strikes Iran [and] Iran takes actions to slow down or potentially try to block the Strait of Hormuz,” Alan Gelder, energy analyst at Wood Mackenzie, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” on Monday.

“[This] would have a far more dramatic effect because that is where 20% of global crude exports travel through from the likes of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq — and the UAE to some extent — that are the holders of the global spare capacity,” Gelder said.

“So, we contend the market is not pricing in the worst case, it is pricing in the potential impact on Iranian energy infrastructure,” he added.

Israel’s promise to hit back at Iran following a ballistic missile attack last week has stoked speculation that the country could soon launch an attack on Tehran’s energy infrastructure.

Iran, which has pledged a forceful response of its own in the event of any further Israeli actions, is a major player in the global oil market.

Energy analysts have questioned whether oil markets are being too complacent about the risks of a widening conflict in the Middle East.

Saul Kavonic, senior research analyst at MST Financial, said supply disruptions along the Strait of Hormuz could send oil prices significantly higher.

“If we see an attack on Iranian production, up to about 3% of global supply could be curtailed and even if we just see tighter sanctions, that could also start to curtail supply by up to 3%. That on its own could see oil approach 100 or even exceed 100 dollars per barrel,” Kavonic told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia” on Oct. 3.

“If [transit through the Strait of Hormuz] was to be impacted, we’re talking about an oil price impact that would be three times larger than the oil price shocks of the 1970s in the wake of the Iranian revolution and the Arab oil embargo, and now we’re talking about $150 plus a barrel of oil,” he added.

Oil prices traded more than 3% on Monday, extending gains even after notching their sharpest weekly gain since early 2023 last week.

International benchmark Brent crude futures with December expiry were last seen trading 1.5% lower at $79.74 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures stood at $75.99, down 1.5%.

Bjarne Schieldrop, chief commodities analyst at Swedish bank SEB, said the general rule of thumb in commodity markets is that if supply is severely restricted, then the price will often spike to between five and 10 times its normal level.

“So, if worst came to worst and the Strait of Hormuz was closed for a month or more, then Brent crude would likely spike to USD 350/b, the world economy would crater and the oil price would fall back to below USD 200/b again over some time,” Schieldrop said Friday in a research note.

“But seeing where the oil price sits right now the market doesn’t seem to hold much probability for such a development at all,” he added.

Warren Patterson, head of commodities strategy at Dutch bank ING, said any disruptions to transit along the Strait of Hormuz would have seismic consequences for global energy markets.

“The key concern, while still extreme, would be that these disruptions spill over to the Strait of Hormuz, affecting Persian Gulf oil flows,” Patterson said in a research note published on Oct. 4.

“A significant disruption to these flows would be enough to push oil prices to new record highs, surpassing the record high of close to $150/bbl in 2008,” he added.

ING’s Patterson said any supply disruption in relation to the Strait of Hormuz would not be isolated to the oil market.

“It could also potentially lead to disruptions in [liquified natural gas] flows from Qatar, which makes up more than 20% of global LNG trade,” he continued.

“This would be a shock to global gas markets, particularly as we move into the northern hemisphere winter, where we see stronger gas demand for heating purposes. While we are seeing a ramp-up in new LNG export capacity, this still falls well short of Qatari export volumes.”

This report is from today’s CNBC Daily Open, our international markets newsletter. CNBC Daily Open brings investors up to speed on everything they need to know, no matter where they are. Like what you see? You can subscribe here.

Stocks slumped on persistent fears
Major U.S. indexes retreated on Monday. The S&P 500 lost 0.96%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 0.94% and the Nasdaq Composite slumped 1.18%. But Super Micro shares were a bright spot, jumping 15.8%. Europe’s regional Stoxx 600 index added 0.18%. Household goods led gains, closing 0.97% higher, while tech shares fell 0.65%.

No more jumbo cuts
After last week’s expectation-busting jobs report for September, there’s virtually zero chance the U.S. Federal Reserve will reduce interest rates by half a percentage point at its next meeting, strategists told CNBC. Traders agree. A week ago, they bet on a 34.7% chance of another jumbo cut by the Fed; today, it’s 0%, according to the CME FedWatch Tool.

AI demand is still high
The artificial intelligence boom “still has some time to go,” Foxconn Chief Executive and Chairman of Foxconn Young Liu told CNBC. Foxconn, which reported better-than-expected earnings for the third quarter, manufactures electronics for technology giants like Apple and Nvidia. Demand for Nvidia’s latest chip Blackwell is “much better than we thought,” said Liu.

Tensions push oil prices higher
Oil prices jumped around 3.7% on Monday on worries Israel will attack Iran’s oil production facilities. If Israel hits Kharg Island, it could disrupt the transport of 90% of Iran’s crude exports, said an analyst. Last week was the best for West Texas Intermediate and Brent oil prices in more than one-and-a-half years. They surged 9.1% and 8.4% respectively.

[PRO] Goldman’s getting more bullish
The S&P 500 is in the red in October so far. But Goldman Sachs raised its 2024 target for the S&P to 6,000 from 5,600, making it the second-highest forecast on Wall Street, according to the CNBC Market Strategist Survey. Goldman also increased its 12-month S&P target to 6,300 from 6,000. Here’s why the bank is so bullish on stocks.

Oil prices spiked yesterday after having their best week in over a year. And September’s blockbuster jobs report, the futures market is pricing in a 13.7% chance the Fed will not cut rates at all at its November meeting. That’s a drastic change from a week ago when traders thought there was a 34.7% chance of a 50-basis-point cut.

But a recession?

Admittedly, that’s speculation on my part. But it bears pointing out that the yield curve between the 10- and 2-year Treasurys is “getting close to flipping back into danger territory,” as CNBC’s Jeff Cox noted.

Simply put, when the 10-year yield is lower than that of the 2-year, the yield curve is inverted – which has almost always preceded a recession since the mid-1970s. The yield curve inverted in early July 2022 and normalized in early September.

After Monday, however, the gap between the 10- and 2-year yields is now just 3.5 basis points. It’s not inconceivable, then, for investors who take stock in what the yield curve signals to panic a little.

That said, strategists think a recession is a far-fetched idea, considering the health of the U.S. economy.

As David Roche, founder and strategist at Quantum Strategy, put it, “the economy is fine, thank you very much.”

So much so that “the probability of the American economy going into recession, at least in the fourth quarter of this year, and probably in the first quarter of next year, is close to zero,” said Bob Parker, senior advisor at the International Capital Markets Association.

Concrete numbers are driving market movement. But there’s an undercurrent of fear that can perhaps run contrary to what some of those numbers are saying.

– CNBC’s, Jeff Cox, Lisa Kailai Han and Jesse Pound contributed to this story.