U.S. President Donald Trump appears to have set his eyes on Greenland again while venting frustration at NATO, as the diplomatic fallout from Iran war exposes rifts in Washington’s ties with the security alliance.

In a Truth Social post Wednesday evening stateside, Trump said that “NATO WASN’T THERE WHEN WE NEEDED THEM, AND THEY WON’T BE THERE IF WE NEED THEM AGAIN. REMEMBER GREENLAND, THAT BIG, POORLY RUN, PIECE OF ICE!!!”

The latest broadside comes after Trump announced a 2-week ceasefire after more than a month of fighting with Iran. Trump has repeatedly criticized NATO members for not joining the war effort in Iran, saying his call for action was “a great test,” while threatening to pull out of the alliance.

Trump has taken aim at NATO and Greenland in recent days. “It all began with, if you want to know the truth, Greenland,” Trump told reporters at a White House press conference Monday. “We want Greenland. They don’t want to give it to us. And I said, ‘bye, bye.'”

U.S. relations with European allies have frayed after Trump threatened tariffs on European countries and signaled military action to acquire Greenland, a Danish autonomous territory. In January, Trump said he and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte had reached “the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland.”

The Iran war has brought fresh tensions in the diplomatic ties, as several NATO members have resisted supporting the U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran, denying American military aircraft use of their airspace and declining to contribute naval forces to efforts aimed at reopening the Strait of Hormuz to energy shipping.

Trump’s comments Wednesday followed a meeting with Rutte at the White House earlier in the day, with spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt reportedly saying that NATO had “turned their backs on the American people.”

Rutte acknowledged the friction, in an interview with CNN following the meeting, saying that “He is clearly disappointed with many NATO allies, and I can see his point.”

Last week, Trump called NATO a “paper tiger” and said he was “absolutely” considering to withdraw from the 32-member alliance, arguing that European members have relied on U.S. security guarantees while offering inadequate support when Washington needed them most.

“Trump can’t attack the alliance forever without making it hollow,” said Michael Feller, chief strategist at Geopolitical Strategy, as Iran was “testing unity” by offering Spain and Turkey waivers to get their oil via the Strait of Hormuz.

Alongside Trump’s remarks, the Pentagon timed leaks on new military activities in Greenland, Feller said referring to a New York Times report earlier this month on the Pentagon looking for military expansion in Greenland. The U.S. was in talks with Denmark for access to three additional bases in Greenland, in what would be the first U.S. expansion there in decades, according to the report.

“This doesn’t augur invasion, but is likely designed to intimidate,” Feller said.

Meanwhile, less than 24 hours into the truce with Iran, the country’s parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said that Washington had violated the terms of the ceasefire deal.

Israel reportedly launched its heaviest strikes yet on Lebanon, killing hundreds of people and drawing a threat from Iran, saying that it would be “unreasonable” to proceed with peace talks with the U.S., underscoring the fragility of the ceasefire agreement.

Oil prices rose Thursday after Iran accused the United States of violating elements of a two-week ceasefire agreement, raising concerns that tensions could escalate again and disrupt energy supplies.

International benchmark Brent crude futures for June delivery rose 2.52% to $97.14 while the U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude futures for May added 2.72% to $96.96 per barrel.

The moves come a day after U.S. crude oil posted their biggest single-day drop since 2020.

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, said on Wednesday that Washington had breached the terms of the ceasefire deal.

“The deep historical distrust we hold toward the United States stems from its repeated violations of all forms of commitments — a pattern that has regrettably been repeated once again,” Ghalibaf said in a statement posted on social media.

Ghalibaf said three elements of Iran’s 10-point truce proposal had been violated: Israel’s ongoing strikes in Lebanon, a drone entering Iranian airspace, and what he described as the denial of Tehran’s right to enrich uranium.

U.S. President Donald Trump had said Tuesday stateside that Iran’s proposal could serve as a basis for talks.

Vice President JD Vance responded to the allegations while on a trip to Hungary on Wednesday. “Ceasefires are always messy,” Vance said, addressing the reported drone incident in Iranian airspace. He added that Washington maintains Iran should not be allowed to enrich uranium, and said any ceasefire covering Lebanon had not been included in the agreement.

Now that oil is below $100 per barrel, refiners should “use this window to resume more opportunistic buying,” said Rystad Energy’s vice president of commodity markets, Janiv Shah. 

“However, the transition period itself could present the next challenge. If refiners delay purchases in anticipation of further price declines while physical flows remain constrained, product tightness could worsen even amid de-escalation,” he added.

Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y., on Wednesday called for a federal probe into suspicious trading activity in oil and equity futures markets just before President Donald Trump’s announcement of a five-day delay in attacks on Iran’s energy infrastructure in March.

In a letter to Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins and Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chair Michael Selig, first reported by CNBC, Torres cites reports on a series of irregular and well-timed trades in the minutes ahead of Trump calling a pause on hostilities.

“What kind of trader would make a massive trade at 6:49 a.m., 15 minutes before a market-moving presidential announcement with billions of dollars at stake and without a hedge?” Torres said in an interview on Wednesday. “The only plausible answer to that question is an insider trader. Any other alternative is a statistical impossibility.”

More than $500 million in crude oil futures trades were made in the roughly 15 minutes before Trump announced the halt in strikes via Truth Social, Reuters reported last month. The New Yorker reported that in the immediate lead-up to Trump’s announcement, there was an abnormal surge in futures trading volume predicting a decline in oil prices and a rebound in equity markets.

Torres in his letter said the “occurrence may constitute one of the largest instances of insider trading in history,” and called on the SEC to open a formal investigation and, in consultation with the CFTC, obtain comprehensive trading records.

A spokesperson for the SEC on Wednesday declined to comment. The CFTC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The SEC tapped David Woodcock, a Gibson Dunn lawyer and former agency official, to be its next enforcement director, Reuters reported Wednesday.

“I have a lack of confidence in our market regulators,” Torres said in the interview. “But we have no choice but to agitate for accountability. We cannot allow the SEC and the CFTC to turn a blind eye to what may be the largest case of insider trading in history.”

This is the second time in several months that Torres — a member of the House Financial Services Committee — has raised the issue of potential insider trading around Trump administration actions.

Torres introduced legislation in January after an account on the prediction market platform Polymarket placed a well-time bet in the hours leading up to the ouster Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, earning a $400,000 payout.

The legislation would bar federal elected officials, congressional staff, political appointees and executive branch officials from buying or selling event contracts based on government policy, action or political outcomes if they have material nonpublic information. It has 42 Democratic cosponsors but is unlikely to pass in the Republican-controlled House.

Congressional Democrats in recent months have repeatedly raised concerns about the appearance of insider trading within the Trump administration, particularly on prediction markets. A group of House Democrats on Monday sent a letter to Selig questioning the CFTC’s role in regulating event bets placed on offshore prediction markets like Polymarket.

“Recent high-profile instances of alleged insider trading on prediction market platforms relating to U.S. government actions — including the military’s intervention in Venezuela and our recent attack on Iran —have fueled concern that the CFTC does not have adequate control over these fast-growing markets,” wrote the group, led by Reps. Seth Moulton and Jim McGovern, Massachusetts Democrats.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez on Wednesday joined a chorus of world leaders welcoming the announcement of a U.S.-Iran ceasefire but issued a thinly veiled swipe at the Trump administration for having initiated the hostilities.

“Ceasefires are always good news. Especially if they lead to a just and lasting peace. But this momentary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, the destruction, and the lives lost,” Sánchez said in a social media post, according to a translation.

“The Government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they show up with a bucket.”

Sánchez, who has emerged as one of the European Union’s leading critics of U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran, called for “diplomacy, international law and PEACE” to prevail.

His comments come shortly after the U.S. president said he had agreed to suspend attacks on Iranian infrastructure for two weeks, sparking a broad-based relief rally across risk assets.

Trump had earlier threatened that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again” if no deal was struck by his Tuesday deadline.

Iranian officials said the temporary truce meant safe passage through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz would be “possible,” subject to coordination with its armed forces and “technical limitations” — caveats that may give Tehran some room to define compliance on its own terms.

World leaders welcomed the ceasefire, although analysts characterized the agreement as fragile and warned that a substantial lack of trust on both sides will likely complicate the path to lasting peace.

Sánchez has repeatedly raised the ire of the White House since the U.S. and Israel first launched strikes against Iran on Feb. 28.

Spain’s government refused to allow two jointly operated bases in its territory from being used in U.S. strikes against Iran, before later closing its airspace to U.S. aircraft involved in attacks as it doubled down on its anti-war stance.

In response, Trump renewed his criticism of Spain’s defense spending and threatened to sever all trade ties with the southern European country.

Alongside Spain’s prime minister, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen welcomed the two-week ceasefire, saying it brings “much needed de-escalation.”

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas described the deal as “a step back from the brink after weeks of escalation.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer also welcomed the ceasefire agreement, saying it “will bring a moment of relief to the region and the world.”

Israel, for its part, backed the U.S. ceasefire with Iran but said the agreement doesn’t cover fighting against Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, India, China and Japan all issued statements welcoming the diplomatic breakthrough, which was brokered by Pakistan.

Further talks to explore a comprehensive end to the Middle East crisis are scheduled to take place in Islamabad on Friday.

— CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger contributed to this report.

Governments around the world are making efforts to crack down on teen social media use amid mounting evidence of potential harms, but critics argue blanket bans are an ineffective quick fix.

Australia became the first country to enforce a sweeping social media ban for under-16s in December, requiring platforms like Meta’s Instagram, ByteDance’s TikTok, Alphabet’s YouTube, Elon Musk’s X, and Reddit to implement age verification measures or face penalties.

Several European countries are now looking to follow Australia’s lead, with the U.K., Spain, France, and Austria drafting their own proposals. Although a national ban in the U.S. looks unlikely, state-level legislation is underway.

It comes after Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and Threads, faced two separate defeats in trials related to child safety and social media harms in March.

A Santa Fe jury found Meta misled users about child safety on its apps. The next day, a Los Angeles jury ruled that Meta and YouTube designed platform features that contributed to a plaintiff’s mental health harms.

These developments are set to “unleash a lot more legislation,” Sonia Livingstone, social psychology professor and director of the London School of Economics’ Digital Futures for Children center, told CNBC.

However, Livingstone said a social media ban for teens is a slapdash solution from governments that have failed to properly police tech giants for years.

“I think the argument for a ban is an admission of failure that we cannot regulate companies, so we can only restrict children,” she said, explaining that the U.S. and Europe already have a lot of legislation in the books that isn’t being enforced.

“When are governments really going to enforce, raise the stakes on fines, ban the companies if necessary for not complying,” she added.

Experts argue the sector has for too long escaped accountability and the rigid requirements faced by other industries.

“[Governments] should be implementing the law [and] big tech companies should be facing a slew of regulatory interventions that forbid a whole series of practices that they currently do,” Livingstone said.

She highlighted the U.K.’s Online Safety Act, which “requires safety by design” — this means features such as Snapchat’s “Quick Add” that invite teens to befriend others should be stopped, according to Livingstone.

Livingstone believes that a blanket ban wouldn’t even be under discussion if social media companies had undergone appropriate premarket testing to establish if their features are safe for their target audience.

“There are lots of areas where we have a well functioning market that requires testing to establish it meets the standards…[before products] can go into the market,” she said. “If we did that for AI and for social media, we would be in a whole different place and we’d not be having to talk about banning children from anything.”

Josh Golin, executive director at Boston-based non-profit Fairplay for Kids, told CNBC that he’d like to see “privacy and safety by design legislation rather than blanket bans” across the U.S.

This includes passing the Children and Teen Online Privacy Protection Act to put a stop to personal data-driven advertising towards children, so there’s “less financial incentive for social media companies to target and addict kids.”

Golin added that passing the Senate’s version of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is also key to ensuring platforms are held legally responsible for design features that can cause addiction or other harms.

He added that Meta has already successfully lobbied to stop KOSA even though it passed the Senate in 2024. But, if it continues to block legislation further, Golin thinks this could see further pressure “line up behind bans because addictive and unsafe is not OK.”

Many Australian teens flouted the social media ban when it first came into force in December. A BBC report found that downloads of VPNs, which hide users’ locations to avoid country-specific restrictions, increased before the ban.

Additionally, downloads of some apps that weren’t yet affected such as Lemon8, Yope and Discord also surged in the days after the law came into effect, per the report.

“I think it [a ban] certainly gets rid of all the harmful aspects, but it gets rid of the good ones too and I’m just not yet sure if that’s proportionate,” Nash added.

A temporary U.S.-Iran ceasefire sparked a broad relief rally across assets on Wednesday, but experts warned that any deal concerning lasting peace will be complicated by a major trust deficit.

The ceasefire came following hastened diplomatic efforts led by Pakistan and just hours before Trump’s threatened deadline for wiping out the entire Iranian civilization, briefly pulling the region back from the brink of a massive military bombardment.

Oil prices cooled to below $100 per barrel following the ceasefire announcement, but remain far above the pre-war levels of around $70 per barrel.

While U.S. President Donald Trump said the two-week ceasefire was contingent on the “complete, immediate, and safe opening” of the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian officials stated that safe passage through the strait would be “possible,” subject to coordination with its armed forces and “technical limitations” — caveats that may give Iran some room to define compliance on its own terms.

“This is a problem that could derail the ceasefire later this year,” said Matt Gertken, chief geopolitical strategist at BCA Research, warning that the coordination requirement remains a risky ambiguity in both sides’ statements so far.

Trump may temporarily accept Iran as a gatekeeper — with U.S. midterm elections approaching and gasoline prices sharply higher than before the war — but after the election, the U.S. national security establishment will start to demand a more permanent solution,” said Gertken. “Fighting will ignite later this year, if not later this month.”

Tehran also said that its armed forces will cease defensive operations if attacks against Iran are halted. After the ceasefire came into effect at 8 p.m. ET Tuesday, missiles were still launched from Iran towards Israel and several Gulf states.

The reprieve on Tuesday would allow some time for the two sides to reach a longer agreement to end the six-week-old war, which has killed thousands of people and sparked a global energy crisis, with their delegations expected to meet in Islamabad on Friday.

Iran is reportedly finalizing a joint maritime protocol with Oman to institutionalize coordinated management of tanker traffic through the strait, which could embed Iranian authority over the crucial energy artery into a standing bilateral agreement.

Israel agreed to suspend strikes but urged Washington to press for deeper Iranian concessions, including the surrender of enriched uranium stockpiles. In its 10-point terms, Iran requested Washington to accept its uranium enrichment program and the lifting of all sanctions.

The ceasefire will likely hold in the near term, given the economic costs accruing to the global economy from six weeks of conflict, said Michael Langham, emerging markets economist at Aberdeen Investments. “Parties with vested interest in stopping the conflict and reopening the strait will double down on efforts to find a compromise,” he said.

If the truce holds and the strait reopens, the global economic damage should prove manageable, Langham added. Central banks could broadly resume their pre-conflict paths — and attention may shift from inflation to growth, if commodity prices normalize quickly, he added.

The ceasefire sparked a relief rally in markets amid repricing for a de-escalation in the conflict, but investors will watch for something more durable than a two-week pause, Geoff Yu, senior market strategist at BNY, said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia” on Wednesday.

“What the market is going to start pricing ahead is a first step towards further de-escalation and perhaps something more permanent,” he said, flagging that the disruption has extended beyond crude oil to commodities such as helium, critical to semiconductor manufacturers in South Korea and Taiwan.

The surging price of jet fuel isn’t the airline industry’s only problem. Now, it’s whether it will have enough.

Since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, the price of jet fuel in the U.S. has nearly doubled, going from $2.50 a gallon on Feb. 27 to $4.88 a gallon on April 2, with the increases even sharper in other regions. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz is choking off supplies of both crude and refined products like jet fuel, further driving up the price.

That’s forcing airlines to consider cutting flights, especially overseas.

Carsten Spohr, CEO of Germany’s Deutsche Lufthansa, told employees in a webcast last week that the carrier is assigning teams to come up with contingency plans because of the war in the Middle East, including for drops in demand or a lack of jet fuel, a spokesman said. Those plans could include grounding some of its aircraft.

The U.S. produces a lot of jet fuel and isn’t as exposed as other regions like Europe and parts of Asia are in comparison. But aircraft fill up locally, so some U.S. airlines could face shortages on international trips.

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby told reporters late last month that the carrier, which has the most service to Asia among U.S. airlines, would have to cut back its flights there. He also said it’s “not impossible” that airlines collectively would have to reduce service in that region.

He noted that as the price of jet fuel goes up, it could be more acute in parts of the U.S. that aren’t as connected by pipelines.

“There’s not enough refining capacity, and so fuel price prior to this and going forward is more susceptible to supply weakness on the West Coast than anywhere else in the country,” he said.

Kirby told employees earlier in March that the airline is preparing for oil to stay above $100 a barrel through 2027 and is pruning some of its flights in the near term.

“To be clear, nothing changes about our longer-term plans for aircraft deliveries or total capacity for 2027 and beyond, but there’s no point in burning cash in the near term on flying that just can’t absorb these fuel costs,” he said in a March 20 message to employees.

Airlines overall are pruning some flights for the coming months, though they often adjust schedules throughout the year to match demand, aircraft availability or other complications.

Domestic capacity in the second quarter for U.S. carriers is up 2.1%, down from previous plans of 2.3% growth, while total capacity is set to rise 1.1%, down from 2.4% on the week ended March 20, according to a Monday report from UBS.

“We expect more capacity cuts in the coming weeks,” UBS said.

So far, airline executives have said that travel demand is strong, but the fuel strains and price spikes are a headache for carriers and passengers alike as the peak summer travel season approaches.

Fuel is generally airlines’ biggest expense after labor, and carriers are already raising airfare and fees like for checked luggage to make up for the added cost.

Investors will be listening for more insights into how the jet fuel spike could affect the industry as airline earnings kick off Wednesday with Delta Air Lines. That carrier owns a refinery, so it could benefit from jet fuel sales.

Delta Air Lines and Southwest Airlines are raising checked bag fees by $10 for tickets, the third and fourth major U.S. carriers to increase prices as the industry grapples with a jump in jet fuel expenses this year.

“As part of an ongoing analysis of the business and against the evolving global backdrop, Southwest Airlines is increasing its fees on first and second checked bags by $10, effective on all reservations ticketed or voluntarily changed on or after April 9, 2026,” Southwest said in a statement.

Southwest Airlines ended its policy allowing all customers to check two bags for free less than a year ago.

The changes would bring the fee to check a first piece of luggage to $45, and $55 for a second bag on each airline. Delta’s changes take effect with bookings starting Wednesday and don’t apply to long-haul international travel but domestic flights and shorter flights abroad.

“These updates are part of Delta’s ongoing review of pricing across its business and reflect the impact of evolving global conditions and industry dynamics,” the airline said in a statement Tuesday.

A third bag on Delta would cost $200 to check.

Last week, United Airlines and JetBlue Airways increased their checked bag fees. Other carriers often follow such pricing moves.

Jet fuel in major U.S. cities was going for $4.69 a gallon on Monday, according to Airlines for America, citing Argus data, up nearly 88% since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28. The key Strait of Hormuz shipping channel has remained effectively closed over the past month, choking off global crude and refined fuel supplies.

Delta reports first-quarter results before the market opens on Wednesday, and investors are likely to question executives on how well they are covering the surge in fuel, airlines’ biggest expense after labor. Analysts have pointed to strong demand as a salve for high fuel, but it’s not clear that carriers will be able to cover the entirety of the fuel price run-up.

Danone’s CEO told CNBC that inflationary pressures from the Iran war may force the company to consider price hikes as the outlook for conflict in the Middle East remains highly uncertain.

When asked if the company would be raising prices, CEO Antoine de Saint-Affrique said, “we are not there yet.”

“Nobody knows when [the war] is going to stop, and depending how the next two to four weeks are going to evolve, the outcome from a macroeconomic standpoint, is going to be very, very different,” he told CNBC’s Charlotte Reed.

“If it lasts for long enough, it will have an impact,” he added.

His comments come as companies increasingly take stock of how the war may impact their operations and cost base. 

The conflict in the Middle East has now entered its sixth week, with U.S. President Donald Trump turning up the tone on Iran over the weekend to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. 

The president on Monday said Iran has until 8 p.m. Eastern time to reopen the strategically important strait where normally a fifth of global oil supply passes through.  

The effective closure of the narrow passage has caused not only surging energy prices but also soaring fertilizer and shipping costs. 

The Head of the International Monetary Fund Kristalina Georgieva warned Monday that even if the conflict resolves soon, the Iran war will inevitably lead to higher inflation and weaker growth.

Earlier this month, Britain’s Food and Drink Federation (FDF) forecasted food inflation of at least 9% by the end of the year, revised upwards from an estimated 3.2% previously. That would be the highest annual food and non-alcoholic drink inflation since 2023. 

“Given the fast-changing nature of the situation, this revision is based on assumptions that the Strait of Hormuz opens to cargo traffic within the next two-three weeks and the majority of key facilities, such as oil, gas and fertiliser sites, return to normal within a year,” the FDF said on April 1. 

“If it lasts for long enough, it will have an impact,” de Saint-Affrique said. 

Danone reported a roughly 2.1% overall price increase in the fourth quarter, while volume-led growth stood at 2.5%. 

The company is betting it can capitalize on its healthy brands to remain relevant as food brands also face increasing competition from cheaper private labels that offer grocers higher margins. In March, it announced it would buy protein shake maker Huel for an undisclosed sum to optimize its position in the fast-growing nutrition space. 

Retailers have also warned that they can only absorb increased costs for so long before passing them on to their customers.

British retailer Next said late last month that it had accounted for £15 million ($20 million) of additional costs likely to arise from the Middle East conflict, such as fuel and air freight, assuming the disruption lasts for three months.

“Beyond the next three months, if we see these costs persist, then we will begin to pass costs through as higher pricing,” Next said.