The United Arab Emirates has requested financial assurances from Washington in the form of a dollar swap line, threatening to shift to Chinese yuan for oil trade settlements if its request is denied. Abu Dhabi aims to protect its national economy from liquidity shortages caused by the protracted military conflict with Iran and the risk of depleting its foreign currency reserves.

UAE Central Bank Governor Khaled Mohamed Balama proposed that US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessen establish an emergency credit line to prevent investor flight from the region. Emirati officials warned their American counterparts of their readiness to switch export transactions to Chinese yuan if the available volumes of US currency face critical reductions. Meanwhile, Federal Reserve officials have expressed skepticism about the need for such a facility, citing a lack of systemic risks to the US financial system.

The UAE’s national currency remains pegged to the US dollar, supported by reserves of $270 billion. However, frequent attacks on infrastructure pose a long-term stability threat. The UAE Ministry of Defense has reported more than 2,800 launches of Iranian missiles and drones targeting Gulf states since the escalation began. To address its funding shortfalls, Abu Dhabi has already raised $4 billion through a bond issuance facilitated by Goldman Sachs.

During a meeting with the IMF, Saudi Finance Minister Mohammed Al-Jadaan ruled out a quick recovery for the regional energy sector. It would take time to restore normal oil logistics, at least until the end of June, Al-Jadaan noted. The significant supply shock and geopolitical uncertainty are pushing major oil exporters to seek new mechanisms to protect their assets and diversify currency risks.

Bitcoin plunged 2.02% to $75,064.20 after Iran blocked the key shipping route, triggering a broad investor exodus from risk assets. The drop hit the entire crypto market despite Bitcoin fund assets reaching a record $100 billion.

Geopolitical instability in the Middle East has driven market participants to pull capital out of volatile instruments, weakening Bitcoin’s position as a safe‑haven asset. At the same time, market data recorded an inflow of $663.91 million into Bitcoin ETFs, while Ethereum‑based funds attracted $127.49 million, marking seven consecutive days of institutional demand. Institutional investors also allocated $13.74 million to XRP instruments and $13.04 million to Solana‑based products. This dynamic underscores strong long‑term institutional interest in digital assets despite temporary price swings amid the Middle East conflict.

Pressure was amplified by industry-specific problems, including legal uncertainty around DeFi protocols, noted in reports by The Block. According to CoinMarketCap statistics, stablecoin liquidity on centralized exchanges is shrinking, leaving the market vulnerable to forced liquidations. Bloomberg reports that high yields on risk‑free assets and persistent inflation further discourage crypto accumulation. Thin order books on trading venues contributed to higher volatility and accelerated price declines during periods of peak market anxiety.

Most altcoins weakened: Ethereum (ETH) lost 2.89%, sliding to $2,307.42; XRP fell 2.12% to $1.4198; Solana and Cardano sank 3.40% and 3.54% respectively. Meme token Dogecoin also fell, down 3.40% amid the Strait closure and the general risk‑off sentiment. The current situation is forcing traders to revise strategies and reduce exposure to digital assets until logistics through the Strait of Hormuz get back on track.

On April 21, 2026, US President Donald Trump said he would be disappointed if Kevin Warsh did not embark on immediate rate cuts after being appointed the Federal Reserve chairman. The president also called for a review of spending on the construction of a new Federal Reserve building amid the ongoing criminal probe into Jerome Powell.

In an interview with CNBC, Donald Trump expressed hope for a radical shift in monetary policy shortly after the Senate confirms Kevin Warsh’s nomination. Current Fed Chairman Jerome Powell is under investigation over testimony concerning renovations of the central bank’s offices, which Powell himself describes as unprecedented political pressure. Despite demands from the White House, the regulator did not lower interest rates during 2026, maintaining a hawkish stance despite regular public criticism from the administration.

Military actions in Iran have significantly complicated the Federal Reserve’s work by triggering a sharp rise in energy prices and cementing inflation expectations. Fed officials emphasize that the prolonged conflict poses risks to household welfare and forces a difficult choice between suppressing inflation and supporting economic growth. Most officials lean toward keeping interest rates high until the oil market stabilizes and volatility subsides. The administration fears that delayed monetary easing could dent domestic demand and investment activity over the long term.

The US banking sector is urging caution on changing borrowing costs until the geopolitical crisis is fully resolved. Wells Fargo CEO Charlie Scharf (New York: WFC) called a potential rate cut before the end of the war in Iran the wrong decision. “Until it becomes clear that the end is near, there is a real risk,” Scharf emphasized, noting a market consensus on the need to wait. Major financial institutions fear that hasty action by the regulator under political pressure could spark a new wave of inflation acceleration and confuse markets.

In April, investment flows shifted toward riskier assets. According to the monthly report from Bank of America, inflows into stocks turned positive, while money market funds experienced outflows. This change in investor strategy is driven by hopes for a peaceful resolution to the US-Iran conflict, as well as seasonal liquidity withdrawals for tax payments.

Data analysis from Simfund, Morningstar, and ICI shows that interest in equities has risen despite traditional tax pressures. In addition, there has been a resurgence in the fixed-income segment. On the other hand, money market funds have been losing ground since the beginning of the month, which BofA analysts attribute to the short-term need for cash to settle tax obligations.

BofA economists have significantly revised their expectations for the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy. The bank now forecasts only two interest rate cuts of 25 basis points each in September and October, whereas easing had previously been anticipated in June and July.

This delay supports high yields on short-term bonds and prompts a capital rotation, with investors moving from money market funds to short-duration debt instruments. The inflow into equities has been predominantly from US issuers, while the bulk of funds in the bond market is concentrated in US Treasuries.

A structural analysis of the market confirms the long-term dominance of passive investing. The share of active managers who can outperform the market over a three-year horizon remains stagnant at 27%. 

BofA statistics reveal a historical shift: while actively managed equities accounted for 41% of the market in 2010, that share has now fallen to 26%. In contrast, passive instruments (index funds and ETFs) have dramatically expanded their presence from 14% to 38% during the same period, becoming the primary refuge for capital disillusioned with the performance of active portfolio managers.

In the sixth week of the military conflict in Iran, the global oil market has been hit by a massive supply shock. The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has trapped hundreds of tankers in the Persian Gulf, triggering a sharp rise in global oil prices. Yet current oil futures are projecting a distorted and overly optimistic picture, masking the true scale of the commodity shortage.

There is now an unprecedented divergence between physical market prices (real barrels for immediate delivery) and the “paper” market (financial derivatives and futures).

Refineries are forced to buy physical crude at a historically record premium of about $30 per barrel above the nearest futures contract. This spread rarely exceeds $2 under normal macroeconomic conditions.

This abnormal pricing pattern suggests traders are unwilling to place long-term bets so that extremely high prices will hardly persist. Market participants expect the acute shortage to be short‑lived and the conflict to be frozen by a political settlement. The price gap is also driven by a calendar factor: Brent futures trade nearly two months forward (the nearest contract is June), while physical benchmarks reflect the cost of deliveries here and now.

According to analysts at Energy Aspects Ltd, exchange optimism is built on expectations of imminent US intervention. Investors are confident that President Donald Trump will find a way to end the conflict so as not to jeopardize his political standing amid soaring gasoline prices ahead of the midterm elections in November.

The economic consequences of the conflict are already being felt by consumers. In the US, the average retail gasoline price has broken the psychological $4-per-gallon mark, setting seasonal highs. More expensive fuel has sparked a new wave of global inflation: rising prices for gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel are already translating into higher airfares, logistics costs, and food prices. Polls show that a majority of American voters disapprove of military operations against Iran and are seriously worried about the economic damage from further escalation.

Against the backdrop of lingering shipping instability in the Strait of Hormuz, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has put forward a plan for a radical overhaul of export routes. IEA Chief Executive Fatih Birol called for the construction of a new main oil pipeline that would directly link Iraq’s southern fields in Basra with Turkey’s Ceyhan export terminal on the Mediterranean coast.

The initiative’s primary goal is to create a permanent overland alternative to the strategic sea route, whose logistics are regularly disrupted by unpredictable actions from Iran.

Right now, Baghdad is critically vulnerable: roughly 90% of all Iraqi oil exports depend on transit through the Strait of Hormuz. In an interview with the Turkish newspaper Hürriyet, Fatih Birol stressed the gravity of the situation, saying that “a broken vase is extremely difficult to glue back together.” According to the IEA head, the Basra–Ceyhan pipeline has outgrown the status of an ordinary infrastructure project. It is now strategically essential for both Baghdad and Ankara, and a critically important tool for ensuring the energy security of European buyers.

The IEA proposal comes amid the collapse of traditional transit corridors in the Middle East. The US-backed India–Middle East–Europe corridor (IMEC) is effectively frozen, and commercial navigation in the Red Sea remains a high-risk zone. In these circumstances, Turkey is actively positioning itself as the primary and safest logistics hub for transporting energy resources from the Persian Gulf to EU markets.

Practical implementation of the pipeline project will require a firm political agreement between the administrations of Turkey and Iraq. Fatih Birol views the prospects for such a consensus positively, calling the current geopolitical moment “absolutely suitable” for a start. The main barrier for cross-border initiatives like this is commonly the capital attraction issue, but the IEA chief indicated that financing could be provided by Europe, which has a direct interest in diversifying supplies.

The bullish trend in the uranium market continues to strengthen. According to a new special report from BCA Research, a structural supply deficit and rising concerns over energy security, exacerbated by the military conflict in Iran, provide a solid foundation for sustainable long-term price growth in this commodity.

Analysts at BCA Research note that the war in the Middle East is acting as a powerful catalyst for the uranium sector. In addition to the global push to utilize nuclear generation as a shield against price volatility in traditional fossil fuels, the conflict directly disrupts the logistics of key components needed in the nuclear fuel production cycle—specifically, sulfur supplies.

Emerging constraints further tighten an already unstable market. The report emphasizes that ensuring the security of physical supplies has become the top priority for global energy companies, which are now urgently seeking to secure commodity volumes through long-term contracts.

Despite a recent uptick in production volumes, global demand for uranium continues to consistently outpace available supply. This structural deficit is being reinforced by unprecedented political support for the nuclear industry worldwide. Governments across various nations are striving to meet ambitious decarbonization goals while simultaneously ensuring reliable and uninterrupted baseload power generation.

Moreover, new fundamental demand drivers are emerging in the market. Analysts point out that the push for expanded nuclear generation is now motivated not only by ecological agendas and carbon reduction targets but is also linked to the enormous energy requirements of artificial intelligence systems and the rapidly growing infrastructure of data centers.

Combined with a global political consensus, these factors lead BCA analysts to conclude that the current tension in the uranium market is not merely a short-term cyclical spike but marks the onset of a fundamentally new strategic era for the asset.

The ZEW economic expectations index sank to -17.2 points in April 2026 against the backdrop of a protracted energy crisis. Military actions in Iran have halted Europe’s economic recovery, provoking a decline in business sentiment and a sharp jump in inflation.

The ZEW indicator plunged from -0.5 points in March to -17.2 points, significantly worse than economists’ median forecasts. Achim Wambach, president of the ZEW institute, noted, “The economic consequences of the war in Iran for Germany extend far beyond consumer inflation.” Businesses are worried about the threat of a long-term shortage of energy supplies, which is holding back investment activity and reducing the efficiency of government support measures.

Leading German research institutes now expect GDP growth to be less than half of their initial forecasts. In 2025, Germany’s economy grew by just 0.2%, and government investments in the defense sector only partially offset the downturn. The European Central Bank plans to keep interest rates unchanged at its meeting on April 30, 2026, in order to assess the damage from the Middle East conflict.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz confirmed that additional anti-crisis measures are already on the table in case of further escalation in Iran. The government has already allocated €1.6 billion ($1.9 billion) to curb retail petrol prices through a temporary tax cut. The current dynamics of commodity prices remain the main factor putting pressure on manufacturing, limiting the country’s ability to perk up promptly in the wake of stagnation.

The cost of gasoline and diesel at fueling stations across the European Union saw unprecedented increases at the end of March 2026 due to the escalation of the military conflict in Iran. Eurostat has reported a worsening energy crisis in the region, driven by significant disruptions in the supply of petroleum products from the Middle Eastern market.

The most notable price hikes in gasoline, ranging from 14% to 15%, occurred in Belgium, Sweden, Austria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, and Lithuania, marking the highest levels since the onset of hostilities in Ukraine. In the diesel segment, the Czech Republic and Sweden led the way, with prices soaring by 27.6% in just one month. Significant increases were also recorded in Estonia at 26.8%, in Latvia at 25.4%, and in Belgium and the Netherlands at 25.2%. This trend is attributed to a sharp reduction in crude oil supply to the European market, driven by instability in key hydrocarbon-producing regions.

A critical factor in the resource shortage remains the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz by Iranian forces, which is the primary logistical artery for crude transportation. The restriction on vessel movement has led to a significant drop in the export of aviation kerosene, directly threatening the operations of civil aviation in Europe. Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency, assessed the potential risks to the transport sector, warning that major European airports could face mass flight cancellations at the beginning of the summer season if supplies remain blocked. Prolonged crisis conditions could force several member states to implement fuel consumption rationing.

On April 15, 2026, US President Donald Trump officially announced his intention to remove Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell from office. The president plans to carry out a forced dismissal if the current central bank’s head refuses to step down voluntarily after a new chair is appointed.

In an interview with Fox Business Network, Trump said he is confident his nominee for the central bank’s leader will be confirmed as early as next week. The president has launched a review of Powell’s actions intended to establish professional incompetence and to detail the causes of recent negative developments in the financial sector. The White House links changes in the Federal Reserve Board directly to the need for an urgent correction of the country’s economic course and the restoration of confidence in financial institutions.

Trump explicitly demanded an immediate easing of interest rates once the new Fed chair takes office. He expects the incoming chair to pursue a more accommodative monetary policy to support domestic business and encourage consumer demand. The current inquiry into the Federal Reserve is meant to document regulatory failings and provide legal grounds for the reshuffling of the Board of Governors. The president’s ultimatum that Powell must quit underscores Washington’s intent to exert tight control over US borrowing costs.

Donald Trump confirmed significant damage to the global financial system caused by the six‑week hostilities in Iran and the area beyond it. The US president predicted market stabilization and a return of energy prices to pre‑crisis levels before the start of the midterm elections in fall 2026.

In an interview with Fox Business, Donald Trump commented on the current economic challenges: “Well, look, there will be a hit, because, you know, we’ve been going through this for six weeks now... but I think the economy will fully recover.” The US president stressed that the adverse effects of higher energy costs are being felt on every continent, but he said the pace of recovery would overcome the fallout of the crisis. The White House counts on a substantial drop in oil and gas prices to ease inflationary pressure on the global community in the coming months.

High fuel prices have become a critical domestic political issue ahead of the upcoming vote. Vice President J.D. Vance has officially confirmed the administration’s intention to actively engage in dialogue with Tehran to ease the financial burden on citizens. The US administration acknowledges the hardships posed by soaring gasoline prices and views a diplomatic settlement as a priority tool for normalizing the energy sector. Success in the talks with Iran would strengthen the ruling party’s position on the political stage.

Donald Trump has officially announced his intention to impose a 50% tariff on all Chinese goods if reports confirm that Beijing has supplied portable missile defense systems to Iran. The warning follows intelligence data revealing a potential expansion of military-technical cooperation between China and Tehran amid ongoing instability in the Middle East.

In an interview with Fox News, the US president expressed skepticism about the reliability of these reports while outlining the scale of the potential economic response. "I doubt they would do that... but if we catch them doing that, they get a 50% tariff, which is a staggering — that's a staggering amount," Trump stated. Despite China being one of the guarantors of the temporary ceasefire, any potential arms shipments could radically alter the dynamics of US-China relations, introducing significant uncertainty into global trade processes.

China's economy remains heavily dependent on Iranian exports, having accounted for over 80% of all sanctioned Iranian oil purchases in 2025. According to the Kpler analytics firm, Chinese tankers are among the few vessels that have maintained access to the Strait of Hormuz during the current maritime blockade. The rise in gasoline prices within China has already reached 11%, prompting government authorities to impose administrative limits on retail prices to stabilize the domestic market. Further escalation of the trade conflict with the US poses additional risks to China's energy security and the stability of its industrial sector.

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright presented a forecast for the trajectory of global energy prices. The secretary anticipates that oil and other energy prices will reach their peak within the next few weeks. This trend is directly linked to the ongoing armed conflict in Iran.

In the longer term, after the active phase of the conflict ends, oil prices are expected to return to their prior fundamental levels. Restoring market balance will take time. Wright highlighted a direct relationship between the duration of the military conflict and the pace of subsequent economic stabilization.

Global oil prices rallied after fruitless US–Iran talks aimed at resolving the Middle East situation. On April 13, financial markets were overwhelmed by high volatility.

Crude prices at one point spiked more than 7%, topping $102 a barrel. Industry experts warn that if the crisis in Iran drags on, oil prices could develop a rapid rally.  

Goldman Sachs analysts do not rule out the possibility that commodity prices will set new record highs by the year's end. TASS reports that the outlook will depend on the parties’ willingness to engage in dialogue and on the stability of petroleum supplies from the crisis region. 

According to data from the General Administration of Customs of China for the first quarter of 2026, the country's external trade has shown distinct mixed dynamics. The primary increase in trade volume has come from the European Union, where figures rose by 17.6% year-over-year. The total trade volume between Beijing and Brussels reached $212.4 billion, supported by a surge in Chinese exports to the European market, which rose by 21.1% compared to the previous year.

In contrast, the interaction between China and the United States is exhibiting a prolonged decline amid ongoing geopolitical and economic tensions. The total volume of bilateral trade during the reporting period fell by 16.6%, totaling $128.68 billion. The negative trend affected both sides, with Chinese exports to the US trimming by 16.3%. Current figures confirm a long-term trend of diminishing economic ties, following a substantial one-third drop in trade volume at the end of the previous fiscal year.

Stagnated trade relations with Washington is attributed to the imposition of tariffs on a wide range of goods, enacted in the spring of last year. In response, Beijing is actively diversifying its trade partnerships, strengthening strategic cooperation with alternative partners. Thus, trade volume between China and Russia increased by 14.8% in the first three months of 2026, reaching $61.25 billion. A significant portion of this growth came from Chinese exports, which added over 22.1%, making a substantial contribution to the structure of the external trade balance.

In March, the pace of consumer inflation in the US accelerated sharply. The main catalyst for the inflation surge was a jump in energy costs amid the escalation of the conflict with Iran, although such dynamics were broadly anticipated by market participants.

According to the US Department of Labor, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) spiked 3.3% year‑on‑year in March, up from 2.4% in February. The reading was slightly below the economists’ consensus of 3.4% but represented the largest increase since June 2022, when oil prices skyrocketed following the start of hostilities in Ukraine.

On a monthly basis, headline inflation jumped 0.9% versus 0.3% a month earlier (analysts had expected 1.0%). The key hit came in the energy segment: prices there surged 12.5% year‑on‑year, a sharp reversal after just a 0.5% rise in February.

Macroeconomic data for March drew market attention because it was the first to reflect the direct economic consequences of the conflict that began with joint US‑Israeli strikes on Tehran in late February. Iran responded by almost entirely blocking tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway that handles roughly 20% of global oil shipments. Although the US is a net energy exporter, the global nature of pricing pushed the average gasoline price at US pumps above $4 per gallon for the first time in more than three years.

Nevertheless, core inflation (core CPI), which excludes volatile food and energy prices, was 2.6% year‑on‑year and 0.2% month‑on‑month, coming in below forecasts. Given the moderate behavior of core measures, analysts expect the Federal Reserve will not place excessive weight on the headline CPI jump when setting future monetary policy.

At the same time, markets are increasingly worried that a protracted Middle East war could force households to cut spending, which would eventually hit the labor market. So far, employment — another key indicator for the Fed — showed a sharp recovery last month, supporting hopes for stabilization.

With inflation remaining elevated, some economists no longer expect the US central bank to cut borrowing costs in 2026. Moreover, several Fed policymakers have already noted that rate hikes may be necessary under current conditions. 

The European Central Bank is being forced to accelerate its tightening of monetary policy as the Middle East crisis has pushed the eurozone into a classic stagflation trap, triggering a sharp rise in inflation amid slowing economic growth.

According to a new macroeconomic report from UBS titled "Prospects for the European Economy," the ECB is expected to deliver at least two interest rate hikes of 25 basis points each this year, with the baseline scenario projecting rates to reach 2.5% by September.

This shift is largely driven by persistently high fuel prices, which have already begun to seep into a broad range of consumer goods. UBS emphasizes that the balance of risks has now shifted toward earlier and more aggressive rate increases. The ECB Governing Council may raise interest rates as soon as its meeting on April 30 if it detects signs of second-round inflationary effects.

Frankfurt is faced with a difficult choice: attempting to curb imported energy inflation through high rates poses a direct risk of stifling the already weak economic growth in Europe. Analysts warn that their forecasts could prove "too soft" if the logistical blockade in the Persian Gulf extends into the latter half of the year.

While the ECB prepares to tighten its stance, other European central banks are adopting a wait-and-see approach. The Bank of England is expected to take a prolonged pause, with its next significant action likely being a rate cut at the end of 2026.

The Swiss National Bank plans to keep interest rates steady at zero until mid-2027, as a strong franc provides the country with a reliable shield against imported inflation. The Swedish Riksbank will maintain its rate at 1.75%, relying on falling domestic inflation.

A key trigger for the ECB remains negotiations in Islamabad concerning the deblocking of the Strait of Hormuz. If oil transit is not restored, Frankfurt may sacrifice economic growth and raise interest rates more than twice to safeguard price stability in the eurozone.