The Kremlin issued a stark warning on Tuesday that the spiralling military confrontation between the United States and Iran risks not only regional chaos but also severe damage to the global economy. As missile strikes and counter-strikes intensified overnight, Moscow called for an immediate return to diplomatic channels, cautioning that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz could trigger a supply shock reminiscent of past oil crises.

The latest cycle of escalation began with the destruction of an American Apache helicopter over the strategic waterway on 9 June, an incident first reported by Western media and apparently confirmed by subsequent military moves. Washington responded with air and missile attacks on Iranian territory, while Tehran hit US military positions in the region and once again threatened to block the strait—a choke-point for some 20 per cent of the world’s seaborne crude. President Donald Trump acknowledged that dozens of missiles had been launched at Iran, signalling that the White House was prepared to sustain pressure.

Speaking at a press briefing in Moscow, presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia was “seriously concerned” by the tit-for-tat violence and urged both sides to exercise restraint. “We are calling for a return to the negotiating process, because another round of escalation is fraught with new and additional negative consequences for the regional situation and for the international economy as a whole,” Peskov stated. Viewed from Moscow, the conflict threatens to unwind delicate diplomatic architectures built around the Iran nuclear file and could draw extra-regional powers further into the fray.

Analysts in London note that even a temporary disruption of Hormuz traffic would ripple through energy markets, sending crude prices sharply higher at a time when major economies are struggling with inflation. Beyond the immediate oil shock, a prolonged stand-off could sever trade routes and erode investor confidence across the Gulf, with knock-on effects for emerging markets from Mumbai to São Paulo. Russia, itself a major energy exporter, may see short-term price benefits, but officials in the Kremlin appear more focused on the dangers of a wider conflagration that could complicate Moscow’s own strategic calculus in Syria and the Levant.

Diplomatic channels between Washington and Tehran remain virtually non-existent, yet European intermediaries and China have signalled they stand ready to facilitate a de-escalation. The coming days will test whether the logic of deterrence gives way to a renewed search for off-ramps. For now, the Kremlin’s message is that the costs of failure—economic, humanitarian and geostrategic—far outweigh any perceived gains from military posturing.