All major asset classes were still showing positive year-to-date returns as of Friday’s close. However, market conditions can shift dramatically over a single weekend.
The ongoing joint U.S.–Israel military operation against Iran is expected to persist for days, potentially even weeks. While the longer-term market impact remains uncertain, it is reasonable to expect that the prevailing bullish sentiment — already exhibiting signs of exhaustion in certain segments — may become another casualty of escalating tensions in the Middle East.
Through February 27, foreign equities and commodities had emerged as the top performers in 2026, based on ETF benchmarks. Yet assumptions that seemed firmly grounded just a week ago now appear outdated in light of rapidly evolving geopolitical developments.
The central issue now is the degree of vulnerability facing the global economy. In short, the longer the conflict persists, the greater the risk of economic blowback. At present, the likelihood of a swift resolution appears limited, particularly as the war expands across the Middle East, including Iran’s strike on Saudi oil infrastructure.
According to Torbjorn Soltvedt, an analyst at Verisk Maplecroft, the attack on Ras Tanura Refinery represents a meaningful escalation, placing Gulf energy infrastructure directly in Iran’s crosshairs. He noted that a prolonged period of instability is likely, as Iran attempts to inflict economic pressure by targeting tankers, regional energy facilities, trade corridors, and U.S. security partners.
Should the conflict drag on and oil prices remain elevated, the global economic impact could be substantial. In 2025, approximately 31% of all seaborne crude shipments passed through the Strait of Hormuz, according to analytics firm Kpler. Given Iran’s strategic positioning, it retains the capacity to disrupt — if not completely halt — shipping flows through this critical chokepoint.
Norbert Rücker, head of economics at Julius Baer, emphasized that the broader economic consequences hinge largely on the uninterrupted flow of oil and gas through Hormuz. The gravest risk, he suggested, is not necessarily a full closure, but significant damage to key regional energy infrastructure.
Kpler further cautioned that any meaningful shutdown — or even a prolonged de facto closure driven by insurers withdrawing coverage — would likely trigger simultaneous supply shocks across multiple commodity markets.
How long the conflict will endure remains highly uncertain. On Sunday, Donald Trump indicated that the military campaign could last “four weeks or less,” though such timelines in geopolitical conflicts are often fluid.
Energy markets are already reacting. Crude prices are climbing, with the international Brent Crude benchmark trading near $78 per barrel this morning — its highest level in more than a year.
The Trump administration’s stated objective of pursuing regime change in Iran points to the possibility of a protracted conflict. On Sunday, Donald Trump urged “Iranian patriots who yearn for freedom” to seize the moment and reclaim their country — rhetoric that signals ambitions extending beyond limited military strikes.
However, achieving regime change would be extraordinarily difficult. Although Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, was reportedly killed in Saturday’s airstrikes, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps remains a formidable power center. The Revolutionary Guard — Iran’s dominant military institution with vast economic holdings that help finance its operations — has likely prepared for sustained confrontation following years of tensions and prior strikes by the U.S. and Israel. Airpower alone is unlikely to dismantle what amounts to the regime’s praetorian guard.
According to Jonathan Panikoff, now affiliated with the Atlantic Council, the decisive factor will ultimately be internal dynamics. Once U.S. and Israeli strikes subside, any movement to end the regime would depend on whether rank-and-file security forces stand aside or align with popular unrest. Otherwise, those elements of the regime that retain control of weapons are likely to use force to preserve power.
Regime change in Iran is currently viewed as only moderately probable. Betting markets on Polymarket assign roughly a 42% likelihood to that outcome. The takeaway: expectations for a swift resolution appear limited, with the conflict likely to persist until one side concedes strategic ground.
However, the longer-term outlook may look different. Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at Chatham House, argues that over time the survival of the Islamic Republic in its current form is doubtful. In his assessment, the regime as it exists today may ultimately prove unsustainable.
If that scenario unfolds, the central question shifts to succession: what replaces the current leadership — and whether any transition ushers in greater stability or instead fuels further instability within Iran and across the broader Middle East.
Sources: James Picerno
THE ETERNAL SOVEREIGN 
Leave a comment