Iran War: Future Scenarios and Business Implications

The Iran situation remains volatile and uncertain, with material impacts for organizations.

Leaders should plan for multiple future scenarios, prioritizing resilience and effective decision-making

Current State (April 10)

Figure 1: An explosion in Tehran, February 28, 2026 (Source: PBS)
Figure 2: Cone of Plausibility Overview: Iran Conflict (Source: Recorded Future)

Framework Overview

To assess how the Iran conflict could evolve over the next 6–12 months, Insikt Group analyzed regional and global dynamics using the PESTLE-M framework, covering Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, Environmental, and Military domains, with a focus on Iran, the United States, Israel, and Gulf States.

Figure 3: PESTLE-M Framework (Source: Recorded Future)

This analysis informed a scenario generation exercise using a Cone of Plausibility (CoP) method. The objective was not to predict a single outcome, but to explore a range of alternative futures based on observed signals and emerging trends.

Wildcard

Plausible

Baseline

Plausible

Figure 4: Cone of Plausibility Framework (Source: Recorded Future)


Methodology

For each PESTLE-M category, we identified key drivers that could increase or decrease the likelihood of escalation, de-escalation, or sustained instability, and assessed how these dynamics may evolve under different assumptions. These were combined to develop six scenarios: one baseline, two plausible (best and worst case), and three wildcard scenarios, enabling organizations to evaluate how the conflict may unfold and the potential impacts on their operating environment.

Within the CoP framework:

We define scenarios as follows:

Baseline Scenario: Fragile Ceasefire with Sustained Economic Disruption

Key Drivers and Assumptions

Figure 5: Brent oil prices and projections (Source: Oxford Economics)
Figure 6: Iran is also threatening maritime traffic through the Bab al-Mandab, another key route (Source: Times of India)

Ceasefire holds, but conflict shifts into sustained economic warfare.

A fragile ceasefire reduces the pace of direct military exchanges strikes, but the drivers of conflict remain unresolved. Iran lacks the capacity for decisive escalation but retains asymmetric leverage, while the US prioritizes energy market stability and conflict containment. The Strait of Hormuz reopens only intermittently, with recurring disruptions, inspections, and security incidents, keeping shipping, insurance, and energy markets under sustained pressure. Gulf financial, logistics, and technology sectors operate intermittently, airlines maintain some route suspensions, and cyber activity remains elevated against regional infrastructure and Western-linked organizations. The conflict evolves into economic coercion as a primary tool, driving elevated oil and gas prices, persistent market volatility, and tighter financing conditions. Supply chains gradually reconfigure away from high-risk routes, increasing costs and reducing efficiency. Russia benefits from sustained high energy prices and reduced Western focus, strengthening its position in Ukraine. China capitalizes on fragmentation by expanding alternative trade and financial networks, reinforcing a more bifurcated global system.

Likelihood

Most likely if ceasefire holds without resolution: Conflict remains below full-scale war, but economic disruption persists as the dominant mode of competition.

Business Implications
Priority Actions (0-90 days)
Operational: Intermittent shipping, route, and supplier disruption increases cost and complexity
Stress-test exposure to Hormuz-related shipping and energy disruption
Financial: Elevated energy prices and volatility sustain margin pressure and tighter financing
Harden resilience for energy, logistics, and cyber-dependent operations
Competitive: Firms with diversified routing and lower energy exposure gain advantage
Review sanctions, insurance, and counterparty risk across key jurisdictions
Legal: Evolving sanctions and emergency measures raise compliance burden and enforcement risk
Reputational: Scrutiny over pricing, shortages, and regional exposure increases brand risk

Plausible Scenario (Best Case): Managed Stalemate

Key Drivers and Assumptions

Figure 7: US President Trump delivers a warning to Iran at a White House Easter event (Source: PBS News)
Figure 8: Iran has used maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz as leverage in the conflict (Source: CNBC)

Plausible: A realistic alternative outcome based on evolving drivers and assumptions

The US portrays its leadership decapitation campaign as successfully facilitating “regime change,” creating space for diplomatic engagement with “new” leadership. Iran maintains increased level of oversight over the Strait of Hormuz, while internally the IRGC plays a greater role in strategic decision-making.

Domestic economic and political pressure leads to the US to scale back military operations without clear resolution of key regional security issues, including Iran’s right to nuclear enrichment, ballistic missile program, and support to regional proxies. Maritime traffic slowly returns to pre-war levels, with a new protocol for vessel traffic under an internationally accepted mandate. Iran retains an increased level of oversight over the Strait of Hormuz passages and profits from the traffic. This relieves some economic strain, though lingering supply chain effects remain. Cyber attacks persist as a means of asymmetric coercion. The US lifts some sanctions against the “new” regime, but other sanctions remain in place, complicating the regulatory environment. Interest in renewable energy increases as companies seek to mitigate against future disruption, though oil demand returns to pre-conflict norms. Israel continues limited, highly targeted strikes, while the US retains its military presence in the region, keeping the possibility for re-escalation open.

Likelihood

Less likely as conflict continues: This scenario assumes the US’s limited appetite for full-scale war, but the opportunities for de-escalation diminish as the conflict persists.

Business Implications
Priority Actions (0-90 days)
Operational: Recurring disruption risk for regional transport corridors, ports, and cross-border trade
Keep sanctions, export-control, and third-party due diligence on heightened alert
Financial: Long-term effects of recovery
Build redundancy into critical suppliers
Competitive: Competitors with diversified sourcing, redundancy, and mature sanctions controls are best positioned to withstand ongoing shocks
Maintain an elevated cyber posture
Legal: Continued tensions mean sanctions and export controls may tighten again with little notice
Tighten executive decision rights and trigger points for regional exposure
Reputational: Price increases tied to lingering supply-chain effects may trigger accusations of profiteering
Accelerate resilience investments with strategic upside, especially energy efficiency, renewable sourcing, and inventory visibility

Plausible Scenario (Worst Case): Regional Conflict with Gulf Involvement

Key Drivers and Assumptions

Figure 9: The Saudi crown prince reportedly urged President Trump to continue war (Source: NYT)
Figure 10: The UAE has been proactive in the conflict, taking nonmilitary measures against Iran (Source: South China Post)

Plausible: A realistic alternative outcome based on evolving drivers and assumptions

Ceasefire collapses, triggering multi-state regional war.

A temporary ceasefire breaks down following renewed strikes and failure to secure maritime access. Iran escalates missile and proxy attacks, including targeting Gulf energy infrastructure. With critical thresholds crossed, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain enter the conflict directly to protect economic and political stability. The Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab become sustained conflict zones, with repeated attacks, mining, and vessel seizures. Shipping and insurance markets withdraw at scale, severely constraining global energy flows. Energy prices surge, driving inflation and recession risk globally. Fuel shortages emerge in import-dependent economies, triggering industrial slowdowns, reduced mobility, and rolling outages. Cyber operations escalate into coordinated campaigns targeting energy, logistics, and financial systems. Legal fragmentation accelerates, with overlapping sanctions regimes, asset controls, and enforcement actions constraining cross-border operations. Russia exploits elevated energy revenues and reduced Western focus to press its advantage in Ukraine. China remains indirect but leverages Western overstretch to increase pressure on Taiwan.

Likelihood

More likely if ceasefire collapses and Gulf assets are targeted: Escalation becomes self-reinforcing once regional actors are drawn into direct conflict.

Business Implications
Priority Actions (0-90 days)
Operational: Supplier and production relocation, increased redundancy, and higher cost and complexity
Harden critical infrastructure dependences (energy, logistics, third parties)
Financial: Energy costs and inflation drive margin pressure, while financing becomes tighter and more expensive
Test business continuity under outage scenarios
Competitive: Resilient, energy-secure firms gain advantage; exposed firms lose share
Segment and isolate high-value systems; prioritize offline backups and rapid recovery
Legal: Fragmented, fast-changing sanctions increase compliance burden and legal risk
Review third-party and regional concentration risk, particularly for Middle
Reputational: Scrutiny over pricing, shortages, and exposure drives brand and trust risk
Establish crisis governance and decision cadence

Wildcard Scenario 1: Lasting Peace Agreement

Key Drivers and Assumptions

Figure 11: Pakistan has offered to host talks to broker peace between US, Iran (Source: Time)
Figure 12: Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz dropped significantly since conflict began (Source: Lloyd's List)

Wildcard: A low-probability, high-impact scenario that challenges existing assumptions

Negotiated settlement reached between the US and Iran, allowing for longterm drawdown of conflict.
Significant degradation of Iran’s energy, military, and industrial infrastructure, combined with mounting economic strain, power shortages, and reduced capacity to sustain conflict, compels Tehran to reassess its position and signal willingness to accept concessions. In parallel, the United States faces rising economic costs from prolonged energy disruption, inflation, and market instability, increasing pressure to stabilize conditions. A negotiated settlement emerges through indirect talks, mediated by Oman, with Iran accepting concessions on maritime security and nuclear constraints in exchange for phased sanctions relief and assurances against further strikes. Iran seeks a revised Strait of Hormuz security framework and limited economic concessions, though broader demands such as reparations are only partially addressed. The Strait of Hormuz fully reopens under agreed security mechanisms, restoring stable shipping and energy flows. Sanctions ease gradually, enabling reintegration of Iranian energy exports and limited foreign investment. Military activity declines sharply, cyber operations reduce, and global energy markets stabilise, easing inflationary pressures and improving financial conditions.

Likelihood

Low probability: Requires significant concessions from one side under sustained pressure.

Business Implications
Priority Actions (0-90 days)
Operational: Supply chains stabilize, enabling efficiency gains and reduced redundancy
Monitor stabilization signals and time market re-entry strategically
Financial: Lower energy prices ease margin pressure and improve access to capital
Secure long-term energy and supply contracts at favorable prices
Competitive: Early movers capture growth opportunities in recovering markets
Re-optimize supply chains and reduce excess redundancy
Legal: Sanctions easing reduces compliance burden and enables cross-border activity
Reassess sanctions exposure and compliance frameworks
Reputational: Stabilization and reinvestment strengthen stakeholder trust
Align growth and investment strategy to recovering regional markets

Wildcard Scenario 2: Iranian Regime Collapses

Key Drivers and Assumptions

Figure 13: Mass protests against the regime in December 2025 were brutally repressed (Source: Le Monde)
Figure 14: Displaced Syrians have lived in refugee camps for ten years, demonstrating the long-term impacts of internal conflict (Source: UNHCR)

Wildcard: A low-probability, high-impact scenario that challenges existing assumptions

The Islamic Republic collapses, plunging the country into a civil war and complex humanitarian crisis.

The US and Israel’s persistent “decapitation strategy” weakens the regime to the point where it is no longer able to assert internal control. With no viable alternative, the country falls into a multiparty civil war made up of pro-regime, pro-democracy, and assorted regional and ideological militias. Food and fuel shortages are severe in certain regions. Refugee camps are built in Iraq while Europe’s asylum system faces overwhelming demands. The US claims Kharg Island in the chaos and asserts control over the Strait of Hormuz, mitigating international economic damage. However, the political instability gives pro-regime and other ideological groups a base for asymmetric operations, leading to persistent regional disruption. Cyber capabilities degrade amid internal fighting, though some hacktivist operations persist against a wider variety of ideological enemies. Damage to water and energy facilities sustained during the conflict exacerbates humanitarian crisis and slows recovery. Russia supplies military support to pro-regime factions, but not enough to significantly tilt the balance of power.

Likelihood

Long-term resilience of regime and viability of alternatives is unknown, making it difficult to assess likelihood with confidence.

Business Implications
Priority Actions (0-90 days)
Operational: Reduced reliability of just-in-time inventory models, especially for firms dependent on Gulf maritime corridors
Segment critical operations
Financial: Long-term increase in operational and energy costs
Harden sanctions and third-party controls
Competitive: Larger firms use stronger government relationships or balance sheets to secure logistics
Require an immediate review of regional dependencies, with backup routing and alternate sourcing plans for critical business lines
Legal: Export-control failures involving dual-use goods, technology, industrial inputs, or cyber tools
Ensure employee protection measures are ready across the region
Reputational: Activist or online campaigns tying the firm to foreign intervention or opportunism
Create a 90-day resilience plan including decision triggers for escalation or market withdrawal

Wildcard Scenario 3: Nuclear Crisis

Key Drivers and Assumptions

Figure 15: Bushehr has not yet been a direct target, though missiles have landed near it (Source: Development Aid)
Screenshot 2026-04-08 at 4.38.23 PM.png
Figure 16: Weather patterns following the Chernobyl nuclear disaster spread radiological material affecting up to 6 million people (Source: UNSCEAR)

Wildcard: A low-probability, high-impact scenario that challenges existing assumptions

Missile strikes hitting a nuclear facility lead to a radiological incident, causing immediate global shock and rapid escalation.

A missile strike causes extensive damage to Iran’s Bushehr civilian nuclear power facility, causing radiological release with cross-border contamination. This occurs due to escalation, miscalculation, or degraded command and control. Immediate impacts include evacuation zones and disruption to regional energy supply. Emergency response efforts are delayed by ongoing conflict, limiting containment and extending environmental and economic damage. As a result, southern Iran and Gulf States experience long-term harm to drinking water supply and maritime food sources. The conflict also prevents long-term monitoring in Iran, which extends the long-term health and environmental damage from inadvertent exposure. Contamination further restricts maritime trade routes in the Gulf, while energy markets react sharply to both supply disruption and elevated systemic risk. Cyber and information operations amplify panic and misinformation.

Likelihood

Low probability, high impact: Risk of intentional or unintended strike increases under sustained conflict.

Business Implications
Priority Actions (0-90 days)
Operational: Disruption to regional operations and supply chains; site closures
Activate crisis management and continuity protocols
Financial: Extreme market volatility and energy price spikes
Protect personnel and account for regional workforce exposure
Competitive: Firms with geographic diversification gain advantage
Secure critical systems and prepare for sustained disruption
Legal: Emergency regulations, sanctions, and liability exposure increase
Identify alternative routes and supply chain contingencies
Reputational: Heightened scrutiny around safety, workforce protection, and response
Manage disinformation through strong crisis communications process