Reading time: 5 min
The Nikkei 225 dropped 1,845 points to 53,372 as Iran’s missile strikes on Gulf energy infrastructure sent oil above $113 per barrel. The Bank of Japan held rates at 0.75 percent and, in an unusual move, cited the Iran conflict directly in its policy statement. South Korea’s Kospi fell 2.7 percent. Neither country is a participant in the war. Both are paying the bill.
The sell button got hit early. By the time Tokyo’s morning session was fifteen minutes old, the Nikkei had already dropped below 54,000, and it never recovered. Automakers led the decline. Exporters followed. Technology, which had been the lone sector keeping the index within reach of its February highs, gave back a week of gains in a single session. The pattern in Seoul was identical: Samsung Electronics fell, SK Hynix fell, Hyundai fell. The Kospi closed at 5,763, its lowest level since late February.
The trigger was not domestic. It never is, with these two economies. Japan and South Korea import virtually all of their crude oil and a majority of their natural gas. When Iran fires missiles at Ras Laffan, the world’s largest LNG export facility, and Brent spikes to $119 before settling near $113, the cost lands directly on their industrial base. It doesn’t pass through a policy filter first. It arrives as a tax on every factory, every shipping route, every household electricity bill.
What the Bank of Japan Actually Said
The BOJ’s decision to hold at 0.75 percent was expected. What wasn’t expected was the directness of the language. The policy statement noted that “in the wake of increased tension in the Middle East, global financial and capital markets have been volatile and crude oil prices have risen significantly,” adding that “future developments warrant attention.” For a central bank that typically communicates in layers of indirection, this was as close to a red flag as the BOJ gets without actually raising one.
Put that in context. The BOJ had been on a tightening path. It hiked 25 basis points in December 2025, the second increase since 2007. Markets had been pricing in another move. The war has frozen that trajectory. Governor Ueda now faces a textbook central banking dilemma: inflation driven by imported energy costs that monetary policy cannot address, combined with a weakening growth outlook that would normally call for accommodation. Tightening into an oil shock risks crushing demand. Easing risks validating the price surge. Holding is the only option that doesn’t make either problem worse, which is another way of saying it solves neither.
The yen, Japan’s traditional safe-haven currency, has not behaved like one. USD/JPY has strengthened in the dollar’s favour since the war began, driven by safe-haven flows into the greenback and the repricing of Federal Reserve rate expectations. The dollar’s strength is compounding Japan’s problem: it makes energy imports more expensive in yen terms at the exact moment those imports are more expensive in dollar terms.
The Industrial Cost
Japan’s industrial sector is uniquely vulnerable to this particular shock. The country has no meaningful domestic oil production and sources the overwhelming majority of its LNG from the Gulf and Australia. The Strait of Hormuz, effectively closed to commercial traffic since early March, had been the transit route for a substantial portion of those shipments. Reuters reported that Brent crude has risen from less than $73 per barrel on the eve of the war to above $113 as of Thursday morning, a gain of more than 50 percent in under three weeks.
Toyota and Suzuki, per a Nikkei Asia report from March 14, are the “last bastions” among Japanese automakers as investors shy away from the sector. The rest of the industry is facing a margin squeeze that higher energy costs will only accelerate. Japanese factory orders had shown resilience through the end of 2025, but the forward-looking data has turned. The ZEW survey equivalent for Japan, the Economy Watchers Survey, will be the next data point to watch, but the market is not waiting for surveys. It is pricing the damage now.
For South Korea, the exposure runs through semiconductors as well as energy. Samsung and SK Hynix dominate global memory chip production and are critical suppliers to Nvidia’s AI infrastructure buildout. Both companies have a dependency on helium, a byproduct of LNG production, and Qatar is a major source. The helium supply chain disruption from Ras Laffan is no longer theoretical. Al-Kaabi told Reuters on Thursday that Qatar’s helium output would fall 14 percent as a direct result of the train damage, a figure that won’t recover for three to five years. The Kospi’s 2.7 percent decline on Thursday reflects the market’s assessment that the semiconductor supercycle narrative, which had driven the index to records earlier this year, is now competing with an energy shock that has no clear end date.
The Broader Asia Session
The damage was not confined to Tokyo and Seoul. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 2 percent to 25,500. The Shanghai Composite dropped 1.4 percent to 4,006. Taiwan’s Taiex lost 1.4 percent. China’s CSI 300 declined 1.6 percent but held together better than its regional peers, reflecting Beijing’s relatively insulated energy position: massive crude reserves, diversified supply chains, and discounted Russian oil flowing outside the Hormuz corridor. India’s external affairs ministry confirmed it is negotiating with Iran to route 22 ships through the strait, two of which have already reached Indian ports.
The market is telling you something about what happens next for Asian equities. The Federal Reserve held rates on Wednesday and Chair Powell’s comments were interpreted as hawkish, pushing the probability of any 2026 rate cut to 27 percent, down from 74 percent a month ago, per CME FedWatch. The BOJ is frozen. The won is weakening. Oil is above $110. The entire Asian equity trade of the past six months, built on the premise of semiconductor demand, AI capex, and central bank easing, is being repriced against an energy shock that nobody modelled for and nobody can hedge against at scale. That repricing has further to run if the Strait stays closed and the damage at Ras Laffan is as durable as QatarEnergy’s CEO suggests. For reference, he said three to five years.
For a complete timeline of how the Iran war reshaped global markets, see our reference page.
