The U.S. is preparing to send thousands more troops to the Middle East, prompting speculation about a ground attack on Iran amid conflicting accounts of peace talks.

The Pentagon is reportedly preparing to send about 3,000 troops from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East, alongside two Marine Expeditionary Units, to assist military operations in Iran. CNBC has contacted the White House and is awaiting a response.

Military experts said that the number of additional troops being deployed to the region appears to be consistent with plans for discrete and time-limited operations — rather than a sustained ground campaign.

It puts two strategic Iranian islands in the spotlight and raises questions about a potential move to seize the Islamic Republic’s nuclear materials.

Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis estimated that there were likely only around 4,000 to 5,000 “trigger pullers” or ground troops.

“That is enough to seize a small target for a period of time. You’ve got to understand, even the 82nd Airborne Division, it’s an immediate reaction force to provide very quick reaction on the ground but only in advance of something bigger coming in behind that,” Davis, a senior fellow and military expert at Defense Priorities, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia” on Thursday.

“I have seen no evidence that any kind of a force of size has been even considered, much less alerted, prepared, equipped, trained up that you would need to go … That takes months of time to do.”

Davis said that, from the limited number of ground troops being deployed, there were three possibilities that the U.S. could theoretically execute.

The first possibility is seizing Qeshm Island, which sits “in the horseshoe bend of the Strait of Hormuz,” Davis said.

Qeshm Island, off Iran’s southern coast, is the largest island in the Persian Gulf. Located near the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, the arrow-shaped island has emerged as a potential U.S. target amid reports that anti-ship missiles, mines, drones and attack craft are being kept there in underground tunnels.

“All enemy movements are under the full surveillance of our armed forces,” Iran’s Speaker of Parliament Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf said on X, according to a Google translation.

“If they step out of line, all the vital infrastructure of that regional country will, without restriction, become the target of relentless attacks,” he added.

Ruben Stewart, senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think tank, said the number of U.S. forces preparing to be deployed was not consistent with a sustained ground campaign.

“What is notably absent are the heavy armoured units, logistics depth, and command structures required for a prolonged land war. In practical terms, this is a force that can act quickly and selectively, but not one that could sustain operations deep inside Iran or over an extended period,” Stewart told CNBC by email.

“Seizing Kharg Island is technically feasible but escalatory, given its centrality to Iran’s oil exports. By contrast, securing Iran’s nuclear material would be the least realistic with this force as it would require a far larger, sustained ground presence,” he added.

The relatively limited level of deployment was perhaps best understood as a tool of coercive leverage, Stewart said, as U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration seeks to increase its bargaining power and signal that it has options if diplomacy fails.

The White House has said that Trump has been engaged in “productive” talks with Iran over the last three days, adding that the military operation in Iran was “ahead of schedule.”

Iran, however, has repeatedly denied holding talks with Washington.

Republicans on a House Natural Resources subcommittee blocked a Democratic motion to subpoena Donald Trump Jr., President Donald Trump’s eldest son, over his backing of critical mineral companies.

President Trump’s administration is trying to rapidly increase the production of critical minerals in the U.S. Vulcan Elements, a rare earth magnet maker backed by Trump Jr.’s 1789 Capital, received a $620 million federal loan last year from the Department of Defense.

Democrats on the panel sought to subpoena the younger Trump to force his testimony on the Vulcan deal. The hearing, called by the majority Republicans on the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee, was titled “Unleashing America’s Mineral Potential: The Critical Mineral Commodity Supply Chain.”

“We are done waiting for Republicans to fulfill their responsibility to conduct oversight,” said Rep. Maxine Dexter, D-Ore, the top Democrat on the subcommittee, when offering the motion to subpoena. “Donald Trump Jr. must be made to answer whether the president’s son illegally profited from his father’s presidency.”

Dexter also called to subpoena Patrick Witt from the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Capital. After publication of this story, CNBC was told by the committee that Dexter incorrectly named Vulcan Materials CEO Ronnie Pruitt. She intended to subpoena the CEO of Vulcan Elements, John Maslin, the company that Donald Trump Jr. backs.

Trump’s family business ties have been under immense scrutiny during his second administration, particularly the investment activity of his sons, Trump Jr. and Eric Trump. Democrats have warned that they stand to benefit financially from the companies they are backing receiving lucrative contracts from the government their father runs.

Republican subcommittee chair Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., immediately moved the committee into a nearly hour-long recess following the motion. Upon returning, Gosar moved to table the motion to subpoena. The motion was tabled in a 5-2 vote. Republicans control the subcommittee 5-3.

Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., then immediately moved to adjourn the subcommittee hearing, following the tabling of the resolution.

Natural Resources Committee ranking member Jared Huffman, D-Calif., warned that the issue is “not going away.”

“You can do these moves, but you cannot hide, you cannot dodge accountability,” Huffman said.

The subcommittee then adjourned, with a vote of 5-2.

The head of the International Energy Agency said on Monday that at least 40 energy assets across nine countries in the Middle East have been “severely or very severely” damaged since the Iran war began, raising fears of prolonged supply disruptions.

Speaking at the National Press Club in Australia’s capital, IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said damage to oil and gas fields, refineries and pipelines across the Middle East would take some time to repair.

His comments come as market participants closely monitor threats from the U.S. and Iran over energy facilities as the sprawling regional conflict enters its fourth week.

The Iran war has severely disrupted energy trade flows through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, creating what the IEA says is the largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market. The global supply of liquefied natural gas (LNG) has also been reduced by roughly 20% since the conflict began on Feb. 28.

Birol said the fallout from the Iran war is equivalent to the two major oil crises of the 1970s and the 2022 gas crisis “put together.”

He added: “And, if I may, not only oil and gas. Some of the vital arteries of the global economy, such as petrochemicals, such as fertilizers, such as sulfur, such as helium. Their trade is all interrupted, which would have serious consequences for the global economy.”

U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday threatened to “obliterate” Iran’s power plants if Tehran did not fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours.

The narrow waterway is a key maritime corridor that connects the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Roughly 20% of global oil and gas typically passes through it.

Iran’s Parliament spokesperson Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf responded, saying that critical infrastructure and energy facilities in the Gulf region could be “irreversibly destroyed” should Iranian power plants be attacked.

Given that shipping has virtually ground to a halt in the Strait of Hormuz since the conflict began, the IEA’s Birol said the reopening of the waterway was the “single most important” solution to the global energy crisis.

He singled out Asia as being at the forefront of the Iran war energy shock and said the IEA was prepared to follow-up its historic release of 400 million barrels of oil to the market on March 11.

“If it is necessary, of course, we will do it,” Birol said.

— CNBC’s Anniek Bao contributed to this report.

The Strait of Hormuz shutdown caused by the war in Iran is jacking up fertilizer prices, hitting farmers in their pocketbooks and threatening to raise food prices.

Now, Democrats trying to win the U.S. midterm elections in November see another new opportunity to pound the affordability crisis and turn the tide after years of losses in the states that produce crops and livestock.

The Strait of Hormuz is a critical channel for fertilizer, including about 50% of global nitrogen-rich urea fertilizers, according to the Fertilizer Institute, the industry’s trade association. The strait has been effectively impassable since President Donald Trump launched the assault, which is now in its third week with no end in sight.

The closure has spiked fertilizer prices just before planting season, potentially scrambling decision-making for farmers across the U.S. And it comes on top of already low commodity prices that have lingered for years and eaten into farmers’ margins.

“We’re in uncharted territory,” Matt Frostic, a Michigan farmer who sits on the board of the National Corn Growers Association, said in an interview with CNBC. “It’s like a code red.”

Frostic said he purchased nitrogen fertilizer, critical for corn crops, in January for around $350 per ton. That same product, he said, is now closing in on $600 per ton.

The murky farm outlook also comes eight months before the midterm elections that could cost Trump control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Democrats, who are trying to win competitive seats in farm-heavy states such as Iowa, Minnesota and Nebraska, are jumping on the high fertilizer prices as a new example of the affordability issue that continues to haunt Trump and Republicans.

“There are tons of people just like me in our district who are like, I don’t get it. I don’t understand. It was already hard, and now they’re making it harder, and nobody knows why,” said Jake Johnson, a public school teacher who is running for Congress in Minnesota’s first District against incumbent Republican Rep. Brad Finstad.

“Our number one job as a campaign and what we want to talk about to every single person we talk to is we need ways to make things cheaper,” Johnson said.

The rural entreaties from Democrats come after years of bleeding support in the country’s rural, agrarian states in the middle of the country. Trump in 2024 won nearly every state in the Midwest, with exceptions in Minnesota and Illinois. He also dominated the county-by-county contest, according to the Center for Politics, winning 2,660 counties compared with former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 451, which were centered in the most populated parts of the U.S.

Turning the tide in rural America has been a longtime goal for Democrats, but has often proved elusive. In Iowa in 2018, Democrats won 3 out of the 4 congressional seats in the state. Now, Republicans control all four. But with Trump’s economic approval plummeting and Democrats leading in the generic ballot, Democrats have high hopes this year.

Johnson said farmers in particular are recoiling from Trump’s tariff campaign, which saw his White House authorize a roughly $12 billion bailout last year. The war now adds a new inflationary wrinkle.

On Thursday, more than 50 agriculture trade groups including the Farm Bureau wrote another letter to Trump, asking him to include farm aid in the forthcoming defense package.

“As the Administration considers what needs to be included in a defense supplemental package in
the coming weeks, we urge you to include much-needed market relief for America’s farmers,” the letter read.

Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., the Senate Agriculture Committee chair, said he’s working with the administration to quickly find a solution to the fertilizer issue.

Tesla is expanding ties with South Korea’s LG Energy Solution, striking a deal to buy $4.3 billion worth of battery cells for energy storage systems that will be made in Lansing, Michigan.

The plant was formerly developed for a joint venture between LG and General Motors before the automaker decided to retreat from that initiative in late-2024, selling its stake to LG as part of a pullback in the automaker’s electric vehicle investments.

While Tesla still makes most of its revenue from EVs, the company is investing in its more rapidly growing energy business, as data centers drive up electricity demand. Tesla’s Megapacks can store power produced using intermittent sources like solar or wind, or during off-peak hours, then make it available for use when demand is high.

Tesla currently sells Powerwall backup batteries for residential use with its solar installations, and much larger Megapack and Megablock systems for utility-scale power storage. Last year, revenue in the company’s energy segment increased 27% to $12.8 billion, accounting for 13% of total revenue. Total revenue dropped due to a 10% decline in the auto business.

Details of the Tesla-LG partnership were announced during an Indo-Pacific Energy Security Summit in Japan, according to a release from the U.S. Department of the Interior. The Trump administration announced a total of $56 billion in private sector commitments at the event.

A spokesman with LG Energy Solution said the company “will establish dedicated production lines at our Lansing facility to deliver on this agreement.” LG last year retooled the facility to build LFP (lithium iron phosphate) prismatic cells, later confirming a $4.3 billion deal with an unnamed company.

GM continues to have a significant presence in and around the Lansing battery plant, but the company has largely retrenched from the EV market, announcing $7.6 billion in related write-downs.

Tesla, meanwhile, expects its energy business to “have very high growth for as far into the future as we can imagine,” CEO Elon Musk said during the company’s fourth-quarter earnings call in January. Chief Financial Officer Vaibhav Taneja cautioned that the energy segment expects “margin compression” from low-cost competition and the cost of tariffs.

Tesla’s competition includes companies like BYD in China and climate-tech startups like Form, which is making iron-air batteries, and others.

WATCH: Why the EV factory boom in the U.S. south is suddenly in trouble

Countries around the world have scrambled to cope with the fallout of the energy shock from the Iran war, imposing measures from fuel export bans, loosening refining standards, and even getting workers to climb stairs instead of taking elevators.

This comes as the Iran war stretches into its third week, and despite U.S. President Donald Trump proclaiming that the U.S. has “won,” the effects of the war, especially on the energy market, continue to be felt.

On Thursday, China ordered refiners to stop refined fuel exports so as to mitigate potential domestic fuel shortages, according to Reuters.

Sources told the agency that the ban was issued by the National Development and Reform Commission, and includes shipments of gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel.

CNBC attempted to reach the NDRC for comment, but did not receive an immediate reply.

Other major countries are considering or have imposed price caps for fuel products.

On Monday, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said that Tokyo was considering steps ‌to cushion the economic blow from rising fuel costs, including curbing gasoline prices.

Takaichi was quoted by Japanese media on Thursday as saying she plans to cap pump prices at an average of 170 yen ($1.07) per liter nationwide, adding that gasoline prices could potentially hit 200 yen per liter.

Tokyo also conducted a unilateral release of crude from its own stockpiles, without waiting for coordination with other nations.

Japan has been particularly badly hit by the war in Iran, as the world’s third-largest economy needs to import almost all of its energy needs.

South Korean President Lee Jae Myung said on Friday the government implemented a petroleum price ceiling.

“We have decided to set a clear price cap on supply prices to curb domestic fuel prices, which are fluctuating wildly due to the unstable international situation,” Lee said.

India also had to make some tough choices. The country told oil refineries to prioritize supplying liquified petroleum gas to the 330 million households that use it as a primary cooking fuel, over 3 million businesses that use commercial LPG cylinders.

Work-from-home orders came back in some countries after years of companies trying to coax workers back to offices after the pandemic, with Vietnam and Thailand reportedly getting employees to work remotely.

Thailand went a step further, ordering civil servants to take the stairs instead of elevators, reducing their reliance on air conditioning and telling government employees to wear short-sleeved shirts rather than suits.

The Philippines and Pakistan both instituted four-day work weeks for government workers, and Bangladesh has even shifted its calendar, bringing forward its Eid-al-fitr holiday, allowing universities to close early in a bid to save fuel.

Tesla is suing California’s Department of Motor Vehicles to reverse a ruling that found the automaker violated the law by falsely promoting its cars’ self-driving capabilities.

The suit comes two months after the state’s Office of Administrative Hearings determined that Tesla engaged in false advertising, and said the DMV could temporarily suspend the company’s licenses to manufacture or sell cars in the state.

The DMV instead asked Tesla to clean up its marketing language. By Feb. 17, the agency said Tesla had done so appropriately and no license suspension would be required.

But Tesla, which is banking much of its future on robotaxis, wants the DMV to go further. In their complaint, dated Feb. 13, attorneys for the automaker alleged that the agency “wrongfully and baselessly” labeled Tesla a “false advertiser” for its prior use of the terms “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving.”

Tesla now uses the brand name “Full Self-Driving (Supervised)” to describe its partially automated driver assistance system, and it sells it only on a subscription basis. In the past, Tesla packaged partially automated driving features in Autopilot standard, Enhanced Autopilot and Full Self-Driving tiers, and it offered some customers “beta” or early access to new features, which are not yet fully debugged. It sold the systems for a single up-front fee.

The DMV did not immediately provide a comment. Tesla didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has long promised investors and customers that the company’s cars would be upgraded over time via over-the-air software updates that would turn them into robotaxi-ready vehicles. That hasn’t happened yet, though the company’s systems have become more sophisticated.

After sales of its electric vehicles declined last year, Tesla’s future success hinges largely on its ability to deliver driverless systems that make their cars safe to use without a human at the wheel, ready to steer or brake at any time.

Tesla is now testing a handful of automated vehicles in its Robotaxi pilot in Austin, Texas. Last week, the company announced the start of production of its forthcoming Cybercab, a two-seater designed without a steering wheel or pedals, in Texas.

Tesla has for years presented its systems as if they were safe to use without an attentive driver. For example, in 2018 Musk appeared on CBS’ “60 Minutes” driving in a Model 3 with Autopilot engaged and correspondent Lesley Stahl in the passenger seat. Musk kept his hands off the wheel and told Stahl that he was “not doing anything,” while the car was driving itself.

However, Tesla’s owners manuals specify that drivers should not use FSD (Supervised) features without paying attention to the road.

In filings with California’s OAH, lawyers for the state’s DMV wrote that Tesla’s marketing for “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” falsely suggested the cars are capable of operating autonomously.

Tesla’s attorneys alleged that the DMV never proved consumers in the state had been confused about whether its cars were safe to drive without a human at the wheel.

When Tesla used those brand names, the company’s attorneys argued, “It was impossible to buy a Tesla equipped with either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving Capability, or to use any of their associated features, without seeing clear and repeated statements that they do not make the vehicle autonomous.”

In a separate class-action lawsuit that’s winding its way through California courts, customers who purchased FSD expecting their cars to be upgraded into robotaxi-ready vehicles over time are asking for their money back.

Tesla was also held partly liable for a fatal crash involving Autopilot. During the trial, the Tesla owner said he had dropped his phone while driving and scrambled to pick it up, but thought the car’s Enhanced Autopilot system would brake if an obstacle was in the way. The suit resulted in a $243 million verdict against Tesla to be paid to the family of the deceased and an injured survivor of the crash.

WATCH: Nancy Tengler says Tesla is still a generational opportunity