Missiles were launched from Iran toward Israel a short time ago and defense systems are operating to intercept the threat, the Israeli military said in a statement.
"The defense systems are operating to intercept the threat," the statement added.
The Trump administration's sanctions on Iran's largest cryptocurrency exchange mark an escalation in Washington's effort to disrupt the financial infrastructure Tehran uses to operate outside the formal banking system.
The US Treasury designated Nobitex alongside Wallex, Bitpin and Ramzinex and sanctioned senior figures connected to Nobitex, including chairman, co-founder and former chief executive Amir Hossein Rad.
According to the Treasury, Nobitex processed more than half of all Iranian digital asset inflows in 2025. Washington also accused it of facilitating transactions linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), sanctions evasion, ransomware activity and the Central Bank of Iran's access to hundreds of millions of dollars in stablecoins.
The sanctions therefore struck at part of the infrastructure that has allowed Iranian individuals, companies and state-linked actors to access international digital asset markets despite years of financial restrictions.
Crypto vs sanctions
Iran's interest in cryptocurrency is not difficult to explain. Sanctions have sharply limited access to international banking networks, dollar transactions, trade finance and oil revenues. Digital assets do not eliminate these constraints but can provide alternative channels for moving value across borders.
Cryptocurrencies and stablecoins can help facilitate transactions, preserve value and maintain access to foreign markets. Stablecoins are particularly attractive because they reduce exposure to price volatility while still operating outside traditional correspondent banking networks.
Crypto mining has also become part of Iran's sanctions-evasion toolkit. By using subsidized electricity to mine Bitcoin, Iran can effectively convert domestic energy resources into a globally transferable digital asset.
The strategy comes with costs. Mining places additional strain on Iran's electricity grid and has been linked to power shortages and public frustration. Yet for a sanctioned economy, the logic remains compelling: when access to conventional finance is restricted, any mechanism capable of transforming local resources into internationally usable value becomes strategically important.
Hormuz and crypto
Cryptocurrency has also emerged in discussions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most important energy chokepoints.
Chainalysis reported recently that Iran intended to demand cryptocurrency payments from oil tankers seeking safe passage through the strait during periods of heightened tension. Whether such plans were fully implemented is less important than what they reveal about the potential role of digital assets in future geopolitical confrontations.
For Tehran, cryptocurrency offers several advantages in such scenarios. Payments can move rapidly across borders, avoid some traditional banking restrictions and reduce exposure to frozen accounts or conventional financial controls.
The prospect of crypto-based payments linked to maritime security demonstrates how digital assets could potentially be used not only to move money quietly but also to generate revenue during periods of geopolitical crisis.
The US Treasury has warned of sanctions risks associated with Iranian demands for transit-related payments through the Strait of Hormuz, including payments made through digital assets, fiat currency, offsets, swaps or other arrangements.
Blockchain evasion limits
Despite its advantages, cryptocurrency is not a magic shield against sanctions.
Blockchain transactions often leave traces that can be analyzed by firms such as Chainalysis and Elliptic or by government financial-intelligence agencies.
Once the United States designates a platform such as Nobitex, international exchanges, liquidity providers and counterparties face increased risks if they continue interacting with Iranian-linked wallets. This pushes activity toward smaller, less liquid and often riskier channels.
The sanctions also highlight another vulnerability. Treasury officials noted that Nobitex suffered a major hack in June 2025, underscoring the risks associated with relying on digital financial infrastructure.
Another area of interest is the role of the IRGC, which under Iran's previous budget law was tasked with exporting roughly 700,000 barrels of crude oil per day—about half of the country's exports at the time. The organization is also one of Iran's largest infrastructure contractors.
While available data do not reveal where imported services originated or who ultimately benefited from them, the overlap illustrates the growing importance of non-traditional financial channels within Iran's sanctioned economy.
Iran is likely to adapt. Activity may shift toward peer-to-peer trading, decentralized platforms, foreign intermediaries, stablecoin networks or new domestic exchanges. Yet each alternative carries costs, whether through reduced liquidity, greater compliance risks or increased exposure to future sanctions.
For Washington, the challenge is sustained enforcement. Sanctioning Nobitex will matter most if it is accompanied by international cooperation, improved blockchain intelligence, pressure on foreign exchanges and clear guidance for shipping firms, insurers and commodity traders.
The United States does not need to stop every Iranian crypto transaction to have an effect. It only needs to make the system more expensive, more traceable, riskier and less attractive for counterparties.
The Nobitex case illustrates how financial warfare has moved from banks to blockchains. Digital assets have given Tehran greater flexibility under sanctions, but they have also created new vulnerabilities.
The more Iran relies on crypto infrastructure, the more that infrastructure becomes part of the sanctions battlefield.
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have put their missile units on full alert after Israeli strikes on Hezbollah’s headquarters in Beirut, with commanders requesting authorization from Mojtaba Khamenei’s office to launch missile attacks on Israel, two sources close to Iran’s military forces told Iran International.
In recent hours, senior IRGC commanders have sent a formal request to the office of Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei seeking authorization to launch missile attacks on Israel, the two sources said.
Neither Khamenei nor his office has responded to the request, and it remains unclear whether the attack will be approved, the sources added.
The alert follows an earlier warning by Ali Abdollahi, commander of the Khatam al-Anbia Central Headquarters, that northern Israel would be targeted by missile attacks if Beirut came under attack.
Following the IRGC’s evacuation warning, Israel temporarily refrained from a broad attack on Beirut after mediation and direct pressure from US President Donald Trump, and tensions subsided for a time. But Sunday’s Israeli fighter jet attacks on Dahiyeh have once again sharply raised the possibility of direct conflict.
Earlier, Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for parliament’s National Security Committee, has also threatened Israel and declared that “tonight, one must await a response in the sky over the occupied territories.”
The sources said Iran’s Revolutionary Guards are concerned that staying silent over Israel’s attacks on Dahiyeh would encourage Israel to intensify its attacks on Hezbollah.
Military commanders also believe that failing to act on declared red lines would severely weaken morale among Hezbollah’s shaken rank and file and endanger the Islamic Republic’s standing among its allied groups.
At the same time, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of parliament, has also threatened that Iran will target US bases and interests in the region in response to these attacks.
In contrast, Masoud Pezeshkian’s government, expressing serious concern about these movements, has warned that any hasty action by the IRGC will give Israel the necessary pretext for a heavy retaliation and drag the country into another full-scale and devastating war.
According to information received by Iran International, Pezeshkian’s administration believes Iran is not currently in a position to enter a new conflict, and that a wider war would halt sensitive ongoing negotiations with the US and make the economic and military situation extremely difficult to control.
Regional governments are not in a position to demand reparations over war damages, Iran’s deputy foreign minister Kazem Gharibabadi said, rejecting reports that Washington may use Iranian assets to compensate its allies.
“Iran’s assets are neither war spoils for Washington nor a payment fund for its allies,” Gharibabadi said.
"Any seizure, transfer, or allocation of Iran's property without the consent of the Iranian government is itself a new internationally wrongful act, giving rise to the responsibility of the United States—especially under conditions where it claims to seek negotiation and understanding—and will also prompt an appropriate response from Iran," he added.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said the government would be compelled to respond if state television and some media figures continued to direct what he described as unfair criticism toward the administration during wartime.
"Our colleagues in the government have always been careful to ensure that society's psychological calm is not threatened, and I have emphasized preserving unity and tolerating differences," Pezeshkian said in a post on X.
"However, when state television and some media activists direct the edge of unfair criticism toward the government during wartime conditions, we will be compelled to provide an appropriate response. This is not in the country's interest," he added.
Iran's judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei said Tehran stood with Lebanon after the Israeli military said it struck Hezbollah infrastructure in Beirut's southern suburbs in response to fire from the Iran-backed group toward northern Israel.
"The resistance of Lebanon is the soul of Iran," Ejei said on X.
"Now, with the Zionists' aggression, a cloud of sorrow has settled over Beirut's face. With this cloud of grief, hearts in Tehran have begun to tremble. We stand alongside the people and resistance of Lebanon," he added in another post on X.