As the war in Iran intensifies, the CEO of Reconnaissance Research, an independent think tank based in Kuwait, discusses the country's unique economic challenges and how it is building resilience amid conflict.
Global Finance: What was your first reaction when you saw the attacks on Kuwait?
Abdulaziz Al-Anjeri: My first reaction was genuine shock. For Kuwaitis, war is never just an abstract headline. The memory of 1990 still lives inside many families, and people here also remember what regional spillover feels like when conflict erupts nearby. What makes this especially difficult to process is not only the danger itself, but the strategic contradiction behind it. Iran says Israel is the enemy, yet the Gulf is absorbing the spillover. That is what many people here find hardest to rationalize.
If the real objective is to impose pressure on the United States, then targeting the Gulf does not make obvious strategic sense, especially when Israel is far more central to Washington’s political and strategic calculations under the current US administration. June 2025 already showed that Iranian missiles could reach Israeli territory despite Israel’s extensive missile-defense systems. That is why many in the Gulf do not see this simply as escalation; they see it as a logic in which the stated battlefield is elsewhere, but the costs are being transferred here.
As for the situation now, Kuwait is calm, but nobody is pretending this is normal. People are trying to live a near-normal life inside an abnormal situation. Daily life continues, but under visible strain. Ramadan is usually bright and social; this year it feels quieter, more cautious, and more restrained. Kuwaiti authorities have recently reported intercepting missiles and drones, while disruptions to regional airspace have made travel far more difficult and unpredictable.
GF: What has been the reaction of financial institutions and businesses in Kuwait?
Al-Anjeri: The reaction has been shaped by continuity first, but with visible precaution. After the drone strike that caused damage to the Public Institution for Social Security headquarters in Kuwait City, some major bank headquarters and large office buildings temporarily closed or reduced physical presence as a safety measure. But that did not translate into a broader shutdown of economic life. The main pattern has been to limit exposure at headquarters while keeping essential functions running through alternative sites, digital channels and branch networks.
Financial institutions understand that in moments like this, their role is not only technical but psychological. The Central Bank of Kuwait has publicly affirmed that banking operations, payment systems, instant transfers, branches and ATMs continue to function normally. That matters because confidence is part of resilience. In other words, the strategy has been clear: protect key personnel and major buildings where necessary, but avoid any impression that the financial system itself is under disruption.
Businesses, meanwhile, have moved into contingency mode rather than panic mode. They are focusing on staff safety, operational coverage, cash-flow discipline, supply reliability, and communications. The broader business community is also watching the price of risk rise in real time. Logistics friction, disrupted travel, and shipping uncertainty quickly translate into delayed decisions and more defensive behavior.
GF: Has there been fear of disruption to online banking services?
Al-Anjeri: People worry about friction more than collapse. They worry about delays, outages, cyber pressure, or interruptions that suddenly make ordinary life harder. In a modern economy, payment systems and digital access are part of national resilience.
So far, however, the official picture has been one of continuity rather than breakdown. The Central Bank has stated that payment systems are functioning normally, including instant transfers through Wamd, and that cash access through branches and ATMs remains available. That does not eliminate public concern, but it does mean the conversation has shifted from fear of systemic failure to the question of how long continuity can be sustained efficiently if regional stress persists.
GF: What risks and opportunities do you foresee in the coming weeks?
Al-Anjeri: The immediate risk is the uncertainty premium. Even before physical damage becomes the dominant issue, uncertainty raises costs. It affects insurance, logistics, planning, investment decisions, and consumer confidence. Markets price instability quickly, and that alone can impose a meaningful economic burden.
At the same time, crises like this expose what was merely “good enough” and force institutions to take resilience more seriously. That creates an opportunity, if governments and institutions are disciplined enough to use it. The opportunity is to strengthen cyber readiness, business continuity planning, crisis communications, redundancy around critical infrastructure, and practical coordination between state institutions and major service providers.
GF: How will Kuwait and GCC economies be affected if the war drags on?
Al-Anjeri: If this conflict drags on, the economic effect will be mixed, but some of that effect is already visible. Higher energy prices may support revenues in the short term, yet the wider economy pays through weaker confidence, disrupted logistics, higher insurance costs, and a more cautious business climate. In Kuwait’s case, this is no longer just theoretical: Kuwait Petroleum Corporation has already declared force majeure and begun precautionary output cuts because of the regional conflict and shipping disruptions.
That is why the real challenge is not simply whether oil prices rise, but whether wartime friction becomes a longer-term tax on confidence and the cost of capital across the region. Non-oil sectors usually feel prolonged uncertainty first, especially travel, services, retail, and private investment. Gulf states have buffers, of course, but buffers do not replace stability.
GF: Can you already identify lessons learned from this crisis?
Al-Anjeri: One early lesson is that resilience is not only military. It is also the systems that allow daily life to continue: communications, payments, cyber defense, continuity planning, and credible public messaging. When those systems hold, you reduce the secondary damage caused by confusion, rumor, and overreaction. That is how a state preserves social stability under stress.
Another lesson is that crisis governance matters as much as hardware. You need readiness, but you also need disciplined communication, institutional coordination, and de-escalation channels. The point is not only to withstand the first shock. It is to prevent a single incident from triggering a wider chain reaction across the economy, public mood, and regional politics.
