March 12, 2026—US President Trump issued his latest statement on the escalating US-Iran conflict, declaring, "If we want, the US can strike more targets." He also claimed the US has nearly destroyed all of Iran’s mine-laying vessels and expressed no concern about Iran-backed domestic terrorist attacks in the US. This marks another strong signal from Washington since the joint US-Israeli military strikes against Iran began on February 28. Meanwhile, Iran has firmly rejected negotiations, stating, "We will not negotiate with the US," and vowing to "fight to the end." Drawing on public information and industry logic, this article objectively reviews the conflict’s developments, factual data, and potential future scenarios.
Event Overview: Hardline Statements and Dual Signals on Negotiation
On March 12 (local time), Trump publicly stated that the US has the capability to launch further strikes against Iran, emphasizing that the US could "take away" certain assets left in Iran. He also noted the Iranian Navy has suffered heavy losses, predicting oil prices would fall. This statement comes at a critical juncture—the twelfth day of joint US-Israeli military operations against Iran.
Just a day earlier (March 10), Trump signaled a conditional willingness to negotiate with Iran, saying, "I hear they really want to negotiate." Iran quickly responded: Foreign Minister Araghchi declared, "Iran will not negotiate with the US," while the spokesperson for Iran’s parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Committee stressed, "There are no red lines when it comes to defending our territory and sovereignty." On March 11, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced the 38th round of "True Commitment 4" strikes, stating that previous "reciprocal retaliation" was over and that a "chain strike" strategy would be implemented going forward.
Background and Timeline: From Surprise Attack to War of Attrition
| Timeline | Key Event |
|---|---|
| Feb 28 | US and Israel launch large-scale military strikes against Iran |
| Mar 1 | Iran confirms Supreme Leader Khamenei killed in the attack; cryptocurrency markets experience extreme volatility |
| Mar 8 | Four Iranian diplomats killed in an Israeli attack on a hotel in Beirut, Lebanon |
| Mar 9 | Trump claims the war against Iran is "very thorough," hinting at a quick end, then later says "results are insufficient" |
| Mar 10 | Trump signals "conditional negotiations" with Iran; Iran launches the 34th wave of "True Commitment 4" offensive |
| Mar 11 | Iran announces the 38th round of strikes, initiating the "chain strike" strategy; Trump says, "If we want, the US can strike more targets" |
| Mar 12 | Trump states the Iranian Navy has been severely damaged, expects oil prices to drop |
Data Analysis: Battlefield Losses and Capability Assessment
Based on multiple public sources, the ongoing conflict has resulted in significant personnel and equipment losses. The following data is compiled from both sides and third-party reports, with the caveat that some sources may reflect narrative bias.
Casualties and Equipment Losses
- Iran: According to Iran’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Iravani, on March 10, US-Israeli strikes since February 28 have killed over 1,300 civilians. The IRGC claims multiple rounds of missile attacks targeting US military bases, the US Fifth Fleet, and Tel Aviv.
- US-Israel: On March 10, a Pentagon spokesperson reported about 140 US soldiers injured since the start of military operations, including 8 critically wounded. US Central Command previously confirmed 7 American soldiers killed in Iranian counterattacks. The Israeli Defense Forces claim to have killed "about 1,900 Iranian soldiers and commanders."
- Equipment losses: On March 10, Trump stated the US military has struck over 5,000 Iranian targets, sunk 51 Iranian Navy warships, destroyed more than 90% of Iran’s missile launchers, and over 80% of its drone launchers. The US has lost 11 MQ-9 "Reaper" drones in the conflict, valued at over $330 million. Three US F-15 fighter jets were downed in a friendly fire incident with Kuwaiti forces.
Strategic Capability Assessment
Iran’s missile stockpiles and underground fortification systems remain its core defensive assets. Analysts report hundreds of mountain-shielded launch sites nationwide, with key missiles and manufacturing units deeply embedded in bedrock. The "Khorramshahr-4" medium-range ballistic missile has a maximum range of 2,000 kilometers and can carry a 1–1.5 ton warhead. Iran claims its missile reserves are ample, its military-industrial complex is fully mobilized for wartime, and it can sustain high-intensity operations for at least six months.
US War Costs
According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, US military spending in this conflict is about $890 million per day. US officials revealed that the first week of operations cost approximately $6 billion. In the first three days of strikes, the US fired around 400 Tomahawk cruise missiles—about 10% of its current stockpile.
Public Opinion Breakdown
Positions are sharply divided, with three core narratives dominating the discourse:
US Narrative: Victory Within Reach Amid Domestic Pressure
The Trump administration showcases military achievements (destroying 90% of missile launchers, crippling the Iranian Navy) but faces domestic anti-war sentiment and midterm election pressures. Polls indicate most Americans oppose the war. Advisors have privately urged Trump to find an exit strategy, fearing surging oil prices and prolonged conflict could trigger political backlash. Trump’s statements oscillate between "ending soon" and "can strike more targets," reflecting an attempt to balance strategic gains with political risk management.
Iranian Narrative: Resolute Resistance and Rejection of Negotiations
Iran’s public stance is unified: no negotiations, continued retaliation, and control over ending the war. Parliamentary Speaker Kalibaf declared, "We will never seek a ceasefire," stressing the need to "strike back hard at aggressors." Deputy Foreign Minister Gharibabadi stated, "Ending the war is in Iran’s hands." The logic: Iran refuses to let the US and Israel start or end the war at will, aiming to wear down their political resolve through protracted conflict.
Israeli Narrative: Tying US to a Long-Term Threat
Prime Minister Netanyahu stated operations against Iran are "not over yet," with the goal to "eliminate the existential threat Iran poses to Israel in the long run." Israel seeks to leverage US power to weaken Iran as much as possible but faces the risk of unilateral US withdrawal. The US has requested Israel halt further airstrikes on Iranian energy facilities—marking the first clear US constraint on Israeli military actions since the war began.
Examining Narrative Authenticity
When evaluating battlefield information, it’s important to distinguish facts, opinions, and speculation:
- Facts (verifiable): The conflict has lasted 12 days; both sides have casualties; Trump has issued contradictory statements; Iran refuses negotiations; international oil prices are highly volatile; shipping risk in the Strait of Hormuz is rising.
- Opinions (source-dependent): Reported enemy casualties and destroyed equipment (e.g., "destroyed 90% of missile launchers" vs. "stockpiles sufficient for six months of sustained combat"); predictions of a quick end or prolonged conflict.
- Speculation (unconfirmed): The pace of Iran’s "chain strike" strategy; whether the US will force an exit before midterm elections; whether Israel can successfully tie US military timing to its own objectives.
Industry Impact Analysis: Dual Logic in Energy and Crypto Markets
Energy Markets: The Strait of Hormuz as a Core Variable
The Strait of Hormuz is a critical chokepoint for global energy transport, with roughly 20% of the world’s oil trade passing through. The conflict has triggered extreme volatility in international oil prices: On March 9, Brent crude briefly surged toward $120/barrel, then retreated above $90 after Trump signaled de-escalation. Iran accounts for 4.5% of global oil and 6.4% of global natural gas production, and is a major exporter of methanol, urea, and propane—representing about 9%, 5%, and 6–7% of global capacity, respectively. If the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked or Iran’s industrial facilities suffer systemic attacks, global energy and chemical supply chains will face significant disruption.
Crypto Markets: "Pressure Valve" Effect Amid Geopolitical Risk
During geopolitical conflict, crypto assets display dual characteristics:
- The contradiction between safe-haven and liquidity: As a 24/7 liquid asset, Bitcoin often acts as a "pressure valve" during weekends and traditional market closures, absorbing sell-off pressure from stocks, bonds, and commodities. Early in the conflict, Bitcoin dropped to $63,000, then rebounded above $70,000.
- On-chain commodity contracts gain attention: Following the escalation in Iran, decentralized exchange Hyperliquid saw a surge in perpetual contract trading for oil, gold, and silver. On-chain oil prices were even cited by Bloomberg, indicating decentralized finance tools are becoming a new channel for traditional market participants to access geopolitical risk exposure.
- Volatility and liquidation data: Gate market data shows that as of March 12, Bitcoin traded at $70,100—still down over 40% from its all-time high of $126,000. In recent weeks, the crypto market has seen tens of thousands of liquidations, underscoring persistent high volatility.
Capital Flows and Macro Expectations
The conflict continues to push inflation expectations higher, impacting the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy trajectory. US CPI rose 2.4% year-over-year in February, in line with forecasts, but does not reflect post-escalation energy price changes. Rate-cut expectations have noticeably pulled back, with the dollar index holding in the 97.4–97.9 range and the 10-year Treasury yield dropping below 4%. Sustained high oil prices will erode corporate profits and consumer purchasing power, further influencing global capital allocation.
Scenario Projections
Given current information, three main scenarios could unfold:
Scenario 1: Limited Escalation Followed by Diplomatic Resolution
Under domestic political pressure, Trump seeks a "dignified exit," unilaterally declaring victory by showcasing "devastating blows to Iran." Iran, preserving its "not defeated" image, accepts a de facto ceasefire. The conflict de-escalates into proxy skirmishes. In this scenario, energy prices quickly retreat, and the crypto market returns to being driven by macro and regulatory factors.
Scenario 2: Escalation and Prolonged Conflict
Iran’s "chain strike" strategy triggers larger US-Israeli reprisals, expanding the conflict to include Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shia militias in Iraq, and other proxies. The Strait of Hormuz is effectively blocked, keeping international oil prices above $100 for an extended period. The crypto market will continue to oscillate between safe-haven demand and inflation hedging, maintaining high volatility.
Scenario 3: Unexpected Escalation Triggers Systemic Risk
If US-Israeli forces strike Iranian nuclear facilities or religious sites, or Iran retaliates with weapons of mass destruction, a regional war could break out. This would disrupt global energy trade, push major economies into stagflation risk, and pressure risk assets across the board. The crypto market may experience extreme short-term volatility, then demonstrate its "non-sovereign store of value" role.
Conclusion
Trump’s statement—"If we want, the US can strike more targets"—serves both as a declaration of battlefield superiority and a bargaining chip in political negotiations. As the conflict enters its twelfth day, both sides are probing each other’s limits while keeping exit strategies open. For market participants, the core variable is not each exchange of fire, but the security of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and the struggle between the US and Iran over "control of war termination." Regardless of how the situation evolves, the restructuring of energy supply chains, changing inflation expectations, and crypto assets’ role as a "24/7 liquidity window" will continue to shape global capital market pricing logic in the months ahead.
