The Tread of Chaos: who will pay for the "antifragility" of international logistics
Amid the global shocks of recent years, companies and governments are striving to make supply chains resilient to any shocks. Systems are becoming more and more "antifragile" — the focus of business attention is no longer efficiency, but reliability. The key consequence of the transition to this model is an increase in structural inflation. All costs and risks eventually fall on the end user, turning into an "uncertainty tax." How geopolitical storms are changing global logistics — in the Izvestia article.
Storm warning
For the past 40 years, the global economy has been focused on increasing efficiency and reducing costs. However, a series of global shocks, including the coronavirus pandemic and armed conflicts, have shifted the focus to reliability. In the context of geopolitical instability, the "antifragility" of the system is coming to the fore.
This concept, proposed by economist Nassim Taleb, is based on the claim that a long period without mistakes worsens the response to problems in the future. Efficiency in this sense is becoming synonymous with fragility, since the close relationship between systems and processes built with its help can cause a cascading effect in the event of a failure. Simply put, the failure of one element of the system provokes a ripple effect that can lead to exponentially increasing harm.
In today's world, the vulnerability of bottlenecks has become apparent. The events of recent years — from the blocking of the Suez Canal by the Ever Given ship in 2021 to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz in 2026 - have shown that one incident in a key artery can lead to the shutdown of factories on the other side of the world.
However, the tectonic shift towards "antifragility" in the global economy was primarily caused by the geopolitical situation, which directly affects the operation of international transport corridors. Sanctions, trade wars, and regional conflicts have turned supply chains into a pressure tool, showing companies that in the traditional logistics configuration, their business can become hostage to "big politics."
The current restructuring of global supply chains began in the last decade against the backdrop of the trade war between the United States and China (2018), which resulted in the relocation of production facilities to Southeast Asian countries (Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia) and Latin America, which changed the map of transport flows.
The subsequent coronavirus pandemic disrupted supply chains systemically — the volume of international trade during this period fell by 5.3% over the year. This has drawn the attention of governments and businesses to the need to ensure food security, build reserves and supply autonomy.
The companies did not have time to recover from the effects of the pandemic shock — the large-scale imposition of sanctions against Russia in 2022 only complicated the situation. The restrictions led to the closure of traditional railway routes between China and Europe passing through the Russian Federation, which increased the importance of maritime transportation through the Suez Canal.
And in general, the number of trade-blocking measures and export restrictions in the world has increased dramatically in recent years. According to the World Trade Organization, an average of about 20 such restrictions were introduced in 2016-2019. In 2022-2023, there were already about 139 of them, and in the period from October 2024 to October 2025 — 169.
At the same time, military conflicts remain one of the main factors affecting global logistics. They lead to the closure of transport corridors, an increase in insurance tariffs and an increase in the cost of transportation. A recent example is the war in the Middle East, which has significantly increased the risks to shipping in the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. The outbreak of hostilities in Iran and the subsequent blocking of the Strait of Hormuz caused an increase in oil prices (the cost of Brent soared from about $70 to peaks of $ 110-125 per barrel), which made transportation more expensive due to the introduction of additional fuel charges. As a result, by mid-March, container shipping rates had increased by an average of 3-10%, depending on the destination.
All of this is changing traditional supply chains, forcing companies to look for new logistics solutions. Today, routes using geographical isolation from conflict zones show maximum resistance to geopolitical shocks. Currently, these are three key transport arteries — the North–South international transport corridor connecting Russia, Iran, India and the Persian Gulf countries, the Middle Corridor (Trans-Caspian International Transport Route) passing through Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and European countries, and the Northern Sea Route running in the territorial waters of the Russian Federation in Arctic (isolated from international straits, which makes it resistant to naval blockades).
Survival strategy
However, the creation of an "antifragile" supply chain involves not only changing the route along which the cargo will be transported. The very structure of trade is changing. There are three main strategies to increase resilience in times of crisis. The first is based on a duplication mechanism — instead of one "ideal" supplier, the business finds several in different parts of the world, which ensures uninterrupted production.
Companies are increasingly assessing not only the cost, but also the reliability of counterparties, says Petr Shcherbachenko, associate professor at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation. The effectiveness of the supply of products that a potential partner can offer remains an important criterion, but a lot of attention is also paid to the reliability of suppliers. Business studies the quality and price of goods, payment terms, timeliness, flexibility of delivery, etc. But the availability of technical assistance and feedback, production capabilities and the financial condition of the organization are also important criteria.
The second strategy, localization, is often used to diversify suppliers. The focus is on friendshoring, in which suppliers are sought among allied countries that share common values and geopolitical interests, which minimizes risks. In some cases, the company may even embark on rescheduling, which involves the return of production facilities from abroad to the country where the head office or main sales market is located. In such a scenario, labor starts to cost more, but the supply chain becomes more stable.
The location of production facilities and the search for suppliers in the immediate vicinity, in particular, is now a priority for Russian companies. Business in the Russian Federation strives to work with partners within the country and in neighboring countries, as a result of which new transport corridors and industrial alliances are being formed.
Simply put, companies today are no longer interested in global expansion, their goal is to build reliable, manageable and diversified logistics networks that can quickly adapt to changing external conditions.
The third strategy of "antifragility" provides for excess reserves. Companies are investing in the creation of huge storage facilities, which allows them to store components not for three days of operation, but for several months. In conditions of disruptions (border closures, port congestion, container shortages, etc.), the availability of reserves allows not only to ensure uninterrupted operation, but also to increase margins, since such companies are able to offer the market what others cannot.
Safely. Expensive
However, despite the obvious advantages, the transition from efficiency to reliability has serious consequences. The first and most obvious result of building "antifragile" logistics is structural inflation. The end user has to pay for the reliability of the new supply chain, which is why the era of cheap goods is gradually becoming a thing of the past. Previously, such products were transported from producing countries with inexpensive labor by huge tankers along the shortest routes, which made it possible to keep the cost low. Now the price includes insurance against wars, expenses for empty warehouses and increased salaries of workers hired after reshoring or friendshoring.
The very essence of "globalization" as a phenomenon was associated with the formation of a network of the most competitive suppliers, recalls Nikolai Kuzenkov, managing partner of NK KRON. And in this context, the concepts of "security" and "sustainability" of supplies, according to the expert, are in many ways the antonyms of the concept of "economy".
At first, as logistics costs rise, businesses sacrifice their margins, says Petr Shcherbachenko. However, in the future, in most cases, the increased costs fall on the shoulders of customers through an increase in the cost of the product.
The current restructuring of the system, in fact, adds an "uncertainty tax" to the price of goods. However, consumers are willing to pay for reliability — in the face of geopolitical storms, the winners are not the companies that offer the lowest price, but those who can guarantee that the product will reach the store shelf, despite external factors.
However, the current policy of "antifragility" has other consequences. In particular, the transition to a less productive but more stable model inevitably leads to a slowdown in global economic growth. Business efficiency is one of the main drivers of GDP growth. And in an environment where companies prefer to invest in "spare wheels" rather than innovation, this growth will naturally decrease.
Another important consequence of the restructuring of supply chains is the fragmentation of the global market. It splits into competing technological blocks in which states seek to subsidize "their" producers of critical goods. At the same time, countries located near large markets are beginning to play an important role (for example, Mexico for the United States, Turkey for the EU, or Vietnam for China). They are turning into new industrial hubs, gaining more importance in world politics.
With continued geopolitical instability, the impact of these scenarios will only increase in the future. Turbulence in key regions will lead to an even greater increase in logistical delays, as well as insurance tariffs for transportation in conflict zones.
Even with the simultaneous disappearance of all existing economic, political, and military constraints, the global economy will continue to live in a high-cost logistics environment for a considerable period of time (approximately 2-4 years), expects Mikhail Khachaturian, associate professor at the Department of Strategic and Innovative Development at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation. But such a scenario is very utopian, so logistics will remain expensive for a much longer period.
At the same time, the world will become even more fragmented, finally breaking up into Western and eastern economic blocs. The market will continue to develop networks of local suppliers, supporting the trend towards deglobalization, Nikolai Kuzenkov expects. In his opinion, a return to the global logistics model is unlikely in the next decade.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
