I just noticed an interesting thing — the war in the Persian Gulf showed how quickly the entire pricing system of global assets can be rewritten. And this is not just a military conflict, but essentially a high-speed revaluation machine that, within hours, affected the entire world.

When the strikes between the US, Iran, and Israel began on February 28, hostilities spread within hours to the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar. Air defense systems intercepted missiles, but falling debris caused casualties and fires in the ports of Dubai and Abu Dhabi. And now, a country renowned for safety and neutrality begins to be revalued right before our eyes.

The market reacts in a classic pattern: first energy prices soar, then shipping, then insurance, stocks, bonds, currencies, and risky assets. War does not require city destruction — just the disappearance of certainty, and prices start to be rewritten.

And now the most interesting about the Persian Gulf. About 20% of the world's oil passes through this strait. When tension arises there, it’s not just a supply reduction — it’s unpredictability in delivery timelines. Several energy companies suspended shipments, tankers were attacked, ships got stuck. Brent quickly jumped above $80. But the main point is not the oil price itself, but that global supply chains turn from a price issue into a time issue. For industry, this uncertainty is much more destructive.

The first to explode were insurance premiums. Military insurance for routes through the Persian Gulf increased by about 50% — adding $100,000 to $200,000 to the cost of a single trip. These costs do not stay with shipping companies but are passed along the trade and logistics chain. The result: increased import costs, passive price increases for raw materials used in production, reduced profitability of international trade. This is lagging inflation, which will not immediately show up in statistics but will manifest in the prices of everyday goods in the coming months.

Airspace was closed, airlines canceled routes through the Gulf, tens of thousands of passengers got stranded. The disruption of flights to Dubai, one of the busiest aviation hubs in the world, means a sharp decrease in the efficiency of east-west movement of people. It’s not just $3.8 million in tickets home — it’s delays in business trips, slowing cross-border projects, rising tariffs on air freight of expensive cargo. One of the main infrastructures of globalization revealed its high vulnerability.

On financial markets, a classic risk-off scenario kicked in. High oil prices mean increased inflationary pressure, expectations of rate cuts diminish, the yield curve rises. Funds flow into bonds, gold, and inflation-sensitive commodities. Stocks come under pressure, especially high-valuation segments like NASDAQ.

And the crypto market — a completely separate story. Three years ago, geopolitical conflicts mainly affected crypto emotionally. Now, the reaction of chain assets almost exactly matches traditional financial markets.

Over the weekend, when news of the conflict spread, traditional markets had not yet opened, but BTC already started falling — from about 68,000 to 64,000. ETH fell even more, over 8%. In derivatives markets, there was a massive deleveraging: within 24 hours, liquidations exceeded $1 billion, open positions rapidly decreased, and funding rates turned negative. The logic fully aligns with Nasdaq’s decline amid expectations of high rates — assets most sensitive to liquidity are sold first.

But the crypto market showed a clear advantage: faster recovery. As soon as stock futures stabilized and oil price growth slowed, Bitcoin immediately rebounded. The V-shaped recovery is explained by the absence of trading time limits and delays in cross-market clearing. Crypto became the first asset class to complete the price formation, deleverage, and re-establish global equilibrium.

Stablecoins indicated the flow of dollars in the chain. After escalation of the conflict, the volume of USDT and USDC significantly increased — investors sold risky assets but stayed in the market, parking funds in stablecoins in anticipation of a reversal. Changes in stablecoin capitalization are essentially a monetary position within the chain.

Tokenized gold and RWA in the chain can be priced when traditional markets are closed. Over the weekend, PAXG and XAUT traded at a premium, their price movements aligned with the direction after the gold spot market opened. Chain assets have become a shadow pricing mechanism for traditional assets.

Gold remains the main safe haven. U.S. Treasury bonds are the anchor of global liquidity. BTC is a high-beta asset, most sensitive to dollar liquidity. Stablecoins are dollars on the blockchain. RWA in the chain is an expanded market for traditional assets. Crypto markets have ceased to be just volatile niche assets and have begun to perform the same functions as traditional finance — risk pricing, liquidity buffering, cross-market arbitrage.

And here’s the interesting part: when three major arteries — energy, shipping, and aviation — are under simultaneous threat, the market looks not for the asset with the greatest growth, but for a structure that provides certainty. And here, China’s role is not a traditional safe haven, but rather a support layer amid global volatility.

When risk in the Persian Gulf raises energy and transportation costs, the global manufacturing sector faces not a cost problem, but supply uncertainty. China’s peculiarity is that it has the most comprehensive industrial system in the world. The added value of Chinese manufacturing has long been about 30% of the global total — nearly twice that of the US. This means that rising external transportation costs do not linearly translate into supply chain disruptions internally.

The concentration of manufacturing capacities in key commodities is striking. In equipment for renewable energy, consumer electronics, and photovoltaic modules, China’s share in global production usually exceeds 60%. When European routes are forced to bypass, this localized production capacity directly ensures order stability. During the crisis in the Red Sea in 2024, the global shipping index rose over 120%, but delivery times for Chinese exports varied much less. Such lower supply volatility itself is a premium. When the world overestimates energy, China values stable supply capabilities.

Hong Kong has become an interesting interface during times of instability. In the stage of geopolitical conflict, investors fear not a fall, but the inability to exit positions. Hong Kong remains one of the few markets in Asia with a US dollar clearing system, an offshore yuan hub, direct links to Chinese assets, and dispute resolution based on common law.

In 2023–2024, the average daily trading volume on the Hong Kong exchange stayed around 100 billion Hong Kong dollars, with funds moving in both directions. The number of CIPS participants exceeded 1,400, covering over 100 countries and regions. Even amid rising global volatility, capital can be distributed and withdrawn through a well-regulated market.

In the realm of virtual assets and RWA, Hong Kong is shaping a new financial structure: traditional assets can legally enter the chain, and chain assets can serve as clearing within the framework of the traditional legal system. During geopolitical conflicts, this ensures continuous price formation across time zones. When European and US markets are closed on weekends, Hong Kong continues trading. When delays occur in traditional settlement, on-chain markets keep pricing. Hong Kong has become a temporary interface between traditional finance and blockchain finance.

This conflict has changed not only energy prices or route choices but also redefined notions of security and liquidity. The future asset pricing hub must possess three capabilities simultaneously: an industrial base for production, a financial system to settle deals, and a market structure for continuous price formation. When the world evaluates uncertainty, whoever provides confidence will become the new anchor.