War is always expensive. But rarely in modern American history has the financial architecture of a military conflict been so transparently designed to enrich the people who helped start it. Three weeks into the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, the money trail runs through Gulf sovereign wealth funds, private equity offices, Pentagon procurement pipelines, and Russian oil terminals, and it all leads back to the same small group of people orbiting the Trump White House.
The Kushner Conflict: $5 Billion And Counting
The New York Times revealed last week that Jared Kushner is pursuing $5 billion or more in new capital for Affinity Partners, his private equity firm, from Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds. His team has already held meetings with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, which pumped $2 billion into Affinity in 2021, a deal that PIF’s own investment staff reportedly recommended against before Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman personally overrode the decision. Kushner has collected more than $100 million in management fees from the Saudi government since leaving the White House.
The business problem here is not complicated. Kushner served as one of Trump’s top negotiators in the Geneva diplomatic talks that preceded the war. Trump publicly credited Kushner as one of the advisers who convinced him to launch the strikes. Meanwhile, the Washington Post reported that MBS made “multiple private phone calls to Trump” in February, lobbying for the attack. CNN reported the UAE was doing the same behind the scenes. Affinity Partners has received more than $200 million from the UAE.
In December 2024, Kushner told the “Invest Like the Best” podcast that he had “preemptively” raised $1.5 billion from Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund to “avoid any conflicts” and ensure his firm would not need to raise capital during the second Trump term. That commitment lasted about 14 months. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington wrote in a letter to the White House that Kushner’s history of financial gains from his time as a White House adviser “raises serious concerns about potential conflicts of interest.”
For investors and market watchers, the question is straightforward: can you trust the foreign policy decisions of an administration whose top advisers have billions in personal financial exposure to the governments lobbying for those decisions?
The Defense-Industrial Trump Pipeline
The president’s sons have built a remarkable web of defense-sector investments that are now directly benefiting from their father’s war. Don Jr. and Eric Trump are invested in Powerus, a drone manufacturer planning to go public through a reverse merger with Aureus Greenway Holdings, a Florida golf course holding company, to create a Nasdaq-listed drone business. Powerus recently raised $60 million and intends to scale production to over 10,000 drones per month.
The market opportunity is enormous. The Pentagon’s Drone Dominance program has earmarked $1.1 billion to procure hundreds of thousands of American-made drone systems by 2027, a spending window opened in part by the administration’s own ban on new Chinese drone imports. Don Jr. also holds shares in and serves on the advisory board of Unusual Machines, a drone component company that received Pentagon contracts for thousands of drone motors and components. A separate startup backed by 1789 Capital, where Don Jr. is a partner, received a $620 million Defense Department loan.
The Iran war has validated the thesis. U.S. Central Command confirmed the conflict marks the first time the Pentagon has used one-way attack drones in combat. Iran’s Shahed drones have proven more disruptive than anticipated, creating a feedback loop of demand: more drone threats mean more drone spending, which means more contracts for the companies the president’s family has invested in. Forbes reported that at least four portfolio companies associated with Trump Jr.’s venture capital firm have won federal contracts totaling more than $735 million.
Russia’s $7 Billion Windfall
The geopolitical irony is staggering. The war on Iran, launched by an administration that claims to be tough on America’s adversaries, has handed Russia its most significant financial lifeline since the Ukraine invasion began.
According to the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air, Russia earned an additional 6 billion euros (approximately $6.9 billion) in fossil fuel revenues during the first two weeks of the conflict. That translates to roughly $588 million per day in additional revenue. Before the war, Russia’s Urals crude had fallen to $40 per barrel under sanctions pressure. Oil and gas revenues had dropped from 45% of the federal budget in 2021 to about 20% in 2025. Analysts had warned that Russia’s 2026 budget assumptions, based on a $59 per barrel oil price, were already unrealistic.
Then Iran shut the Strait of Hormuz, removing roughly 20% of the world’s oil supply from the market. Brent crude spiked above $100. Russian cargoes began selling around $90 per barrel. The Moscow Times reported that if prices average $90 in 2026, Russia could see approximately $55 billion in additional revenue compared to government forecasts.
The Trump administration compounded the windfall by granting India a 30-day waiver to purchase Russian oil already sitting in tankers, the first major relaxation of Russian energy sanctions since they were imposed. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent called it a “stopgap measure.” Eurasia Group’s Henning Gloystein told CNBC that Russia has “already hugely benefited” from the crisis, with cargoes sold at roughly double pre-war prices. The Kyiv Independent reported the additional revenue is enough for Russia to buy 17,000 Shahed drones per day.
The Market Consequences
The economic impact is cascading. Oil prices remain roughly 27% above pre-war levels even after Trump’s repeated claims that the conflict would end “soon.” The Strait of Hormuz remains effectively closed to commercial shipping, removing the transportation route for approximately 20% of global seaborne oil. The Dow Jones fell more than 400 points in the opening days. European growth forecasts have been revised downward. The Philippines saw diesel prices spike nearly 39%.
Despite Trump’s repeated promises that allies would help reopen Hormuz, EU foreign ministers declined to expand naval operations in the strait. NATO allies, China, Japan, South Korea, France, and the UK have all refused or not committed to Trump’s demands for warships. The administration’s isolation on this issue is almost total, a striking contrast to the broad coalitions assembled for previous Gulf conflicts.
The White House initially projected a four-to-six-week military timeline. Israel’s defense minister has said there is no time limit. NBC News reported that military planners have presented daily exit strategy options to Trump, and he has declined every one. The conflict has already expanded into Lebanon, with Israeli ground operations escalating and the Lebanese Health Ministry reporting more than 850 deaths.
First Amendment Under Fire
Adding to the business risk calculus, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr threatened to revoke broadcast licenses over Iran war coverage that displeases the administration, a move that drew condemnation from free speech organizations and even some Republican lawmakers. Defense Secretary Hegseth singled out CNN and suggested the network’s pending acquisition by David Ellison would improve things. For media companies navigating regulatory approval, the implicit message is chilling: favorable coverage may become a condition of doing business.
The Bottom Line
The financial architecture of this war is not subtle. Gulf states that lobbied for the conflict are writing checks to the president’s son-in-law. The president’s sons hold stakes in defense contractors benefiting from policies their father enacted. Russia, which the administration claims to be pressuring over Ukraine, is earning billions from a war that has caused the administration to relax sanctions on Russian oil. Thirteen American service members are dead. The cost to taxpayers is already in the billions.
For investors, the takeaway is uncomfortable but necessary: the incentive structure surrounding this war does not favor a quick resolution. The people with the most influence over its duration are the same people profiting from its continuation. That is not a conspiracy theory. It’s a financial analysis.
