Initially, at least, energy markets appeared to be responding to the latest conflict as Trump officials suggested they would. But experts cautioned that a prolonged war could quickly become far more economically damaging — and less predictable.

The weekend’s strikes, and Iran’s missile and drone volleys in response, have already triggered some of the largest disruptions to global oil and gas markets in years. The flow of oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping channel off Iran’s southern coast, has slowed sharply. Qatar on Monday halted production of liquefied natural gas after Iran attacked two of its gas sites. And Saudi Arabia suspended operations at its biggest oil refinery after a fire broke out during a drone strike.

Oil prices have risen, but they remain far from levels that could cripple the global economy. On Tuesday, international prices had climbed to around $84 per barrel, which is roughly 17 percent higher than they were last week but still left oil trading slightly below its peaks in 2024.

“It is pretty shocking,” said Jason Bordoff, the founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. “A Middle East conflict like we’re seeing now has long been perceived as the mother of all oil risks.” Yet, he added, oil prices “are still at levels that historically are not all that high.”

Before the war began, the world had plenty of excess oil. And one big reason is that, over the past decade, the United States has become the world’s biggest crude producer, thanks to major advances in fracking and other drilling techniques. Those advances have also made the United States the world’s biggest exporter of natural gas.

“The shale revolution has put a lot more oil on the market and does give us more wiggle room to deal with a shock like this,” Mr. Bordoff said.

That surge in U.S. production represents a drastic shift since the 1990s and early 2000s, when the United States was a major importer of oil from countries like Saudi Arabia, and politicians were deeply concerned that conflicts in the Middle East could spike prices.

Few have embraced the change like Mr. Trump. The rise in oil and gas production predated even his first administration, but he has urged companies to “drill, baby, drill.” Officials have also talked much more openly in Mr. Trump’s second term about how America’s oil and gas dominance allows the country to throw its weight around.

“The U.S., we don’t get any oil anymore out of the Strait of Hormuz,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in October, explaining why the Trump administration was willing to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities last summer. “And so, then you’re in a position where now the military power, tied with the economic power of tariffs, tied with the courage to be able to actually use that, you’ve got the degrees of freedom.”

Richard Goldberg, who previously served as a senior counselor for Mr. Trump’s National Energy Dominance Council, said past administrations have been deterred from direct military action against Iran for fear of destabilizing energy markets.

The U.S. transition from oil importer to exporter has changed that dynamic, Mr. Goldberg said. “It is not to say that it makes military conflict or aggression more likely, but it is to say that we have an ability to mitigate a risk and entertain an option that we may not have done before,” he said.

But experts said the administration’s sanguine stance could change quickly if the war lasts longer or spreads farther than expected.

Oil prices are largely set on a global market, which means Americans could still pay more at the pump if crude prices rise elsewhere in the world. On Tuesday morning, average U.S. gasoline prices had jumped about 11 cents, to $3.11 a gallon, according to AAA.

One of the biggest risks involves the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow shipping route that typically carries about one-fifth of the world’s oil, roughly 20 million barrels per day.

Prolonged shipping disruptions in the strait could take 7 to 8 million barrels or more of crude oil off the market per day, the research firm S&P Global Energy estimated. That would be more than was initially at risk when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.

“The duration of the war is critical,” said Jim Burkhard, global head of crude oil research at S&P Global Energy.

If the Strait of Hormuz stays closed for a few weeks, prices could rise past $100 per barrel and cause pain for American consumers, said Robert McNally, the president of the research firm Rapidan Energy Group.

“There will be grave concerns about the economy, and then I think the administration is going to come under pressure to end this conflict,” he said.

It isn’t clear how long the conflict will last. Mr. Trump said Monday that the United States would continue striking as long as necessary. “Whatever the time is, it’s OK, whatever it takes,” he said, adding, “Right from the beginning, we projected four to five weeks, but we have the capability to go far longer than that. We’ll do it.”

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, credited the Trump administration policies with “the highest production of U.S. oil ever.” In a statement, she added that “the Departments of Energy and Treasury will continue to monitor oil markets and do everything possible to keep prices stable.”

Broadly, the U.S. economy is less sensitive to swings in the price of crude than it was during the oil shocks of the 1970s, in part because cars and other industries have gotten more fuel-efficient, said Ed Hirs, an energy economist at the University of Houston. Still, some places could see significant impacts. Electricity prices in New England, for instance, are particularly affected by the price of natural gas and liquefied natural gas.

At the same time, any increases in crude prices could be a boon for oil producers in states like Texas and North Dakota, Mr. Hirs said.

Other regions, including Europe and Asia, could face even greater risks from the conflict. After Qatar said it had been forced to halt production of liquefied natural gas on Monday, regional gas benchmark prices in Europe surged by nearly 50 percent. Qatar supplies roughly one-fifth of the world’s liquefied natural gas, a form of gas that has been cooled for shipment, with most of its exports going to China, India, South Korea and Japan. A prolonged halt in these shipments could force buyers in Asia to compete with Europe for gas from the United States, Australia and elsewhere.

Clayton Seigle, a senior fellow at Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington research organization, said he is worried that policymakers and even market leaders have been overly optimistic about the economic risks.

“Maybe they know something that we egghead analysts haven’t figured out yet of how energy security is somehow indemnified, or how we’re not going to get worst-case scenarios,” he said.

The war could have other unexpected consequences for the Trump administration’s energy agenda, some environmentalists said. Over that past year, top officials have been trying to persuade other countries to buy more American oil and gas and abandon plans to tackle climate change or shift to renewable energy sources like wind or solar power.

But a conflict that drives oil and gas prices up could push countries to reduce their reliance on those fossil fuels for energy security reasons.

“What’s not spiking today is the cost of wind and solar,” said Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group. “National security hawks should be clean energy hawks.”