On April 17, 2026, Beijing time, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy publicly set three passage conditions for the Strait of Hormuz and reiterated the possibility of closing the strait if necessary, once again pushing this global energy artery to the forefront. The Strait of Hormuz carries a significant proportion of the global oil and gas maritime transport volume. Once the passage changes from "default open" to "conditional open," oil prices, shipping rates, and regional security premiums will be repriced. Accompanied by this statement, the shipping market immediately reacted — the Baltic Dry Index (BDI) surged to 2567 points, with a weekly increase of 16.6%, reflecting the rapid pricing of potential disruptions and rerouting costs by shipowners and cargo owners. As traditional market hedging sentiment warmed, the internal cryptocurrency market also began to anticipate: in this new round of geopolitical tensions, digital assets may once again play a role as a safe-haven and asset relocation tool.

The Subtle Game of Conditional Opening

In Iran's external narrative, the Strait of Hormuz is "still open," but this opening is carefully embedded with three passage conditions, essentially rewriting default free passage into "permission-based passage." On one hand, the Revolutionary Guard Navy sends a signal that "passage must be coordinated," emphasizing that any vessel wishing to pass through the strait needs to communicate and confirm in advance; on the other hand, it keeps the option of "possibly closing the strait" on the table, making the strait itself a geopolitical bargaining chip that can be activated at any time.

According to Tasnim News Agency, citing military sources, passage for vessels "must be coordinated with the Revolutionary Guard Navy," highlighting that it transforms a waterway traditionally governed by international navigation rules into a region that highly depends on the discourse of Iranian military institutions. Meanwhile, Fars News Agency emphasized another clue: if "continued blockage is viewed as a violation of the ceasefire agreement." Here, "continued blockage" and "violation of the ceasefire" create a contradictory pull — Iran wants to stress that it has not openly torn up the ceasefire framework while retaining enough military deterrence space to maintain a explainable ambiguous state between internal games and external public opinion.

In stark contrast is the rhetoric from the United States. Trump stated directly on social media that "the strait has fully resumed passage," describing the current state as a "normalization" with almost no barriers. Iran repeatedly emphasizes that any passage must adhere to its set preconditions, especially concerning ceasefire and the red lines of hostile actions. This divergence between the narratives of "full passage" and "conditional opening" not only represents a linguistic clash but also different interpretations of the applicability of international law, the meaning of the ceasefire agreement, and the boundaries of regional sovereignty, leaving the market and shipping participants with significant uncertainty in interpretation.

Behind the Surge of Shipping Indices is Insurance and...

The BDI surged to 2567 points on April 17, Beijing time, with a weekly increase of 16.6%, representing a significant fluctuation in the traditional dry bulk market. On the surface, this index reflects more the freight rates of bulk goods such as iron ore, coal, and grain, but at this geopolitical critical moment in Hormuz, the rapid rise of the index appears more like a collective reassessment of "shipping route security discounts." Shipowners and cargo owners quickly reassessed the risks of transiting through the Middle Eastern routes, with some choosing to raise freight rates to cover potential rising security costs, while others opted to lock in shipping capacity and rerouting in advance to create redundancy, thereby pushing up the overall index.

In this process, the potential rise of war insurance and comprehensive insurance rates becomes an amplifier. Once Hormuz is regarded as a region "with risks of escalation at any time," insurance companies often raise the premiums for voyages in that area or impose stricter terms and restrictions. For shipowners, this is not merely an increase in costs, but a redistribution of capital turnover and asset allocation: higher premiums represent higher thresholds, and smaller shipowners and cash-strapped cargo owners will be forced to compress profits or exit high-risk routes, leading to a relative contraction of available shipping capacity, further driving up freight rates and the BDI.

As insurance costs and shipping risk premiums rise simultaneously, capital naturally begins to seek more easily configurable risk hedging tools. Traditionally, gold is the preferred safe haven in geopolitical conflicts, while in the crypto era, assets like Bitcoin are gradually viewed by some capital as "digital safe-haven positions under geopolitical volatility." Although there is currently a lack of large-scale data proving that the tensions in Hormuz have directly driven massive inflows into cryptocurrencies, the logic chain of rising risk premiums — revaluation of traditional asset prices — partial capital shift to gold and cryptocurrencies is increasingly being incorporated into the trading framework by more macro and crypto traders, especially in regions with restricted cross-border capital flows and rising expectations of local currency depreciation.

The Energy Passage Shift Shadows on Computational Power Layout

The Strait of Hormuz is not only a lifeline for oil tankers but also a crucial chokepoint for the flow of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to numerous terminal markets in Asia and Europe. Once the political level of passage conditions increases, the time costs and uncertainties of oil and gas supply will rise in tandem, forcing the market to pay additional premiums for potential transport delays, detours, or even intermittent interruptions. Any surge in energy prices will cascade through refining, chemical, power, and industrial chains, putting pressure on the profit models of "energy-importing" countries and energy-intensive industries.

For the crypto industry, this uncertainty directly points to the operating costs of mining farms and data centers. The Middle East and surrounding regions already attract some Bitcoin mining power and AI data centers due to low-cost oil, gas, and electricity. If the risks in Hormuz remain high, pressured electricity prices, fluctuating fuel supplies, and tightening infrastructure investments may weaken the relative advantages of local computational power projects. Even if Iran and its neighbors still possess resource endowments in local supply, if external market expectations of long-term risks rise, new capital investments will become more cautious, and the expansion plans of existing projects may also be delayed or scaled back.

In the medium to long term, computational power may further migrate to regions with more stable energy and clearer legal environments. North America, Northern Europe, parts of Latin America, and Southeast Asian countries, with relatively mature regulatory frameworks, renewable energy resources, and more predictable policy environments, have become potential landing spots. However, this migration is not without friction:

● First, compliance costs and policy uncertainties. Some countries welcome data centers and AI power but hold a cautious or even negative attitude towards electricity used for mining and on-chain businesses, forcing companies to weigh "electricity price advantages" against "regulatory sustainability."

● Second, infrastructure construction cycles and capital expenditures. Cross-regional migration means rebuilding data centers, power support, and network facilities, which can take years, making it difficult to quickly respond with physical migration to short-term geopolitical fluctuations.

● Third, local politics and community acceptance. High-density computational power clusters often bring up issues of electricity distribution, environmental and tax redistribution, with local governments and residents' attitudes determining whether the projects can operate stably. These constraints collectively determine that the migration of computational power resembles a slow reconstruction rather than an instantaneous transfer.

Geopolitical Narratives from the Ceasefire Agreement Dispute...

Surrounding the latest actions in Hormuz, the United States and Iran have formed a rhetorical standoff on the "ceasefire agreement" and the characterisation of "whether the blockade is a violation." The Iranian side repeatedly emphasizes through the media that if the strait is further blocked, it may be seen as "a violation of the ceasefire agreement," suggesting that at this stage, it is only taking "conditional management" rather than full blockade, trying to shift the legal and public responsibility onto "the other party if they escalate actions." The U.S. emphasizes that the strait "should maintain full passage" through public statements and media channels, framing any substantial restrictions as a challenge to international rules and the spirit of the ceasefire.

This deliberate ambiguity and hedging rhetoric significantly amplifies market concerns about misjudgment and sudden escalation. The geographical structure of Hormuz means that accidental fire, bilateral clashes, or misinterpreted commands can quickly escalate into "blockade facts," while different definitions of "violation" leave room for post-event interpretation. For shipping, energy, and financial markets, this uncertainty is comparable to a permanent "option": current conditions may only be attributed to rising premiums, but at an unpredictable time, it may suddenly "exercise," triggering oil price surges, runaway freight rates, and tightening local liquidity.

Looking back at history, whenever tensions in Hormuz escalate, traditional assets often show a structure of surging energy prices, rising shipping costs, regional stock markets under pressure, and strengthening safe-haven assets. The performance of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin in past geopolitical events has not been entirely consistent: sometimes viewed as "digital gold" rising with safe-haven sentiment, and at other times, they fell in tandem with overall risk appetite cooling. However, these historical samples provide pricing references for the current market — traders will observe changes in oil prices and the shipping index more sensitively and infer secondary impacts on cryptocurrency liquidity and risk preference, rather than fixating solely on on-chain data and industry news.

Capital Circumventing War to Embrace AI and...

Against the backdrop of rising risks in Hormuz and broader geopolitical uncertainties, capital is seeking growth tracks that avoid military conflicts and do not directly expose themselves to the risks of sanctions and blockades. The news of Diginex planning to acquire AI company Resulticks for $1.5 billion is a specific example of this path shift: a company rooted in digital assets and compliance technology is investing heavily in AI marketing and data analytics, which on the surface appears to be business diversification, but internally it is a structural hedge against regulatory and geopolitical pressures.

The motivation for digital asset companies to incorporate AI is twofold: on one hand, to seek high-growth, relatively de-geopoliticized revenue sources — the demand for AI services comes from global businesses and developers, not confined to a single jurisdiction or monetary area; on the other hand, to construct a "buffer zone" for their own businesses, so that when on-chain transactions or custody services are pressured due to regulation, sanctions, or declining transaction volumes, AI-related income can mitigate fluctuations to some degree. For some participants situated in sensitive regions, possessing distributed data centers and AI computing power also serves as a way to lower single-point policy risks and increase negotiating leverage.

From an infrastructure perspective, the synergistic effects of crypto and AI computing are becoming apparent. Both rely on high-density GPU/ASIC clusters, stable power supply, and reliable networks, meaning that within the same campus or under the same electricity pricing agreement, costs can be amortized through load scheduling, staggered time sharing, and multi-business reuse. When geopolitical shocks impact a specific business—such as mining revenues hindered by falling prices or tightening regulations—the same infrastructure can switch more quickly to training or inference tasks, redirecting computational power toward AI demands, thus diversifying income sources. It is under this logic of synergy and risk diversification that acquisitions like Diginex are not merely simple business expansions but rather a forward response to how infrastructure can survive in a "geopolitically high-volatility era."

The Cryptographic Landscape Under the Unresolved Hormuz...

In summary, the answer Iran provides regarding the Strait of Hormuz is not simply "open" or "closed," but a "conditional opening" : verbally acknowledging freedom of navigation, while essentially embedding uncertainty into daily operations through three passage conditions and ceasefire rhetoric. This uncertainty permeates not only crude oil and natural gas prices but also gradually transmits into the global asset pricing framework through BDI's surge, adjustments in insurance clauses, and corporate risk-hedging behaviors, becoming an implicit discount factor for various assets.

In the crypto market, two potential parallel paths can be envisioned. In the short term, every escalation and de-escalation around Hormuz may trigger emotional shifts of capital between "risk assets — safe-haven assets — crypto assets," enhancing narrative-driven trading, with the volatility of Bitcoin and mainstream coins potentially forming tighter event correlations with oil and gold prices. In the medium to long term, if energy and geopolitical uncertainties remain high, investments in computational power and infrastructure will focus more on the stability of energy costs and regulatory friendliness, leading to a slow migration and restructuring of mining and AI computing globally, altering the current distribution of computational power and industry cost curves.

For investors, during times of high geopolitical volatility, a single-dimension indicator is no longer sufficient to support decision-making. It is necessary to pay attention to:

● Energy prices and supply signals — Volatility in Hormuz, oil prices, and natural gas contracts determines the medium to long-term costs of computational power and regional economic resilience;

● Changes in freight and insurance costs — BDI, shipping stocks, and insurance company pricing reflect the real pressures of global trade frictions and logistics bottlenecks;

● Trends in regulation and capital flows — Ceasefire rhetoric, sanctions, and compliance rules, coupled with cross-border mergers and acquisitions like Diginex's acquisition of Resulticks, illuminate how capital rearranges risks between crypto, AI, and other technology tracks.

In this multilayered chess game interwoven with energy, shipping, AI, and crypto assets, the real advantage lies not in betting on a single narrative but in understanding the interconnections between these signals, comprehending how capital reorganizes its defense and offense under the unresolved shadow of Hormuz.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh

OKX welfare group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance welfare group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。