U.S. military says it can resume large-scale operations against Iran on short notice
Top U.S. general signals rapid readiness
U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Kane said on April 21 that American forces are prepared to restart large-scale military operations against Iran on short notice, according to officials familiar with defense planning.
The comment highlights a high state of military readiness despite a temporary lull in major combat and adds to concerns that hostilities in the Persian Gulf could resume quickly if ordered.
Political debate and buildup since 2025
Kane’s statement comes after more than a year of rising tensions and internal policy disputes in Washington.
In early 2025, Congress debated measures aimed at limiting the president’s authority to deploy forces against Iran. The debate exposed a deep divide over how far the United States should be willing to go militarily in confronting Tehran.
By 2026, the Pentagon had stepped up operational planning. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Kane coordinated a series of visible deployments, including B-52 bombers and the establishment of an operational command center at Mar-a-Lago, signaling that contingency plans had moved into advanced stages.
“Deadly strike” plan and focus on Iranian capabilities
Pentagon documents indicated that a plan code-named “Deadly Strike” was under development, outlining options for both air and ground operations.
Planning reportedly centered on Iran’s mine-laying capabilities and potential strike platforms viewed as threats to U.S. and allied bases and shipping lanes in the region.
Then-President Donald Trump framed Iran’s missile program as a direct danger to the United States, describing possible operations as a “final opportunity” to weaken Iran’s military infrastructure. His comments placed any future campaign inside a broader national security narrative focused on preempting perceived threats.
Mixed signals on duration of any conflict
While some senior defense officials spoke of readiness for extended combat, several members of Congress insisted Washington had no intention of launching a large ground campaign and predicted that fighting, if renewed, would be short-lived.
The gap between military preparations and political assurances fueled public uncertainty about how long a new phase of conflict might actually last.
Prediction markets later saw active wagering on whether the administration would declare an official end to operations by March of that year, reflecting skepticism over how quickly a confrontation could be wound down once intensified.
Ceasefire deadline and naval blockade heighten risk
Kane’s latest confirmation of large-scale mobilization capability comes as a temporary ceasefire, brokered by Pakistan, is set to expire on April 22.
At the same time, a U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports remains in force. In response, Iran again closed the Strait of Hormuz on April 18, a critical chokepoint through which more than 20 percent of global oil exports typically pass.
The overlapping pressures of an expiring ceasefire, an active blockade, and the closure of Hormuz leave the situation between Washington and Tehran unstable and prone to rapid escalation.
Energy markets roiled by conflict
The ongoing tensions have driven sharp swings in global energy markets. Since the onset of military action on February 28, Brent crude futures have climbed by about 50%, with prices earlier this month topping $109 per barrel amid fears of prolonged supply disruption.
The price spike reflects growing concern that continued or expanded fighting could limit oil flows from the Gulf, prolonging tight market conditions.
Global economic outlook darkens
The impact of the conflict has widened beyond energy costs. International financial institutions have begun downgrading their economic forecasts.
The International Monetary Fund recently cut its global growth projection for 2026 from 3.3 percent to 3.1 percent, explicitly citing the conflict. The IMF warned that a severe, extended confrontation could pull growth down to 2.5 percent and potentially tip the world economy into recession.
Digital assets show vulnerability to geopolitical shocks
Digital asset markets have also reacted sharply to developments in the Gulf.
In the 24 hours following the February 28 strikes, Bitcoin fell more than 6%, while total liquidations across the crypto market reached roughly $494 million as leveraged positions were forcibly closed.
This pattern suggests that during intense geopolitical stress, capital tends to move toward traditional safe-haven assets such as government bonds, while newer and more speculative assets are sold off. The shift points to a broader de-risking phase that can sweep across financial markets when uncertainty is high.
What traders are watching now
Those active in financial markets are closely tracking both official rhetoric and concrete developments on the ground.
On the political side, attention is focused on Defense Secretary Hegseth, whose recent remarks have swung between emphasizing a diplomatic exit and warning that the United States could destroy what remains of Iran’s energy sector. Mixed signals from Trump over the status and prospects of negotiations add to short-term volatility in prices across energy, bond, equity, and digital asset markets.
On the operational side, traders are watching for any verified changes to the U.S. naval blockade, shifts in shipping traffic through the Persian Gulf, or alterations to Iran’s posture around the Strait of Hormuz.
These physical indicators are seen as more reliable signals of immediate escalation risk than statements alone, and are likely to guide market expectations if tensions harden or begin to ease in the days following the ceasefire’s expiration.
Geopolitical shocks often move crypto fast—explore how macro risks shape digital assets with our latest guide on crypto and DeFi in 2025.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
