ستة أشهر من الحرب: كيف شكّل الصراع في الشرق الأوسط الأسواق المالية

The conflict’s main market transmission channel is now persistent energy and logistics inflation, rather than a one-off geopolitical shock. Brent averaging around $90 in 2026 versus roughly $70 last year, alongside sharper diesel gains, raises the risk that markets underestimate the effect on transport, industrial margins and consumer prices. The approach of the Northern Hemisphere winter makes heating oil and refined-product disruptions particularly important. This is broadly bullish for crude, refined fuels and energy producers, but bearish for airlines, transport, chemicals and energy-intensive manufacturers.

For central banks, the shock is stagflationary: higher input prices can lift inflation while weakening household purchasing power and corporate demand. That could delay expected rate cuts or revive tightening concerns, supporting front-end yields and reducing the valuation support for long-duration equities. However, the effect is asymmetric: if higher energy costs materially damage growth, longer-dated yields could eventually fall as recession risk overtakes inflation risk. The direction of bonds therefore depends on whether policymakers prioritize second-round inflation or deteriorating activity.

Global equities have so far treated the conflict as containable, with an AI-led rally overwhelming the usual geopolitical risk premium. That suggests the market’s current vulnerability is not necessarily an immediate broad equity selloff, but concentration risk: any further escalation that affects global growth, funding conditions or technology-sector risk appetite could expose richly valued growth shares after their strong performance. Gulf equities are already signaling a more severe regional impact than global indices, making Qatar, UAE and Saudi-linked assets more sensitive to further supply or infrastructure damage.

Traditional havens are providing an inconsistent hedge. The dollar’s modest aggregate rise appears partly driven by yen weakness, while Treasuries have been pressured by inflation and reduced rate-cut expectations. Gold’s recent rebound indicates renewed concern about currency debasement and policy credibility rather than a simple flight-to-safety trade. In a renewed escalation, the dollar could still benefit from liquidity demand, but that response may be weaker if higher U.S. inflation, fiscal concerns or doubts about Fed policy dominate.

The fertilizer disruption creates a delayed second-round risk for agricultural commodities and emerging-market inflation. Food-price effects may build with a lag as shipping constraints and input shortages feed into planting and harvest decisions. This is most negative for food-importing economies in Asia, Latin America and Africa, potentially weakening their currencies and limiting domestic rate-cut flexibility; agricultural producers and fertilizer-related companies may be relative beneficiaries.

The most exposed credit risk is regional rather than global: weaker Gulf exports, damaged gas infrastructure, falling Dubai property activity and wider sovereign-insurance costs point to pressure on Gulf banks, real estate and government-linked borrowers. Qatar and UAE assets may remain under pressure even if global risk sentiment stays resilient, while Bahrain’s higher debt burden makes it particularly vulnerable to refinancing and spread shocks.

What traders should monitor next:

the duration and breadth of Hormuz shipping restrictions; additional attacks on Gulf or Russian energy infrastructure; diesel and heating-oil crack spreads; freight and insurance costs; food and fertilizer prices; inflation expectations; central-bank guidance; and whether global equities continue to rise despite worsening regional credit indicators. A credible ceasefire would likely compress the oil and regional-risk premium, while further disruption could convert the current contained shock into a broader inflation-growth repricing.