Introduction
Following the attack of the United States and Israel on Iran on February 28, 2026, as previously warned by Iranian officials, the scope of tensions rapidly expanded beyond a limited confrontation and evolved into a multi-layered and large-scale crisis across the Middle East.
This situation, compounded by Iran’s retaliatory measures—including targeting industries and military facilities linked to the United States in several Persian Gulf Arab countries, as well as disrupting maritime transit through the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz—acquired increasingly complex dimensions and made the interconnection between regional security and global security tangibly evident.
Consequently, international concerns over the direct impact of this conflict on key domains such as economic security, food security, energy security, and even the sustainability of health systems increased significantly. These concerns were reflected in the responses of energy-dependent states, including the adoption of domestic energy restriction policies and intensified diplomatic efforts aimed at de-escalation.
Nevertheless, a fundamental question remains:
How did the military action undertaken by the United States and Israel against Iran—despite prior warnings regarding its consequences—lead to heightened insecurity across economic, food, energy, and health domains at the global level, ultimately transforming a regional conflict into a crisis of global proportions?
This question underscores the necessity of re-examining the role of this military intervention in destabilizing critical global supply chains and expanding systemic uncertainty within the international order.
Incidents
Following the large-scale attacks on Iran in March 2026, Tehran responded by imposing restrictions on maritime passage through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz—a waterway through which a substantial share of global energy trade passes. This measure, as a decisive geopolitical variable, triggered a chain of interconnected developments in the sphere of global security and rapidly generated multi-layered shocks in the international economy. Disruption to the free flow of energy, growing uncertainty in global markets, sharp fluctuations in oil and gas prices, and precautionary responses by governments and economic actors constituted only part of the initial consequences of this situation. On a broader level, these developments weakened economic security, intensified concerns regarding food security in energy-importing countries, and increased pressure on global supply and distribution systems. Accordingly, the restriction of passage through the Strait of Hormuz was not merely a regional act, but rather the starting point of a chain of interconnected crises whose effects quickly became visible across various dimensions of global security; these consequences are examined in detail below.
- Energy and Economic Security
After the Strait of Hormuz was closed by the Iranian navy, maritime tracking data showed that on March 1, approximately three days after the start of the war, the daily number of ships and oil tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz had fallen to 4 vessels, whereas before the war the figure had been around 24 vessels[1]. This meant that maritime trade in the Persian Gulf region—upon which both the regional and global economies were deeply dependent—was suddenly hit by a major shock resulting from the halt in the passage of ships and tankers, especially given that the five southern littoral states of the Persian Gulf, excluding oil and gas, account for approximately 20 percent of global trade, equivalent to at least $1.6 trillion[2].
This sudden shock drove up the global prices of crude oil and petroleum and gas products, to the point that in the early days, oil prices reportedly rose to around $120 per barrel. The gravity of this situation became even more evident when the International Energy Agency announced that, in response to prevailing conditions, it was seeking agreement with various countries around the world to release 400 million barrels from the global emergency strategic petroleum reserves in order to mitigate the impact of the price shock[3].
Furthermore, Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund, stated at the opening of the IMF and World Bank Spring Meetings in Washington that the institution would be compelled to revise downward its global economic growth forecasts due to the Middle East war. According to her, even under the most optimistic scenario, a rapid and complete return of the global economy to pre-war conditions would be highly unrealistic[4].
According to Reuters, a prolonged sudden price shock in the energy market—especially in oil—could evolve into a far broader inflationary and economic shock worldwide, since, according to the outlet, every sustained 10 percent increase in oil prices adds 40 basis points to inflation[5]. In this context, Ben Emons, Managing Director at Fed Watch Advisors, stated that in addition to oil, the prices of commodities such as fertilizers and helium—both critical for food production and semiconductor manufacturing—are also likely to continue rising, thereby exacerbating the already increasing inflationary pressures[6].
Overall, the shock resulting from conditions in the Middle East has been observed across the world. In Chile, gasoline prices rose by 60 percent and diesel prices by 30 percent[7]. In South Korea, in an effort to shield itself from the effects of disruption in the global energy supply chain, the government implemented emergency bond buybacks and expanded fuel tax exemptions[8]. In India, where the government spends more than $32 billion annually on energy subsidies[9], authorities reduced fuel duties while simultaneously imposing taxes on the export of certain petroleum products in order to contain the situation[10]. Additionally, shortages of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) resulting from the war have forced many Indian households and small businesses to revert to the use of firewood, coal, and kerosene[11]. The government of the Philippines also announced that it had suspended the country’s wholesale electricity market until further notice, citing risks related to fuel supply and price volatility[12]. Meanwhile, the Monetary Authority of Singapore tightened its monetary policy settings on Tuesday, April 14, warning that the energy shock resulting from the Iran war could increase core inflation[13]. In China, the national oil company has begun injecting gas into large underground storage facilities across the western regions of the country during the month of April to ensure sufficient supply[14]. In other parts of the world as well, many governments adopted precautionary measures in an effort to stabilize their domestic markets. In this regard, Patrick Pouyanné, Chief Executive Officer of TotalEnergies, stated: “It is clear to me that if this crisis lasts more than three or four months, it becomes a systemic problem for the world. You cannot stop 20 percent of the world’s exported crude oil and 20 percent of liquefied gas capacity in the Gulf without consequences[15].”
Following the announcement by the administration of Donald Trump imposing restrictions—effective April 13—on vessels originating from or destined for Iran, as well as the seizure of any ship that has paid transit fees to Iran for passage through the Strait of Hormuz, the situation has entered a new phase characterized by heightened uncertainty and ambiguity. This evolving condition has the potential not only to intensify the initial crisis triggered at the outset of the war but also to generate additional, cascading crises in the near future.
- Food Security
Energy security and economic security in the Persian Gulf are directly linked to global food security, because the inability of ships and tankers to pass safely and without threat through the Strait of Hormuz means that the cost of transporting fuel, as well as the cost of moving goods, increases. This, in turn, affects the speed of the global food supply chain and naturally subjects food prices to temporary shocks and severe fluctuations.
In addition, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Persian Gulf region, beyond supplying global energy—which itself affects food supply, availability, and prices worldwide—is also one of the world’s key regions in the production and export of fertilizer. According to this body, the Persian Gulf is a crucial area in this regard, and around one-third of global maritime fertilizer trade, amounting to approximately 16 million tons of fertilizer, is exported from this region to the rest of the world[16]. This has a direct impact on human food security. It should be noted that fertilizer production is heavily dependent on urea, and urea production itself depends on natural gas. As one of the world’s largest producers of natural gas, Qatar plays a major role in this supply chain.
In Australia, urea prices in some cases have risen to more than $1,100 per ton, a situation that places farmers before difficult choices: either they reduce fertilizer use, which leads to lower production, or they shift toward cultivating crops that require less fertilizer[17]. Thus, the security crisis in the Persian Gulf directly intensifies the global food crisis. According to the World Food Programme, this food insecurity could affect millions of people worldwide, including 17.7 million people in East and Southern Africa, 2.2 million in Latin America and the Caribbean, 5.2 million in the Middle East and North Africa, and 10.4 million in Central Africa[18].
- Medical Security
In the area of medical security, which may receive less attention than other sectors under these circumstances, security in the Persian Gulf is of considerable importance. One of the essential elements in the medical industry—particularly in medical imaging and MRI technology—is helium gas. Liquid helium is used in cooling superconducting magnets in the medical field[19]. Since Qatar is one of the world’s most important gas producers, any disruption in the supply of this substance to the global market and any disturbance in gas processing also affects security in this field. Examination of this market shows that, since the beginning of the security crisis in the Middle East, the global spot price of helium has doubled, rising by 100 percent[20].
In addition, chip production, which is highly significant in many industries including the manufacture of medical equipment, has also experienced widespread disruption. Key raw materials used in semiconductor production—including helium, sulfur, and bromine, a substantial portion of which is supplied from this region—have faced both supply shortages and considerable price increases[21].
Challenges and Responses
- Fuel Prices and Their Deep Impact on the Entire Market
One of the most significant challenges associated with insecurity in the economic domain—particularly energy economics in the Persian Gulf—and its impact on global energy markets is the extent to which energy prices, supply, and availability influence virtually all goods and services. In practical terms, an inflationary shock in global energy markets can extend its effects even to a small consumer item in a supermarket in South America, East Asia, or elsewhere, as energy lies at the core of all production and transportation chains.
When fuel costs rise, the final price of goods and services increases, ranging from food and agricultural products to air, maritime, and road transportation. For instance, in the aviation sector, available data indicate that the conflict in the Middle East has led to a dramatic surge in ticket prices: the price of a Bangkok–Frankfurt flight rose from $474 to $2,870, while a Hong Kong–London ticket increased from $503 to $3,318[22].
Such conditions typically lead to rising inflation in energy-importing countries and place significant pressure on household purchasing power. In financial markets, rising fuel prices cause severe volatility in stock exchanges, increase production costs for companies, and reduce profitability in energy-intensive industries, while at the same time the energy sector and oil and gas companies often experience growth.
Overall, a fuel price shock represents one of the fastest and most far-reaching economic shocks, capable of simultaneously affecting global markets and trade. Among the most important globally consumed fuels, gasoline serves as a notable example. Gasoline is not merely a consumer good; in the United States, gasoline prices can even influence the political fate of a president[23]. For this reason, public pressure can itself play a decisive role in the continuation or termination of wars and conflicts.
- Domestic Reactions
In response to the attack by the United States and Israel against Iran—and its repercussions on global energy markets, including energy prices in the United States—street protests known as “No Kings” emerged across the country. These protests reflect widespread opposition to decision-making driven by personal executive will, particularly that of Donald Trump, which critics argue has bypassed many established institutional arrangements in the United States.
By the time of writing, at the end of March 2026, these protests were ongoing in various regions of the country. According to The Washington Post, demonstrators—who had previously taken to the streets under the same banner in opposition to earlier decisions by the Trump administration—viewed the February war against Iran as an example of executive overreach. They also identified it as a factor contributing to rising living costs for American citizens, including increased taxation to finance the war and the war’s impact on fuel price inflation[24].
Prominent figures participating in these protests included Bernie Sanders, Ilhan Omar, Tim Walz, as well as public figures such as Jane Fonda, Maggie Rogers, and Robert De Niro[25], among many others.
Domestic divisions within the United States following the onset of attacks on Iran largely coalesced around the issues of “war powers” and “Congressional oversight.” On March 5, the House of Representatives rejected a resolution that would have required the administration to obtain Congressional authorization for the war. However, according to Reuters, even critics within Congressional debates argued that the war had been initiated “without authorization, without clear objectives, and without an exit strategy.”
Moreover, the legal framework concerning presidential war powers, particularly the 60-day limitation for military actions conducted without Congressional approval, remains a point of institutional pressure on the administration[26].
In the Senate, a group of senators attempted to bring a vote to the floor regarding the withdrawal of U.S. forces from hostilities, claiming that Republicans had blocked the vote. In an official statement published on the website of Tim Kaine, emphasis was placed on the “unauthorized nature” of the war and its linkage to rising gasoline prices, inflationary pressures, and the loss of American service members[27].
Meanwhile, CNN reported on the Middle East crisis and its global economic repercussions, noting that the war—through rising energy prices and disruptions to supply chains—has placed significant strain on the global economy. The surge in oil prices and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz increase the risk of higher inflation and interest rates while potentially slowing economic growth. At the same time, disruptions in transportation and trade—from the suspension of rice exports in India to rising fertilizer prices—have intensified concerns regarding food security and the sustainability of global production.
This crisis is particularly severe for energy-importing economies in Asia and Europe, leading to increased production costs and reduced purchasing power. In addition, financial market instability and rising transportation costs have imposed further pressures on economies and heightened global uncertainty. In sum, the continuation of the war could lead to a combination of high inflation, trade disruption, and reduced economic growth[28].
- International Reactions
Anas Alhajji, a prominent analyst in the field of oil and energy economics, reacted to the continuation of the war and its global economic implications through posts on the social platform X. Referring to the growing risks associated with disruptions in global energy markets, he wrote: “If this war does not end soon, the global economy will collapse by early May.”
Alhajji described the situation in the Strait of Hormuz as escalating and pointed to increasing tensions around this strategically vital waterway, through which approximately one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passes. Any disruption in shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, he emphasized, could severely shock energy markets and global trade. According to him, the impact of this crisis is already being felt beyond the Middle East, particularly in Europe. He warned: “Europe is moving toward energy shortages, sharply rising prices, and greater dependence on Russian energy.”
He also highlighted extreme price volatility in energy markets, noting that oil prices in Asia had already exceeded $173 per barrel, reflecting growing fears of supply disruptions linked to potential escalation with Iran. He further cautioned that if tensions intensify or the conflict spreads further across the region, prices could reach unprecedented levels[29].
At the level of the European Union, responses have largely focused on managing the consequences of potential energy shortages, safeguarding freedom of international navigation, and maintaining distance from direct involvement in the war. The EU formally warned its member states to prepare for long-term disruptions in energy markets, with particular concern directed toward jet fuel and diesel supplies, as well as the expected arrival of final shipments dispatched prior to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, projected to reach Europe by approximately April 10, 2026.
Simultaneously, France announced discussions with approximately 35 countries regarding a purely defensive post-war mission aimed at reopening the Strait of Hormuz. French officials emphasized the necessity of a framework approved by the United Nations, as well as considerations related to insurance mechanisms and Iran’s consent[30]—reflecting Europe’s cautious stance, particularly that of France, in balancing crisis management with the preservation of limited trust and diplomatic engagement with Tehran.
Guido Crosetto, in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, addressed concerns regarding the war with Iran. He stated that the conflict occupies his thoughts around the clock, to the extent that he is unable to sleep at night. He emphasized that his primary concern lies in the economic and social consequences that the war may impose on Italy and Europe in the coming weeks. He further noted that Iran, due to its larger geographical size, greater population, and thousands of years of historical continuity, possesses characteristics that may contribute to the prolongation and complexity of any conflict[31].
Hossein Ghaheri, head of the Iran–China Strategic Studies Think Tank, also examined the impact of the war on global and U.S. financial markets. His analysis suggests that if oil prices rise from a hypothetical $80 per barrel to between $120 and $150 (an increase of 50–80 percent), historical elasticity indicates that this could add 2 to 3 percentage points to inflation, potentially raising it to 5–7 percent. This represents a classic case of cost-push inflation, where rising energy prices transmit directly to other sectors.
Further assessments indicate that such shocks could, in the medium term, double inflation, render real asset returns significantly negative, reduce stock market value by up to 40 percent, and push financial markets into a cycle of deep instability. Although this scenario is based on analytical assumptions, historical evidence and financial models suggest that the combination of sharp oil price increases, contractionary monetary policies, and pressure on corporate profitability could rapidly produce conditions akin to an “economic tsunami” in U.S. financial markets—characterized simultaneously by high inflation, declining asset values, and liquidity crises[32].
An article published by International Monetary Fund titled “How War in the Middle East Affects Energy, Trade, and Finance”, authored by economists including Tobias Adrian, analyzes the broader economic consequences of the conflict. The report demonstrates that the war has impacted the global economy through three primary channels: energy, supply chains, and financial markets, leading to rising prices and reduced economic growth. Disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz have driven energy price spikes and placed significant pressure on importing countries, particularly in Asia and Europe.
Simultaneously, increased transportation costs and disruptions in the movement of goods such as fertilizers have disturbed supply chains and intensified the risk of rising food prices and food insecurity—especially in low-income countries where a larger share of income is spent on food. Moreover, rising inflation driven by higher energy and food prices, combined with financial market instability and higher interest rates, has made economic conditions more challenging in many countries[33].
The Guardian also reported on the war’s impact on global economic and financial markets, noting that energy markets experienced extreme volatility during the weeks of conflict. Brent crude oil recorded its largest monthly increase and most severe daily fluctuations in history. These fluctuations affected not only oil markets but also gas, fuel, fertilizer markets, and even global stock exchanges, raising concerns about the global economy.
Traders have acknowledged that markets are no longer driven by traditional analysis but are instead shaped by news, rumors, and real-time political developments. As one trader remarked: “Analysis no longer matters; everything is fear and headlines.”
In addition, concerns have emerged regarding suspicious trading activities and the potential for market manipulation. Large trades in oil futures markets, occurring shortly before political announcements, have fueled speculation about insider trading. Although U.S. authorities have denied such allegations, the close ties between government actors and certain investment funds have intensified these suspicions[34].
Finally, Alexander Stubb, in an interview with Politico, warned that the economic impact of the Middle East conflict could exceed the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and potentially lead to a global economic recession. He characterized Trump’s approach as a form of transactional economic policy, deeming it ineffective in foreign affairs, and stated: “I think we are now in a situation where this in the Middle East can become a self-inflicted global recession. This shows what happens when you act outside international rules and norms.”
He further remarked: “What we are witnessing now is the death of international institutions or rules at precisely the moment in history when we need them more than ever[35].”
Conclusion
The outbreak of a large-scale war in the Middle East following the attacks by the United States and Israel against Iran in February–March 2026 can be assessed as a turning point in the geopolitical and economic dynamics of both the region and the world. This conflict—whose scope has reportedly extended to approximately twelve countries in the region—has not only led to a noticeable decline in the efficiency and stability of Middle Eastern economic structures, but, due to the region’s strategic position in global energy supply, has also imposed profound and far-reaching consequences on the international economy.
Disruptions in energy supply chains, increased volatility in oil and gas markets, and heightened economic uncertainty have collectively generated a set of interconnected and multi-layered global shocks. In response, many countries have adopted precautionary and, in some cases, counteractive policies in an effort to prevent the collapse of their domestic markets, while simultaneously seeking—through diplomatic mechanisms—pathways to contain tensions and restore a degree of relative stability.
However, the scope of the crisis has extended beyond the economic sphere and has directly affected other core components of human security, including food security and public health. In this context, the role of the United States and Israel—as initiating and intensifying actors in this widespread conflict—emerges as a determinative variable. This is particularly significant given that, despite repeated warnings by Iranian officials and assessments by international experts regarding the potentially catastrophic consequences of such actions, the conflict nevertheless entered its operational phase and produced the current conditions.
The continuation of this situation will not only further undermine regional stability, but will also pose increasingly profound and complex challenges to the global economic order and the broader architecture of human security.
References
[1] Saba, Yousef, & Elimam, Ahmed. (2026, March 3). Global energy costs soar as Iran crisis disrupts shipping, oil and gas production. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/global-energy-costs-soar-iran-crisis-disrupts-shipping-oil-gas-production-2026-03-03/
[2] Asriran. (2026, March 30). $170 Billion Logistics Turnover in the Strait of Hormuz. Asriran. From: asriran.com/004pvn
[3] International Energy Agency (IEA). (2026, March 11). IEA member countries to carry out largest ever oil stock release amid market disruptions from Middle East conflict. IEA. From: https://www.iea.org/news/iea-member-countries-to-carry-out-largest-ever-oil-stock-release-amid-market-disruptions-from-middle-east-conflict
[4] Tabnak. (2026, April 10). A Deep Wound to the Body of the Global Economy: the Bitter Trilogy of Inflation, Slowing Economic Growth and Food Insecurity Worldwide. Tabnak. From: https://www.tabnak.ir/005jRd
[5] Shalal., & Andrea., & Campos., & Rodrigo. (2026, March 19). IMF says prolonged increase in energy prices could boost inflation, lower growth. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/world/imf-says-prolonged-increase-energy-prices-could-boost-inflation-lower-growth-2026-03-19/
[6] Irna. (2026, April 13). CNBC: The Blockade of the Strait of Hormuz is Worsening the World,s Most Severe Energy Crisis. Irna. From: https://irna.ir/xjX59v
[7] Reuters. (2026, March 24). Chile’s fuel prices jump as global oil shock strains public finances. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chiles-fuel-prices-jump-global-oil-shock-strains-public-finances-2026-03-24/
[8] Kim, J., & Kim, C. (2026, March 26). South Korea to carry out bond buyback, expand fuel tax breaks to cushion blow from Iran conflict. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/south-korea-raise-fuel-price-cap-expand-tax-break-cushion-blow-iran-conflict-2026-03-26/
[9] Fararu. (2026, March 24). Trump’s Gamble in the Strait of Hormuz: The Economic Consequences of a U.S. and Israeli Attack on Iran. Fararu. From: https://fararu.com/fa/tiny/news-957807
[10] Reuters. (2026, March 27). India cuts special additional excise duties on petrol, diesel. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-cuts-special-additional-excise-duties-petrol-diesel-2026-03-27/
[11] Bhat, A., & Kujur, R. (2026, April 13). Gas crunch pushes India to dirtier cooking fuels. DW. From: https://www.dw.com/en/iran-war-gas-crunch-pushes-india-back-to-polluting-fuels/video-76730563
[12] Asriran. (2026, March 26). The Energy Crisis Has Also Forced South Korea into an Emergency Response. Asriran. From: asriran.com/004pjP
[13] Yuan Yong, J., & Kok, X. (2026, April 14). Singapore tightens monetary policy as Iran war fuels inflation risks. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/singapore-central-bank-tightens-monetary-policy-expected-2026-04-14/
[14] Irna. (2026, April 13). Consequences of U.S Military Escalation for the Global Economy: Liquified Natural Gas Prices in Asia have Risen. Irna. From: https://irna.ir/xjX58q
[15] Khabar Online. (2026, March 30). Bloomberg: The Strait of Hormuz Oil Shock Is Moving Toward the West. Khabar Online. From: khabaronline.ir/xpJ8t
[16] UNCTAD. (2026, March 10). Hormuz shipping disruptions raise risks for energy, fertilizers and vulnerable economies. UNCTAD. From: https://unctad.org/news/hormuz-shipping-disruptions-raise-risks-energy-fertilizers-and-vulnerable-economies
[17] Tabnak. (2026, March 28). A Time Bomb Beneath the World’s Tables: When the Global Price of Bread Is Set in the Strait of Hormuz. Tabnak. From: https://www.tabnak.ir/005iti
[18] Asriran. (2026, March 25). 45 Million People Worldwide Could Face Hunger if the Strait of Hormuz Remains Closed. Asriran. From: asriran.com/004pg6
[19] National Research Council. (2000). Impact of the implementation of the Helium Privatization Act. The National Academies Press. From: https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/9860/chapter/6
[20] Kumar, A., & Saha, S., & Sterling, T. (2026, March 12). Helium prices soar as Qatar LNG halt exposes fragile supply chain. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/helium-prices-soar-qatar-lng-halt-exposes-fragile-supply-chain-2026-03-12/
[21] Tabnak. (2026, March 29). The Atlantic: The World Is on the Brink of an Economic Catastrophe. Tabnak. From: https://www.tabnak.ir/005j0E
[22] Tabnak. (2026, March 27). War Fires at the Wings of Global Flights: Fuel Gets Pricier and Routes Get Longer. Tabnak. From: https://www.tabnak.ir/005ivG
[23] Fararu. (2026, March 14). The Gasoline Shock in Global Markets: Could Oil Prices Change the Course of the War. Fararu. From: https://fararu.com/fa/tiny/news-956007
[24] Paquette, D., & Boorstein, M., & Slater, J., & Kirkpatrick, N. (2026, March 28). No Kings protests fill streets at over 3,300 rallies in all 50 states, a record number. The Washington Post. From: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/03/28/no-kings-protests-marches-record-turnout/
[25] Etemad Online. (2026, March 30). Prominent artists participate in anti-Trump protests across the United States. Etemad Online. From: https://www.etemadonline.com/tiny/news-766863
[26] Zengerle, P. (2026, March 6). US House rejects war powers resolution, backs Trump on Iran war. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-house-rejects-war-powers-resolution-backs-trump-iran-war-2026-03-05/
[27] Kaine, T. (2026, March 24). Senate Democrats Force War Powers Vote as Trump’s War in Iran Spirals Out of Control. kaine.senate.gov. From: https://www.kaine.senate.gov/press-releases/senate-democrats-force-war-powers-vote-as-trumps-war-in-iran-spirals-out-of-control
[28] Zlady, H., & Llu, J. (2026, March 6). Surging energy prices and threats to shipping. How the Middle East war could hurt the global economy. CNN. From: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/05/economy/economy-impact-middle-east-war-intl
[29] Khabar Online. (2026, March 30). Alhajji: If the Iran war does not end, the global economy will collapse by May. Khabar Online. From: khabaronline.ir/xpJ7X
[30] Abnett, K. (2026, March 31). EU may revive 2022 energy crisis measures in response to Iran war. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/eu-tells-members-prepare-prolonged-disruption-energy-markets-iran-war-2026-03-31/
[31] Entekhab. (2026, March 30). The Italian Minister of Defense: The war in Iran has occupied my mind day and night, to the point that I can’t even sleep at night. My main concern is the consequences this war will have on the economy in the coming weeks…. Entekhab. From: https://www.entekhab.ir/003qBf
[32] Tasnim News. (2026, March 30). The Collapse of U.S. Financial Markets: Trump’s Achievement from the War with Iran. Tasnim News. From: https://tasnimnews.ir/3552234
[33] Adrian, T., & Azour, J., & Chalk, N., & Gourinchas, P., & Kammer, A., & Selassie, A., & Srinivasan, K., & Valdés, R. (2026, March 30). How the War in the Middle East Is Affecting Energy, Trade, and Finance. IMF. From: https://www.imf.org/en/blogs/articles/2026/03/30/how-the-war-in-the-middle-east-is-affecting-energy-trade-and-finance
[34] Ambrose, J. (2026, April 5). ‘It’s all fear and headlines’: energy traders race to keep pace with volatile oil markets. The Guardian. From: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/apr/05/its-all-fear-and-headlines-energy-traders-race-to-keep-pace-with-volatile-oil-markets
[35] Entekhab. (2026, March 27). The President of Finland: European politicians are not obligated to join the Middle East war in support of Trump. This may sound like a strong view, but the war in Iran is not my war…. Entekhab. From: https://www.entekhab.ir/003q4r
