BITCOIN FACES WAR
Share
Not a diplomatic crisis, not a slow escalation of declarations and economic sanctions. A war. Brutal. Immediate. Visible live on screens around the world. On February 28, 2026, while most Western capitals were still asleep or barely awake, the first images began circulating online. Explosions on the outskirts of Tehran. Columns of black smoke rising into the gray dawn sky. Shaky videos filmed from anonymous apartments, rooftops, and cell phones capturing the moment even before governments confirmed anything. Very quickly, rumors gave way to facts. The United States and Israel had just launched their most ambitious military operation since the invasion of Iraq. A series of coordinated strikes targeting strategic military infrastructure in Iran. Air bases.
Command centers. Facilities linked to Iran's ballistic missile program. The operation seemed to have been planned for months, perhaps years. The Tomahawk cruise missiles and airstrikes had been synchronized with surgical precision. But one detail would transform this military event into a global political earthquake. The primary target of the operation was not just a base or a research center. It was a man. Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran since 1989, the central figure of the regime and the political embodiment of Iranian religious power, was believed to have been personally targeted in his command bunker. For several hours, the information remained uncertain. News channels reported strikes. Governments remained silent. Analysts speculated. Then the confirmation came. Khamenei was dead.
From that precise moment, the situation was no longer a simple military operation. It became a major geopolitical event, capable of reshaping the strategic balance of the Middle East and triggering a global chain reaction. The Iranian response was swift. In less than 24 hours, Iran launched more than 170 ballistic missiles toward various targets in the Middle East. Israel, of course, but also Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. Anywhere American bases were present. Anywhere strategic infrastructure could be affected. The message was clear. The retaliation would not be symbolic. While the missiles crossed the night sky over the Persian Gulf and missile defense systems were activated, another, more discreet but equally revealing phenomenon was unfolding elsewhere: in the markets.
Because today there exists a financial asset that never closes. A market that remains open when all the world's stock exchanges are still dark. A permanent barometer of human fear and greed. This asset is called Bitcoin. And that weekend, Bitcoin was about to offer an almost clinical reading of how global capital reacts to war. When the first images of Tehran ablaze began circulating online, trading algorithms reacted before most people even understood what was happening. News headlines were scanned, analyzed, and translated into market signals. In less than an hour, Bitcoin fell below $63,000. Three hundred million dollars in long positions were liquidated almost instantly. Overexposed, overly optimistic traders were expelled from the market by the mechanical force of the liquidations. On paper, nearly $128 billion in crypto market capitalization evaporated in minutes.
The scene was familiar. Fear. Panic. Liquidations. Commentators already predicting a deeper collapse. The classic scenario that markets have rehearsed hundreds of times. But this time, something strange was about to happen. As rumors of Khamenei's death began to be confirmed, Bitcoin abruptly reversed course. Not a simple technical rebound, not a small, timid recovery. A pump. The price surged above $68,000 in a matter of hours. A rapid, almost violent rise, as if the market had suddenly digested the information and drawn a different conclusion than the one the initial panic had suggested. By the end of Saturday, even as the Western coalition had just struck Iran and ballistic missiles rained down on several Middle Eastern countries, Bitcoin was stabilizing around $66,700.
The day the world may have entered a new major conflict ended with Bitcoin in positive territory. On Sunday, tensions remained high. Strikes continued. Political pronouncements multiplied. Iran threatened to escalate the conflict. US bases in the Gulf remained on high alert. Traditional markets were still closed. But some assets began to react. Oil surged at the Asian open. The price quickly settled above $75 a barrel, driven by fears of disruption to energy routes in the Strait of Hormuz. Gold and silver also rose, as they almost always do when geopolitics becomes uncertain. Bitcoin, however, remained surprisingly stable.
The price fluctuated within a narrow range between $66,000 and $67,000. Slight downward pressure occasionally appeared, but nothing resembling a collapse. Nothing resembling a capitulation. On Monday morning, when traditional markets finally reopened, futures for major US indices reacted immediately to the geopolitical situation. Tech stocks retreated. The Nasdaq displayed the most visible signs of stress. Bitcoin followed suit for a few hours. Then it stabilized. And this is where the phenomenon becomes interesting. Because while equity markets were still trying to assess the potential consequences of the conflict, Bitcoin had already passed through the bulk of its emotional reaction. Within 72 hours, the crypto market had absorbed a war.
Traditional markets, meanwhile, were still trying to understand what had just happened. This reveals something fundamental about the current nature of Bitcoin. Many simplistic narratives present Bitcoin as a perfect safe haven, a digital equivalent of gold capable of instantly withstanding any crisis. The reality is more complex. Bitcoin is not yet a safe haven. When the initial shock occurs, Bitcoin still reacts like a risky asset. Investors sell. Liquidations are triggered. The price falls. This is exactly what happened during the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Bitcoin fell by more than 8% in the first few hours. But then, something unusual happens. Bitcoin recovers faster than other risky assets.
After the invasion of Ukraine, Bitcoin surged by nearly 28% in the following sixty days. After Hamas's attack on Israel in October 2023, the pattern was similar: an initial drop followed by a rapid rebound. This weekend, that pattern repeated itself, but with one important difference. The dip didn't last several days; it lasted only a few hours. What's happening now isn't a weakness in Bitcoin. It's the gradual emergence of an implicit consensus in the markets. Geopolitical shocks have become buying opportunities. This consensus is visible in the options market data. While panic dominated social media and liquidations cascaded, some investors were massively buying Bitcoin call options at $74,000 and $75,000 for March 2026. Someone, somewhere, was watching this chaos and saw an opportunity.
This wasn't a blind bet. It was a thesis. Because behind the immediate price fluctuations lies a much deeper dynamic. A dynamic that directly links geopolitics, currency, and Bitcoin. To understand this, we must consider two possible scenarios for the continuation of the conflict. The first is the most comfortable scenario. The conflict remains contained. Iran, deprived of its supreme leader, chooses to limit the escalation. Diplomatic negotiations resume after a show of military force. The Strait of Hormuz remains open. Energy routes are not disrupted in the long term. In this scenario, oil prices gradually fall. Global inflation does not rise again. The US Federal Reserve can maintain its monetary policy without having to intervene massively.
In this case, Bitcoin could simply resume the upward trend that has been emerging for several weeks. Levels of $74,000 or $75,000 would quickly become plausible targets. But there is a second scenario. A scenario that governments rarely discuss publicly. A protracted war. A regional conflict that expands, involves more actors, and permanently disrupts energy routes. A partially closed Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices settling above $90 or $100 a barrel. In this scenario, the economic consequences would be immediate. Inflation would surge again. Central banks would be trapped. Interest rates could not be lowered despite the economic slowdown. Stock markets would suffer.
Bitcoin could then experience another phase of short-term pressure. A return to $60,000, or even $55,000, would become possible. Many investors fear this scenario. But it contains a profound irony. Because long wars always have the same economic consequence. They force states to spend. Emergency military budgets. Support programs. Aid to allies. Colossal expenditures that can only be financed in one way: through debt. And when the debt becomes too burdensome, through money creation. Monetary history is full of these moments when geopolitical conflicts forced governments to print more money. World War I. World War II. The Vietnam War. Every major war leaves behind a mountain of debt and a weakened currency.
In this context, Bitcoin possesses a unique characteristic: its supply cannot be increased. Every dollar printed to finance a war implicitly reinforces the argument for an asset whose issuance is mathematically limited to 21 million units. This dynamic is increasingly captivating analysts. Arthur Hayes, former head of BitMEX, recently summarized this idea provocatively. According to him, Bitcoin's next major bull run will not come from ETFs or institutional adoption. It will come from a major geopolitical crisis. Because geopolitical crises force governments to restart the monetary machine, and every monetary stimulus is unintentional advertising for Bitcoin. It is in this context that the current market situation must be viewed.
The crypto market is still experiencing a significant correction. The drawdown has reached approximately 52% compared to the peaks of the previous cycle. But this kind of correction is not exceptional in Bitcoin's history. The issue is not the depth of the correction, but the context in which it is occurring. Today, Bitcoin is evolving in a radically different environment than in previous cycles. Institutional ETFs are absorbing steady inflows. Large corporations are beginning to integrate Bitcoin into their treasury strategies. The financial infrastructure surrounding Bitcoin is more developed than ever.
And it is in this context that a major geopolitical shock hits the system. Historically, major Bitcoin bottoms often build around a brutal external event. The FTX bankruptcy in 2022. The Covid crash in March 2020. A shock. A massive liquidation. Then an eerie calm. It is in this calm that the market slowly rebuilds its base. This weekend, three hundred million dollars of long positions were liquidated in a matter of minutes. Weak hands were expelled. The most aggressive investors bought into the panic. Bitcoin held the $63,000 support level. And then it moved again. This does not mean that the bottom is already confirmed. Markets never provide certainty. But the current structure looks more like the gradual construction of a floor than the beginning of a collapse.
And this weekend's geopolitical shock could paradoxically accelerate this process. Crises have a strange property: they reveal the true nature of systems. This weekend, Bitcoin underwent one of its most severe tests since becoming an institutional asset. And it held. Not because it's already the perfect safe haven some imagine, but because it has become something else: a permanent market, an asset available 24/7, capable of absorbing global fear even before traditional markets open their doors, an asset that powerful investors buy when panic reaches its peak. The war that has just begun thus has two faces for Bitcoin. In the short term, it means volatility, uncertainty, and potential shocks if the conflict escalates.
But in the long run, every war that pushes states to take on more debt and print more money reinforces the logic that gave birth to Bitcoin: the logic of a currency whose supply no one can manipulate. The question, therefore, is not whether Bitcoin will resume its upward trajectory. The only question that truly matters is this: at what price will you be positioned when that happens?
👉 Also read: