Tensions in the Middle East escalated sharply over the weekend after the United States launched coordinated strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities. The military action, ordered by President Donald Trump, marked a turning point in the ongoing US–Iran–Israel standoff.
Markets, global diplomacy, and military alliances are now in flux, and many question whether this event could evolve into something larger.
While Iran has promised retaliation, attention is shifting to how major powers like China and Russia might respond. The risk of wider conflict is rising, and with it comes uncertainty across financial and digital asset markets.
The Military Operation and the Growing Risk of a Multipolar Confrontation
In the early hours of Saturday, June 22, the US Air Force executed a carefully planned strike targeting Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites.
The Pentagon later confirmed that B-2 stealth bombers dropped deep-penetration bombs on the facilities, while Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched from submarines in the Gulf.
President Trump claimed the operation delivered “monumental damage,” though military analysts are still evaluating how much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was disabled.
Iranian authorities responded by activating air defences over major cities, including Tehran and Karaj. According to Israeli officials, at least one Iranian missile was launched toward Israel but was intercepted.
Meanwhile, mass protests broke out in Iran’s capital, and calls for a military response grew louder among Iranian lawmakers and clerics.
The country’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has yet to speak publicly, but senior diplomats have warned that Iran’s armed forces will determine the scope and timing of their response.
At the United Nations, emergency discussions were held following Iran’s formal complaint against both the United States and Israel.
Iran’s ambassador stated that the strikes were acts of aggression and hinted that the country may reconsider its membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Domestically, Iran’s parliament has backed military escalation, and some figures have floated the possibility of closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil shipping route.
Outside the region, reactions varied. China, which is Iran’s top oil customer, condemned the strikes and urged restraint. Russia also voiced concern and criticised Washington’s decision, though neither country signalled military involvement.
China’s concern is partly driven by the Strait of Hormuz, which handles a fifth of the world’s oil supply. Any disruption there could cause ripple effects throughout Asia, particularly for countries like India and Japan, which also rely on that corridor for energy imports.
Western allies have largely supported the United States, though some urged caution. The United Kingdom described the strikes as targeted military action, while Australia emphasised the importance of preventing nuclear proliferation.
France and Japan expressed concern over escalation and called for dialogue, while Gulf countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia warned that further conflict would destabilise the region. The potential for a broader confrontation is now a central concern for international observers.
While there is no formal military coalition against the United States, growing alignment between Iran, China, and Russia in terms of trade, energy, and security raises questions about how global alliances may shift in response to this crisis.
Global Market Fallout and Crypto’s Position in an Unstable World
The financial fallout began almost immediately. On Sunday night, oil prices surged, with Brent crude briefly climbing above $80 per barrel before retreating slightly. The initial reaction was driven by fears that Iran could act on its threat to block the Strait of Hormuz.
Stock markets across Asia opened in negative territory, and European futures also pointed to a cautious start. US stock futures showed declines across major indices, including the Dow Jones and Nasdaq.
The cryptocurrency market, often seen as an alternative to traditional finance, was not spared. Bitcoin dropped below $100,000 within hours of the strikes, reflecting broader investor anxiety, with a huge selling pressure happening.
Ethereum and other major tokens also experienced declines, and trading volumes spiked as holders rushed to exit positions. According to data from CoinGlass, more than $1 billion in crypto positions were liquidated over 24 hours, with over 95% of those being long positions.
This behaviour underscores a reality that many in the crypto community are reluctant to admit. In moments of geopolitical crisis, digital assets tend to move in the same direction as risk-sensitive markets.
Rather than acting as a haven, Bitcoin and its peers responded in line with technology stocks and other volatile assets.
Institutional flows have also shown signs of retreat. Spot Bitcoin ETFs, which had received over $1 billion in net inflows earlier in the week, saw only minimal movement by Friday. This suggests that asset managers were pulling back ahead of anticipated instability.
The decline in inflows removes an important buffer for price stability and indicates waning confidence in crypto’s ability to withstand external shocks.
More concerning is the structural uncertainty now facing the sector. If geopolitical divisions intensify, especially with countries like China and Russia creating financial systems that bypass Western infrastructure, the crypto industry could be caught in the middle.
Stablecoins backed by US dollar reserves may become harder to move across borders. Exchanges may come under regulatory scrutiny for facilitating transactions involving sanctioned parties.
Decentralised platforms, though harder to control, may still face pressure from network providers, developers, and even validators.
For now, there are no signs of direct regulation emerging from the conflict. However, history has shown that financial tools used during sanctions or crises often draw attention from governments. Crypto’s decentralised design does not make it immune to this.
On the contrary, it may increase the likelihood of being targeted, especially if it is used to route around capital controls or participate in politically sensitive transfers.
Conclusion
The US airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities mark a dangerous new phase in global geopolitics. While the operation was framed as a military necessity, its consequences are already being felt beyond the battlefield.
Iran has signalled that retaliation is likely, and concerns are growing that larger powers could be pulled into the conflict, directly or indirectly.
Financial markets are showing signs of distress, and crypto is responding with the same volatility as other high-risk assets.
As global alliances shift and the boundaries of confrontation expand, the world may be entering a more unstable phase—one that affects both traditional and digital economies alike.